China supports UN move to denounce North Korea over nuclear test
China backs U.N. move to denounce North Korea over nuclear test, WP, By Carol Morello and Simon Denyer January 28 16, BEIJING — Secretary of State John F. Kerry and China’s foreign minister agreed Wednesday to move ahead with a U.N. resolution condemning North Korea for its latest nuclear test, but they appeared as far apart as ever on how far to push Pyongyang………https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/china-agrees-to-sanctions-against-north-korea-during-kerry-visit/2016/01/27/2d09569a-bfcd-11e5-98c8-7fab78677d51_story.html
Nuclear scientist – it’s unwise to rebuild Ontario nuclear plant
Scientist calls $12.8B rebuild of Ontario nuclear plant ill-advised, CTV News, The Canadian Press January 27, 2016 TORONTO — The proposed $12.8-billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors at the Darlington generating station is an ill-advised make-work project that will end up soaking taxpayers, a retired nuclear scientist says.
In a letter to Ontario’s energy minister, obtained by The Canadian Press, Frank Greening warns of the formidable technical hazards he says will undermine rosy projections for the project.
“I am quite mystified that you would consider the refurbishment of Darlington to be some sort of solution to Ontario’s economic woes, when in fact the premature failures of (nuclear reactors) are a major cause of Ontario’s economic problems,” writes Greening, a frequent critic of the industry.
“Spending billions of dollars trying to patch up Darlington’s four dilapidated reactors will simply continue the bleeding.”
Earlier this month, the province’s publicly owned generating giant, Ontario Power Generation, announced plans to start refurbishing Darlington — situated east of Toronto on Lake Ontario — this fall. The project aims to extend the life of the CANDU reactors, scheduled for permanent shutdown in 2020, by 30 years……..
Greening argues the units are in need of rebuilding prematurely because their pressure tubes and feeder pipes will soon fail fitness tests. He also warns the reactors’ massive steam generators, which are not part of the proposed project, have had a less than stellar track record and will more than likely need replacement.
“Replacing these steam generators is fraught with very serious problems, both technical and economic, that could prevent the continued operation of Darlington beyond 2030,” says Greening, a senior scientist with OPG until he retired in 2000.
“The decision to proceed with the refurbishment of Darlington could prove to be a disastrous mistake if it is discovered that steam generator replacement is in fact needed in the next 10 to 15 years.”
Environmental groups also argue such projects always run massively over budget and have cost taxpayers untold billions in the past and refurbishment is simply not worth the potential radiation risk to public safety.
The Ontario cabinet has so far given the green light to refurbish one of Darlington’s reactors. OPG would need separate approvals for each of the other three units……….http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/scientist-calls-12-8b-rebuild-of-ontario-nuclear-plant-ill-advised-1.2754272
Untested and unsafe technology ? Jaitapur nuclear power station
Last year on the Republic Day, to please the United States President Obama who was the chief guest, Modi government effectively surrendered the govt’s option to sue the nuclear vendors in case of a nuclear accident by creating an insurance pool from public funds to channel suppliers’ liability back to the taxpayers, taking an about turn from earlier strong reservations of the BJP on nuclear liability.
This year, Modi’s government seems bent on finalising an insanely dangerous and destructive nuclear project.
Another Republic Day, another compromise on nuclear safety? A year after giving in on nuclear liability during Barack Obama’s visit, India’s enthusiasm to seal a deal with France on the expensive and dangerous Jaitapur nuclear project is disturbing. Scroll In 28 Jan 16 Kumar Sundaram On Tuesday, chief guest Francois Hollande looked on as India showcased its military might at the Republic Day parade in New Delhi. Nearly 2,000-km away in Maharashtra, farmers and fisherfolk in the port town of Jaitapur are gearing up to protest the French president’s visit. They believe that the nuclear reactors India wants to import from France pose a threat to their lives, livelihoods and the local ecology.
