No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Changing Nature: Union Discourse and the Fermi Atomic Power Plant
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 March 2014
Abstract
The first known grassroots protest against nuclear power was organized by industrial unions: the United Auto Workers, the International Union of Electrical Workers, and the United Papermakers and Paperworkers. In Power Reactor, a landmark case begun in 1956 and pursued all the way to the Supreme Court (where it was lost in 1961), these unions tried to prevent construction of the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, a fast breeder reactor, outside Detroit. However, their action has been interpreted as not truly environmental at all, but rather as merely a smokescreen for their opposition to commercially developed atomic power; at that time they were identified with support for public power, which was under assault by the Republican party. Attending to union discourses of nature reveals the case to have marked a pioneering turn from a conservation to environmental discourse of nature.
- Type
- Environment and Labor
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 2014
References
NOTES
1. This essay is based on a chapter of my dissertation, “Labor, Environmentalism, and the Public Interest: The United Auto Workers in the Quiet Decade.” I am grateful to my advisor, Susan Hanson, for her encouragement and support and appreciate the help of my committee members, Robert Mitchell, Dianne Rocheleau, Patricia Greenfield, and the late Julie Graham. I also appreciate the close reading and suggestions of two anonymous reviewers. Above all, many thanks are due my husband, Christopher Couch.
2. Kasperson, Roger E., Berk, Gerald, Pijawka, David, Sharaf, Alan B., and Wood, James, “Public Opposition to Nuclear Energy: Retrospect and Prospect,” Science, Technology, and Human Values 5 (1980): 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. The most extensive account of the legal controversy can be found in Mazuzan, George T. and Walker, J. Samuel, Controlling the Atom: The Beginnings of Nuclear Regulation, 1946–1962 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1984)Google Scholar, chaps. 5–7.
4. Benjamin C. Sigal, “Statement before Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,” June 27, 1957 (UAW President's Office: Walter P. Reuther Collection [hereafter WPR], box 575, folder 4, Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs, Walter P. Reuther Library, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan); Atomic Energy Commission, Atomic Energy Commission Reports, vol. 1, Opinions and Decisions of the Atomic Energy Commission with Selected Orders, October 8, 1956, to December 31, 1961 (Washington, DC, 1962)Google Scholar, 149; “Atom Permit Upheld,” New York Times, May 27, 1959, 10.
5. “Science in the Courts: The Supreme Court is Asked to Decide on the Inherent Dangers of Nuclear Reactors,” Science, May 5, 1961, 1410. The district court case is International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO; United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America; and United Papermakers and Paperworkers v. United States of America and Atomic Energy Commission, 280 F.2d 645 (1960). The Supreme Court case is found at Power Reactor Development Co. v. International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO et al., 367 U.S. 396 (1961).
6. Gray, Mike and Rosen, Ira, The Warning: Accident at Three Mile Island (Chicago, 1982)Google Scholar, 182; Cutter, Susan, “Technological Failures and Toxic Monuments,” in Geographical Snapshots of North America: Commemorating the 27th Congress of the International Geographical Union and Assembly, ed. Janelle, Donald G. (New York, 1992), 117–121 Google Scholar; “Fermi I Nuclear Reactor an Engineering and Financial Disaster,” Examiner.com, June 12, 2011, http://www.examiner.com/article/fermi-i-nuclear-reactor-an-engineering-and-financial-disaster; Perrow, Charles, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies (Princeton, 1999)Google Scholar, 50; Kate Sheppard, “Fermi Stance,” Grist, August 5, 2008, http://gristmill.grist.org/2008/8/5/105447/6616?source=weekly.
7. Harvey Wasserman and Norman Solomon with Alvarez, Robert and Walters, Eleanor, Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America's Experience with Atomic Radiation (New York, 1982), 208–209 Google Scholar; Novick, Sheldon, The Careless Atom (Boston, 1969)Google Scholar, 60; Fuller, John G., We Almost Lost Detroit (New York, 1976)Google Scholar. Howard Kohn describes the impact of Fuller's book in Who Killed Karen Silkwood? (New York, 1981).Google Scholar
8. Schuparra, Kurt, “Freedom vs. Tyranny: The 1958 California Election and the Origins of the State's Conservative Movement,” Pacific Historical Review 63 (November 1994), 537–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raymond Moley, “Lagoona Controversy,” Newsweek, November 11, 1957, 128; “Investigating Atom Power,” Business Week, January 12, 1957, 28.
