The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Global campaign to ban nuclear from the Paris climate talks

globalnukeNOBan nuclear from Paris talks, green groups urge–urge-green-groups/ 17 June 2015, source edie newsroom  Brad Allen, An international coalition of clean energy groups have launched a new campaign asking for the nuclear power industry to be barred from the UN climate talks in Paris.

The Don’t Nuke The Climate campaign is being led by the Netherland’s World Information Service on Energy (WISE), and supported by green groups from Germany, Russia, France, Austria and the US.

WISE director Peer de Rijk explained: “We are calling on 1,000 civil society organisations to join us for a campaign to block the nuclear industry’s lobby activities at COP21 and instead ensure the world chooses clean energy. It is the only real climate solution.”

Under the Kyoto Protocol, nuclear energy is excluded from the possible solutions available to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But de Rijk claims the industry is “in collaboration with certain nations, lobbying for their dangerous and polluting technology to be sold as a climate-friendly option during the Climate COP21”.


As an initial step for the campaign, the organising groups today launched an international petition, designed to lobby world leaders in support of nuclear-free clean energy.

The coalition is also planning a “mass demonstration” in Paris on the 12 December, in the midst of the UN conference.

“Nuclear power is in no way a climate solution,” said Michael Mariotte, the president of the US-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service, which is part of the campaign.

“Nuclear power remains dirty, dangerous and expensive; is not carbon-free; and encourages nuclear proliferation.”

UK picture

No UK groups have yet joined the campaign, but the technology remains divisive.

According to the World Nuclear Association, the UK currently has 16 reactors generating about 18% of its electricity and all but one of these will be retired by 2023.

Three new generation plants – including the station at Hinkley Point – are expected to start coming online in 2023, with an estimated 19GW of capacity.

Green groups called the planning approval for the Hinkley power plant a  “world record sell-out” and a “shocking decision”, but Circular Ecology’s Dr Craig Jones warned that nuclear provided valuable electricity to the UK, and if it was abandoned, the void would likely be filled by coal and gas.

June 19, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, climate change, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

21st Century electricity – and the nuclear industry’s war against it

In contrast to nuclear power, renewables have made much more progress, more quickly with much smaller subsidies, and there are good reasons to expect these trends to continue.
The number of jobs created by building alternatives to replace nuclear exceeds the number of jobs “lost”
Policy should not subsidize nuclear reactors, old or new. In the long run, their large size and inflexible operation make them a burden, not a benefit in the 21st century system.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the ongoing battle between two very different visions for the future of the electricity sector:
 the 20th century model of central station, baseload/peak-load generation that passively follows demand,
 the emerging 21st century, decentralized model based on coordinating and actively integrating distributed supply with managed demand using advanced information, communications, and control technologies.
The paper demonstrates that the current conflict between the dominant incumbents, led by nuclear power on the one side, and the new entrants, on the other, has reached a crucial turning point that will deeply affect the speed of the transformation and the ultimate structure of the 21st century electricity system.
Section III: The economic characteristics of the alternatives – size, construction period and cost – combine to make them much more attractive from the point of view of risk. With smaller, quicker to market assets with much smaller sunk costs available, a portfolio approach to acquiring low carbon resources that minimizes risk or price leaves nuclear power and “clean” coal out of the mix. Section III also shows that traditional measures of environmental impact and contemporary measures of sustainability indicate that the alternatives are vastly superior to nuclear power and “clean” coal……..
THE NUCLEAR WAR AGAINST THE FUTURE  Part III of the analysis examines the reaction of central station utilities to the powerful technological development of alternatives. Not surprisingly, utilities that are deeply invested in large central station generation see the distributed alternatives as a severe threat to their interest. They have responded by launching an all-out attack on the alternatives on several fronts. ………

Continue reading

June 19, 2015 Posted by | 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES, 2 WORLD, Reference | Leave a comment

Gangwon Province, China, strongly opposes nuclear power

Voices growing in Gangwon Province against slated nuclear reactor Jun.18,2015
flag-ChinaGovernment’s recently released 7th Power Supply Plan mandates two new nuclear reactors by 2029After the government announced its 7th Power Supply Plan, which will depend on the construction of two more nuclear reactors by 2029, residents of Gangwon Province are becoming more vocal in their demands to cancel the construction of nuclear reactors in Samcheok.On June 17, the Gangwon Province branch of the New Politics Alliance for Democracy (NPAD) held a press conference in front of Samcheok Post Office calling for the national government to scrap its plans to build nuclear reactors in the city and to revoke its designation of the planned areas.

