Taking Power | Safe and Green Campaign: Taking Power
Posted on August 16, 2013
TAKING POWER: An exhibit of photographs of the local anti-nuclear movement by three area photographers. Opening Sept. 6th, First Friday Gallery Walk, at the Elliot Street Cafe, 134 Elliot St., Brattleboro, Vt. Reception 5:30-8:00pm.
Photographers David Shaw of Dummerston, Vt., Cate Woolner of Northfield, Ma., and Lionel Delevingne of Stockbridge, Ma., will exhibit selected photos for the month of September at the Elliot Street Cafe in downtown Brattleboro.
From their successful efforts against Seabrook in the late 1970s to the latest actions to shut down Vermont Yankee just five miles from Brattleboro, local nuclear activists have waged peaceful protest against atomic energy. Click here for details.
Culture of Complicity Tied to Stricken Nuclear Plant
The Conversation With Deepak Chopra: Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant on The Conversation: Deepak HomeBase - live streaming video powered by Livestream
> the stream? It's a bit over half the total. I wonder how much could
> be recovered/ not wasted?
"Rejected energy" is energy that does not do useful work. It is a
gross measure of efficiency. The percentages are 57% waste to 43%
work. Transportation being the most inefficient and electrical
generation following. Electrical efficiency, according to Thomas Casten in 2008, peaked in 1960 in the US and has been falling since 2000. There's quite a lot of that which could be recovered and used
but outdated regulation and infrastructure gets in the way. Casten
says he could do industrial and commercial cogeneration profitably to
a much greater extent with the change of regulations and some laws.
> And then there's all the waste from using a big car to transport one
> person, heating a large leaky building, -- and making weapons, like
> bombs that are gone in an instant and damage someone else's energy
> economy-- to say the least.
These are all issues that this gross analysis does not cover. Amory
Lovins and others talk about 90% of everything going into the dump
after 6 months of use. Second Law Economics could identify many more
opportunities for efficiency without going into the "moral" questions
of SUVs for one, McMansions, and war. We are surrounded by
insurmountable opportunities and, in energy, most of the conversation
is about the magic solar crystal which is too expensive, the bird-
killing eyesore of wind farms, and the putative safety of nuclear
power. Efficiency and waste, resource conservation and elegant
frugality are an afterthought, if mentioned at all.
> Makes you wonder how little we could get by with if we acted
We are not rational creatures though we like to pretend we are.
"I was shocked and disappointed that NPR's Morning Edition gave time to Dr. Robert DuPont "Fear Dominates Discussion on Nuclear Power," this week. His clear message was to label fear of nuclear power as unreasonable, a phobia therefore, and compared it to a fear of flying ..." Lynn Chong.Read More......
The Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI), a government run institute under the Department of Science and Technology of the Philippines (DOST), closely monitors the situation at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and provides ....CTBTO Newsroom: "website"
Nuclear safety spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama says the air above the leak contains 1,000 millisiverts of radioactivity.
For starters, even the unit is spelled incorrectly. It's not "millisiverts" but rather "millisieverts." But that's a small issue compared to the bigger one.
Radiation dose monitoring from Fukushima, Ibaraki and Tochigi Prefectures - Japanese Radiation Monitoring re Fukushima Daiichi
KAALtv.com - Experts: Don't Worry About Radiation in US Milk Maybe Radio activity should be listed along with cholesterol etc....so we can decide ???
|Description: Energy Professionals Information Routing Group. Professionals interested in the energy world covering: energy efficiency, technology, resources, policy, modelling, futurology, economics, politics, generation technologies and conservation.|
Because we refuse the perpetuation of nuclear threat on the planet;
Because we deny the French nuclear lobby the right to impose a new reactor on us (French people and the rest of the world);
Because we reject the confusion between state service to the public (“service public d’état”) and nuclear lobbying interest;
Because we know this useless investment will end up as a burden on consumers and future generations in France and elsewhere;
Because we want a future made of clean, decentralized, safe and renewable energies;
Together, let’s say NO to the EPR, Yes to energy alternatives and let’s sign the call
AREVA is mobilized for Japan - AREVA: "AREVA IS MOBILIZED FOR JAPAN
GROUP / CORPORATE
March 16, 2011
Following the earthquake and tsunami that struck northern Japan, AREVA is mobilizing its forces to provide support to residents of the affected area and to the rescue workers and personnel working near the Fukushima nuclear plant.
