nuclear-news

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

USA’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission at risk of being hacked

cyber-attackNuclear commission risks being hacked because of organizational issues: watchdog report  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/13/nuclear-commission-risks-being-hacked-because-of-o/ By Andrew Blake – The Washington Times – Wednesday, January 13, 2016

Computer networks used by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissionpose a real possibility of being exploited by hackers as a result of inadequate organization among security personnel, a federal report found this week.

The NRC’s inspector general said in a 18-page assessment released on Tuesday that its Security Operations Center, or SOC, isn’t “optimized to protect the agency’s network in the current cyber threat environment.”

Weeks after new reports revealed that hackers had successfully compromised a hydroelectric dam in New York City in 2013, the government watchdog said the NRC’s unclassified computer networks risk being breached because the agency has failed to structure itself in a way that would ensure any unauthorized intrusions are handled appropriately.

NRC staffers told the inspector general that the SOC “does not meet agency needs” and singled out a lack of proactive analyses and timely, detailed reports that could otherwise provide the information necessary to keep its networks properly protected.

“There are no performance goals,” the watchdog found, meaning the NRCcannot possibly assess “whether agency needs are being met.”

More specifically, the report faulted “generic” contracts that have yielded “differing expectations” with respect to roles and responsibilities, as well as “inadequate definitions in agency policies and undifferentiated functional descriptions between different entities responsible for securing NRC’s network.”

“This occurs because although the contract performance criteria are aligned with National Institute of Standards and Technology and NRCinternal guidance, the contract does not clearly define SOC performance goals and metrics that can be used to determine whether agency needs are being met,” the inspector general concluded following a five-month audit of the NRC’s headquarters in Rockville, Maryland.

To keep the NRC’s unclassified networks safe from hackers, the agency must ensure that organizational roles and responsibilities are more clearly defined, the watchdog said.

In the meantime, the inspector general acknowledged in a footnote that the nuclear sector has not been spared from cyberattacks: While federal data has suggested a 9.7 percent surge between 2013 and 2014 with regards to computer security incidents across the board, the NRCexperienced an 18 percent increase in hack attacks during that same span, including instances in which hackers had attempted to gain unauthorized access through malicious code injections, social engineering, policy violations or other attempts.

“A dynamic cyber threat environment demands a high-performing SOC,” the inspector general wrote. “The sophistication and frequency of malicious activity targeting NRC has increased. These forces, combined with the need for NRC users to stay connected with stakeholders and partners through the Internet, make effective information security a critical capability.”

January 15, 2016 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

“Irresponsible” to restart Belgium’s nuclear reactors

Concerns over two Belgian nuclear reactors, News 24 2016-01-14 20:18 Brussels – Two Belgian nuclear reactors which were temporarily shut down due to structural problems should never have been restarted, according to a study commissioned by a pro-environmental group in the European Parliament and published on Thursday.

The study feeds into an ongoing debate about the safety of Belgium’s ageing nuclear plants, but the country’s nuclear regulator rejected the findings.

Technical problems with Belgium’s nuclear reactors have created tensions with neighbouring Germany, which is moving toward clean and sustainable energy sources and has passed legislation that requires the closure of all its commercial nuclear reactors by 2022.

The two reactors, Doel 3 and Tihange 2, were taken offline in 2012 after service checks indicated defects in the reactor pressure vessels. They were later found to be hydrogen flakes, formed when hydrogen bubbles became trapped during the manufacturing of the tank’s steel rings.

 Belgium’s Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) carried out further analysis and consultations with international experts, and announced in November that the reactors could be relaunched.

But the new study, carried out by material scientist Ilse Tweer on behalf of the Greens’ parliamentary group, challenges several of the FANC’s assessments and concludes that the decision to restart the two power plants is “not understandable.”

Tweer’s report says it is not certain that the flaws in the pressure vessels are hydrogen flakes, adding that there is no “explicit proof” that they have not grown during the 30 years that the reactors have been operational, or could do so in future.

“A reactor pressure vessel with thousands of flaws – and with these large flaw sizes – would not be licensable, neither today nor at the time of manufacture,” the report notes.