“In a popular referendum about building nuclear reactors that was carried out in October of last year, 85% of the citizens of Samcheok voted against the plan. A majority of Samcheok citizens are united in their position that building nuclear reactors poses an unacceptable threat to their lives and safety,” a speaker at the press conference said.

protest China 15

“The government means to push ahead with the construction of the nuclear reactors because of its stubborn insistence that nuclear power is the business of the state and is not subject to a popular referendum, but in the end no government can defeat its own people. We will join with the people of Samcheok to block the nuclear reactors,” said Shim Gi-jun, head of the NPAD’s Gangwon Province branch.

On June 16, Lee Yi-jae, 56, Saenuri Party representative for the cities of Donghae and Samcheok; Kim Yang-ho, mayor of Samcheok; and Chung Jin-gwon, head of the Samcheok city council met with Moon Jae-do, Second Vice Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy, in the committee room of the National Assembly‘s Trade, Industry, and Energy Committee and asked that plans to build nuclear reactors in Samcheok be omitted from the 7th Power Supply Plan, which will be confirmed at the end of this month.

“Delaying the final decision about the location of the nuclear reactors for three years until 2018 will provoke conflict and division between different regions. There is precedent for this, since Deoksan Village was removed from the list of possible nuclear reactor sites in 1999 and the construction of a nuclear waste disposal facility was shelved in 2005. I hope that public receptiveness will be given the highest priority and that the plans to build a nuclear reactor in Samcheok will be scrapped,” Lee said.

The Committee Fighting against the Samcheok Nuclear Reactor recently issued a statement of its own responding to the government’s announcement of the 7th Power Supply Plan. “The nuclear reactor construction plan should not be slyly delayed until 2018 but should be struck from the 7th Power Supply Plan at once. If the plans to build nuclear reactors are not revoked, we will step up our fight against the government,” the committee said.

The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy is set to submit the 7th Power Supply Plan to the National Assembly around June 20. If the plan is approved, it will be officially announced around the end of the month.

By Park Soo-hyeok, Gangwon correspondent      Please direct questions or comments to [

June 19, 2015 Posted by | China, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Pope Francis encyclical on the environment: 10 key excerpts

Pope & St Francis10 key excerpts from Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment June 19, 2015

Pope Francis is calling for an “ecological conversion” for the faithful in his sweeping new encyclical on the environment. In Laudato Si (Praise Be), On the Care of Our Common Home, he warns of harming birds and industrial waste and calls for renewable fuel subsidies and energy efficiency.

Here are some of the key passages people will read closely, everything from climate change and global warming to abortion and population control.

1. Climate change has grave implications. “Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species

 2. Rich countries are destroying poor ones, and the earth is getting warmer. “The warming caused by huge consumption on the part of some rich countries has repercussions on the poorest areas of the world, especially Africa, where a rise in temperature, together with drought, has proved devastating for farming.”

3. Francis called for policies to “drastically” reduce polluting gases. Technology based on fossil fuels “needs to be progressively replaced without delay” and sources of renewable energy developed.

4. Christians have misinterpreted Scripture and “must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures.”

5. The importance of access to safe drinkable water is “a basic and universal human right.”

6. Technocratic domination leads to the destruction of nature and the exploitation of people, and “by itself the market cannot guarantee integral human development and social inclusion.”

7. Population control does not address the problems of the poor. “In the face of the so-called culture of death, the family is the heart of the culture of life.” And, “Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion.”

8. Gender differences matter, and “valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognise myself in an encounter with someone who is different.”