Untested and unsafe technology
In the joint declaration issued on Monday in New Delhi, the two governments reaffirmed their commitment to go ahead with the nuclear deal. The project has been in the pipeline for almost a decade now, and last several bilateral annoucements have ceremoniously menioned the nuclear agreement. The intense negotiations to finalise the commercial agreement are yet to be completed as the staggering cost of the project remains a major sticking point.
The Modi government has added “make in India” in the declaration, a reference to the prime minister’s ambitious plan to turn India into a hub of manufacturing. Now, this is more than a ceremonial insertion and has potentially dangerous implications. The joint declaration mentions “large-scale localisation” of components for the nuclear power project at Jaitapur, a Memorandum of Understanding for which was signed between the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and French government-owned nuclear corporation Areva last year. “Transfer of technology” is also being considered, claims the declaration.
The French company Areva, which is verging on bankruptcy after the Fukushima disaster, desperately needs this project to survive. Its terminal financial crisis has also led to a major re-structuring in France. To save Areva from bankruptcy, the Électricité de France, a govt owned electricity utility company has bought majority stake in Areva. Areva has resorted to massive job cuts – it did 6,000 lay offs worldwide in 2015 – and is frantically seeking investorsto rescue itself from the crisis.
It is actually this financial crisis that has forced Areva to consider partial closure and outsourcing of its reactor manufacturing business. There too, it is giving away only the parts which it cannot absolutely manage on its own for financial and safety reasons. And the European Pressurised Reactor design fits in this scheme. France is building reactors in Jaitapur of the same design, of 1650MWe capacity each. Totalling 9,900 Mwe, Jaitapur would be the world’s largest nuclear power park.
The safety of this design, especially the vulnerabilities of the Reactor Pressure Vessel – the huge iron core where radioactive fission takes place – came under serious questions, raised by France’s own nuclear safety regulator Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire in April last year. Later in 2015, Areva had to ask the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend certification review for EPR design. The US has been postponing certification for the European Pressurised Reactor( since 2007. In Finland’s Olkiluoto, the only other place where Areva is building these reactors, the project was supposed to be completed in 2009 but has run into massive cost and time over-run and cannot be completed before 2018. The Finnish regulator has taken Areva to the court on this issue and Finland has cancelled the order for the 4th reactor. Even in China’s Taishan, the only other place where such a reactor is under construction, the project has been delayed. Ironically, just after two days of publication of Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire’s report, Modi re-affirmed the commitment to buy the reactors from France during his visit to Paris last year in April.
In another extremely dangerous irony, the Modi govt is lauding Jaitapur as a “Make in India” project. The localisation in this case is nothing more than Areva passing off its burden and risks to Indian companies. Without much experience in nuclear sector, Larsen and Toubro has been given the task of collaborating in manufacturing of pressure vessel, the same crucial equipment in which the French regulator has found vulnerabilities. There is also pressure on L&T to keep the cost to the minimum, which would have its own safety implications. Technology transfer in this case actually means experimenting an untested and unsafe technology on the Indian people……….
U-turns and misadventures
For its entire 10-year entire stint in the opposition the Bharatiya Janata Party kept opposing Manmohan Singh government’s nuclear policy, but now nuclear deals have become matters of pride for Modi’s foreign sojourns. In 2010, the BJP had sought a review of the environmental clearance given to the Jaitapur project on the eve of the visit of the then French president Nicholas Sarkozy. But now the government has sought an extension of the same.
Last year on the Republic Day, to please the United States President Obama who was the chief guest, Modi government effectively surrendered the govt’s option to sue the nuclear vendors in case of a nuclear accident by creating an insurance pool from public funds to channel suppliers’ liability back to the taxpayers, taking an about turn from earlier strong reservations of the BJP on nuclear liability.
This year, Modi’s government seems bent on finalising an insanely dangerous and destructive nuclear project.
Kumar Sundaram is Senior Researcher with the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace, India. http://scroll.in/article/802473/another-republic-day-another-compromise-on-nuclear-safety
French unions unhappy with arrangements for UK’s Hinkley nuclear build
New nuclear power: It’s consumer protection vs corporate profit, http://www.carolinelucas.com/latest/new-nuclear-power-its-consumer-protection-vs-corporate-profit January 27, 2016 The Government’s policy of burdening bill payers with eye watering subsidies for new nuclear power has received another blow. Just before a crucial board meeting at EDF (the French state owned energy giant relied on by the Government to invest in and operate Hinkley Point) French trade unions spoke out about their concerns.
