Climate change, drought, and the migrant caravan
The Climate Implications of the Migrant Caravan, EcoWatch, Olivia Rosane, Oct. 29, 2018 The U.S. military will send as many as 5,000 troops to the country’s Southern border to meet thousands of refugees and migrants who are traveling north through Mexico from Central America, The Independent reported Monday.
Brazil’s new President – a danger to environment and to action against climate change
|
Brazil elects Bolsonaro, who has threatened Amazon and global climate efforts Climate Home News, 29/10/2018,
Rightwing president-elect has pledged to open the rainforest to farming and industry, while slashing environmental protections and democratic rights By Megan Darby Jair Bolsonaro is the next president of Brazil, sparking fears for the future of the Amazon rainforest and the global climate. In Sunday’s run-off, the right-winger won 55% of the vote, beating Fernando Haddad of the Workers’ Party. Bolsonaro has courted the mining and farming lobbies, pledging to roll back environmental protections and gut federal enforcement. Early in the campaign, he threatened to withdraw Brazil from the Paris Agreement, but backtracked last week after an outcry at home and abroad. Scientists have warned his proposed policies will send deforestation soaring, predicting clearances the size of the UK each year within a decade. That would make it “all but impossible” for Brazil to meet its climate commitments, four experts wrote in Mongabay. The authoritarian leader’s praise for dictatorship and hostile comments towards minorities and political activists have also raised concerns about democratic freedoms. ….. Bolsonaro’s victory is raising concerns abroad, including in Norway, a major funder of forest protection efforts in the Amazon. The Norwegian government rebuked the outgoing administration and slashed payments to the $1.1 billion Amazon Fund last year, over an uptick in deforestation rates. Under Bolsonaro, the Brazilian government is expected to be less amenable to international influence. In his comments on the Paris Agreement, the president-elect has expressed that his main concern is preserving Brazilian sovereignty. Norwegian environment minister Ola Elvestuen told Norway’s state broadcaster: “Brazil’s contribution to reducing deforestation in the Amazon has been one of the most important measures to curb climate change in the last decade… We want to continue the good cooperation with Brazil in the future too.” Ines Luna, a campaigner with Rainforest Foundation Norway said: “Of course we are extremely worried that Brazil will change its climate policies.”….http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/10/29/brazil-elects-bolsonaro-threatened-amazon-global-climate-efforts/ |
|
Brazil’s new president will make it harder to limit climate change
New Scientist, By
It is being described as a catastrophe for the planet. The far-right winner of Brazil’s presidential election, Jair Bolsonaro, looks likely to further weaken protections for the Amazon rainforest and make the goal of limiting global warming to under 2°C even harder to achieve.
“If he carries through on his rhetoric we can expect tribal genocide, torture of dissidents, and climate-altering destruction of the Amazon forest,” tweeted Christopher Dick of the University of Michigan, who studies the rainforest. “This is a nightmare scenario.”
Bolsonaro has …(subscribers only) https://www.newscientist.com/article/2183842-brazils-new-president-will-make-it-harder-to-limit-climate-change/?utm_campaign=RSS%7CNSNS&utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=RSS&campaign_id=RSS%7CNSNS-
Serious concern in nuclear industry over no-deal Brexit
Utility Week 26th Oct 2018 , The Chief Executive of the Nuclear Industry Association has waned. Tom Greatrex says
the absence of a transition period could cause serious problems. Although
the UK and EU have already reached agreement over what their future
relationship should be, these plans would be scuppered if the wider deal
falls apart. With the free movement of workers and components at stake a no
deal Brexit is a serious concern.
https://utilityweek.co.uk/serious-concern-of-no-deal-brexit-scenario-in-the-nuclear-industry/
New global approaches needed to tackle climate change
FT 29th Oct 2018, For the past 20 years the orthodox response to the threat of climate change
has been focused on the search for a global agreement to reduce emissions.
Such an approach is entirely logical and rational. Climate change is a
global risk and so everyone should be involved in the response. The only
problem is that the approach has failed.