9. The international community has not acted enough: “recent World Summits on the environment have not lived up to expectations because, due to lack of political will, they were unable to reach truly meaningful and effective global agreements on the environment.” He writes, “the Church does not presume to settle scientific questions or to replace politics. But I am concerned to encourage an honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common good.” And, “there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.”

10. Individuals must act. “An integral ecology is also made up of simple daily gestures which break with the logic of violence, exploitation and selfishness,” he writes. We should also consider taking public transit, car-pooling, planting trees, turning off the lights and recycling.  “What kind of world do we want to leave to those who come after us, to children who are now growing up?” he writes. “Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving to coming generations debris, desolation and filth.”  The Washington Post, Reuters

June 19, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, Religion and ethics | 1 Comment

UK’s energy policy in a shambles as govt seeks China funding for new nuclear reactors

exclamation-Smflag-UKNuclear adviser attacks ‘perverse’ idea of Chinese building UK reactors Prof Dieter Helm also identifies security pitfalls as unions accuse government of sacrificing safety for free-market ideology over Hinkley Point C plant, Guardian,  , 19 June 15, A leading energy academic and government adviser has called on ministers to take an equity stake in the planned new Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset, saying it would not make sense to prefer Chinese money.

The comments from Dieter Helm, professor of energy policy at Oxford University, came as trade union leaders accused the government of letting political beliefs override practical and safety issues in the nuclear sector. In a paper entitled British Energy policy – What Happens Next? , Helm said the British government should issue debt or specific nuclear guaranteed bonds, that could cut the cost of capital from 10% to 2%.

“It is a no-brainer,” said Helm. “Add in the military and security issues of letting Chinese state-owned companies into the heart of the British nuclear industry, and it seems positively perverse to prefer Chinese government money to British government money in so sensitive a national project.”

Helm usually champions free-market methods and is on the economic advisory committee at the Department of Energy and Climate Change.

Meanwhile the attack on government nuclear policy from the GMB union came after comments from Amber Rudd, the energy and climate change secretary, left the door open to Chinese state companies building and operating a new plant at Bradwell, in Essex.

Gary Smith, the union’s national secretary for energy, said the Conservatives seemed ready to allow Beijing to use its own equipment and supply chain in return for funding the new stations at Bradwell and Hinkley Point.

“Energy policy is a shambles because the government is driven by ideology. It will do anything to bring in private or Chinese state money to build British energy infrastructure rather than have it (debt) on George Osborne’s balance sheet,” he said.

This would extend to the Chinese being allowed to ship over large amounts of equipment from Chinese factories, potentially affecting British nuclear safety and as well as hitting UK jobs, he said. Smith noted that an eminent Chinese nuclear scientist, He Zuoxiu, had raised concerns about the safety of his country’s atomic equipment………….

June 19, 2015 Posted by | politics, UK | 1 Comment

The global clean energy movement at risk of infiltration by the thorium nuclear cult

Thorium Church: a trojan horse in the “green” movements. Here the Removal Tool. No Nukes, 
By Massimo Greco June 2015   
What are trojan horses?

Trojan horses, otherwise known as trojans, are programs or applications that are inadvertently opened by the user, who expects the file to be something else..  by the same way “thorium supporters” are infecting forums, mailing list, debacts and environmental organizations.

Thorium-cultIt’s a strategy that is working in progress from some year. In few years they infected large part of the web.  Like any malware, thorium’s priests are insinuated through any open space or open port .. and they are able to act at different levels. Mutating depending on the circumstances, improvising them selves as technicians or economists with the sole purpose of creating deviationism which in practice consists of annoying redirect to their cause that is regularly touted as a “green” solution or, even, “pacifist” or as a miraculous solution for the “salvation of the climate”.

Their function is aggressive, especially when you try to contradict them. They always want to have the last word in any discussion, obsessively, and only when it is too late you will realize how they can make you loosing your precious time. At that point you will no more than take note that they have achieved their goal. The infection has taken place and yours space is compromised. Whether it on youtube, any social network, forums or in any blog … it makes no difference: the malware is mutant. And in this, their behavior is very reminiscent of the deviationist hysteria typical of the fanatics of “chemtrails”. And this is not a “coincidence”. In fact one of several strategies, probably the most important, of the priests of thorium, has been to adopt the method of the conspiracy. Internet is full of delusions offering thorium as ecological way prevented by the famous NWO …. This was the most successful strategy in the work of proselytism in previous years, because it could involve a considerable number of idiots on the net.

