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

June 23 Energy News



¶ “Exxon, Stephen Hawking, greens, and Reagan’s advisers agree on a carbon tax” • What do ExxonMobil, Stephen Hawking, the Nature Conservancy, and a number of former conservative cabinet members have in common? All are founding members of the Climate Leadership Council, which proposed a revenue-neutral carbon tax policy. [The Guardian]

Stephen Hawking (Photo: Jemal Countess | Getty Images)

¶ “Cuba unveils plan to confront climate change” • In April, Cuba’s Council of Ministers approved a climate change plan. It is the latest manifestation of Cuba’s sustained endeavor to contain the impact of climate change. The Cuban government has dedicated resources and talent to the project, relying on facts, data, and science. [Green Left Weekly]


¶ The government of Alberta launched the Residential and Commercial Solar Program, a $36 million solar rebate scheme to support deployment of around 50 MW of PV power through 2019. The…

View original post 779 more words

June 23, 2017 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Coal Action Network Oppose New Coal Mine Plan for Cumbria —

Coal Action Network have written to Cumbria County Council opposing the new coal mine plan in West Cumbria saying that: “The application to mine is too close to the Sellafield nuclear site and the proposal for another nuclear power station at Moorside. [5] Underground mining can have a significant impact on the surrounding areas, recently […] […]

via Coal Action Network Oppose New Coal Mine Plan for Cumbria —

June 23, 2017 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Trump Donor-Fundraiser Loses Antitrust Case: U.S. District Court Blocks EnergySolutions’ Acquisition of WCS Nuclear Waste Site (June 21, 2017 Ruling)

Mining Awareness +

WCS west Texas nuclear waste dump

Energy Solutions, owned by Trump large donor Doug Kimmelman, wants to take-over competitor WCS in clear violation of antitrust law. Thus, The United States of America, acting under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States, brings this civil antitrust action to enjoin EnergySolutions, Inc. (“ES”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Rockwell Holdco, Inc. (“Rockwell”), from acquiring Waste Control Specialists LLC (“WCS”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Andrews County Holdings, Inc.
Energy Solutions Clive Nuclear Waste Dump :
(San Onofre Nuclear steam generators were sent to Clive.)

Energy Solutions Barnwell site

Vigilance is still required in case of Appeal. EnergySolutions is privately held and thus is more difficult than average to monitor-hold accountable. Better WCS return to the public now, than later. Nuclear waste needs to be managed as not for profit. Both WCS and EnergySolutions are costly and…

View original post 347 more words

June 23, 2017 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

US Congress Members Press EPA Admin Pruitt on Trump Advisor Carl Icahn’s Conflicts of Interest Re the Renewable Fuel Standard

Mining Awareness +

Besides the conflicts of interest described in the US Congressional letter further below, Trump advisor; corporate raider, purchaser of Trump Taj casino, Carl Icahn also has a joint venture with KAMAZ, FEDERAL-MOGUL Naberezhnye Chelny. Icahn owns 81.99% of Federal Mogul shares: Currently the Russian government owns 73.4% of KAMAZ via Rostec at 49.9%, 51% Russian government owned Sberbank at 23.5%; Daimler 15%, KAMAZ PTC 3.72%. (4-traders. com). The US raised concerns to Icahn enterprises re KAMAZ dealings with “terrorist” states:
US VP Mike Pence’s brother, Ed Pence, is VP and General Manager of the High Horsepower Engine Business of Cummins, which is a long-time joint venture partner of Russian Government owned KAMAZ.

From the US House Energy and Commerce Committee, Democrats:
E&C Democratic Leaders Press EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt on Trump Advisor Carl Icahn’s Potential Conflicts of Interest

Jun 21, 2017 Press Release
Members Ask…

View original post 1,876 more words

June 23, 2017 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Global Collaboration Towards a Legally Binding Ban on Nuclear Weapons

President Eisenhower was right to equate possession of nuclear weapons with commission of crime:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

By Kathy Kelly, Global Research, June 22, 2017, Common Dreams 20 June 2017, This week, in New York City, representatives from more than 100 countries will begin collaborating on an international treaty, first proposed in 2016, to ban nuclear weapons forever.