The Paris conference in 2015 brought people together and collected a range of loose promises from almost
every country in the world. Those promises in aggregate were inadequate, and some have already been forgotten as regimes have changed, not least in the US.
Many countries are taking action to mitigate climate change, but these actions don’t add up to an answer. Potential global solutions such as a universal carbon tax remain off the agenda. What is the alternative? The
best hope for limiting emissions comes from the application of science to
the energy market. That means finding sources of energy that can be made
available to all the world’s citizens, at a price they can afford, enabling
them to switch away from the carbon-intensive fuels such as coal that are
the main source of the problem. If politics cannot solve climate change,
perhaps science and economics can do better.
New techniques to store renewable electricity would be a great advance making sustainable power
available worldwide. Dramatic gains in the efficiency of energy consumption
may also be within reach. And there could be other answers to be found if
we looked.
https://www.ft.com/content/217fff44-d2d6-11e8-a9f2-7574db66bcd5
California Governor Jerry Brown joins Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in campaign against threats of nuclear war and climate change
Last week, the governor — whose term ends this January — announced that he’s accepted a position as the executive chairman of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a nonprofit that combats the risks of nuclear war and other threats to the world.
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists was founded in 1945 by researchers who worked on the atomic bomb. It published a regular magazine in which the scientists who built the bomb made the case for worldwide disarmament. Today, it publishes research on “manmade existential threats such as nuclear war, climate change, and disruptive technologies.”
The organization is best known for its Doomsday Clock, which the group updates annually to reflect the risks facing humanity. The clock currently says we are two minutes from midnight — the closest we’ve been since the Cold War to a disaster that could annihilate humanity……..
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists publishes research and updates on nuclear risk, climate change, and emerging risks to humanity from new technologies. All of those feature in their Doomsday Clock. In their 2018 statement, though, nuclear risks loomed largest. “Major nuclear actors are on the cusp of a new arms race,” the group wrote, “one that will be very expensive and will increase the likelihood of accidents and misperceptions. Across the globe, nuclear weapons are poised to become more rather than less usable because of nations’ investments in their nuclear arsenals.” …..
Brown and the team behind the Doomsday Clock are not alone in raising concerns about nuclear war and other threats.
The Global Challenges Foundation, which publishes an annual report on global catastrophic risks, named many of the same concerns that have driven the Doomsday Clock team to move us from six minutes to midnight in 2010 to two minutes to midnight today. Nuclear war is prominent among the risks they consider; they’re also worried about climate change, pandemics, AI, and threats we can’t yet anticipate — just like, 10 years before the atomic bomb, only a few scientists had any inkling it was possible. …….https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2018/10/29/18038254/jerry-brown-nuclear-war-doomsday-clock-climate-change-existential-ris
France’s people turning away from nuclear power
French public opinion growing against nuclear power https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/French-public-
opinion-is-growing-against-nuclear-power-as-awareness-of-environment-and-renewable-energy-growsThe French public is becoming less and less in favour of nuclear power, as awareness and concern for the environment grows, according to a new study.
The change in opinion has been attributed to the growth and improvement in renewable energy sources, and the rising awareness of the public towards the environment.
The safety of nuclear reactors has also been in question recently, after a spike in breakdowns, and more and more people living within 80 km of a central reactor.
Environmental campaigner Greenpeace, said: “We have gone from a world in which French society believed that nuclear was the only choice. The public thought it was bad, but a necessary evil. But now, with the rise in renewable energy, with sun and wind, we can bypass nuclear completely.”
Concern over the environmental impact of nuclear power has also played a role, it suggested.
The statement continued: “We are waking up to the fact that when we turn on a light or a toaster at home, we are producing radioactive waste that is going to remain on Earth for thousands of years. We are starting to ask ourselves if this is a clean source of energy.”
Despite this, however, the same poll found that just 28% of people would be willing to pay more for their energy to fix the nuclear problem.