Thorium’s priests respond with their usual strutting arrogance that scandals such as Kerr-McGee Chemical LLC affair at West Chicago, Ridgewood … NYC’s Most Radioactive Place … The affair of the soil that came from radioactive waste storage site in St. Louis and dumped at West Lake …. or the thorium contamination (with murders and judiciary prosecution) for military use in Sardinia (and in other NATO italian bases …) “has nothing to do with LFTR” …..

“that has nothing to do..” ???

So… why, in their propaganda, the most important slogan is “Thorium is green”? “it’s natural”… “viable”… “clean”…. or “peaceful”???

This is the best example of the typical commercials fraud of the lies in matter of communication.

Is there any “pope” in this kind of “church”?

Oh yess! More than one!

According to an article diffused by “Energy & Capital” that is a network resource that promotes “Pratical Investment Analysis in the New Energy Economy”, Bill Gates (whose company TerraPower has also begun testing thorium reactors) is one of the major investors.

On the Huffington Post you can read also that “In the U.S., TerraPower, founded by former Microsoft chief technology officer Nathan Myhrvold, with backing from Bill Gates, is working on a “traveling wave reactor”–often described as ‘the world’s most passive fast breeder reactor’ –that will be able to run on both thorium and uranium and is due, in prototype form, by 2020.”

Another important bishop, Kirk Sorenson, chief technologist for the Energy from Thorium Foundation, says that “To stop global warming,” says…  “we need thousands of new reactors worldwide; currently we have hundreds. It took three years from when they invented the fluoride reactor until they built the first one. That was fifty years ago, and we know a lot more about how to do it now.” [Huffinghton Post]

So not only priests but also cardinals…. like Kirk Sorensen, former NASA aerospace engineer and formerly chief nuclear technologist at Teledyne Brown Engineering. Often present in all the results of the infected search engines used to promote about “the potential for thorium to offer humanity a safe, cheap and abundant source of energy”.

But the Thorium Church is also “modern” and “emancipated”, so you can learn that there is also a woman pope… :
Bryony Katherine Worthington, Baroness Worthington, patron of the Weinberg Foundation, she is a life peer in the House of Lords. She became a member of the Lords on 02-Feb-2011. The Baroness was once “passionately opposed to nuclear power” but came to advocate the adoption of Thorium as a nuclear fuel in the name of “climate change mitigation”…
On 29 February 2012 a Thorium all-party parliamentary group was formed; its officers were Worthington, Julian Huppert and Ralph Palmer, with twenty other members at founding. According to the info of wikipedia Worthington is no longer listed on the APPG registry however, we can’t know why… maybe there are different strategies or competitive conflicts inside the Church.. :p

That’s all you need to know in order to undestand, better, what we are talking about before to talk about their “trojan horse” propagandistic resources and how to get safety protection about it…


June 19, 2015 Posted by | spinbuster, thorium | 1 Comment

It’s time that UK civil servants spoke out on the poor prospects for new nuclear power

The public has been ‘protected’ from the truth of Fukushima Many people are gravely disturbed by the prospect of new nuclear power. That is particularly so among Treasury civil servants. We are in an extraordinary situation, where there is still public support in spite of Fukushima.

One of the main reasons for that is that the British public were ‘protected’ by a skilled public relations operation from knowing the terrible cost of Fukushima – between $100 billion and $250 billion.

protest-Hinkley-CCivil servants must speak out: ‘the time has gone for nuclear power’,
 Paul Flynn MP 18th June 2015 Despite the PR spin the truth about nuclear power is clear, says Paul Flynn. Current projects are plagued with technical failures, cost escalations and long delays – while renewables power ahead. As tin-eared ministers refuse to get the message, it’s time for civil servants to speak out direct to the public.

