Remember EBRD - nuclear project K2R4 in Ukraine

I doubt that our government will ever consider the articles submitted on this site about Plutonium/MOX before decisions are made, though they may contain the thruth and the best possible way to act with this devastating matter.
A couple of years ago I took part in a small delegation, transferring to the Belgian minister of finance, seated in the advisory commission of the EBRD, a petition about K2R4 in Ukrain, a nuclear project ready to be financed by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The petition was signed from numerous large and smaller organisations in sectors like politics, youth, workers and environment. Documents came from greenpeace and independent institutions. We proposed to consider the better use of energy through energy-saving techniques like insulation among others, use of wind energy and solar power and use of coal. Now I ask you to surf to the site of EBRD, project K2R4.

How many of these alternative proposals can you find on their official website? ONLY the worst of these alternatives: coal, producing CO2, SO2 and NOx. NOWHERE do I read about the other predominant energy sources that we presented, causing nearly no damage to environment. It is clear that they only want to hear what 'their' industry is aware of, though it is prooven in the mean while that these 'alternatives' (like sun and wind) should better become 'main stream'.

Also, it is said that "Notwithstanding the acceptability of the (public consultation) process it should be noted that the majority of individuals and groups who were opposed to the project at the beginning did not change their stand during the public consultation process." Should that be noted so as to kick out these people from any further 'proceedings'?

It is clear that any pro-environmental ideas and persons are being blocked off by persons to be situated in the highest ranks of governments, industrial and finance world, be it national, European or world-wide. It is in the interest of all living creatures that we make clear who is actively blocking the path towards a sustainable future and environment.

I have been sanctioned before by national employment services because "reasons of ecology cannot be withold not to be at the disposition of the general employment market." I let it all up to the reader to make up his own mind, just like I did myself.

arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)