“Operating these two reactors, which contain thousands of cracks, is irresponsible,” Green EU lawmaker Rebecca Harms of the said on Wednesday. “Were the vessel to burst, the consequences for the densely populated region around the reactors would be catastrophic.”…… http://www.news24.com/World/News/concerns-over-two-belgian-nuclear-reactors-20160114

January 15, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Another 6.7 Earthquake Warns that Japan is No Place for Nuclear

miningawareness's avatarMining Awareness +

Japan doing it’s routine shaking and quaking. Another 6.7 earthquake warns that Japan is no place for nuclear power stations. Japan’s apparently homicidal and suicidal government doesn’t care and is restarting more and more. Even shut-down they constitute a menace, not only to Japan but to other countries.

Not satisfied with the Fukushima nuclear disaster, which still must be cleaned-up, and which has continued to belch lethal radionuclides into the environment by TEPCO’s own admission, PM Shinzo Abe-the Japanese government appear determined to experience another, or even an earthquake-volcano-nuclear disaster. No wonder that rumors surface now and again that Abe is a member of a death cult. Abe’s maternal grandfather is considered to have been a war criminal by many: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobusuke_Kishi Easy to wonder if Abe has a Nuclear-kaze thing going.
Japan 6.7 quake 14 Jan 2016
http://ptwc.weather.gov/?region=2&id=hawaii.TIBHWX.2016.01.14.0336
(The time frame of this earthquake map isn’t clear, but it’s striking. No tsunami warning was issued.)
Japan north nuclear reactors
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan

View original post 23 more words

January 14, 2016 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

January 14 Energy News

geoharvey's avatargeoharvey

World:

¶ The Canadian Wind Energy Association has reported that Canada closed 2015 seventh in the world for total installed wind energy capacity with 11,205 MW, and sixth in the world for the amount of capacity added in 2015. Over the year, Canada added 36 wind projects totalling 1,506 MW of new capacity. [Windpower Engineering]

Wind energy supplied approximately 5% of Canada’s electricity demand in 2015, or enough to power over three million Canadian homes. Wind energy supplied approximately 5% of Canada’s electricity demand in 2015, or enough to power over three million Canadian homes. CanWEA

¶ Oil prices briefly have fallen below $30 a barrel on international markets for the first time since April 2004, before recovering again. Brent crude, used as an international benchmark, fell as low as $29.96, but bounced back to trade at $30.22. Oil prices have fallen by 70% in the past 15 months. [BBC]

¶ Growth in India’s coal-based installed generation capacity is on a decline, despite an increase in…

View original post 721 more words

January 14, 2016 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Crisis in Britain’s nuclear safety regulator

Nuclear watchdog risks meltdown, critics warn, The Times UK, 12 Jan 16 The nuclear safety regulator is facing a leadership crisis and is ill-equipped to deal with a mounting workload linked to China’s plans to invest £8 billion in the British industry, experts have warned.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation is responsible for ensuring the safety and security of 15 nuclear reactors, hazardous sites such as Sellafield and the transport and disposal of high-level nuclear waste. It also oversees the safety case for new reactors.

In recent months it has been plagued by desertions, including the departure of Andy Hall, the Chief Inspector, and Alasdair Corfield, the finance director. Neither has been….. –  (Subscribers only)

rats leave ship

  http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4662825.ece

January 13, 2016 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Electricite de France (EDF) at new low with crippling financial problems

AREVA EDF crumblingEDF already needs to borrow money just to pay its dividend and is set to spend tens of billions of euros on upgrading its ageing reactors, building new nuclear plants in Hinkley Point, Britain and buying the reactor arm of Areva.

“This report is clearly negative for all nuclear operators, and most specifically for EDF and Areva”

EDF shares are down more than 44 percent in the 12 months,

EDF sinks to all-time low as nuclear waste cost estimate soars http://uk.reuters.com/article/edf-nuclear-waste-idUKL8N14W2RO20160112 PARIS | BY GEERT DE CLERCQ Jan 12 Shares in French utility EDF sank to all-time lows on Tuesday after the country’s Andra nuclear waste agency said that storage costs could be higher than EDF’s estimates.

Mirroring German utilities E.ON and RWE , which saw their shares hit decade lows late last year over worries about nuclear decommissioning costs, EDF fell as much as 7.3 percent before recovering to 4.1 percent lower.

A string of brokerage price target downgrades and French forward power prices falling to new decade lows only added to the gloom.