America shouldn’t trust Saudi Arabia with nuclear technology
 Khashoggi’s Killing Should Be a Nuclear Red Flag, The Saudis can’t be trusted to enrich uranium and reprocess spent fuel. WSJ, By Jamie Fly and Henry Sokolski,Oct. 28, 2018 If the Saudi government’s prevarications about Jamal Khashoggi’s murder teach us anything, it should be that there are limits to how far the U.S. can trust Riyadh. In particular, America shouldn’t trust Saudi Arabia with nuclear technology……….
the risk of regime change if there is nuclear power in Saudi Arabia. Nuclear reactors operate for 40 years or more and are far more dangerous than any conventional arms sales. In the 1970s, the U.S. considered selling the shah of Iran 23 reactors. That would have been a colossal mistake. Saudi officials, including Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, have publicly threatened to violate the Kingdom’s Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons if they believe Iran is acquiring them. The U.S. has never negotiated a nuclear cooperation agreement with a country threatening to get nuclear weapons. The United Arab Emirates, a Saudi neighbor and ally, agreed to allow intrusive international nuclear inspections and to forgo enriching uranium and reprocessing spent fuel as part of its 2009 nuclear cooperation agreement with Washington. Riyadh has refused to make such pledges. Enriching and reprocessing could bring Riyadh within weeks of making bombs. It is unclear if the administration is intent on pressing the Saudis on this point…….. After Saudi Arabia’s kidnapping last year of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, its bungling of the war in Yemen, its erratic diplomatic moves against Canada, its continued jailing of human-rights activists, and now the killing of Khashoggi, Washington must demand more. This regime can’t be trusted with nuclear technology. Concluding a nuclear cooperation agreement to Riyadh’s liking would undermine the Trump administration’s effort to reverse the nuclear concessions President Obama made to Iran and set a dangerous precedent in the region. Any negotiations regarding a U.S.-Saudi nuclear cooperation agreement should be halted. If the Trump administration refuses to do this, Congress should make clear, as part of its broader response to the Khashoggi killing, that any agreement submitted for review will be blocked. This episode should serve as a reminder that unreliable proxies are no substitute for American leadership. A Reaganesque approach to Iran requires the fortitude to stand up for what is right, be it on nonproliferation or human rights, whether it involves friend or foe. Mr. Fly is a senior fellow of the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Mr. Sokolski is executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and author of “Underestimated: Our Not So Peaceful Nuclear Future.” https://www.wsj.com/articles/khashoggis-killing-should-be-a-nuclear-red-flag-1540753005
|
Study of 120,000 hibakusha atomic bomb survivors shows raised risk of breast cancer
 Study: Atomic bomb radiation raised teens’ risk of breast cancer http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201810270001.html, By SONOKO MIYAZAKI/ Staff Writer October 27, 2018 Women from Hiroshima and Nagasaki who had their first periods around the time of the atomic bombs are at an increased risk of developing breast cancer, a study has found.The findings by researchers from Japan and the United States were released by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) on Oct. 15, and published in the U.S. academic journal Radiation Research in the same month.