Nuclear power was promised as an energy source that would be too cheap to meter. It is now too expensive to generate.

If we were planning a nuclear policy from scratch, would we choose to do a deal with two French companies, one of which is bankrupt, while the other, Électricité de France, has a debt of €33 billion?

Would we also collaborate with a country with a dreadful human rights record – China, whose national investment department is coming into the arrangement – and with Saudi Arabia, with its atrocious record on human rights, where people are executed on the street?  Continue reading

June 19, 2015 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

USA’s (or Russia’s) nuclear weapons could be launched by a cyber hacker

hackerWhat happens when our nuclear arsenal is hacked? One of the most chilling comments I’ve ever heard was the former commander of U.S. nuclear forces telling a San Francisco audience this month that our nuclear missiles could be hacked — launched and detonated without authorization.

 If you thought this was just a fantasy from the sci-fi movie, “Terminator,” think again.

Retired Marine Gen. James Cartwright used to have his fingers on all the nuclear buttons. As a former head of the U.S. Strategic Command, he was responsible for more than 5,000 nuclear weapons targeted at cities around the globe.

So when he told almost 200 Bay Area business, civic and philanthropic leaders gathered last week for the annual Ploughshares Fund gala that our nuclear strategy “made no sense,” he got their attention. But when he told them that our nuclear forces are hit by countless cyberattacks, he sent chills down their spines.

There are only two realities in the modern, interconnected world, he warned: “You’ve either been hacked and not admitting it, or you’re being hacked and don’t know it.”

CYBERSECURITY AND HACKING A key problem, he said, is that we keep hundreds of missiles on “hair-trigger” alert — a vestige of the Cold War that enables the launch of fully armed nuclear weapons in under 15 minutes. Continue reading

June 19, 2015 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Buildup of radioactive materials in Pacific ocean food chain – salmon, tuna and other species

radiation-in-sea--food-chaiStudy: Fukushima radiation will cause long-term harm to Pacific salmon population — Efforts needed to protect species from possible extinction — Radiation monitoring is critical to avoid human health problems — “US inland areas also at risk of exposure”

Journal of Applied Mathematics — Modelling the Effects of Radioactive Effluent on Thunnus orientalis and Oncorhynchus gorbuscha, New Jersey City Univ. (Chen, Ding, Laracuenti, Lipat(Columbia Univ., NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies)), 2013 (emphasis added):

  • The contamination of the Pacific Ocean by the radioactive pollutants released from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has raised legitimate concerns over the viability of marine wildlife. We… explore the extent of the effects of the radioactive effluent on two marine species: the Pacific Bluefin Tuna and the Pacific Pink Salmon…
  • Because of the brevity of the period of time during which radioactive material was discharged… [it’s] assumed to be instantaneous [note the study was released beforeTEPCO admitted the flow of radioactive material into the Pacific never ended]…
  • This pollution was spread through the entire Pacific Ocean…
  • A numerical solution… will simulate the effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster…This simulation has far-reaching implications for decisions related to the location of nuclear power plants as well as to fishing policy…
  • According to data released by Tepco, the initial concentrations of radioactivity following the release of 11,500 metric tonnes of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean… are 310,000 Bq/L of iodine-131, 230,000 Bq/L of caesium-134, and 230,000 Bq/L of caesium-137 [which] produces the initial radioactivity of the iodine-131: 3.57 trillion Bq… caesium-134: 2.65 trillion Bq… caesium-1372.65 trillion Bq [note that estimates by gov’t scientists are 10,000+ times higher]…
  • Analysis of the results shows that the Pacific Bluefin Tuna will experience a steeper population decline in the short term compared to its expected population decline… after which the population will return to the expected population.
  • Pacific Pink Salmon, on the other hand, will simply decline at a faster pace than the expected population decline… radioactive effluent will result in a marked and lasting decrease in population [see Fig. 5, 6]…
  • Before the conclusions are subjected to social analysis, the model’s limitations must be considered… the model does not reflect the migratory nature of both fish species. This does not, however, entirely negate the validity of the simulation: over a sufficiently long period of time, the short-term movement of the fish throughout the Pacific Ocean becomes negligible… The results of the model… opt to consider the fish species’ population on average…
  • The very high rate of decline of the Pacific Pink Salmon indicates that live specimens may contain relatively high levels of radioactivity. Continued monitoring of the Pacific Pink Salmon, as well as all marine species, for radioactivity will be critical to the avoidance of health problems for humans. Because the species migrates throughout freshwater rivers and tributaries of British Columbia, Alaska, and the Pacific Northwest of the United States, inland areas are also at risk of exposure to, at the very least, low-level radioactivity. Moreover, the rapid rate of decline of the Pacific Pink Salmon, in conjunction with rapidly deteriorating conditions, seems to necessitate drastic action. Work beyond sustainability is needed to protect the species from possible extinction
  • Because of the deleterious effects on the marine environment… it seems reasonable to suggest that any new nuclear power plants be constructed sufficiently far from coastal waterways so as to mitigate the absorption of any radioactive contaminants into the biosphere. This, however, would pose a risk to the environment near the nuclear power plant without the capacity of an ocean to diffuse the radioactivity…
  • The authors are thankful to [National Science Foundation award] NSF HRD-0902132 (LSAMP) for the support to do this research.