In a report released late on Monday, Andra said costs for the Cigeo deep geological storage project could be as high as 30 billion euros or as low as 20 billion depending on assumptions about different cost factors in coming years.

“There are different views on the calculation, more or less conservative, depending on estimates for future technological progress and optimisation,” Andra said in a statement. n a letter to the energy ministry, posted on the ministry’s website, EDF, fellow state-controlled company Areva and the CEA (Atomic Energy Authority) said they estimated the cost at around 20 billion euros.

“Andra’s study only took into account a small number of possible optimisations,” said the letter, adding that a certain number of costs and ratios used by the state agency were not in line with their experience.

“We are waiting for a decision of the energy minister on the cost of storage,” an EDF spokesman said.

Energy Minister Segolene Royal’s decision on the 10 billion euro gap in estimates could have a huge impact on the already stretched balance sheet of EDF, which operates 58 nuclear plants in France and generates the bulk of the country’s nuclear waste.

EDF already needs to borrow money just to pay its dividend and is set to spend tens of billions of euros on upgrading its ageing reactors, building new nuclear plants in Hinkley Point, Britain and buying the reactor arm of Areva.

“This report is clearly negative for all nuclear operators, and most specifically for EDF and Areva,” Bryan, Garnier analyst Xavier Caroen said in a note, adding that the risk of a cost revaluation was not new.

EDF shares are down more than 44 percent in the 12 months, the second-worst performer in the Stoxx utilities index after RWE. The company has been replaced in France’s CAC-40 index of leading shares by shopping centre operator Klepierre . (Additional reporting by Benjamin Mallet; Editing by Keith Weir)

January 13, 2016 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Jeremy Corbyn – inconveniently sensible on nuclear weapons

Corbyn, JeremyCorbyn says the Trident isn’t worth the money. It is a costly weapon that can never be used. British security concerns should be focused on terrorism, economic turmoil and catastrophic climate change; nuclear weapons are irrelevant to all that. Corbyn argues, sensibly, that the Cold War era is long gone

Jeremy Corbyn talks common sense on nuclear weapons, WP.  By Katrina vanden Heuvel  January 12 The new leader of the British Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, has sparked a political firestorm by challenging the myths around nuclear weapons and Cold War deterrence. Corbyn announced that he would never use a nuclear weapon. He followed that apostasy by declaring that he opposed renewal of the British nuclear Trident submarine program.“I am opposed to the use of nuclear weapons. I am opposed to the holding of nuclear weapons. I want to see a nuclear-free world. I believe it is possible,” Corbyn declared.

Several Labour shadow ministers suggested they might resign if that became Labour’s policy. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron and the right-wing British press have been pillorying Corbyn as a threat to national security for his heresy.

Corbyn’s aides argue this is not a new version of the debate over unilateral disarmament that wracked Labour in the 1980s. Rather, they insist the question is whether renewing the fleet is worth the money. Corbyn’s doubts are shared by some current and retired military officers. The British fleet of four Trident submarines is slated for retirement in the late 2020s. It will take almost that long to develop a successor. Renewing and operating the Trident program will cost an estimated 167 billion British pounds over the next four decades. The Army has already been reduced to below 82,000 soldiers, the lowest number since the 1700s. Renewing the Trident fleet would likely force more cuts.

Corbyn says the Trident isn’t worth the money. It is a costly weapon that can never be used. British security concerns should be focused on terrorism, economic turmoil and catastrophic climate change; nuclear weapons are irrelevant to all that. Corbyn argues, sensibly, that the Cold War era is long gone….

The Corbynites are sensitive about being accused of unilateral disarmament, since the party’s adoption of that position in the 1980s at the height of Cold War tensions was electorally damaging. Yet a British commitment to give up nuclear weapons unilaterally might just be the highest and best use of the Trident fleet…..

Corbyn is now taking a beating in the conservative tabloids for his blasphemies. Yet he is talking common sense. No leader in his right mind would use nuclear weapons. The British people would be better off spending the money that renewal would cost elsewhere. The reality is that the British nuclear arsenal will have greater global significance if it is dismantled rather than renewed. Corbyn is meeting fierce resistance, even inside his own party, but he is raising questions that deserve a full debate. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jeremy-corbyn-talks-common-sense-on-nuclear-weapons/2016/01/12/52e8c886-b88f-11e5-b682-4bb4dd403c7d_story.html

January 13, 2016 Posted by | politics, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nuclear lobby getting its way in USA Congress?