Past studies have revealed patients have a higher risk of breast cancer when they start menstruating earlier or receive doses of radiation in their early years. Alina V. Brenner, a senior scientist at RERF, said the correlation between onset of menstruation and radiation exposure ages and the radiation-derived risk suggests breast tissue is more sensitive to radiation around the emergence of secondary sexual characteristics. In the latest study, RERF tracked 120,000 hibakusha atomic bomb survivors and non-hibakusha, and analyzed radiation doses received and the ages of women suffering from breast cancer when they had their first period. The results showed a 70-year-old woman who first menstruated at the age of 15 and was affected by radiation at 30 has twice as high risk of breast cancer as radiation-free individuals, while the risk for a 70-year-old female survivor who had both a radiation dose and her first period at 15 is 2.4 times higher than non-hibakusha. |
|
The world is in danger, as Donald Trump and John Bolton just don’t ‘get it’about nuclear treaties
 WHAT TRUMP AND JOHN BOLTON DON’T UNDERSTAND ABOUT NUCLEAR WAR,  The Intercept, Jon Schwarz, PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S announcement on October 20 that he intends to pull the United States out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty was, if nothing else, appropriately timed. On that date exactly 56 years before, President John F. Kennedy abruptly cut short a midterm campaign trip to Illinois because, the White House said, he had a cold. In fact, Kennedy was returning to Washington to address the Cuban missile crisis — the closest humanity has ever come to obliterating itself with a nuclear war.The INF treaty was signed in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. It required both countries to forgo any land-based missiles, nuclear or otherwise, with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
In concrete terms, the treaty was a huge success. The U.S. destroyed almost 1,000 of its own missiles, and the Soviets destroyed almost 2,000 of theirs. But arms control treaties are never about weapons and numbers alone. They can help enemy nations create virtuous circles, both between them and within themselves. Verification requires constant communication and the establishment of trust; it creates constituencies for peace inside governments and in the general public; this reduces on both sides the power of the paranoid, reactionary wing that exists in every country; this creates space for further progress; and so on. The long negotiation of the INF treaty, and the post-signing environment it helped create, was part of an extraordinary collapse of tensions between the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the 1980s. When Reagan took office, the Soviets genuinely believed that the U.S. might engage in a nuclear first strike against them. This, in turn, led to two separate moments in 1983 in which the two countries came terrifyingly close to accidental nuclear war — closer than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis. Instead, the INF treaty was part of an era of good feelings that contributed to one of the most remarkable events of the past 100 years: the largely peaceful implosion of the Soviet Empire. Empires generally do not go quietly, and the dynamics of imperial collapse often contribute to huge conflagrations. Think of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and World War I; or the British Empire and World War II. The Soviet fall was an incredible piece of good fortune for the world; if it had happened in the early 1980s, instead of a few years later, it plausibly would have been catastrophic…….. exiting the treaty will do more than just lead to an arms race in which all three countries throw themselves into building new weapons. It will also create an atmosphere in which any rational modus vivendi between the U.S. and Russia, or the U.S. and China, will be far more difficult. This is the prize for Bolton and his allies, who can imagine only one world order: One in which they give orders, and everyone else submits. Bolton has the standard self-perception of his genre of human: In his memoir, “Surrender Is Not an Option,” he explains that he cares about “hard reality,” in contrast to the “dreamy and academic” fools who support arms control. But in fact, it is Bolton who is living inside of a dream. The hard reality is that our species almost committed suicide on October 27, the most dangerous moment of the Cuban missile crisis, later dubbed Black Saturday by the Kennedy administration. Even with comparative doves in charge of the U.S. and the Soviet Union, we came close to ending human civilization, thanks to mutual incomprehension. And we avoided it, as then-Defense Secretary Robert McNamara later said, not by talent or wisdom, but pure luck. Then, we created a false history of what happened, one which allows terrifying fantasists like Bolton to reach, and thrive within, the highest levels of power……… Shortly after midnight, in the early morning of Black Saturday, the U.S. informed NATO that it “may find it necessary within a very short time” to attack Cuba. At noon, a U-2 flight over Cuba was shot down, killing the pilot. On all sides, war — potentially nuclear war — seemed likely, if not inevitable. But that night, Kennedy made the most important presidential decision in history: He accepted an offer from Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to remove the U.S. missiles in Italy and Turkey in return for the removal of the Soviet missiles in Cuba. But the U.S. part of the bargain was kept secret from Americans. The administration maintained that Kennedy had forced the Soviets to give in, giving them nothing. That was, of course, more than frightening enough. But here’s the rest of the story. ON OCTOBER 27, A U.S. Navy ship participating in the blockade dropped depth charges on a Soviet submarine. It was only discovered years later that not only was the submarine armed with nuclear torpedoes, but also was out of radio contact with the Soviet government and believed that the war had begun. The captain wanted to use the torpedoes, which almost certainly would have led to the U.S using nuclear weapons in response. However, according to Soviet protocol, the torpedoes could only be launched with the approval of all three officers aboard. One of them refused. ……… what we can be sure of is that if people like Trump and Bolton had been in charge in 1962, then today there would be no discussion of the INF treaty — because there would be no treaty and no one to discuss it. It’s also certain that on our current trajectory, the day will come when the world will face a similar crisis. That time we won’t get the same roll of the dice. The hard reality of the Cuban missile crisis is that, as Blight and Lang put it, “either we put an end to nuclear weapons, or they will put an end to us.” https://theintercept.com/2018/10/27/trump-inf-treaty-cuban-missile-crisis-nuclear-war/ |