9. Weart, Spencer R., Nuclear Fear: A History of Images (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar, 296; Ford, Daniel, Meltdown: The Revised and Updated Edition of The Cult of the Atom (New York, 1986)Google Scholar, 75.
10. Damon Stetson, “Battle Impends on Atomic Plant,” New York Times, November 13, 1956, 44.
11. For studies of the production of interrelated discourses of nature, embodiment, and workers' health, see Di Chiro, Giovanna, “‘Living Is for Everyone’: Border Crossings for Community, Environment, and Health,” Osiris, 2d ser., 19 (2004): 112–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sackman, Douglas C., “Nature's Workshop: The Work Environment and Workers' Bodies in California's Citrus Industry,” Environmental History 5 (2000): 27–53 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Nash, Linda, Inescapable Ecologies: A History of Environment, Disease, and Knowledge (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2006)Google Scholar. A profoundly important study of workplace radiation and workers' health is Hecht, Gabrielle's Being Nuclear: Africans and the Global Uranium Trade (Cambridge, 2012).Google Scholar
12. Kendall, Gavin and Wickham, Gary, Using Foucault's Methods (Thousand Oaks, CA, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hajer, Maarten A., The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Modernization and the Policy Process (Oxford, 1995).Google Scholar
13. Hecht, Being Nuclear, 15; emphasis in original. For a close study of the changing historical ontologies of workers' health, see Sellers, Christopher C., Hazards of the Job: From Industrial Disease to Environmental Health Science (Chapel Hill, NC, 1997).Google Scholar
14. Wills, John, Conservation Fallout: Nuclear Protest at Diablo Canyon (Reno, NV, 2006).Google Scholar
15. Hales, Peter B., “The Atomic Sublime,” American Studies 32 (Spring 1991): 13.Google Scholar
16. Weart, Nuclear Fear, chaps. 8–9; Boyer, Paul S., By the Bomb's Early Light: American Thought and Culture at the Dawn of the Atomic Age, with a new preface (Chapel Hill, NC, 1994)Google Scholar, 125; Winkler, Allan M., Life under a Cloud: American Anxiety about the Atom (New York, 1993)Google Scholar, chap. 6.
17. Weart, Nuclear Fear, chap. 1; Boyer, By the Bomb's Early Light, 5, 197; Hilgartner, Stephen, Bell, Richard C., and O'Connor, Rory, Nukespeak: The Selling of Nuclear Technology in America (New York, 1983)Google Scholar, chap. 2.
18. “The Philosophers' Stone,” Time, August 15, 1955 (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,807508,00.html); “U. N. Atom Unit Urged,” New York Times, August 3, 1955, 8.
19. Weart, Nuclear Fear, 85–87.
20. Gunther, John and Quint, Bernard, Days to Remember: America, 1945–1955 (New York, 1956), 188–189.Google Scholar
21. Boyer, By the Bomb's Early Light, 153; Harvey, Mark W. T., A Symbol of Wilderness: Echo Park and the American Conservation Movement (Albuquerque, NM, 1994)Google Scholar, esp. chap. 8; Gottlieb, Robert, Forcing the Spring: The Transformation of the American Environmental Movement (Washington, DC, 1993)Google Scholar, 40.
22. “New World A'Coming?” IUD Digest 1 (1956), 6Google Scholar; Reuther, Walter P., “Atoms for Peace,” in Walter P. Reuther: Selected Papers, ed. Christian, Henry M. (New York, 1961)Google Scholar, 115.