Congress Wants To Ramp Up Nuclear Reactor Research The Daily Caller, 12 Jan 16   A House committee approved a bipartisan bill Tuesday to promote private sector research into new nuclear reactor designs.

The Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act (H.R. 4084) directs the Department of Energy (DOE) to work with private companies and researchers to develop new nuclear reactors. The bill will help private investors demonstrate novel reactor concepts and designs such asmolten-salt or pebble-bed reactors……..

USA nuclear lobby
 The DOE’s Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear program aims to increase investment in nuclear energy research, while providing more data about government reactors to private companies. Another DOE program, called the Advanced Nuclear Energy Projects Solicitation, will expand existing financial support for building and upgrading nuclear reactors.

January 13, 2016 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The Final Push: The Road to 95,000 Signatures – Help Us Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump

  • sign-thisPetition http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stopthegreatlakesnucleardump.html

  • Bruce NGS Great Lakes Lake Huron
  • Ontario Power Generation plans to bury and abandon radioactive nuclear waste approximately 400 metres below the bottom level of  Lake Huron. Scientists cannot guarantee  that this Nuclear Waste Dump will not leak.
  • The Great Lakes provide fresh drinking water for 40 million people in two countries.Why would we bury radioactive nuclear waste beside this precious resource?
  • Ontario Power Generation did not consider ANY other sites for this nuclear waste dump  except right beside the Great Lakes. Is this responsible?
  • OPG claims it has done its homework, yet the Joint Review Panel’s own consultant, Dr. Duinker, concluded that OPG’s analysis was “not credible, not defensible, not clear, not reliable, inappropriate.”
  • The radioactive nuclear waste must stay isolated in this dump for 100,000 years. The Great Lakes were created by an ice age about 12,000 years ago.
  • There are 3 deep geological repositories on the entire planet and all have leaked – a 100% failure rate. OPG claims their DGR will be different, but also notes they “can’t guarantee anything”.
  • An underground nuclear waste dump in limestone is unproven and unprecedented.

January 13, 2016 Posted by | ACTION | Leave a comment

Is it just Hinkley that’s finished or the whole of EDF?

AREVA EDF crumblingNo2Nuclear Power Jan 2016 “………French utility EDF is considering selling assets protest-Hinkley-Cworth over 6 billion euros (£4.5 billion) this year, according to French daily Les Echos – notably it is considering selling a stake in its eight British nuclear plants to fund plans to build Hinkley Point C. But it could only sell a 29% share of EDF Energy (which is supposed to be worth 9 billion euros in total). This would leave EDF with a 51% stake, because Centrica already owns 20%. The paper said a sale had been studied but the process had not been launched. The company needs 55 billion euros to upgrade its ageing nuclear plants, plans to invest 18 billion pounds in Hinkley and spend several billion euros to buy Areva’s reactor unit. (1)