|
Nuclear facilities in UK – perfect targets for terrorism
 Nuclear facilities as potential targets in China and UK https://nuclearexhaust.wordpress.com/2018/10/27/nuclear-facilities-as-potential-targets-in-china-and-uk/
Nuclear reactors as potential targets in UK Wales |
|
New research on impacts of climate change in the Mediterranean
 First study on climate change impact in Mediterranean https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-10/cuoh-fso102618.php, The first-ever study synthesizing risks posed by climate and environmental changes in the Mediterranean, CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG As the Mediterranean Basin is experiencing the impact of climate change more than ever, an international network of scientists has worked together to synthesize the effects of climate change and environmental problems, as well as the incurred risks, in the region, to facilitate decision-making in addressing the issues.This first-ever synthesis of multiple environmental changes and risks affecting the livelihoods of people in the entire region has just been published in the latest issue of Nature Climate Change.
The rates of climate change observed in the Mediterranean Basin exceed the global trends for most variables. The impact has further exacerbated the existing environmental problems caused by land use changes such as urbanization and agricultural intensification, increasing pollution and declining biodiversity. Led by Professor Dr Wolfgang Cramer from the Mediterranean Institute for Biodiversity and Ecology, an international team of scientists has just published a review article in Nature Climate Change to address the current and future risks related to these changes, titled “Climate change and interconnected risks to sustainable development in the Mediterranean”. Professor Michael Tsimplis from the School of Law at City University of Hong Kong who is part of the international team and has multidisciplinary background with research in oceanography and climate change said, “this paper suggests that the risks posed by climate change in the Mediterranean Sea were underestimated because each was only examined independently. But in reality, they are interconnected and interact with social and economic problems exacerbating their impacts. So they all have to be addressed at the same time and within the same financial constraints.” The paper reviews the various environmental changes and the risks posed by these changes in the five major interconnected domains, namely water resources, ecosystems, food safety and security, health, and human security. For an instance, average temperatures in this region have already risen by 1.4°C since the pre-industrial era, 0.4°C more than the global average. Even if future global warming is limited to 2°C, as prescribed by the Paris Agreement, summer rainfall is at risk to be reduced by 10 to 30% in some regions, thereby enhancing existing water shortages and decreasing agricultural productivity, particularly in southern countries. Due to climate change alone, the irrigation demands in the region are projected to increase between 4 and 18% by the end of the century. Population growth may escalate these numbers furthers to 22-74%. Tourism development, new industries and urban sprawl may increase water pollution, too. The acidification of sea water, increasing heatwaves in combination with drought and land-use change also affect the natural ecosystems, posing risks in biodiversity and fisheries. Food production from agriculture and fisheries across the Mediterranean region is also changing due to the social, economic and environmental changes. Combined with the ongoing switch to more animal-based food production, southern countries are at risk to increase their dependence on trade. Public health is impacted by multiple trends of change, through heat waves, pollution (higher risk of cardiovascular or respiratory diseases), and the increased spread of disease vectors (West Nile virus, Dengue, Chikungunya). In politically unstable countries, environmental change is an increasingly relevant factor for socio-economic risks, due to famines, migration and conflict. Human security will also be threatened due to extreme weather, such as a rise in sea level posing a higher risk of storm surges for people living in coastal areas in the region. To facilitate decision-making in the face of these risks, the authors call for a pan-Mediterranean integrated risk assessment. Therefore, the Mediterranean Experts on Climate and Environmental Change (MedECC) network has been established, currently involving 400 scientific experts, supported by government agencies and other partners, to produce a full synthesis of risks and present it to decision makers for debate and approval. |
|
Climate change bringing more droughts, more extreme rainfalls, more often
Meteorologist expects severe drought and heavy rain events to worsen globally https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/10/181025141009.htm, October 25, 2018, University of Oklahoma
- Summary: Meteorologists expect severe drought and long-lasting rainfall events to worsen in the future. Researchers have determined how frequent, intense and long lasting these types of events will be in the future.