AREVA has chartered a plane that will depart for Japan as soon as possible to deliver 3,000 activated charcoal protective masks, 10,000 overalls and 20,000 gloves. The aircraft will also carry 100 tons of boric acid, a neutron absorber, made available by EDF.
French rescue workers left for Japan early this week with radioactivity detection equipment provided by AREVA’s subsidiary, Canberra, specializing in the manufacture of nuclear detection and measurement equipment.
Equipment in AREVA’s Tokyo offices has already been made available to the Japanese security teams.
The Group also decided as of Monday to donate one million euros to the Japanese Red Cross.
AREVA press office:
Patricia Marie / Fleur Floquet-Daubigeon / Pauline Briand / Maxime Michaut
Tel: 33 1 34 96 12 15 - Fax: 33 1 34 96 16 54
AREVA Investors Relations:
Marie de Scorbiac
Tel: 33 1 34 96 05 97
Bankers Flee Japan As Nuclear Crisis Worsens At Fukushima: "'bankers are fleeing Tokyo as Japan's nuclear crisis worsens, scrambling for commercial and charter flights out of the country'"
Panic grips Tokyo, unless you happen to be British: "'We are going to Hiroshima because it will be much safer there.'"
"Clamshell-TVS.org", the umbrella organization which hosted "THE NO NUKER" has closed due to a lack of funding.
While THE NO NUKER will no longer provide its edited news selection, it will keep all links to resources open, as well as a constant stream of relevant news from all over the world, as offered by GOOGLE.
All past news material are archived here and easily searchable.
No Nukes !
Bloomberg.com: Germany: "German Nuclear Exit Should Be Reversed, Ministry Taskforce Says
By Patrick Donahue
Aug. 5 (Bloomberg) -- The German government should abandon its planned phase-out of nuclear energy to help rein in surging electricity prices and protect the environment, according to proposals drawn up by an energy taskforce under Economy Minister Michael Glos."
August 5, 2008
Below is a copy of a memo we received today from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning a public meeting in Oswego, New York on August 21, 2008, to discuss the upcoming application for a Construction/Operating License for a new atomic reactor at Nine Mile Point. We hope as many of you as possible will make it to this meeting and let Unistar and the NRC know that New York opposes new reactors!
NIRS is actively working against a similar reactor Unistar has proposed for Maryland. Feel free to contact us if we can provide more information about the NRC’s licensing process or anything else.
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
July 30, 2008
MEMORANDUM TO: Joseph Colaccino, Chief
EPR Projects Branch
Division of New Reactor Licensing
Office of New Reactors
FROM: Michael A. Canova, Project Manager /RA/ for
EPR Projects Branch
Division of New Reactor Licensing
Office of New Reactors
SUBJECT: PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETING ON THE COMBINED LICENSE
APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSED NINE MILE POINT
UNIT 3 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
DATE & TIME: August 21, 2008
6:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.
LOCATION: SUNY Oswego – Sheldon Hall
7060 Route 104
Oswego, NY 13126
PURPOSE: The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff will discuss the role that the NRC will play in the anticipated review of the UniStar’s application for a combined license including details of the safety and environmental reviews. A key topic is how and when the public may participate in NRC processes, if so desired. The public is encouraged to ask questions about the NRC’s review of the Nine Mile Point Unit 3 combined license application (COLA).
CATEGORY 3: * This is a Category 3 Meeting. The public is invited to participate in this
meeting by providing comments and asking questions throughout the
Michael A. Canova, NRO/DNRL Surinder Arora, NRO/DNRL
*Commission's Policy Statement on AEnhancing Public Participation in NRC Meetings@
(67 FR 36920), May 28, 2002
PARTICIPANTS: Participants from the NRC include the following members from the Office
of New Reactors (NRO).
