Workshop: "Strategies against the expansion of nuclear activity in Brazil and Argentina"
Porto Alegre Declaration
January 25, 2003
D rom the 50s Germany, Brazil and Argentina undertook plans massive electric generation development plans nuclear power plants and large investments of public funds in infrastructure support, research and training resources for the sector. E n the two South American countries the major decisions were taken by military dictatorships between the 60 and 70. Among them, forge a solid alliance with the German state and Siemens, the leading industry in this country. Product of this society is built Atucha I and Angra II, began Atucha II and Angra III.
A l grew while the military rivalry between two countries deepened Americans and parallel plans for nuclear military use. In 80 years, with the fall of dictatorships, they stopped well as each other. However, while the advanced democratic governments in the demilitarization of nuclear plans, inheritance, economic, social and environmental impact of these has yet been taken by the three countries. For example, mining of uranium has been formally eliminated in Germany, but have not been rehabilitated mining areas in any of the three countries.
A l As in other countries, the nuclear option has proved incapable of keeping promises a cheap and clean energy. But while Germany has decided to terminate the nuclear era, Brazil and Argentina still bear a heavy economic debt, both internal and external, in this particular case the state, banks and German companies. This occurs in the context of a bankruptcy attorney that prevents the southern states even think of continuing with the works. This is an inequitable situation where the borrower is pressured to pay whether or not to build power plants.
D rom two decades ago that has become a de facto moratorium in Argentina and with the completion of Angra II in Brazil the situation is similar. But there is no decision policy to follow the German example of economic and political costs that would lead to governments.
E n particular, the historical responsibility of having to invest public resources in a period in which participation in the affairs of state was denied to all but the military must be shared by the three governments. With this common approach will be possible to renegotiate the foreign debt and redirect nuclear cooperation between the three countries to clean energy options and socially acceptable.
R ecently, Argentina has signed a controversial bilateral agreement with Australia which will result in that country violates its own national constitution to allow the entry of radioactive waste from Australia. This agreement opens the door unpublished Argentina, and the region, the entry of international nuclear waste. This business is extremely dangerous and conflicted, was intended to carry out without the knowledge of the public.
L to public pressure generated an opposition such as to prevent the ratification of that agreement so far, which is now pending in the House of Representatives
the nation. Argentina do not open their borders to the entry of nuclear waste because it is an unwise practice in the management of such waste and thereby strengthens the transport of radioactive substances dangerous for the South Seas.
L you Southern Cone countries (Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil) should hold a firm opposition to the transport of highly radioactive substances by the South Pacific and Atlantic, as already made by France, Britain and Japan .
therefore recommend:
1) Argentina and Brazil should definitely cancel their projects to complete construction of Atucha II and Angra III.
2) This decision should be facilitated by the collaboration of Germany in the renegotiation of outstanding financial commitments that both states have Southern Cone.
3) Argentina should not ratify the agreement signed with Australia and sustain its constitutional ban the entry of radioactive waste on their territory.
4) The Southern Cone should hold a firm opposition to the transport of waste and plutonium in the southern seas seeking to continue and expand those already made by England, France and Japan.
5) The potential of our region in terms of clean and renewable energies such as wind, solar, biomass, etc. is immense and can not be justified under any view larger investments in riskier technologies and resisted socially as in the case of nuclear energy. The three countries (Brazil, Argentina and Germany) should cooperate in such a way to redirect existing commitments in the nuclear to clean energies.
6) The carrying out of technical audits and evaluations of the facility policies that form the nuclear cycle in Brazil and Argentina with the participation of civil society. Organizations
conveners:
1.Coalicion Rios Vivos
2.Taller Ecologist / WISE Argentina
3.GT Energia del FBOMS (Brazilian Forum of NGOs and Social Movements for Environment and Development
)
4.Urgewald (Alemania)
5.Apedema - Rio de Janeiro 6. CREA-RJ (Conselho Regional Engineering, Architecture and Agronomy of the State of Rio de Janeiro)
7.Movimento Citizenship by Aguas
8.Amigos Earth Brazil
9.SAPE (Angraense Ecological Protection Society)
10. Fundacion Heinrich Boll
11. World Information Service on Energy (WISE) Amsterdam
12.Foro Political Ecology
13. Greenpeace
14. Ceuta - Uruguay
15. Friends of the Earth Argentina
16. Friends of the Earth Australia
17. Gamba
18. Instituto del Tercer Mundo
19. Os Verdes
Greetings chorionic
Friedbert Schlichting
Variete of Ideas Paraguay
Source: Greenpeace Argentina - 2003 World Social Forum