23. For a lively inside account of the TVA in the context of relentless opposition to the New Deal and public power, see former TVA Director Smith's, Frank E. The Politics of Conservation (New York, 1966)Google Scholar. For a study of the forces antagonistic to the principle of public power, see McCraw, Thomas K., TVA and the Power Fight, 1933–1939 (Philadelphia, PA, 1971)Google Scholar, and on efforts to undermine public power after World War Two, see de Luna, Phyllis Komarek, Public versus Private Power during the Truman Administration: A Study of Fair Deal Liberalism (New York, 1997)Google Scholar. The best-known public/private debacle in atomic power is analyzed by Wildavsky, Aaron in Dixon-Yates: A Study in Power Politics (New Haven, CT, 1962).Google Scholar
24. Wells, Wyatt, “Public Power in the Eisenhower Administration,” Journal of Policy History 20 (2008): 227CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nye, David E., Consuming Power: A Social History of American Energies (Cambridge, 1998)Google Scholar, 202.
25. Hays, Samuel, Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: The Progressive Conservation Movement, 1890–1920, with a new preface (New York, 1975)Google Scholar, esp. chap. 7; Gottlieb, Forcing the Spring, 46.
26. Koppes, Clayton R., “Efficiency/Equity/Esthetics: Towards a Reinterpretation of American Conservation,” Environmental Review 11 (1987): 127–146 Google Scholar; de Luna, Public versus Private Power, 1; Gompers, Samuel, “The Attitude of Organized Labor,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 118 (1925): 67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bates, J. Leonard, “Fulfilling American Democracy: The Conservation Movement, 1907 to 1921,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review 44 (1957): 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse, 65.
28. I refer to “New Deal Democrats” to foreground their commitments to conservation, public power, and the Keynesian state. Without claiming that they comprised a stable bloc, this terminology helps to distinguish them from the racist Dixiecrats who often opposed organized labor on principle and from other labor-Democrat coalitions shaped by local, sectoral concerns that I have not explored. In coal states, for example, the United Mine Workers, Republicans, and Democrats worked together to defeat Tennessean Albert Gore and Californian Chet Holifield's bill for public atomic power because of its competition with coal. Similarly, some southern Republicans and Democrats in mining areas supported the TVA only on the narrow basis of its heavy consumption of coal. Oestreicher, Richard, “The Rules of the Game: Class Politics in Twentieth-Century America,” in Organized Labor and American Politics, 1894–1994, ed. Boyle, Kevin (Albany, 1998), 19–50 Google Scholar; Douglass Cater, “The Peaceful Atom: An Admiral Adrift,” The Reporter (New York), October 18, 1956, 27; Anderson, Clinton P. with Viorst, Milton, Outsider in the Senate: Senator Clinton Anderson's Memoirs (New York, 1970)Google Scholar, 190. Though he was head of the JCAE, Anderson is mainly remembered as a conservationist; see Baker, Richard Allen, Conservation Politics: The Senate Career of Clinton P. Anderson (Albuquerque, NM, 1982)Google Scholar.
29. Shabecoff, Philip, A Fierce Green Fire: The American Environmental Movement (New York, 1993)Google Scholar, 91.
30. Schuparra, “Freedom vs. Tyranny”; Cook, Blanche Wiesen, The Declassified Eisenhower: A Divided Legacy of Peace and Political Warfare (New York, 1984)Google Scholar; “Call It Socialism,” IUD Digest 2 (1957), 60–67.Google Scholar
31. Lane, James A., “Economic Technology of Nuclear Power,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 290 (1953), 35–44 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ruebhausen, Oscar M. and von Mehren, Robert B., “The Atomic Energy Act and the Private Production of Atomic Power,” Harvard Law Review 66 (1953): 1450–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lowen, Rebecca S., “Entering the Atomic Power Race: Science, Industry, and Government,” Political Science Quarterly 102 (1987): 459–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ray Cromley, “AEC Plans to Boost Spending on Nuclear Power Plants, ‘Engines,’” Wall Street Journal, February 17, 1955, 1.