See also: Scientists: Radioactivity in food web off Pacific Northwest to “significantly increase” — Salmon forecast to exceed Japan radiation limit — “Major concern for public health” (POSTER)

June 19, 2015 Posted by | oceans | Leave a comment

The tax-payers’ unnecessary burden of useless nuclear deterrence systems

missile-moneyAmerica and other nuclear states have come to a juncture, one where they have to weigh the costs and benefits of continuing this expensive status quo of nuclear deterrence; alternatives exist with the same ‘benefit’ and only marginal costs. The taxpayers need not bear this burden on their shoulders forever.

The Atlas Burden: The Cost of America’s Nuclear Arsenal, Ethical Technology  By Steven Umbrello, 18 June 15, Over the course of the next three years, the United States projects that it will continue the reduction of its nuclear arsenal. As it stands, the country currently holds approximately 7’100 nuclear weapons, 2,340 of which are retired and waiting to be dismantled. This leaves approximately 4,760 warheads both in deployment and storage.

The cost of maintaining such an arsenal is understandably gargantuan. Over the next ten years, the American government plans to spend as much as $350 billion maintaining and upgrading its nuclear infrastructure. These upgrades include: Continue reading

June 19, 2015 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Report: Nuclear power a costly failure 

 Kristina Smith,  June 17, 2015 CARROLL TOWNSHIP – Nuclear energy is a costly failure, and Ohio and other states should focus on alternative energy, according to a report released Wednesday by an energy institute.

Upgrading the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and other aged nuclear and coal plants around Ohio and asking the state to assess fees to help bail out the plants will ultimately cost power customers more money, said Mark Cooper, author of the report “Power Shift: The deployment of a 21st century electricity center and the nuclear war to stop it.”……..

June 19, 2015 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Hedge funds, Goldman Sachs and the money behind the push for nuclear power

uranium-enrichmentFollow the Money   I’ve been following the money for the uranium supply chain:
I turned over a rock and found Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s biggest, if not the biggest, uranium trader through its control of Nufcor.
2008 June 26, Nufcor was bought by the Constellation Energy Group, a U.S. firm that operated several nuclear power plants, for about $103 million. (Exelon has owned Constellation Energy since 2011)
2009 Goldman acquires Nufcor from Constellation Energy as part of a purchase of 900,000 pounds of uranium. Nufcor is the biggest private trader of uranium.