Further delays at the Taishan EPR being built in China are hammering another nail in a coffin, says Dr David Toke, reader in Energy Politics at Aberdeen University. The only debate now is whether the coffin will house just the Hinkley C project or the whole of EDF. The Taishan plant’s construction began in 2009 and was supposed to be finished in 2013, but is now not expected to open until 2017. EDF will have to sell-off profitable assets to fund Hinkley C, something that is almost universally regarded as at least a rather large gamble or, increasingly, a probable disaster that will sink EDF. Given that the EPR is proving to be such a turkey in three multibillion projects (Olikuoto, Flamanville and now Taishan) what sort of business decision can it be to fund a fourth project that could break the company? (2
Disagreements over valuation and charges related to a Finnish EPR are likely to delay EDF’s acquisition of Areva’s nuclear reactor business. In late July, EDF agreed to buy 51 to 75% of the Areva NP reactor unit based on a value of 2.7 billion euros for the entire division. But EDF has revised that valuation down to 2.2 billion to 2.3 billion euros and won’t make a firm offer for Areva NP until early 2016. There was a “substantial” disagreement between the two sides on the value of the unit and that the talks “remain very complicated”. “The disagreements are about the amount, but especially about Finland,” another source said, adding that the French government prefers to clear the Finland issue with Areva before finalizing the sale of Areva NP. Finnish utility TVO has a 2.6 billion euro ($2.8 bln) claim against the Areva-led EPR consortium at the International Chamber of Commerce’s arbitration court. Areva-Siemens has a 3.4 billion euro counter-claim. (3)
According to the Guardian, possible buyers of a stake in UK reactors might include the stateowned Chinese companies, who are already committed partners of the Hinkley Point C project. EDF could unveil details of a sell-off plan on 16th February, when it is scheduled to release annual financial figures and is expected to give a final investment decision on Hinkley. (4)
Industry sources told the Guardian that the possible sell off was only one of a number of different options that were under consideration as the group looked at financing Hinkley Point C and other projects. They said it was still likely EDF would give the go ahead to Hinkley next month even though it did not have all the financing in place.
EDF is also said by Les Echos to be considering disposing of its 49.99% stake in three nuclear power plants in the US which are operated by Exelon (Two reactors at Calvert Cliffs Maryland; two at Nine Mile Point, New York, and one at RE Ginna, New York) The sale of EDF’s stake in No2NuclearPower nuClear news No.81, January 2016 12 these five reactors could be complicated. At least two of those reactors are at risk of closure due to economic pressures, and Exelon is having trouble with its nuclear business more broadly. Exelon might not be willing to take on more liability. EDF is also considering selling 50% of its holding in power transmission business RTE. It cannot sell more than half because 50% is allocated to its decommissioning fund, which is segregated. There is of course a risk in selling half because if it turns out to be worth less than EDF has claimed it is worth for the decommissioning fund, EDF would have to top up the decommissioning fund by the shortfall.
Meanwhile the National Audit Office says over a third of major government infrastructure projects are at risk of delays and spiraling costs. 37 of the 106 projects due to be completed within the next five years have been branded “unachievable” or “in-doubt” by a government body set up to monitor them. It is not known whether Hinkley Point is one of the projects the NAO considers to be at risk. (5) http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo81.pdf

January 13, 2016 Posted by | business and costs, France, UK | Leave a comment

CLEAN UP TOXIC ABANDONED URANIUM MINES! 

sign-thisFlag-USAPETITION  http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/clean-up-15-000-toxic-abandoned-uranium-mines?bucket=&source=twitter-share-button  Campaign created by Klee Benally

TO: MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

We urge you to prioritize passage of the Uranium Exploration and Mining Accountability Act, which will ensure clean up of thousands of hazardous abandoned uranium mines throughout the United States.

Why is this important?

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, more than 15,000 AUMs and exploratory sites are located throughout the United States, posing substantial public health and environmental hazards.

No existing federal laws require clean up of these toxic abandoned sites. Most of these AUMs were established under the “General Mining Law of 1872,” that does not require reclamation or remediation. Mining companies walked away from their clean up responsibilities after decades of mining, leaving the public to bear their toxic legacy. With 75% of AUMs located on public or Tribal lands, Indigenous communities have long faced disproportionate impacts from this toxic legacy.

According to EPA data, approximately 10 million people are estimated to live within 50 miles of a recorded AUM.

Radioactive pollution from AUMs have been linked to cancer, genetic defects, and increases in mortality. There is no minimum threshold for radiation damage (no dose which is harmless), and radiation causes cancer and other organ damage, especially during fetal development and in young children.

It’s time to clean up the mines!