32. Palfrey, John Gorham, “Atomic Energy: A New Experiment in Government-Industry Relations,” Columbia Law Review 56 (1956): 375CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “A Job for Free Enterprise,” Time, July 20, 1953 (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,889847,00.html); “Comparison,” New Republic, December 28, 1953, 4; Sachnoff, Lowell E., “Extraordinary Obsolescence, Rate-Making and the Atomic Reactor,” University of Chicago Law Review 25 (Winter 1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 288 n. 65, 292; Adams, Walter, “Atomic Energy: The Congressional Abandonment of Competition,” Columbia Law Review 55 (1955): 166CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Atomic Giant,” Business Week, March 19, 1955, 29; Gene Smith, “‘35 Law a Threat to Atomic Power,” New York Times, May 6, 1956, 1; “S.E.C. Waiver Asked on Atomic Project,” New York Times, December 5, 1956, 67; Feinman, Ronald L., Twilight of Progressivism: The Western Republican Senators and the New Deal (Baltimore, MD, 1981), 95Google Scholar; “Cisler Urges U.S. Help on A-Plant Problems,” Detroit News, February 17, 1956, 1; Thomas, Morgan, “Democratic Control of Atomic Power Development,” Law and Contemporary Problems 21 (1956): 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Caulfield, Henry P., “The Conservation and Environmental Movements: An Historical Analysis,” in Environmental Politics and Policy: Theories and Evidence, ed. Lester, James P. (Durham, NC, 1989), 25Google Scholar; Adams, “Atomic Energy,” 173; Peterson, Eric, “Miracle of Democratic Partnership,” IUD Digest 3 (1958): 48–49.Google Scholar
34. Labor Looks At The 84th Congress: An AFL-CIO Legislative Report (Washington, DC, 1956)Google Scholar, 23.
35. Boyer, Richard O. and Morais, Herbert M., Labor's Untold Story (New York, 1955)Google Scholar, 373; “Giving It Away,” IUD Digest (July, 1956): 35–37 Google Scholar; Labor Looks At The 84th Congress, 23–27, 34; “Fast Atom Power Action a ‘Must,’” AFL-CIO News, July 14, 1956; “Atomic Numbers Game,” IUD Digest 2 (1957): 91–98.Google Scholar
36. “Text of the Conclusions and Recommendations for Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy,” New York Times, February 1, 1956, 18; “Peaceful Atom's Impact,” Science News Letter, February 11, 1956, 84; Reuther, “Atoms for Peace,” 104–28; James A. Wechsler, “Labor's Bright Young Man,” Harper's, March 1948, 270.
37. Bruce Lambert, “Anthony Wayne Smith, 86, Environment Leader and Labor Lawyer,” New York Times, March 7, 1992; “Billion Dollar Give-Away On Atomic Energy Rapped,” CIO News, July 27, 1953; “NAM Urges Easing of Curbs on Private Atom Work; CIO Opposed,” Wall Street Journal, May 20, 1954, 2; Preis, Art, Labor's Giant Step, 2nd ed. (New York, 1972)Google Scholar, 475.
38. Marks, Herbert S., “Public Power and Atomic Power Development,” Law and Contemporary Problems 21 (1956): 137–138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Douglas, William O., An Almanac of Liberty (Garden City, NY, 1954)Google Scholar, 169.
39. Ellis, Clyde, Introduction to The Conservation Fight: From Theodore Roosevelt to the Tennessee Valley Authority, by King, Judson (Washington, DC, 1959)Google Scholar, viii.
40. Andrews, Richard N. L., “Recovering FDR's Environmental Legacy,” in FDR and the Environment, ed. Henderson, Henry L. and Woolner, David B. (New York, 2005)Google Scholar, 226; Robbins, William G., “Narrative Form and Great River Myths: The Power of Columbia River Stories,” Environmental History Review 17 (1993): 1–22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dick, Wesley Arden, “When Dams Weren't Damned: The Public Power Crusade and Visions of the Good Life in the Pacific Northwest in the 1930s,” Environmental Review 13 (1989): 113–53.Google Scholar
41. Marks, “Public Power,” 132–36, 146.
42. Boyer, By the Bomb's Early Light, 352–53; Weart, Nuclear Fear, chaps. 10–11; Miller, Richard L., Under the Cloud: The Decades of Nuclear Testing (New York, 1986)Google Scholar. For a study that contextualizes the fallout controversies against contemporary secrecy and complacency toward growing emissions, waste, and contamination from reactors used to produce plutonium, see Brown, Kate, Plutopia: Nuclear Families, Atomic Cities, and the Great Soviet and American Plutonium Disasters (New York, 2013).Google Scholar
43. Weart, Nuclear Fear, 187–88, 214; Frickel, Scott, Chemical Consequences: Environmental Mutagens, Scientist Activism, and the Rise of Genetic Toxicology (New Brunswick, NJ, 2004)Google Scholar, 49.