J. Colaccino, NRO
M. Canova, NRO
S. Arora, NRO
P. Brandt, NRO
J. Jennings, NRO
L. Rakovan, EDO, et al.
ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML082120125 NRC-001
OFFICE PM:DNRL/NARP/NRO LA:DNRL/NARP/NRO BC:DNRL/NARP/NRO
NAME GTesfaye for MCanova JMcLellan JColaccino
DATE 7/30/2008 7/30/2008 7/30/2008
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OPEN HOUSE AND PUBLIC OUTREACH MEETING
UNISTAR APPLICATION FOR A COMBINED LICENSE
Nine Mile Point Unit 3
August 21, 2008
6:00 p.m. Open House (Sheldon Hall Lower Lobby) NRC
7:00 p.m. Public Outreach Meeting Begins. (Sheldon Hall
7:15 p.m. NC Staff Presentations
• NRC: Who We Are And What We Do
• Overview of COLA Review Process
o Safety Review
o Environmental Review
o How the public may participate
• Construction Inspection
7:45 p.m. Open forum for public questions and comments on
NRC processes with regard to Nine Mile Point Unit 3.
Labels: ACTION ALERT
prepared by Alexander Lee/Clamshell Yahoo Group
John McCain has consistently misrepresented Senator Obama's position on nuclear energy and we suspect that he may well do so again today when he discusses the issue in Michigan. Below is information to ensure you have a clear sense of where both Senator Obama and Senator McCain stand on the issue...
Barack Obama supports safe and secure nuclear energy. Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our noncarbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power as an option. However, before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, Obama thinks key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation. Barack Obama introduced legislation in the U.S. Senate to establish guidelines for tracking, controlling and accounting for spent fuel at nuclear power plants. To prevent international nuclear material from falling into terrorist hands abroad, Obama worked closely with Sen. Dick Lugar (R‐IN) to strengthen international efforts to identify and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. As president, Obama will make safeguarding nuclear material both abroad and in the U.S. atop anti‐terrorism priority. In terms of waste storage, Obama does not believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site. He will lead federal efforts to look for safe, long‐term disposal solutions based on objective, scientific analysis. In the meantime, Obama will develop requirements to ensure that the waste stored at current reactor sites is contained using the most advanced dry‐cask storage technology available.
MCCAIN'S CLAIM THAT OBAMA OPPOSES NUCLEAR POWER IS "FALSE"
Annenberg/UPenn Factcheck.org: "The McCain Ad Also Portrays Obama As Saying 'No' To Nuclear" And That's "False." Factcheck.org wrote, "The McCain ad also portrays Obama as saying 'no to clean, safe, nuclear energy.' That's false. Obama has said he's open to building new nuclear plants if they are clean and safe. As we noted in a recent article, McCain bases his claim on a partial quote from Obama from a town hall meeting in Newton, Iowa, on Dec. 30, 2007. Obama had been asked whether he was 'truly comfortable' with the safety of nuclear power. Obama, Dec. 30, 2007: 'I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal. ... I am not a nuclear energy proponent.' If that was all Obama said it would not make him an opponent of nuclear power, of course. It would make him 'Dr. Maybe,' but not 'Dr. No.' And In fact, Obama went on to say later in the same response: Obama, Dec. 30, 2007: 'There is no perfect energy source. Everything has some problems right now. We haven't found it yet. Now I trust in our ingenuity. ... I have not ruled out nuclear as part of that [$150 billion proposed energy research] package, but only so far as it is clean and safe.' Furthermore, the energy plan Obama released in October 2007 said: 'It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table.'… It's inaccurate to cast Obama as an opponent, and McCain goes too far when he portrays Obama as saying 'no' to nuclear." [Factcheck.org, 6/26/08
OBAMA HAS CONSISTENLY BEEN OPEN TO MORE NUCLEAR POWER