When even staff working for EDF are raising serious doubts about numerous aspects of the proposal, UK Ministers’ cavalier attitude to Hinkley Point C needs to change, more urgently than ever.
In advance of an EDF board meeting due to take place today, where the company was rumoured to be making a final investment decision, French unions threw a welcome spanner in the works.
They’ve raise no fewer than 15 questions about the project, suggesting it would be difficult to complete on time and that financing it could threaten EDF’s survival. The good news, for now, is that EDF has, again, delayed the decision.
But the concerns of French unions are worth a closer look. They include pending legal cases, the lack of evidence Hinkley can be built on time, and the partnership with the Chinese nuclear energy company when no other investors appear to be interested.
Most telling of all is the following question: “what happens if the UK government decides to look after consumer interest?”
This shows that the Conservative Government’s pro-nuclear policy flies in the face of everything they say about looking after the interests of consumers and billpayers. Indeed, studies show that solar power coupled with energy storage and smart grid technology could generate the equivalent to Hinkley Point C at half the cost – to the Govt and to you and I. Wind power, even with backup, ischeaper than nuclear power too.
The Government’s obsession with outdated, inflexible, expensive nuclear power stations is looking more economically and environmentally reckless by the day. So I’ve tabled some more urgent parliamentary questions on Hinkley.
The first question relates to the problems with a similar model of nuclear power station being built at Flamenville in France. It’s already 6 years behind schedule, €7.5 billion over budget, and subject to safety tests following some serious flaws in the reactor vessel and bottom. The ruling on these safety concerns has itself been delayed. I’m pressing the Government on whether the agreement to proceed with Hinkley is conditional on the Flamanville plant demonstrating it’s capable of operating.
My second question is about the huge cost of new nuclear to consumers. It picks up on Ministers’ mindboggling double standards when it comes to subsidies for nuclear power verses solar power, onshore wind and other renewable technologies.
In the Commons earlier this month, the Energy Secretary again attempted to justify her huge cuts to solar subsidies on grounds that “subsidies for low carbon power should be temporary, not part of a permanent business model”. So my question asks exactly when she expects nuclear power stations to meet the same standards and operate on a subsidy free basis. Some renewable technologies are nearly there already, with the costs of others on a clear downward cost trajectory. Energy storage, interconnection and smart grids make Ministers appear stuck in the last century as they desperately argue about baseload.
The cost and climate change arguments against new nuclear power grow stronger every day. This week, workers have made their voices heard. It’s surely time the UK Government started to work for us rather than big energy companies and consign new nuclear to the dustbin of history. Ministers need to start listening to the many voices cautioning against Hinkely and instead back 21st century clean technologies.
In other major nuclear news this week, tomorrow sees a Special Parliamentary seminar co-organised by Nuclear Free Local Authorities and Nuclear Consulting Group: “UK Energy Policy: Late Lessons from Chernobyl, Early Warnings from Fukushima” The keynote speaker will be Naoto Kan, Former Prime Minister of Japan at the time of Fukushima.
South Afric a’s nuclear corporation in a mess
Step one: Sort out the mess at the nuclear corporation, Times Live The Times Editorial | 28 January, 2016
Power struggles, factionalism and claims of impropriety at state institutions have become so commonplace they are losing their shock value. “…….The latest public entity to be affected is the Nuclear Energy Corporation of SA, which is involved in two court actions over allegations of corporate governance breaches.
Phumzile Tshelane, the corporation’s chief executive and a supporter of the Zuma administration’s nuclear ambitions, is centrally involved in both cases.
The Nuclear Energy Corporation, meanwhile, is reportedly in disarray.
According to Business Day, it has yet to finalise its financial statements for the 2014-2015 financial year and is without a full board.