January 13, 2016 Posted by | ACTION | Leave a comment

James Hansen is so wrong about “new nuclear” as saviour of the world’s climate

No 2 NuclearPower No 81 January 2016  “……NASA scientist James Hansen headed Paris to berate climate campaigners for failing to support nuclear power. Hansen ignores renewables and energy efficiency, setting up a false choice between fossil fuels and nuclear. (3) Writing in The Guardian (with Kerry Emanuel, Ken Caldeira and Tom Wigley) he says he has “become so concerned about humanity’s slow response to the climate challenge” that he “must clearly set out what we see as the only viable path forward”. He doesn’t just want more nuclear power stations, but he wants next-generation nuclear power stations fuelled with weapons-useable plutonium, extracted from spent fuel in reprocessing plants. (4)
New reactor types In his book, Storms of my Grandchildren, Hansen says the problem with conventional reactors is the nuclear waste – particularly the transuranic actinides which have a lifetime of about ten thousand years. And conventional thermal reactors extract less than 1% of the energy in the original uranium. But trying to “transmute” these long-lived radionuclides into elements that have shorter lifetimes requires an elaborate strategy involving the reprocessing of spent fuel, multiple rounds of special fuel fabrication, and irradiation in fast reactors all of which would cause large quantities of radionuclides to get released into the environment. Six decades of global experience with breeder reactors has shown that they are very problematic, much more so than nuclear power in general. So any strategy based on rapid construction of these untested No2NuclearPower nuClear news No.81, January 2016 3 technologies is very likely to suffer from setbacks. There is simply not enough time for us to go down these blind alleys. (5) ……..
climate-change-lie
Writing on the Climate Progress website, Joe Romm who was acting US assistant secretary of energy for energy efficiency and renewable energy in 1997, also points out that Hansen et al’s 115 reactors per year is far beyond what the world ever sustained during the nuclear heyday of the 1970s, and far beyond what the overwhelming majority of energy experts, including those sympathetic to the industry, think is plausible. He says Hansen ignores the fact that the nuclear power industry has essentially priced itself out of the market for new power plants and seems unable to avoid massive delays and cost overruns. Romm asks why do such smart people advance such an indefensibly absurd scenario? Because when you drop the numbers to more plausible (but still highly optimistic) levels, such as imagined by the IEA and NEA, you immediately realize that nuclear power isn’t going to be a major player in the fight to avoid catastrophic warming. (7) …….
renew-world-1Stanford University engineering professor, Mark Z. Jacobson’s response to Hansen points out that it takes around 10-19 years from the start of planning for new reactors to the start of operation compared with 2-5 years for wind or solar. Nuclear is just too slow to help solve climate problems. (8) Bill Gates also made a lot of headlines with his “Breakthrough Energy Coalition” fund to come up with new energy solutions, including “advanced” nuclear reactors. It’s not that innovation isn’t welcome, but what the climate really needs right now is the large-scale deployment of existing technologies which, according to investment bank Goldman Sachs, are already cost-effective and climate-effective. The problem is, an Apollo-style push for what Gates has called “Energy Miracles” is not only a misguided strategy for mitigating climate change, it could also distract funders with the enticing idea that invention is going to rescue us from climate change. They really should be distributing funds to empower communities, and incentivize the massive deployment of energy efficiency and existing renewable technology now rather waiting for miracles which might never happen, or will happen too late to make a difference. (9)  ……http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo81.pdf

January 13, 2016 Posted by | 2 WORLD, climate change, Reference | Leave a comment

Against all reason, Republican hawks still trying to sabotage Iran nuclear agreement

Republican hawk (Trump)Opponents of Iran Nuclear Deal Just Won’t Quit   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-elsner/opponents-of-iran-nuclear_b_8962566.html?ir=Australia Opponents of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between Iran and six world powers to deal with Iran’s nuclear program mounted a massive campaign last summer, spending tens of millions of dollars to sabotage the agreement.

They failed — but they have not quit.

Days after reports that Iran has dismantled one of the most dangerous parts of its program by removing the core of its heavy-water reactor in Arak and filling it with cement, Republicans in the House of Representatives are mounting a new attempt to kill the agreement that has already made the world much safer.

The “Iran Terror Finance Transparency Act” would prevent the President from lifting sanctions imposed on Iranian individuals and entities unless the Administration can “certify the entity is not a terror financier, human rights abuser or involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”

President Obama has already vowed to veto the bill, should it reach his desk, for the simple reason that it tangles up an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program with other issues that have nothing to do with it. The new bill is simply a poison pill, designed to kill the nuclear deal.

The deal was designed to do one very important thing — make the world safe from the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. It does not aim to tackle Iran’s role in regional conflicts, or its sponsorship of terrorist groups or its domestic human rights abuses.

There are separate sanctions imposed on Iran to confront those issues, all of which will remain in place. And the United States and its partners should remain vigilant and take appropriate action when faced with Iranian provocations — like the ballistic missile test they conducted last October which violated UN Security Council resolutions. But none of these factors have anything to do with the nuclear deal.

If the latest bill passed, the White House warned, the legislation “could result in the collapse of a comprehensive diplomatic arrangement that peacefully and verifiably prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.”

That would lead to the end of international inspections and monitoring of Iranian nuclear facilities and leave Iran free to restart its program. It would “lead to the unraveling of the international sanctions regime against Iran, and deal a devastating blow to America’s credibility as a leader of international diplomacy,” the White House said.