Obama position on Nuclear power: Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our noncarbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power from the table. However, there is no future for expanded nuclear without first addressing four key issues: public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation. Barack Obama introduced legislation in the U.S. Senate to establish guidelines for tracking, controlling and accounting for spent fuel at nuclear power plants. To prevent international nuclear material from falling into terrorist hands abroad, Obama worked closely with Sen. Dick Lugar (R – IN) to strengthen international efforts to identify and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. As president, Obama will make safeguarding nuclear material both abroad and in the U.S. a top anti-terrorism priority. Obama will also lead federal efforts to look for a safe, long-term disposal solution based on objective, scientific analysis. In the meantime, Obama will develop requirements to ensure that the waste stored at current reactor sites is contained using the most advanced dry-cask storage technology available. Barack Obama believes that Yucca Mountain is not an option. Our government has spent billions of dollars on Yucca Mountain, and yet there are still significant questions about whether nuclear waste can be safely stored there. [http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf]
· Obama: Nuclear Power Isn't A Panacea But We Should Invest In R&D To See If We Can Store It Safely Since It Doesn't Emit Greenhouse Gasses. Obama said, "I've said this before, I don't think that nuclear power is a panacea. But I also think that given that it doesn't emit greenhouse gases, for us to invest some R&D into seeing whether we can store nuclear waste safely, or reuse it. These are all areas where the market interacting with a clear set of rules by the federal government and billions of dollars devoted to research and development can, I think, trigger the kind of economic growth that we haven't seen in this country for a long time." [Obama Remarks, 6/20/08
· Obama Said We Have To Look At Nuclear And It Can Be An Effective Option If We Figure Out The Storage And Safety Issues. Obama said on Meet The Press, "I think we do have to look at nuclear, and what we've got to figure out is can we store the material properly? Can we make sure that they're secure? Can we deal with the expense? Because the problem is, is that a lot of our nuclear industry, it reinvents the wheel. Each nuclear power plant that is proposed has a new design, has--it, it has all kinds of changes, there are all sorts of cost overruns. So it has not been an effective option. That doesn't mean that it can't be an effective option, but we're going to have to figure out storage and safety issues. And my attitude when it comes to energy is there's no silver bullet. We've got to be--we've, we've got to look at every possible option." [Meet The Press, 5/4/08
· Obama Said He Would Explore Safer Ways To Use Nuclear Power And Accelerate Research Into Technologies That Safe Storage Technologies. "We will also explore safer ways to use nuclear power, which right now accounts for more than 70% of our non-carbon generated electricity. We should accelerate research into technologies that will allow for the safe, secure treatment of nuclear waste. As President, I'll continue the work I began in the Senate to ensure that all nuclear material is stored, secured and accounted for - both at home and around the world. There should be no short cuts or regulatory loopholes - period." [Speech On Clean Energy Future, 10/3/07]
· Obama: We Can't Take Nuclear Power Off The Table. Obama said, "I don't think that we can take nuclear power off the table. What we have to make sure of is that we have the capacity to store it properly and safely, and that we reduce whatever threats might come from terrorism. And if we can do that in a technologically sound way, then we should pursue it. If we can't, we should not. But there is no magic bullet on energy. We're going to have to look at all the various options to reduce greenhouse gases and to put us on a path to energy independence." [Democratic Debate, 9/26/07
OBAMA WAS ATTACKED IN THE PRIMARY FOR HIS OPENNESS TO NUCLEAR POWER
· Obama Contrasted With Edwards, Said We Should Explore Nuclear Power As Part Of The Energy Mix. After John Edwards said he opposed nuclear plants, Obama said, "I actually think that we should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix. There are no silver bullets to this issue. We have to develop solar. I have proposed drastically increasing fuel efficiency standards on cars, an aggressive cap on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted. But we're going to have to try a series of different approaches." [Youtube Debate, 8/13/07
