Editing Union of Concerned Scientists (section)

==Issue stances==
UCS has been critical of proposed [[Generation III reactor]] designs. [[Edwin Lyman]], a senior staff scientist at UCS, has challenged specific cost-saving design choices made for both the [[AP1000]] and [[Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor]].<ref name=bs11>{{cite journal |title=Nuclear energy: Planning for the Black Swan |author=Adam Piore |date=June 2011 |journal=Scientific American }}</ref>

The UCS endorsed the 2007 [[Forests Now Declaration]], which calls for new market based mechanism to protect forests, as the group has recognised the importance of curbing [[deforestation]] to tackle climate change.<ref name=forestsnow>[https://web.archive.org/web/20071205032542/http://www.forestsnow.org/endorsers/?filter=NGO+and+Research+Institutes Forestsnow – Endorsers – NGO and Research Institutes]. Forestsnow.org. Retrieved on 2015-12-26.</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

The group also supports governmental incentives for people who want to preserve undeveloped land instead of selling it to developers.<ref name=book>Brower, Michael, Ph.D. and Leon, Warren, Ph.D. ''The Consumer's Guide to Effective Environmental Choices: Practical Advice from the Union of Concerned Scientists'' 1999, Three Rivers Press.</ref>

It opposes the use of [[space weapons]], and work on reducing the number of [[nuclear weapons]] around the world.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nations |first=United |title=Disarmament |url=https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/disarmament |access-date=2023-10-21 |website=United Nations |language=en}}</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

On October 30, 2006, the UCS issued a press release claiming that high-ranking members of the [[U.S. Department of the Interior]], including Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks [[Julie A. MacDonald|Julie MacDonald]], systematically tampered with scientific data in an effort to undermine the protection of [[endangered species]] and the [[Endangered Species Act]].<ref name=endangered>[http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/systematic-interference-with.html Systematic Interference with Science at Interior Department Exposed – Emails and Edited Documents Show Evidence of Inappropriate Manipulation] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061104140608/http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/systematic-interference-with.html |date=November 4, 2006 }}</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

On December 11, 2006, the UCS issued a statement calling for the restoration of scientific integrity to federal policy-making, which was signed by 10,600 leading scientists including [[Nobel Prize|Nobel laureates]].<ref name=scientistscondemn>[http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/10600-scientists-condemn.html 10,600 Scientists Condemn Political Interference in Science – New Guide Documents Ongoing Federal Abuse of Science; 110th Congress Must Act]. Ucsusa.org (2015-12-22). Retrieved on 2015-12-26.</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

On May 23, 2007, the UCS cited a joint-study with [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology|MIT]] and issued a press release claiming that "any test of the [[National Missile Defense|U.S. missile defense system]] that does not show whether an interceptor missile can distinguish between real warheads and decoys is irrelevant" and "contrived," and called for an end to the taxpayer-funded program until the system can show an ability to actually address "real world threats."<ref name=contrived>[http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/another-contrived-missile-0033.html Another Contrived Missile Defense Test is Coming Up – Decoys Would Overwhelm System, Says Union of Concerned Scientists] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070610121311/http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/another-contrived-missile-0033.html |date=June 10, 2007 }}</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

On June 21, 2007, a UCS report charged the EPA with political manipulation of scientific data to influence updated US [[ozone]] regulations: "The law says use the science, the science says lower the standard to safe levels," said Francesca Grifo, director of the UCS' Scientific Integrity Program. "In disregarding its own scientists' analysis, the EPA is risking the health of millions of Americans."<ref name=smog>[http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/epa-falls-short-0041.html EPA Falls Short of Scientists' Calls for Stricter Controls on Smog – Old standard not enough to protect public health] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070713050229/http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/epa-falls-short-0041.html |date=July 13, 2007 }}</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}

In March 2011, the UCS held daily telephone media briefings related to the [[Fukushima nuclear accident]].<ref>[http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/japan-nuclear-crisis-briefings.html] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110316220346/http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/japan-nuclear-crisis-briefings.html|date=March 16, 2011}}</ref>{{primary inline|date=August 2024}}