44. “Hydrogen Bombs! Something for You to Think About—To Do Something About!” New York Times, October 31, 1956, 20. Reuther was then an officer of the United World Federalists, a peace group that was named a subversive organization. When SANE was founded in 1957 to oppose atom bomb testing, he became an officer of it. Many of the first SANE activists were people who moved over from UWF ( Wittner, Lawrence, Rebels against War: The American Peace Movement, 1933–1983 [Philadelphia, 1984], 244–245 Google Scholar).
45. Frank, Pat, Mr. Adam (Philadelphia, 1946)Google Scholar; Boyer, By the Bomb's Early Light, 116; Worster, Donald, Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas, 2nd ed. (New York, 1994)Google Scholar, 346; “Atom's Biggest Worry—Getting Itself Insured,” Business Week, March 31, 1956, 122; “Progress Report Given On Nuclear Reactor Project in Michigan,” Wall Street Journal, June 29, 1956, 15; Gene Smith, “Utilities Combat Fears over Atom,” New York Times, August 26, 1956, F1. On collusion by the AEC and Cisler's Atomic Industrial Forum in suppressing expert studies of safety hazards in the 1960s, see David Burnham, “A.E.C. Files Show Effort to Conceal Safety Perils,” New York Times, November 10, 1974, 1. Discussing sodium-cooled fast breeder reactors like Fermi I, dissident nuclear physicist George Weil later criticized obfuscations of their potential to explode. Such reactors, he wrote, “are subject to ‘superprompt critical conditions,’ and, as the AEC well knows, this technical terminology translated into layman's language is an ‘atomic bomb’” (quoted in Nader, Ralph and Abbotts, John, The Menace of Atomic Energy, rev. ed. [New York, 1977]Google Scholar, 187).
46. Mazuzan and Walker, Controlling the Atom, 134–40; Anderson, Outsider in the Senate, 159–60; “AEC Unit Questions Safety of a Reactor, Sen. Anderson Asserts,” Wall Street Journal, July 16, 1956, 8.
47. Ford, Meltdown, 55; Mazuzan and Walker, Controlling the Atom, 125–33.
48. “Michigan Reactor Controversy,” Science, August 24, 1956, 358; Cater, “The Peaceful Atom”; Charles E. Egan, “A. E. C. Approves a Nuclear Plant,” New York Times, August 5, 1956.
49. Mazuzan and Walker, Controlling the Atom, 147–49; Memo from Leo Goodman to Walter P. Reuther, “Radiation Casualty Memo #2—Re: M. W. Kellogg Co. (Subsidiary of the Pullman Co.),” August 14, 1957 (WPR, box 575, folder 5); Memo from Leo Goodman to John E. Horne, “Biographical Data and—A Program,” August 3, 1956 (WPR, box 574, folder 3); Memo to ECIC Representatives, “Detroit Edison Reactor,” August 8, 1956 (WPR, box 574, folder 12).
50. “Petition for Intervention and Request for Formal Hearing,” Before the United States Atomic Energy Commission in re License Application of Power Reactor Development Company, AEC Docket No. F-16, August 31, 1956 (WPR, box 574, folder 13); “Reuther Assails A. E. C.,” New York Times, August 30, 1956, 49.
51. Buell, Lawrence, “Toxic Discourse,” Critical Inquiry 24 (1998): 657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52. Lutts, Ralph, “Chemical Fallout: Silent Spring, Radioactive Fallout, and the Environmental Movement,” in And No Birds Sing: Rhetorical Analysis of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, ed. Waddell, Craig (Carbondale, IL, 2000)Google Scholar, 19; see also Souder, William, On a Farther Shore: The Life and Legacy of Rachel Carson, Author of Silent Spring (New York, 2012)Google Scholar, chaps. 9–10.