Several independent directors resigned, or left after their terms ended last year, after reportedly clashing with Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson. It would be tempting to dismiss the ructions at the corporation as just another public entity gone awry.
But the fact is that this is the institution that will play a key role in the government’s controversial plan to procure eight nuclear power reactors at a cost, experts warn, that could exceed R1-trillion.
Moreover, the government has decided to go ahead with the procurement and proceed to the next step, which is to invite tenders, even though the nuclear building programme has not been properly costed.
Surely the mess at the nuclear corporation needs to be sorted out before we take a single step further down the nuclear road.http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2016/01/28/Step-one-Sort-out-the-mess-at-the-nuclear-corporation
Governor Cuomo’s schizophrenic nuclear policies
NY Governor Cuomo thinks Indian Point is too dangerous to operate. He’s right. But why are upstate reactors any different?
In mid-1986, New York Governor Mario Cuomo was asked about the future of nuclear power. The future of nuclear power, he replied, “is Chernobyl.” He understood that nuclear power is dangerous, and he understood that it could never become safe enough to use. He made good on that statement too: he decided to prevent the Shoreham reactor on Long Island, for which construction was basically completed and it had even been tested at very low power, from ever operating.
While he made a futile attempt at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to get them to deny a license to Shoreham, on the grounds that Long Island could never be evacuated in the event of a nuclear meltdown, he also created the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) and made the much-criticized local…
View original post 1,168 more words
January 27 Energy Week
Opinion:
¶ Paris Agreement Unleashes $16 Trillion of Investment in Renewables and Cleantech • If you ever needed proof that we are truly embarking on a renewable energy revolution, then look no further than the latest report from one of the most respected credit ratings agencies in the world. [EcoWatch]
TckTckTck @tcktcktck – Renewable energy, clean tech & green finance poised for $16.5 trillion post-Paris take-off http://bit.ly/1ZH1T0E
¶ Switch to Clean Energy Can Be Fast and Cheap • Even when optimizing to cut costs and limiting themselves to existing technology, scientists showed that renewables can meet energy demands and slash carbon dioxide emissions from the electricity sector by 80% below 1990 levels, while saving money. [Scientific American]
World:
¶ China has launched an aggressive 3 GW target to expand the country’s high-efficiency rooftop solar installations. Such a renewable energy footprint will hopefully help reduce the widespread…
View original post 705 more words
French Nuclear Waste Facility-Test Site Collapses and Kills One, Injures Another
The French government wants to bury their nuclear waste in argillite, on top of a geothermal resource site. On Tuesday, 26 January, 2016, a worker was killed and one injured at the site due to collapse of an underground tunnel gallery.
“An argillite /ˈɑrdʒɨlaɪt/ is a fine-grained sedimentary rock composed predominantly of indurated clay particles. Argillaceous rocks are basically lithified muds and oozes. They contain variable amounts of silt-sized particle” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argillite
A child knows that clay becomes soft and unstable when wet. And, that it shrinks and cracks when dry and expands when wet. Residents near the proposed French nuclear waste facility in Bure France have demonstrated that within 16 minutes the “argillite” clay proposed for high level nuclear storage dissolves into gravel clumps. This is because it is hard materials held together by soft materials.
Images from video link at http://www.villesurterre.eu
“Experimental deformation of Bure argillites…
View original post 641 more words
The Arctic Is Melting And Big Business Is Ready To Dig In
“Standing at a podium before the World Economic Forum, Leonardo DiCaprio briefly smiled as he received an award for his leadership in tackling climate change. Once settled under the spotlight, he quickly moved away from his grateful statements, and began railing on corporate avarice.
“We simply cannot allow the corporate greed of the coal, oil, and gas industries to determine the future of humanity,” said DiCaprio last week while at Davos, Switzerland, where some 2,500 top global business leaders, politicians, and intellectuals gathered to discuss politics, economics, and social issues.
“Fossil fuels must be kept in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change, he continued. “Enough is enough. You know better. The world knows better.”