Details about Goldman’s uranium venture are included in the 2014 US Senate report chaired by Carl Levin and including Senator John McCain title: “Wall Street Bank’s Involvement with Physical Commodities”: From Senate Report: page 113 Constellation Acquisition. After its conversion to a bank holding company, Goldman continued to expand its physical commodity activities. In 2009, according to a Goldman presentation to the Federal Reserve,  Goldman purchased over 3,000 trading assets involving U.K., French, and German power and U.K. natural gas; as well as about 60 coal contracts, 20 time and voyage freight agreements, and 900,000 pounds of uranium ore from Constellation Energy, a U.S. utility and trading business.Included in that acquisition was Nufcor International, a uranium trading company which stored and traded uranium ore in various stages of enrichment, as further described below…

…Page 124: In 2009, Goldman purchased Nufcor, and expanded its business over the
next five years, resulting in Goldman’s buying millions of pounds of uranium, controlling inventories of physical uranium at storage facilities in the United States and Europe, and becoming a long term supplier of physical uranium to nine utilities with nuclear power plants. Because no employees who conducted Nufcor’s business joined Goldman after the sale, Goldman employees ran the business. In 2014, for a variety of reasons, Goldman decided it would sell Nufcor or wind it down…

I find no evidence that Goldman has successfully sold Nufcor.  Since 2011 Constellation Energy, which no longer owns Nufcor, has been owned by Exelon.

In 2006 and 2007 hedge funds piled into Uranium. Goldman is noteworthy because of the scope of its involvement the leverage that involvement affords it over uranium pricing and, no doubt, demand.

If you want to know why nuclear is pursued despite its obvious costs and risks, there is no better place to begin understanding than addressing who benefits from the global uranium trade.

June 19, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, business and costs, marketing of nuclear, Uranium | Leave a comment

How to detect and remove thorium nuclear propaganda from your environmental group

Thorium-snake-oilThorium Church: a trojan horse in the “green” movements. Here the Removal Tool. No Nukes, 
By Massimo Greco June 2015 

“…….Scanning and Removal tool

“How do I know if my preferred “green” organization, or group, or leader… is infected by the ‘thorium church’ trojan horse?”

First check if the leader or “group leader” you are referring knows the problem of thorium, whether it has never taken a position on it. If the answer is “I do not know the problem” or “what you’re talking about,” you have the first certainty that your organization or target group is NOT protected.

If the answer is: “It is not a problem that concerns us”, “there is no matter in our topic or with antinuclear matter or uranium …”, or even worse … “nuclear thorium could be a clean way but the NWO prevents “… then you have the most certain that your group or environmental organization is terribly infected and that the leader is highly compromised.

If you are doing this survey “in public”, in a forum related to your organization reference, and after posting these sacrosanct questions and you are reproached or assaulted without causing or leading an intervention by the “admin” able to defend you, that’s another proof that your organization, or environmental group, results hugely infected.

You can also do a very easy search to see if the “admin” or the “most active” subjects are related to pro-thorium forums or registered as supporters of fan in groups offering thorium as a “savior” or “green”, especially when you attend to spam and suspicious behavior in the forums or social networks. You can do the same search about chemtrails or “HAARP” deviationism. As better Explained before, Thorium Church used very much the conspiracy decoy in order to mislead, confused and make it weak, vulnerable and unpractical environmental movements.

How to protect yourself from malicious propaganda of Thorium Church or from related compromised group or organizations.

If, as explained above, your reference group or environmental organization is infected: leave the group. This way you will avoid being accomplices. Thou hast tried, you have already taken the necessary steps. You’re not responsible. You have tried to change things.

If you are a “leader” or admin of a forum, or group… or green or environmental organization, you have to eject such people before they get completely the control of any topic. You have the duty to eject these individuals, without any hesitation of “democracy” and “freedom of confusion”… Because they, in the spaces controlled by the Thorium Church, do not allow you ever to contradict them and erase systematically, as their typical practice, anything that might cast doubt on their truth or propaganda. And, in any case, as admin or “leader” you have a duty to treat these subjects like any nuclearist that want to provoke discussion on the space that you are owning, or controlling.

If you are owning a youtube channel or any social page on social networks and you want to get protection from the thorium worm.. specially concerning antinuclear or environmental documents:

Simply “turn off” the option about “free comments” and choice comments under authorization or moderate. If you are admin of social pages delete their worms (spamming) and eject the veicle of infection (for the reasons better explained before).

“How can I become active against cultural damages of pro-nuclear business propaganda of the Thorium Church?”