53. “Without Public Hazard?” IUD Digest 1 (1956): 77.Google Scholar
54. Memo from Donald Montgomery to Walter P. Reuther, “Leo Goodman and Atomic Energy Program,” August 22, 1956 (WPR, folder 3, box 574). Montgomery did not live to see the suit to its conclusion, as he died in 1957; for his career, see Boyle, Kevin, The UAW and the Heyday of American Liberalism, 1945–1968 (Ithaca, NY, 1995).Google Scholar
55. “Monroe in No Peril, AEC Assures Meader,” Detroit News, September 2, 1956.
56. Hays, Samuel P., Beauty, Health, and Permanence: Environmental Politics in the United States, 1955–1985 (New York, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gottlieb, Robert, Environmentalism Unbound: Exploring New Pathways for Change (Cambridge, 2002)Google Scholar, chap. 2; Escobar, Arturo, Territories of Difference: Place, Movements, Life, Redes (Durham, NC, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 305. Elsewhere I have discussed the problematic class analytics and teleological narratives that position workers and the middle class as antagonists or competitors: “Blue Collar, White Collar: Deconstructing Classification,” in Class and Its Others, ed. Gibson-Graham, J. K., Resnick, Stephen A., and Wolff, Richard D. (Minneapolis, MN, 2000), 191–224.Google Scholar
57. Melosi, Martin V., Effluent America: Cities, Industry, Energy, and the Environment (Pittsburgh, PA, 2001)Google Scholar, 253.
58. Huth, Hans, Nature and the American: Three Centuries of Changing Attitudes (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA, 1957)Google Scholar, 194; Worster, Nature's Economy, pt. 4; White, Richard, The Organic Machine: The Remaking of the Columbia River (New York, 1995)Google Scholar; Jacoby, Karl, Crimes against Nature: Squatters, Poachers, Thieves, and the Hidden History of American Conservation (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA, 2001)Google Scholar; Shiva, Vandana, “Resources,” in The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power, ed. Sachs, Wolfgang (London, 1992), 206–18.Google Scholar
59. Feurer, Rosemary, Radical Unionism in the Midwest, 1900–1950 (Urbana, IL, 2006)Google Scholar, chap. 5; Smith, Anthony Wayne, “Labor Looks at Conservation and Development,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 281 (May 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 193; Miles, John C., Guardians of the Parks: The National Parks and Conservation Association (Washington, DC, 1995).Google Scholar
60. Dewey, Scott, “Working for the Environment: Organized Labor and the Origins of Environmentalism in the United States, 1948–1970,” Environmental History 3 (1998): 45–63 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Snyder, Lynne Page, “‘The Death-Dealing Smog Over Donora, Pennsylvania’: Industrial Air Pollution, Public Health Policy, and the Politics of Expertise, 1948–1949,” Environmental History Review 18 (1994): 117–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
61. Brown, Plutopia, 230; Nader and Abbotts, The Menace of Atomic Energy, 272; Nucleonics Week, quoted in Walker, J. Samuel, Containing the Atom: Nuclear Regulation in a Changing Environment, 1963–1971 (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA, 1992)Google Scholar, 393; Mazuzan and Walker, Controlling the Atom, 343; Leopold, Les, The Man Who Hated Work and Loved Labor: The Life and Times of Tony Mazzocchi (White River Junction, VT, 2007), 211–12Google Scholar; Ringholz, Raye, Uranium Frenzy: Saga of the Nuclear West (Logan, UT, 2002)Google Scholar, chap. 18.
62. For example, see Worster, Nature's Economy, chap. 16; Hagen, Joel, An Entangled Bank: The Origins of Ecosystem Ecology (New Brunswick, NJ, 1992)Google Scholar; Rome, Adam, The Bulldozer in the Countryside: Suburban Sprawl and the Rise of American Environmentalism (New York, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sellers, Christopher, Crabgrass Crucible: Suburban Nature and the Rise of Environmentalism in Twentieth-Century America (Chapel Hill, NC, 2012).Google Scholar
63. Leo Goodman to Walter P. Reuther, “Atomic Power Reactor Accident,” October 25, 1957 (WPR, box 575, folder 6); Walker, Containing the Atom, chaps. 4–5.
64. Wasserman, Killing Our Own, 209. In a nice continuity of old and new, in 1989 Wasserman was named the recipient of the Citizens Energy Council's Leo Goodman Award for Safe Energy Activism.