2009 February 07 « nuclear-news

It’s still a mad MAD world, but for how much longer?

It’s still a mad MAD world, but for how much longer? The Canberra Times

HAMISH MCDONALD ASIA-PACIFIC EDITOR

7/02/2009 BARACK OBAMA’S inaugural pledge to “work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat” might see an early step taken – perhaps even this weekend, when Vice-President Joe Biden addresses a European security conference – by announcing a halt to America’s controversial missile defence program on the Europe-Middle East front……………………………But even with the suggested cutback of US and Russian arsenals to 1000 warheads apiece and halting construction of missile defence radars in Poland and the Czech Republic, Obama has a major task of persuasion ahead to convince potential adversaries, especially Russia and China, that the US is renouncing an unprecedented amount of power…………………….Specialists Keir Lieber and Daryl Press in the journal International Security . “Today the US stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy vis-a-vis its plausible great power adversaries. For the first time in decades, it could conceivably disarm the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a nuclear first strike………………..the US has been upgrading the accuracy and power of its reduced warhead numbers.Some US nuclear programs “are hard to explain with any mission other than a nuclear first strike on a major power adversary”, Lieber and Press say…………………..Even if the Americans have no intention of using their first-strike capability, the Russians and Chinese could be led by the perception that they are at risk of a successful first disarming strike to short-term responses that are destabilising in themselves.

It’s still a mad MAD world, but for how much longer? – World News – World – General – The Canberra Times

Tags: Ambassadorto address U.S. foreign policy, nuclear disarmament

February 7, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The state of Uranium

The state of Uranium The Financial Times Alphaville Feb 06 Gregor Macdonald “…………………Now spot uranium prices have fallen to the $50 level. Alas, the uranium supercycle proved all too cyclical………………………………..

The global recession meanwhile is presenting a rather obvious problem to any new price advance. Power generation in both the OECD and in Asia is currently being served with much cheaper coal and natural gas. With industrial demand for power down notably in China and the US it’s become opportune for a number of nuclear generators to go offline for maintenance.

In addition, construction costs for new plants have skyrocketed. Some recent studies have also suggested the energy return on investment for new nuclear, after construction time and materials, may actually take years. In this regard nuclear power has been somewhat hurt………………

Tags: Ambassadorto address U.S. foreign policy, nuclear disarmament

February 7, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs | Leave a comment

Ambassador to address U.S. foreign policy, nuclear disarmament

Ambassador to address U.S. foreign policy, nuclear disarmament PENNSTATE LIVE Feb 6 2009 Penn State’s School of International Affairs is pleased to announce an important public lecture series by Ambassador Richard Butler AC, distinguished scholar for international peace and security at the School of International Affairs………………….He also has served as Australian ambassador to the United Nations; chairman of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons; Australian ambassador for disarmament, Geneva; Australian ambassador to Thailand and Cambodia; governor of Tasmania; and Australian deputy representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Vienna, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris. In 2003, Butler was made a Companion of the Order of Australia (AC), Australia‘s highest civilian honor………………………………….

In his second lecture, Butler will discuss the safe elimination of nuclear weapons, an effort he believes should be revived after a decade of inaction. He will analyze the threat of nuclear arms and propose viable solutions to eradicating the problem.

“Twenty years after the end of the Cold War, the terrifying hallmark of which was the nuclear arms race and the doctrine of mutual assured destruction, almost 30,000 nuclear weapons continue to exist,” said Butler. “Their existence poses the greatest threat to the human race and the planetary environment.”

In this presentation, he will argue that nuclear weapons have no utility and that any security issues they are purported to solve would only be made worse by their use.

“There is no serious problem on which military action may be needed which cannot be solved through the use of conventional weapons,” said Butler. “Most disturbing is that possession of nuclear weapons is proliferating, which enlarges the possibility that they may be acquired by non-State groups.”

Penn State Live – Ambassador to address U.S. foreign policy, nuclear disarmament

Tags: nuclear, antinuclear, radioactive, uranium

February 7, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear’s Nemesis

Nuclear’s Nemesis Baltimore Examiner

A Senate committee in Kentucky just passed a bill that could potentially allow for the new construction of nuclear power plants in the Bluegrass State.

Essentially, the bill would repeal a 1984 law that placed a moratorium on nuclear power plant construction until the federal government can figure out how to dispose of the waste.

So has the federal government figured out how to dispose of this waste?

Not a chance.
One of the biggest problems with nuclear is that there is still no safe way to dispose of the waste. And no matter how hard they try, there’s simply no way to spin this one. Sure, there have been attempts.

If you have to put something in a highly-engineered container, capable of withstanding enormous impact…then it ain’t safe!

Still, nuclear power plants have been sending massive amounts of juice to the grid for years. And as a result, we now have tons of nuclear waste – and no safe, centralized place to put it………………………That $96.2 billion (right now) will be enough to develop a repository large enough to handle 77,000 metric tons. Here’s the problem – more than 56,000 tons are already stored at more than 77 reactor sites across the country. And this number increases by about 2,000 tons each year. So by 2036 (when Yucca would be filled to capacity), we’ll be looking at about 110,000 tons – or 33,000 tons above what Yucca can store. Translation – problem NOT solved!……………………………..

Today, nuclear provides us with about 20 percent of our electricity. But between energy efficiency and conservation, and the large-scale integration of renewables, that 20 percent could easily be replaced – and without contributing to the safety and environmental issues that are undoubtedly associated with nuclear power.