Republicans have the votes to pass this bill in the House. It will be more interesting to see how it fares in the Senate, where prominent Republicans expected to face strong Democratic challengers this year, like Mark Kirk of Illinois and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, have been strong backers of previous efforts to sabotage the agreement.

What opponents don’t get is that the nuclear deal is already proving itself. The Iranians have moved faster than most experts believed would happen to fulfill their part of the agreement. Notably, they shipped 25,000 pounds of low-enriched uranium to Russia, leaving them without enough material for a bomb.

“This step is vital because it is irreversible, since the low-enriched uranium is never coming back and would instead need to be produced again,” said Ilan Goldenberg, who directs the Middle East security program at the Center for a New American Security, writing in The National Interest.

The Iranians have also removed centrifuges as required and allowed intrusive inspections of its facilities, as laid down by the JCPOA. And now they are rendering the Arak plant harmless.

It will soon be time for the United States and its partners to live up to their side of the agreement. Once the designated international authorities confirm that Iran has met its obligations, the international community must begin to lift sanctions originally imposed because of Iran’s nuclear program.

Opponents can be expected to continue their campaign to kill the agreement one way or another. That’s why supporters, and all those who believe in diplomatic solutions to tough international problems, must remain vigilant, ready to take political action whenever needed to preserve this important breakthrough.

January 13, 2016 Posted by | Iran, politics, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Iran has removed the core of its Arak heavy water nuclear reactor

diplomacy-not-bombsflag-IranIran nuclear deal: heavy water nuclear reactor core filled with cement, SMH, January 12, 2016  Dubai:   Iran has removed the core of its Arak heavy water nuclear reactor and filled it with cement as required under a nuclear deal signed with world powers last year, the semi-official Fars news agency has revealed, citing an informed Iranian source.

Any such move, reducing the plant’s ability to produce plutonium, might signal imminent implementation of the nuclear deal and clear the way for Tehran to receive relief from economic sanctions.

Separately, the European Union’s foreign policy chief said that EU nuclear-related sanctions on Iran could be lifted soon.

 “I can tell you that my expectation is that this day could come rather soon. The implementation of the agreements is proceeding well,” Federica Mogherini said during a visit to Prague.

The fate of the reactor in central Iran was one of the toughest sticking points in the long nuclear negotiations that led to an agreement in July between Iran and six world powers, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Under the deal’s terms, Iran accepted that the Arak reactor would be reconfigured so it could not yield fissile plutonium usable in a nuclear bomb.

China, the United States, France, Britain, Russia and Germany have agreed to participate in the redesign and the construction of the modernised reactor…….http://www.smh.com.au/world/iran-nuclear-deal-heavy-water-nuclear-reactor-core-filled-with-cement-20160112-gm3zkz.html

January 13, 2016 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Nuclear Industry goes into Climate Overdrive

cartoon-climate-conNo 2 NuclearPower No 81 January 2016  “…….. We are now in the midst of a fight between the past and the future”. Former Australian Greens’ Senator Christine Milne The nuclear industry and its champions went into overdrive during the Paris Climate Conference. Was it a last-ditch effort to convince us all that nuclear power is an important part of the answer to the climate crisis? It all seemed a bit desperate with blatant attacks (1) on those who envisage a future based on renewables and no nuclear.
Nuclear Engineering International reported that the nuclear industry achieved precisely nothing in Paris, (2) but pro-nuclear champions were trying to promulgate three myths. Firstly that there are potentially new reactor types which could help solve the waste problem and the climate crisis given a little bit of extra research and development; secondly that we need nuclear to provide baseload, low carbon electricity; and thirdly that renewables can only provide a proportion of our electricity because of its intermittent nature.
But the truth is that nuclear power is a dangerous distraction from what we really need to be doing to tackle climate change. Every pound spent on nuclear power could have been spent more effectively, making greater reductions in carbon emissions, if it had been spent on energy efficiency or renewables. So spending on nuclear will actually damage our efforts to tackle climate change. And fortunately the concept of a world powered 100% by clean renewable energy is no longer seen as a pipedream but as a necessary and, more importantly, achievable goal at every level–from individuals to large corporations, and from small communities to large cities……… http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo81.pdf

January 13, 2016 Posted by | 2 WORLD, climate change | Leave a comment