June 23, 2017 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

As the global renewable energy transition speeds up, Russia gambles on nuclear energy

Experts have expressed concern that these ambitious development plans are proceeding without adequate plans for disposal of nuclear waste. The Bellona Foundation, an organization that conducts independent research into international nuclear and environmental issues, has been critical of the lack of planning for nuclear waste processing and disposal, and has pointed out that dependency on Russia for nuclear fuel may leave countries particularly vulnerable in the event of a sour political climate.

Russia and Nuclear Power,June 21, 2017 , by Emma Claire Foley

In an age where sources of renewable energy are becoming an increasingly cost-efficient means of providing electricity, Russia is still going nuclear.

Nuclear energy is losing its luster in many parts of the world. In the United States, the drop in the cost of renewables production is making them a more attractive electricity-generation option than nuclear power. France, a country long associated with nuclear power, is also looking to reduce its reliance on reactors. And even China is now investing more in developing wind farms than it is in nuclear infrastructure.

Russia, though, is bucking the trend. Nuclear energy accounts for 11 percent of domestic power production, while the share of wind and solar power generation remains negligible, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Overall, more than 40 percent of Russian power is generated by natural gas. Meanwhile, hydropower is the main renewable source of power in Russia, responsible for a roughly 20-percent share of the overall mix.

Russia has taken steps in recent months to develop its wind power potential. But development efforts are hampered by legislation that requires at least 40 percent of all renewable-energy infrastructure to be locally produced. To meet the requirement, Russia needs to find a substantial amount of foreign investment.

In the realm of international trade, Russia is trying to turn its slow embrace of renewables into an advantage. Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear company, is by far the most active player these days in the international market for nuclear power technologies. Rosatom currently has agreements to provide plants, fuel or expertise in 20 countries in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America. With the notable exception of the Barakah Atomic Energy Station in the United Arab Emirates, which is being built by the Korea Electric Power Corporation, Russia is the most heavily involved of any nuclear-exporting countries in developing nuclear power facilities in the Middle East.

Rosatom’s most recent move in the Middle East was a deal, sealed in late May, to construct Egypt’s first nuclear power plant, pending final approval by the Egyptian government. The pact is the latest of four bilateral agreements signed by Egypt and Russia concerning the nuclear power station at El Dabaa, approximately 200 miles west of Cairo on Egypt’s north coast. The first of these, signed in late 2015, covered the construction and maintenance of the plant for a 10-year period, and included a stipulation that Russia would provide fuel for the plant for 60 years.

The plant would consist of four VVER-1200 reactors, a new design based on the earlier VVER-1000 model developed in the Soviet Union in the mid-1970s. The first VVER-1200 was brought online earlier this year at Russia’s Novovoronezh plant. It is projected to begin producing power in 2024.

Egypt is one of four countries in and around the Middle East where Rosatom has built, or plans to build, nuclear power facilities. Rosatom’s subsidiary, Atomenergostroy, which handles the company’s overseas construction projects, has contracts to build plants in Jordan and Turkey. In addition, it is building additional reactors at Iran’s Bushehr facility. The company will provide financing, staff, and fuel, while retaining ownership of the plants and receiving revenue from the power they produce.

Russia has provided approximately 50 percent of the financing for Turkey’s plant at Akkuyu, and will provide fuel for its operation once construction is complete. Upwards of 85 percent of the financing for the El Dabaa project in Egypt is to come in the form of loans from Russia, a country in the midst of an economic downturn brought on by the global fall in fossil fuel prices.

Egypt is also exploring options for a second nuclear power plant to be built on its coast. During the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union provided supplies, facilities, and training to Middle Eastern countries in an effort to promote nuclear power. The governments of Jordan and Egypt expressed interest at the time in developing nuclear power facilities in the mid-1950s, and the Soviet Union began construction on a research reactor in Egypt in 1961. Similar reactors were built in Iraq in 1967 and in Libya in 1981. In 1995, Russia’s Ministry of Atomic Energy signed a contract to take over construction of the Bushehr plant.