“But while DiCaprio was cheered Wednesday as he stepped off the stage with his Crystal award, the international business community appears interested in venturing into new areas despite potential ecological costs. In fact, a day…
View original post 195 more words
January 26 Energy News
Science and Technology:
¶ Energy storage costs could decrease up to 70% in the next 15 years, according to a report, E-Storage: Shifting from Cost to Value. The report also explains a number of previously unquantified values of energy storage, such as improved grid reliability and predictability of generation needs. [CleanTechnica]
Grid storage installation. Sandia.gov photo
¶ Two global industry giants, DuPont and Archer Daniels Midland, have just announced a new “breakthrough” process for producing a high performance, 100% biodegradable bioplastic building block. A side-effect is that with these companies in the mix, the lobbying dynamics could begin to shift dramatically. [CleanTechnica]
World:
¶ In a move aimed to generate energy savings, reduce air pollution, and bring power to rural areas, India’s Maharashtra state is set to implement an off-grid energy scheme. The state’s chief minister said the government is promoting solar off-grid energy policy…
View original post 684 more words
Willie McRae Death, Nuclear Waste Dumping in Scotland, Group Continues to Call for Inquiry
Loch Doon area sheep
Mullwharchar Loch Doon which the late Willie McRae helped save from becoming a nuclear waste dump
In June 2015 over 12,000 signatures were delivered to Scotland’s Lord Advocate calling for the fatal accident inquiry to which Willie McRae is entitled by law. http://linkis.com/justiceforwillie.com/C7Mtv. http://www.justiceforwillie.com/author/admin/
Willie McRae had successfully worked to stop a nuclear waste dump in Ayrshire, Scotland and “At the time of his death, McRae had been working to counter plans to dump nuclear waste from the Dounreay Nuclear Power Development Establishment into the sea. Due to his house being burgled on repeated occasions prior to his death, he had taken to carrying a copy of the documents relating to his Dounreay work with him at all times. However, they were not found following his death, and the sole other copy which was kept in his office was stolen when it was burgled, no…
View original post 1,216 more words
16 Fault lines near Jaitapur Nuclear Project Site; 6 within 5 km; 93 Major Tremors in Region over Last 20 Years
From Greenpeace India:
“Was Jaitapur site given clearance without conclusive studies, questions Greenpeace Press release – January 22, 2016
New Delhi, 22 January 2016: There are close to 16 fault lines near the Jaitapur nuclear project site, according to a 2006 Geological Survey of India. While the project has been given an ‘in-principle’ site approval, and the preliminary construction has already started at the site, the report commissioned by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) in 2002 has been under review for 10 years now.
Greenpeace was allowed to examine the report in March 2014 under the Right to Information Act, but was not allowed to make copies stating that the “Report is under review, thus copy of the same has not been provided” [1]. “The report states there are six fault lines within the 5km radius of the project site, if the report is still under review…
View original post 401 more words
Japan doles out over ¥16 billion in subsidies for slow-moving MOX projects
The government has used taxpayer money to provide over ¥16.2 billion in subsidies to local governments for promoting so-called pluthermal power generation using mixed oxide fuel (MOX), a survey has shown.
The subsidies, financed with revenue from a tax for power-resources development imposed on electricity users, have been distributed to local governments that accepted pluthermal power generation at facilities in their regions.
The Jiji Press survey released Saturday illustrates that a large amount of taxpayers’ money has been spent on the pluthermal project in order to win support from local governments.
The project, a key part of the country’s nuclear fuel cycle policy, uses MOX fuel, a mixture of uranium and plutonium extracted from spent nuclear fuel.
So far, just four reactors in Japan have used MOX fuel, including reactor 2 at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. The reactor, set to be decommissioned, experienced a core meltdown after the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan hopes to eventually raise the nation’s total number of reactors carrying out pluthermal generation to somewhere between 16 and 18.
However, pluthermal projects have failed to progress as expected, prompting critics to urge the central government to conduct an immediate review of its policy.
The other three reactors that have run on MOX fuel are the No. 3 reactor at Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Genkai plant in Saga Prefecture, the No. 3 reactor at Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s Ikata plant in Ehime Prefecture and the No. 3 reactor at Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Takahama plant in Fukui Prefecture. The Takahama plant reactor is set to be rebooted later this month using MOX fuel.