Ofcourse there are many different ways. Remember that pro-nuclear lobbies are pushing for the “new generation of nuclear power”, that means not only tradicional way of uranium. In fact they are talking about “nuclear of future”. So, “green”, environmentalist organizations, antinuclear people need to look about future strategies of the lobbies and not only to the past or the temporary, local, contingencies.

In recent years many antinuclear resources and internationally famous have taken a position on thorium. Just think about documents released by Bellona, Beyond Nuclear or to the Excellent article from Bob Alvarez on why thorium is not the wonder fuel it’s being promoted as and a brief history of the US’s persistent failure in making thorium safe or efficient ending with the expected trail of dangerous, weaponizable, waste… or the position of Helen Caldicott, violently attacked by the priests of the Thorium Church with a lot of insults like at the time of the “Scarlet Letter”…

[Dr. Arjun Makhijani on the downsides of the proposed thorium reactors (by Dr. Helen Caldicott)]

So it’s important to diffuse all the events, documents and positions, everywhere is possible, in order to counteract the mala information and debunking thorium commercials spot on the net.

To start an international and active support of the antinuclear movement in Indonesia, Malaysia, specially concerning the mobilization around Lynas, Koodankulam and any Rare Earth opposition in the West Asia. Promoting an active “UPGRADE” of all the antinuclear organizations.

Not only. You can help also supporting all the RNA spaces. Like this. For a new “NoThorium” activism. RNA was the first organization that started activism against thorium in Italy and in Paris. And at this moment has and diffuses the most rich archive of documents against thorium.

Better active today than radioactive tomorrow

June 19, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, spinbuster, thorium | Leave a comment

Pentagon presents depleted uranium weapons as legal and acceptable!

depleted-uranium-weaponDU users conclude that depleted uranium weapons are legal and acceptable

The latest US DoD Law of War Manual argues that DU weapons are OK because the UK and France say that they are too.

Earlier this month the Pentagon published a 1204 page document on its interpretation of the Laws of War. The project had sought to collate manuals used by different arms of the military into a single document and covers a range of controversial weapons and practices, from drones and herbicides to autonomous weapons, nuclear weapons and landmines. Naturally the document presents the US’s interpretation of the law and this means that at times their views seem somewhat removed from the global consensus. The legality of DU weapons is dealt with briefly and follows a rather predictable pattern.

June 19, 2015 Posted by | depleted uranium, USA | Leave a comment

It is really in the interest of Republicans to act against climate change

As climate change unfolds around the globe, climate disasters will give undemocratic forces the justification they seek to commandeer resources, declare martial law, interfere with the market economy, and suspend democratic processes. This means that Americans who care about political freedom shouldn’t hold back when it comes to supporting climate scientists and acting to prevent the threats they have so clearly and fulsomely documented.

To do otherwise can only increase the chances that authoritarian forms of governance will come out ahead in a future in which our children and grandchildren, including those of the climate deniers, will all be the losers, as will our planet and so many of the other species on it. Recognizing and emphasizing this aspect of the climate equation may offer some hope of enabling more moderate Republicans to step back from the brinkmanship of denial.

climate-changeClimate Deniers Are Quickly Bringing About Their Own Worst Nightmare How climate denial became second nature to the new Republican Party, The Nation Naomi Oreskes  June 16, 2015  “……As unlikely as it might seem today, in the first half of the 20th century the Republicans were the party that most strongly supported scientific work, as they recognized the diverse ways in which it could undergird economic activity and national security. The Democrats were more dubious, tending to see science as elitist and worrying that new federal agencies like the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health would concentrate resources in elite East Coast universities.

 In recent decades, of course, the Republicans have lurched rightward on many topics, and they now regularly attack scientific findings that threaten their political platforms. In the 1980s, they generally questioned evidence of acid rain; in the 1990s, they went after ozone science; and in this century, they have launched fierce attacks not just on climate science but, in the most personal fashion imaginable, on climate scientists……

Continue reading

June 19, 2015 Posted by | climate change, politics, USA | Leave a comment