In 2010, Rosatom was granted the right to open offices in embassies abroad by a change in laws governing its operations. It did so in Dubai and Beijing in April of 2016, and the company’s website now boasts over $133 billion USD in overseas orders for its products.
Rosatom has also partnered with the International Atomic Energy Agency to fund nuclear infrastructure development internationally, pledging $1.8 million as well as equipment and expertise to equip countries that hope to develop nuclear power capacities in the future.
Experts have expressed concern that these ambitious development plans are proceeding without adequate plans for disposal of nuclear waste. The Bellona Foundation, an organization that conducts independent research into international nuclear and environmental issues, has been critical of the lack of planning for nuclear waste processing and disposal, and has pointed out that dependency on Russia for nuclear fuel may leave countries particularly vulnerable in the event of a sour political climate.

June 23, 2017 Posted by | marketing, politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Energy Secretary Perry quickly backtracks on statement about Yucca nuclear waste dump plan

Perry says no decision made on interim nuclear waste storage in Nevada, Las Vegas Review Journal  June 21, 2017  WASHINGTON — Energy Secretary Rick Perry clarified a previous statement on interim nuclear waste storage, telling a Senate subcommittee Wednesday that no decisions have been made on temporary sites for spent fuel in Texas, New Mexico or Nevada.

Private companies in New Mexico and Texas have submitted applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to store nuclear waste on an interim basis.

Perry created a firestorm Tuesday when he suggested to the House Appropriations subcommittee on energy that the Nevada National Security Site could store waste temporarily.

The suggestion brought an avalanche of criticism from Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and members of the state’s congressional delegation who called the proposal ill-conceived and likely illegal because of restrictions involving the former nuclear test site northwest of Las Vegas.

Before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on energy, Perry clarified the statement to note that no decision has been made on interim storage and that any such plan would require coordination with Congress.

“I think it is appropriate to say, there are no plans at this particular time for interim storage in New Mexico, Nevada or Texas or any other site,” Perry said…..

June 23, 2017 Posted by | politics, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Strong reaction by Nevada against Energy Secretary Rick Perry’s push for Yucca Mt nuclear waste dump

Perry repeats desire to store nuclear waste in Nevada; state officials respond, News 4 , by Tony Garcia, LAS VEGAS (KSNV News3LV) — 

Nevada’s state and national elected officials reacted swiftly Tuesday after Energy Secretary Rick Perry said he wants to build interim nuclear waste facilities at the Nevada National Security Site and called constructing a long-term repository at Yucca Mountain a “moral obligation.”

“Today’s comments by Secretary Perry suggesting he would consider storage of high-level nuclear waste at the Nevada National Security Site come as a complete blindside, and I view this as a total disregard and failure to honor the historical process,” Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said in a statement.

“The idea of storing high-level nuclear waste at the National Security Site is ill-conceived, irresponsible, and likely illegal. This is a prime example of federal overreach, and Nevada will pursue every legal option at our disposal.”

Sandoval added that he has asked Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt to review the proposal and identify legal avenues to stop it.

“Let me be clear – no part of Nevada will be home to the world’s most toxic waste and we will fight every effort that puts our citizens at risk,” Sandoval said.

“Secretary Perry’s comments today are irresponsible, reckless, and show a blatant disregard for the state of Nevada,” U.S. Sen. Dean Heller (R) said in a statement. “As I have repeatedly told the Secretary, Nevada will not serve as our nation’s nuclear waste dump. The only viable solution to our country’s nuclear waste problem is one that is rooted in consent, and Nevada has said ‘no.’….

“I am appalled to see how tone-deaf this administration is in refusing to listen to the collective voice of an entire state,” said U.S. Rep. Jacky Rosen. “The only moral obligation we have is to keep Nevadans safe from nuclear waste. If Secretary Perry thinks that he alone can restart Yucca Mountain with the flip of a switch, he is mistaken. Since the 1980s, Nevada has voiced its opposition to Yucca Mountain based on legitimate safety concerns.

“Today’s comments by Secretary Perry are wrong and dangerous. Reviving Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste dump would place Nevada and communities around the country in harm’s way by green-lighting daily regular shipments of high-level nuclear waste by train or by truck for over 50 years.”