The survey found that seven of the nine prefectural governments and all of the 10 other municipalities entitled to the subsidies — one to promote the fuel-cycle policy and the other to support host municipalities — have actually received the payments.
The exceptions, Hokkaido and Shizuoka prefecture, have refrained from applying for the subsidies. While the Fukushima disaster has spurred safety concerns among citizens, a series of scandals — including attempts to influence public opinion — in favor of pluthermal projects — have eroded trust in the plan, sources said.
In Hokkaido, the No. 3 reactor at Hokkaido Electric Co.’s Tomari plant has been designated for pluthermal power generation. In Shizuoka Prefecture, the No. 4 reactor at Chubu Electric Power Co.’s Hamaoka plant has also been tapped for the pluthermal project.
Of the four prefectures where pluthermal generation has been carried out, Saga received ¥6.097 billion in state subsidies and Ehime was given a total of ¥6.059 billion by the end of fiscal 2014.
Fukui, meanwhile, has received ¥2.486 billion as of the end of 2013 and is expected to get more subsidies through fiscal 2015.
The danger of transporting plutonium
Too much of a bad thing? World awash with waste plutonium http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_round_up/2986959/too_much_of_a_bad_thing_world_awash_with_waste_plutonium.html Paul Brown 24th January 2016
As worldwide stocks of plutonium increase, lightly-armed British ships are about to carry an initial 330kg of the nuclear bomb metal for ‘safekeeping’ in the US, writes Paul Brown. But it’s only the tip of a global ‘plutonium mountain’ of hundreds of tonnes nuclear power’s most hazardous waste product.
Two armed ships set off from the northwest of England this week to sail round the world to Japan on a secretive and controversial mission to collect a consignment of plutonium and transport it to the US.
The cargo of plutonium, once the most sought-after and valuable substance in the world, is one of a number of ever-growing stockpiles that are becoming an increasing financial and security embarrassment to the countries that own them.
So far, there is no commercially viable use for this toxic metal, and there is increasing fear that plutonium could fall into the hands of terrorists, or that governments could be tempted to use it to join the nuclear arms race.
All the plans to use plutonium for peaceful purposes in fast breeder and commercial reactors have so far failed to keep pace with the amounts of this highly dangerous radioactive metal being produced by the countries that run uranium-fulled nuclear power stations.
The small amounts of plutonium that have been used in conventional and fast breeder reactors have produced very little electricity – at startlingly high costs.
Japan, with its 47-ton stockpile, is among the countries that once hoped to turn their plutonium into a power source, but various attempts have failed. The government, which has a firm policy of using it only for peaceful purposes, has nonetheless come under pressure to keep it out of harm’s way. Hence, the current plan to ship it to the US.
Altogether, 15 countries across the world have stockpiles. They include North Korea, which intends to turn it into nuclear weapons.
UK’s Plutonium represents a massive cost – but no balance sheet liability recorded
The UK has the largest pile, with 140 tons held at Sellafield in north-west England, whereplutonium has been produced at the site’s nuclear power plant since the 1950s, also using spent fuel from civilian nuclear plants such as Hinkley Point and Calder Hall. The government has yet to come up with a policy on what to do with it – and, meanwhile, the costs of keeping it under armed guard continue to rise.
Like most countries, the UK cannot decide whether it has an asset or a liability. The plutonium does not appear on any balance sheet, and the huge costs of storing it safely – to avoid it going critical and causing a meltdown – and guarding it against terrorists are not shown as a cost of nuclear power.
This enables the industry to claim that nuclear is an attractive and clean energy-producing option to help combat climate change.
The two ships that set off from the English port of Barrow-in-Furness this week are the Pacific Egret and Pacific Heron, nuclear fuel carriers fitted with naval cannon on deck. They are operated by Pacific Nuclear Transport Ltd, which ultimately is owned by the British government.
The presence on both ships of a heavily-armed security squad – provided by the Civil Nuclear Constabulary’s Strategic Escort Group – and the earlier loading of stores and the craning on board of live ammunition point to a long, security-conscious voyage ahead.