- A University of Oklahoma meteorologist, Elinor R. Martin, expects severe drought and long-lasting rainfall events to worsen in the future. In Martin’s new study just published, she determines how frequent, intense and long lasting these types of events will be in the future. Martin looks at both severe drought and rain events, but it is the first time extended heavy rain events have been studied.
-
“In some places, there will be more frequent droughts, and other places can expect more frequent rainfall,” said Martin, professor in the School of Meteorology, OU College of Atmospheric and Geographic Sciences. “The Caribbean and Central America will have more extreme droughts and the north and northeast of North America can expect more extreme heavy rain events. Around the world, some places will see droughts and heavy rain events become more intense, longer lasting and more frequent. For the agriculture and related industries, this is particularly important.”
Globally, there are areas that will overall become wetter and areas that will become drier. When it gets warmer, the water builds up and it rains for long periods, but there will be longer periods between rain events and in places, it will become drier. Even regions that are projected to become drier overall, like the Southwest and South Central United States, are expected to see more severe, longer and frequent periods of heavy rain. Martin refers to the May 2015 rain event in Oklahoma and Texas as one example of what could be expected in the future.
-
“When it gets warmer, water vapor can build up in the atmosphere, so when it does rain it rains a lot and for long periods, but there will be longer periods between rain events so droughts will become worse.” said Martin. She points to a changing climate as the reason these events will worsen, and defines droughts and rain events by using a standardized rainfall index to compare events between regions and seasons. For this study, Martin used the same climate models as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Story Source:
Materials provided by University of Oklahoma. Original written by Jana Smith
Japan’s Onagawa nuclear reactor No 1 to be scrapped
|
Tohoku Electric to scrap aging No. 1 unit at Onagawa nuclear plant, Japan Times, 25 Oct 18
KYODO, SENDAI – Tohoku Electric Power Co. said Thursday it will scrap the idled No. 1 unit at its Onagawa nuclear power plant in Miyagi Prefecture, more than 30 years after it started operations. The company cited difficulties in taking additional safety measures as well as the relatively small output of the reactor that made it unprofitable. Tohoku Electric President Hiroya Harada conveyed its decision to Miyagi Gov. Yoshihiro Murai. “We decided to decommission (the reactor) at a board meeting today. We took into consideration technical restrictions associated with additional safety measures, output and the years in use,” Harada said when the two met at the prefectural government office….. The basement floors of the Onagawa plant’s No. 2 unit were flooded in the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami disaster. The company is building a 29-meter-high sea wall to guard the complex. Tohoku Electric aims to resume operations of the No. 2 unit at the Onagawa plant in fiscal 2020 at the earliest. The Nuclear Regulation Authority, the country’s nuclear watchdog, has been screening its safety measures. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/10/25/national/tohoku-electric-scrap-aging-no-1-unit-onagawa-nuclear-plant/?fbclid=IwAR3HINMvYO5K5lpiyVwPaXXDlWvNy3cu4walE_uEkDivJ-5sn7uPRSnDEzE#.W9aIxWgzbIW |
|
1.This Month
EVENTS.
Movie Premiere -“The Road to War”- Australia is being set up to be the US proxy in its coming war with China.
Premiere in Melbourne March 22 at the Carlton Nova cinema
Hobart screening State Cinema March 23 with special guest Bob Brown
Adelaide screening Capri cinema March 29
Further information or interviews with David Bradbury:
Mobile 0409925469
-
Archives
- March 2023 (196)
- February 2023 (379)
- January 2023 (388)
- December 2022 (277)
- November 2022 (335)
- October 2022 (363)
- September 2022 (259)
- August 2022 (367)
- July 2022 (368)
- June 2022 (277)
- May 2022 (375)
- April 2022 (377)
-
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
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- 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
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 