June 23, 2017 Posted by | politics, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

President Zuma “knows nothing” about nuclear corruption in South Africa, or his family benefiting

ZUMA ‘HAS NO KNOWLEDGE’ OF HIS FAMILY BENEFITING FROM NUCLEAR PROGRAMME, President Jacob Zuma said the government will pursue a nuclear power project at a pace and scale that the country can afford. Rahima Essop CAPE TOWN – President Jacob Zuma has told the National Assembly he has no knowledge of his family benefitting from South Africa’s proposed nuclear build programme.

He was responding to a question by Democratic Alliance leader Mmusi Maimane, who asked him directly, whether he or any of his family members have received payments related to the project.

Zuma was asked questions about state capture, the recession and his government’s nuclear power ambitions.

The president was terse in his response to Maimane’s frank question about the possibility of corruption in the proposed nuclear build programme.

Zuma said the government would pursue a nuclear power project at a pace and scale that the country could afford.

He also reaffirmed the state’s position that nuclear is a clean and reliable form of energy.

Earlier this year, the Western Cape High Court dealt a legal blow to government’s plans when it found certain agreements related to the project were unconstitutional and unlawful.

June 23, 2017 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma says South Africa is committed to nuclear power expansion

South Africa committed to nuclear power expansion, process to be open – Zuma,

South Africa is committed to an “open, transparent” process to build new nuclear power plants and the government planned to go through with its plans for nuclear expansion, President Jacob Zuma told parliament on Thursday.

South Africa is planning to build 9,600 megawatts (MW) of nuclear capacity, a project that could be one of the world’s biggest nuclear contracts in decades.

But Energy Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi said on Wednesday in Moscow that the plans will be reviewed as the country is in a recession. (Reporting by Wendell Roelf; Writing by Ed Stoddard; Editing by James Macharia)

June 23, 2017 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

Who wants to host the nuke carcass…?, June 22, 2017Demystifying Nuclear Power, Atomic Power and a Just Transition for ‘Host Communities’   By Maggie Gundersen &Ben Shulman-Reed, Atomic power plants are shutting down faster than they are being built.  These reactors conceptualized in the 1960s are failing because they are old and they are being closed because they are not competitive with renewables and therefore economically unfeasible.  People around the world understand that a Fukushima-like disaster can happen anywhere, anytime.  The nuclear power industry that dreams of building a new nuke every twelve days for the next 35 years) – totaling 1000 new rectors by 2050) are facing the harsh reality that atomic energy is not needed and is no longer wanted.

In the United States (U.S.), where largest amount of atomic power reactors in the world are located, Pilgrim in Massachusetts, Indian Point outside New York City, Oyster Creek in New Jersey, Diablo Canyon in California, and most recently Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania have recently announced their intent to close in the near future. While the shutdown of American nukes is good for our economy as well as the planet’s environment, decommissioning is a costly and complicated process that takes a toll on the local communities that hosted these giant facilities. When a nuclear power reactor shuts down, an incredible amount of work must be done to ensure a just, smooth financial transition for the local economy and also to create long-term viable storage for its toxic radioactive waste, which the U.S. Government has failed to provide. In addition to hosting the physical radioactive carcass of the power reactor for decades, the local community must restructure its economy to make it more diverse and self-sufficient as well as creating a more healthy and sustainable energy future.

Unfortunately, the usually small and economically stifled cities and towns, often referred to as ‘host communities’ to these atomic power reactors are not always given a voice at the table when it comes to deciding plans for their future – yet they are the true stakeholders. Fairewinds has continuously monitored and reported upon the challenges and defects of the Vermont Yankee atomic reactor and the lack of stakeholder respect given to its Windham County host. When it came time to close reactor in 2014, the Vermont Legislators and State Officials found themselves having to stand up to both Entergy (Vermont Yankee’s parent corporation), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) the alleged federal regulator for the nuclear power industry, for the Vermont’s own State’s rights and for the rights of all Vermont citizens.

Vermont is still negotiating the terms of the decommissioning process for Vermont Yankee – the state’s lone nuclear power plant and is becoming a leading example for nationwide regarding how to advocate for a smooth and just transition from atomic power operations to decommissioning and dismantlement. Vermont is seeking a just transition that will protect all the stakeholders, not only the profit interests of the power plant’s corporate owners.