Sent to the US for safekeeping
The shipment of plutonium from Japan to the US falls under the US-led Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI), or Material Management & Minimisation (M3) programme, whereby weapons-useable material such as plutonium and highly-enriched uranium (HEU) is removed from facilities worldwide for safekeeping in the US.
The cargo to be loaded onto the two UK ships in Japan consists of some 331kg of plutonium from Japan’s Tokai Research Establishment.
This plutonium – a substantial fraction of which was supplied to Japan by the UK decades ago for ‘experimental purposes’ in Tokai’s Fast Critical Assembly (FCA) facility – is described by the US Department of Energy (DOE) as “posing a potential threat to national security, being susceptible to use in an improvised nuclear device, and presenting a high risk of theft or diversion”. Or, as another US expert put it, “sufficient to make up to 40 nuclear bombs”.
Under the US-led programme, the plutonium will be transported from Japan to the US port of Charleston and onwards to the Savannah River site in South Carolina.
Tom Clements, director of the public interest group Savannah River Site Watch, has condemned this import of plutonium as a material that will simply be stranded at the site, with no clear disposition path out of South Carolina. He sees it as further evidence that Savannah River is being used as a dumping ground for an extensive range of international nuclear waste.
Prime terrorist material’ at risk
The British group Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment (CORE) has for decades tracked the transport of nuclear materials round the world.
Their spokesman, Martin Forwood, said: “The practice of shipping this plutonium to the US as a safeguard is completely undermined by deliberately exposing this prime terrorist material to a lengthy sea transport, during which it will face everyday maritime risks and targeting by those with hostile intentions.
“We see this as wholly unnecessary and a significant security threat in today’s volatile and unpredictable world.” The best option, CORE believes, would have been to leave it where it was, under guard.
From DOE documents, this shipment will be the first of a number of planned shipments for what is referred to as ‘Gap Material Plutonium‘ – weapons-useable materials that are not covered under other US or Russian programmes.
In total, the DOE plans to import up to 900kg of ‘at risk’ plutonium – currently held in seven countries – via 12 shipments over seven years. Other materials include stocks of HEU – the most highly enriched plutonium (to 93%), also being supplied to Japan by the UK.
The voyage from Barrow to Japan takes about six weeks, and a further seven weeks from Japan to Savannah River – use of the Panama Canal having been ruled out by the DOE in its documents on the shipment. Previously, the countries near the canal have objected to nuclear transport in their territorial waters.
Nuclear apocalypse a more pressing danger than Islamic terrorism
Rearming for the apocalypse By Stephen Kinzer , Boston Globe, JANUARY 24, 2016 AMERICANS ARE IN near-panic over the danger posed by Islamic terrorists. That danger, however, pales beside an emerging new one. President Obama has proposed a frighteningly wrongheaded plan to “modernize” our nuclear arsenal at the unfathomable cost of about $1 trillion over the next 30 years. Terror will never reach even 1 percent of our population. Nuclear “modernization” increases the prospect of true devastation.
The nuclear threat seems diffuse and faraway, while the prospect of a deranged fanatic shooting up a cinema is as vivid as today’s news. Perhaps we have been lulled into security by the fact that no nuclear weapon has been used since 1945. Voices trying to alert us to the true threat are drowned out in a frenzy of over-the-top campaign speeches and TV rants about crazed Muslims.
Besides these grave dangers — global proliferation, accidental war, and nuclear terror — there is another: national bankruptcy. Obama’s project is ruinously expensive. Admiral Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calls it “spending ourselves into oblivion.” He describes our skyrocketing national debt as “the most significant threat to our national security.”
Now is the time to stop this program. So far, enthusiasm for it is confined to the White House and Pentagon. Once it is launched, rich procurement contracts will be portioned out to the districts of influential members of Congress. That will produce a self-interested constituency and give the project unstoppable momentum………https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2016/01/24/beware-obama-nuclear-weapons-plan/IJP9E48w3cjLPlTqMhZdFL/story.html
1 This Month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (114)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 