· Edwards Attacked Obama For Being "Open To The Possibility Of Additional Power Plants" And Obama Defended Himself Saying That The Country Should "Create A Menu Of Energy Options." Edwards "added that, unlike Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, he is completely opposed to the building of more nuclear power plants—a point he so often makes when addressing voters on the campaign trail. Edwards said that Obama is 'open to the possibility of additional power plants' and that Clinton has said she is 'agnostic' on the subject. Obama defended himself, saying that he has long been a critic of Yucca Mountain, yet added that the country should "create a menu of energy options" in handling the storage of nuclear waste and 'see where the science and the technology and the entrepreneurship of the American people take us.'" [Fox News, 1/17/08
· NYT: Edwards "Eagerly Pointed Out" That A Difference Between Him And Obama Was That Obama Has Been Supportive Of Building More Nuclear Power Plants. "Mr. Edwards also eagerly pointed out a difference between himself and Senator Barack Obama of Illinois: Nuclear power. 'I'm very strongly against building any more nuclear power plants,' Mr. Edwards said. 'I think it is an inviting terrorist target. I'm against it. I think Senator Obama has in the past been supportive of building more nuclear power plants,' he continued. 'We just have a difference on that issue -– and that's an issue that people should be aware of.'" [New York Times, 12/16/07
MCCAIN RECORD ON NUCLEAR WASTE
McCain Claims on Job Creation Unrealistic: McCain claimed that his plan to build 45 new nuclear plants will create 700,000 jobs, a claim that has no basis in fact. In order for that to be case, each plant would have to create 15,556 unique jobs (meaning no construction workers from one plant would be used to help build others). Even the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry's trade association isn't that bullish on nuclear plants. They say the average nuclear plant.
· employs 1,400 to 1,800 people during construction (with peak employment as high as 2,400)
· employs 400 to 700 people long-term, at salaries typically substantially higher than the average salaries in the local area.
· creates economic activity that generates 400 to 700 additional jobs locally
· Total jobs per plant (2,200-3,800)
Even under this rosy industry-created scenario, McCain's math is not even in the ballpark. [http://www.nei.org/keyissues/newnuclearplants/economicbenefitsofnewnuclearplants/]
McCain Has Consistently Voted to Approve Yucca Mountain As A Nuclear Waste Dump Site. In 2002, John McCain voted to approve a site at Yucca Mountain as a repository for nuclear and radioactive waste. After the vote, McCain said that storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain would answer "one of the most important environmental, health and public safety issues for the American people." In 2000, McCain voted to override the presidential veto of legislation that would establish a permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. In 1997, McCain similarly voted to establish a repository at the Mountain. McCain voted yes on a similar bill in 1996. [2002 Senate Vote #167, 7/9/2002; The Arizona Republic, 7/10/2002; 2000 Senate Vote #88, 5/2/2000; 1998 Senate Vote #148, 6/2/1998; 1997 Senate Vote #42, 4/15/1997; 1996 Senate Vote #259, 7/31/1996; 1996 Senate Vote #256, 7/31/1996]
McCain: "I Am For Yucca Mountain." The Las Vegas Sun reported that in 2007 McCain told the Deseret News, "I am for Yucca Mountain. I'm for storage facilities. It's a lot better than sitting outside power plants all over America." [Las Vegas Sun (Las Vegas, NV), 5/28/08]
McCain: "I Believe That Yucca Mountain Is A Suitable Place For Storage." At a campaign event in Springfield, Pennsylvania, McCain said, "I believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable place for storage and I know that there's controversy about it and lawsuits and all that. But shouldn't America, a country as smart and as wise as we are, be able to find a place to store spent fuel?" [CNN Live Feed (Springfield, PA), 3/14/08]
McCain Senior Adviser Holtz-Eakin Called Political Opposition To Yucca Mountain "Harmful To the U.S. Interests." "McCain criticized both Democrats for their opposition to Yucca Mountain. 'The political opposition to the Yucca Mountain storage facility is harmful to the U.S. interest and the facility should be completed, opened and utilized,' McCain adviser Holtz-Eakin said." [Reuters, 5/6/08]
VIENNA (AFP) - Plutonium leaked overnight in an ageing laboratory operated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) near Vienna, the United Nations nuclear watchdog said Sunday.
100 employees contaminated at France nuclear site - USATODAY.com: "PARIS (AP) — Radioactive particles spewed from a pipe at a French nuclear reactor on Wednesday, slightly contaminating 100 employees, a spokeswoman for the national electric company said."