The real question for all nuclear power plant host communities is: who is protecting and advocating for the rights of the ratepayers, for the level of decontamination at the site, nearby aquifers and watersheds, and an orderly economic transition for all the people in the impacted surrounding communities? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), while the controlling interest in radiological standards and decommissioning processes on each site, does not examine or consider any of these critical human rights issues.  All the environmental justice and human rights issues of assuring ongoing open access to clean air, safe water, and uncontaminated food from the remaining carcass of a shutdown atomic power reactor falls upon local and state governments throughout the US. Vermont is leading the way in creating an open and transparent process for local communities to self-advocate in creating a safer and more transparent decommissioning process and transition to a safe and permanently uncontaminated dismantlement of these highly radioactive nukes.

By opening a wide dialogue as we all advocate for an open and transparent decommissioning process, we believe the U.S. can shed its title of founding nuclear energy and instead become a global leader in cleaning up the mess we started. By following Vermont’s of paying close attention to the interests of our local governments, ratepayers and host communities, we all will begin to achieve just and safe transitions from the glut of toxic radioactive nuclear power plant carcasses coming our way as atomic power continues to become economically unviable.

It is Fairewinds’ goal to help communities work together to achieve a safer transition in their energy futures by shifting energy paradigms to an economically feasible and environmentally compatible model for the health and survival of our species and our planet.

June 23, 2017 Posted by | decommission reactor, USA | Leave a comment

Russia holds AtomExpo – a triumph of nuclear marketing

Further agreements flow from AtomExpo, World Nuclear News, 21 June 2017  More cooperation agreements and contracts have been signed by Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom and its subsidiaries during the IX AtomExpo International Forum it is hosting this week in Moscow. The latest agreements, with Asian and European companies, cover collaboration in a wide range of nuclear-related areas and beyond.

A cooperation program for 2017-2019 was signed yesterday by Rosatom and French energy company Engie. The document was signed by Kirill Komarov, first deputy director-general for international business at Rosatom, and Jan Bartak, Engie nuclear development director. The cooperation program contains more than 20 specific projects in the field of nuclear power plant maintenance and nuclear fuel cycle services.

Rosatom’s nuclear fuel manufacturing subsidiary Tenex signed an agreement with Belgium’s Synatom to extend an existing long-term enriched uranium supply contract. The document envisages extending the contract until 2022 and increasing the volume of enriched uranium exported. Tenex has been supplying uranium products to Synatom since 1975.

Czech Republic  An MOU to cooperate in repairing welding joints in steam generator vessels for VVER-440 units was signed between JSC Rusatom Service and the Czech Republic’s Skoda JS. The aim of the MOU is to develop cooperation between the two companies and identify specific projects for collaboration.

The two companies also signed a contract on the delivery of equipment for unit 2 of the Metsamor nuclear power plant in Armenia. Skoda JS will supply equipment for the control and protection system, which is to be replaced during a scheduled outage in 2018 as part of work to extend the operating period of the unit.

Rosatom’s Komarov also signed an MOU with the Czech Power Industry Alliance (CPIA) aimed at developing cooperation in nuclear energy. “That implies, first of all, CPIA member countries’ participation in Rosatom’s projects in Russia and abroad,” Rosatom said. “In its turn, the Alliance is ready to assist in obtaining export finance for Czech companies to be able to take part in the projects.”

Asian collaboration…….

Workforce development  An MOU in the area of personnel training for nuclear power programs was signed yesterday between Rosatom Central Institute for Continuing Education and Training (Rosatom-CICE&T) and global testing, inspection and certification services company Bureau Veritas.

Signed by Rosatom-CICE&T rector Iurii Seleznev and Bureau Veritas vice president of nuclear services in Europe Laurent Kueny, the MOU aims to foster cooperation in the field of research, education and training in nuclear science and technology. The organisations agreed to collaborate in such areas as the exchange of materials and lecturers, as well as distance learning……..

June 23, 2017 Posted by | marketing, Russia | Leave a comment

The very great difference in effects on the environment between nuclear bombs and nuclear meltdowns

Nuclear Bombs and Nuclear Reactor Meltdowns Affect the Environment in Very Different Ways, Why do nuclear bombs leave little longtime radiation, while nuclear reactor meltdowns could last for centuries? originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world.

