Tattered signs at the city limits of Berkeley discreetly inform newcomers about three key facts: it is located on Ohlone territory, has a population of 112,580 people, and is designated as a “nuclear-free zone.” Although the recent film “Oppenheimer” shed light on the UC Berkeley physicist known as the “Father of the Atomic Bomb” who lived and worked in the East Bay for 14 years, Berkeley’s “nuclear free” policy wasn’t established until 1986. The policy, which was approved by voters, prohibits investments in organizations associated with nuclear energy, weapons, and related infrastructure within the city. This policy was adopted during a period of uncertainty and fear surrounding the Cold War and the Chernobyl disaster.
While some critics mocked the “nuclear-free” designation, arguing that the city government should not involve itself in national policy, it also received support from local elected officials in Oakland, Marin County, Hayward, Davis, and Santa Cruz. Activists played a significant role in promoting opposition to nuclear weapons in Berkeley for many years. However, some activists are now working to find a balance between acknowledging the dangers of nuclear weapons while exploring the potential of nuclear energy as a peaceful technology.
Ryan Pickering, an activist and nuclear energy advocate, is part of a small group of local activists who aim to change public perceptions about the future of nuclear energy. After initially being opposed to nuclear energy while working in the solar industry, Pickering changed his mind after researching the limitations of renewable energy. He now advocates for nuclear energy alongside other influencers and organizations. Pickering and his organization, Nuclear is Clean Energy (NiCE), work with UC Berkeley’s nuclear engineering department to modernize Berkeley’s “nuclear-free zone” policy. They seek to create symbols that do not evoke fear and are collecting signatures for a future ballot measure.
Pickering emphasizes that nuclear energy is different from nuclear weapons and believes that peaceful nuclear sciences have the potential to bring about positive change. He acknowledges that the pro-nuclear movement is currently small and faces challenges due to public fear and lack of understanding, but he believes that progress can be made through education and open dialogue.
Berkeley’s Peace and Justice Commission is responsible for monitoring compliance with the 1986 ordinance and approving exceptions. Waivers have been granted for certain requests, such as city contracts with UC Berkeley researchers and nuclear medicine supplies for public health workers. However, the ordinance has also led to bans on tech products from companies connected to nuclear weapons. For example, the Berkeley Library was denied a waiver to use 3M products due to the company’s refusal to sign a nuclear-free disclosure form.
Efforts to modify or repeal the 1986 ordinance began in 2011. Councilmember Gordon Wozniak argued for removing the ban on investing in U.S. Treasury bonds, notes, and bills, citing the need for more flexibility in Berkeley’s finance department. However, the policy remains in place, and attitudes towards nuclear energy are now being reevaluated.
While some people, like Commissioner Grace Morizawa, remain cautious about nuclear energy due to historical experiences with nuclear warfare, others, such as Councilmember Rigel Robinson, believe it is important to have informed debates. Robinson hopes to find a middle ground between recognizing the horrors caused by atomic weapons and acknowledging the potential benefits of nuclear power in addressing present challenges. It is essential to engage in a nuanced and informed discussion about the modernization of Berkeley’s nuclear policy, taking into consideration the city’s history and the perspectives of its community members.