Nuclear "Renaissance" Dismissed as a "Carefully Fabricated Illusion" | Center for Media and Democracy
Asked why people like Patrick Moore and Stewart Brand, who made their name as environmentalists are now nuclear power advocates, the highly regarded energy efficiency analyst Amory Lovins was blunt: "I think they haven't done their homework. And I keep asking for their analysis and not getting it, because I don't think they have one." Nuclear power, he argues, is no solution to global warming. "If you buy more nuclear plants, you're going to get about two to ten times less climate solution per dollar, and you'll get it about twenty to forty times slower" than efficient use of electricity, renewables and micropower, he said. Lovins is also dismissive of claims that a "nuclear renaissance" is sweeping the world. "It's a very carefully fabricated illusion. And the reason it isn't happening is there are no buyers. That is, Wall Street is not putting a penny of private capital into the industry, despite 100-plus percent subsidies," he told Amy Goodman.
Anti-Nuclear Advocates Receive JBL Awards from Tides Foundation | News Room | Tides: "'As the nation and the world struggle to reduce green house gas emissions in an effort to slow climate change, and to find alternatives to fossil fuel energy sources, nuclear power is back on the table as a viable energy option,' said Drummond Pike, CEO and founder, Tides. 'However, nuclear power remains a dangerous and flawed solution. From the mining of uranium to storage of spent fuel, it creates an unacceptable chain of destruction and risk. Glenn Carroll, Paul Gunter, and Arjun Makhijani are working to halt nuclear energy production and to call attention to its abuses and dangers; and we are so pleased to honor them with the JBL Award.'"
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY NETWORK from Ken Bossong
On July 31, our colleague - the Sustainable Energy Coalition – will be hosting the 11th Annual Congressional Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency EXPO + Forum in the Cannon Office Building of the U.S. House of Representatives in Washington, DC. The event is being co-sponsored by Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency Caucuses.
The day-long program, which is free and open to the public, will bring together nearly 50 exhibitors representing the cross-section of sustainable energy technologies. A morning news conference with Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives as well as a series of afternoon speakers will address the status, economics, benefits, and near-term potential of sustainable energy technologies to address rising energy prices, increased reliance on energy imports, and climate change.
We are therefore writing to you for three reasons:
First, if you plan to be in the Washington DC area on Thursday - July 31, we invite and encourage you to attend the EXPO. No RSVP is required.
Second, we would welcome your sharing information about this event with any, and all, members of the news media, businesses, non-profit organizations, students, or other interested members of the general public. A flier describing the EXPO is attached; please feel free to forward it to any contacts you may have.
Third – and perhaps most importantly – we would like to request your assistance in encouraging Members of Congress and their staff to attend this event.
As you know, Congress currently is considering a range of energy-related issues including climate change legislation, annual appropriations bills, initiatives to extend the renewable energy and energy efficiency production tax and investment tax credits, and proposals to expand domestic oil & gas drilling plus new incentives for fossil fuels and nuclear power. We believe the EXPO offers an unparalleled opportunity for sustainable energy advocates to educate Members of Congress about the role of sustainable energy technologies and the policy options that would affect their development.
However, as a first step, it is necessary to get the Members and their staff to attend the EXPO. And inasmuch as most Members try to be responsive to their constituents, we hope that you would be willing to telephone, e-mail, or fax a request to your congressional delegation and encourage their attendance.
Accordingly, we have attached a suggested letter for your use. Feel free to personalize it with your own letterhead and/or name and to edit the text to highlight any policy issues you would like to stress.
If you wish to telephone your congressional delegation, the main switchboard number for the U.S. Capitol is 202-224-3121.
If you wish to e-mail or fax your Senators and/or Representatives, you can find their contact information by going to either www.house.gov or www.senate.gov. (We advise against mailing letters since there is a one or two week security delay in delivering “snail mail.”)
Thank you very much for any assistance you may be able to give in helping to spread the word about the 11th Annual Congressional Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency EXPO + Forum.
NOTE: Additional details about the EXPO can be found at www.sustainableenergycoalition.org.
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY NETWORK
8606 Greenwood Avenue, #2
Takoma Park, MD 20912