Answer by Viktor T. Toth, IT pro, part-time physicist, on Quora:

Why do nuclear bombs leave little longtime radiation, while nuclear reactor meltdowns could last for centuries? Well, for starters, there is the amount of fuel involved.

Little Boy (the bomb dropped on Hiroshima) contained 64 kilograms of highly enriched (weapons grade) uranium. Of this, less than a kilogram actually underwent nuclear fission, producing fission products including short-lived but dangerous isotopes, and also producing the neutron radiation “flash” that induced secondary radioactivity in some materials that absorbed those neutrons.

In contrast, an RBMK reactor like the one that blew up in Chernobyl contains 100–150 fuel assemblies, each with over 100 kg of partially enriched uranium. So right there, the amount of fuel in the reactor is several hundred times more than the amount of fission fuel in a nuclear bomb. And whereas a nuclear bomb uses its fuel rather inefficiently (the explosive fission process takes place in milliseconds), a reactor does a more thorough job consuming its fuel over the course of several months before a fuel assembly is replaced.

Furthermore, the fission byproducts remain in the fuel assembly. Depending on the reactor design, these may, in fact, include materials a lot worse than the uranium fuel, such as weapons grade plutonium. Then there are also all the irradiated parts of the reactor that have been continuously exposed to radiation, resulting in secondary radioactivity and more nasty byproducts.

When a nuclear bomb explodes, it is dispersed over a large area. In case of a reactor accident, some of the fuel is dispersed, but a lot of it remains in place, at the reactor site. So this represents a concentration of radioactive materials that just does not occur in case of a bomb. And because all of it sits on the ground, there is the chance of leakage, e.g., into the water table, contaminating the water supply of a large region.

A nuclear reactor site may also contain other sources of radiation. For instance, one of the biggest concerns after the Fukushima accident was due to spent fuel pools located near the meltdown sites.

Having said all that, let us not forget that the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone became possibly the biggest accidental wildlife sanctuary in Europe, if not the world. That is because while radioactive contamination takes its toll, it’s nothing compared to what humans do. Remove most of the humans and even if you add a substantial amount of radiation, Nature thrives.

June 23, 2017 Posted by | 2 WORLD, environment, radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

Critics call for an end to $14 billion South Carolina nuclear plant project

End $14 billion SC nuke plant project, critics say,, BY SAMMY FRETWELL, 

June 23, 2017 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Russia marketing nuclear power to Uganda

Uganda Could Become The First African Country To Develop Nuclear Power by Odunayo Eweniyi , 22 June 17 Like there’s not enough wrong in Africa right now, Uganda has signed a deal with Russia to develop uranium into nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Not to mention that it’s really suspicious that Russia seems intent on handing nuclear power to anyone and everyone who will take it. But let’s not worry, they said it’s for peaceful purposes.

Uganda’s State Minister for Minerals, Simon D’Ujanga and Russia’s Deputy Director-General of Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation, Nikolai Spasskiy, signed the Memorandum of Understanding in Moscow, and it includes collaboration in the areas of radiological and physical security, fundamental and applied researches, human resource training, and nuclear research centres.

The discussions with Russia started last October, shortly after the launch of the Uganda-Russian Joint Permanent Commission, an inter-governmental framework for economic, scientific and technical cooperation.

 Uganda also has ongoing discussions with China to help develop peaceful nuclear power. This agreement with Russia comes just a month after a team from Uganda’s Ministry of Energy travelled to meet with the Zhonguan Engineering Corporation (CZEC), a subsidiary of China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC).

At least 8 countries in Africa are actively considering starting nuclear programs – Nigeria (don’t laugh), Ghana, Senegal, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Zambia, Namibia; but the question is why? Emerging countries like the ones listed generally do not have the expertise for this, so as opposed to focusing on building and relying on licenses from developed countries who arguably have their own agendas when sponsoring developments like this one in African countries, why don’t we focus on building the expertise first?

And African countries are largely unable to manage the present grid system that we have, where do we get the assurance that they can manage nuclear power plants, which they say are built for peaceful purposes, but could just as easily harm citizens?

June 23, 2017 Posted by | AFRICA, marketing, Russia | Leave a comment