Why doesn’t debt-ridden EDF cut its losses and close its uneconomic UK nuclear reactors
|
Unanswered questions dog UK’s new nuclear plans Climate News Network June 11th, 2020, by Paul Brown A French company has designs on the United Kingdom: new nuclear plans for more reactors, with British consumers footing the bill.
– The French company EDF, a company in a hurry, wants permission to start building two more reactors in the United Kingdom, and it hopes to save money – by arranging for British taxpayers to pay the capital costs of its new nuclear plans. EDF is already building two reactors at Hinkley Point in the West of England, and it is hoping to transfer workers from that site to Suffolk, on the east coast, believing that will help it to save up to 20% of the construction cost of the two planned reactors, because everyone employed there will know already what to do. The catch is that EDF has no money itself to finance the construction and wants the UK government to impose a new tax on British electricity consumers so that they will pay the cost through their electricity bills. The UK has yet to decide whether to go ahead with this tax, euphemistically called a Regulated Asset Base. If adopted, what the scheme means is that the UK consumer will pay EDF’s bills rather than the company having to borrow the money from banks, which are increasingly unlikely to lend money to such expensive schemes because they take so long to build and promise little return. Anxieties abound Meanwhile EDF, which has a Chinese nuclear company as its junior partner, promises to create 25,000 jobs, including 1,000 apprenticeships during construction, and says 900 full-time jobs will be available when Sizewell C, as the station will be called, is complete. If all goes to plan the company hopes to start work in 18 months and says the two reactors will take 10 years to build. It expects them to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity, enough for six million homes. There are many objectors. Some say much of the coastline will be badly affected, including internationally important nature reserves. Others fear the site is highly vulnerable to sea level rise and therefore a danger to the public. Local people also fear that the construction site, with its attendant lorry and commuter traffic, will disrupt their lives for a decade, destroying the important tourist trade. Cheaper options Other more strategic objections, which might weigh heavier with the government, are that nuclear power is very expensive and much cheaper and less controversial alternatives exist, particularly on-shore and off-shore wind and solar power, and biogas. More importantly, a drive for energy efficiency, badly neglected in the UK at present, would render the whole project unnecessary. The problem EDF has is its track record on construction and repairs. The type of reactor it plans to build, the European Pressurised Water Reactor, said by the company to be the most powerful in the world, is proving extremely difficult to build, and till now none has yet been completed outside China. Construction is running more than 10 years late in both Finland and France, and costs continue to escalate.
EDF’s debts are now huge, so big that the French state is working out how to restructure the company by splitting it into a renewables arm (which is profitable) and a nuclear branch. There are serious doubts about the reliability of EDF’s claims and timetables for fixing existing power stations and opening new ones. The company currently owns all of the UK’s operating nuclear reactors, most of which are near the end of their lives, and there are serious doubts about whether they are economic and in some cases even safe. Two reactors at Hunterston in Scotland have serious cracking in the graphite blocks that are part of the control mechanism. The company has spent two years trying to justify continuing to operate the reactors to the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). Similarly, at the other end of the UK, at Dungeness in south-east England, the station is also closed for extensive repairs, an outage that was going to take weeks has now stretched to two years – and the start-up date has just been put back again. Looking on the bright side One of the features of all of EDF’s activities is the extraordinary optimism the company seems to have, particularly about when reactors will be finished or ready to restart after repairs. With the Hunterston reactors restart dates have been announced nine times, only to be postponed each time. This track record led the Climate News Network to ask EDF some searching questions, including why they continued to offer optimistic start-up dates that were repeatedly postponed. We also asked why the company kept the Hunterston and Dungeness stations open at all, since repairing them was costly and they were already near the end of their operating lives. We asked EDF: “At what point do you cut your losses and close the stations permanently?” After five days of pleading for more time to answer, it sent us already published press releases extolling the virtues of the plan to build Sizewell, and several comments. …….HTTPS://CLIMATENEWSNETWORK.NET/UNANSWERED-QUESTIONS-DOG-UKS-NEW-NUCLEAR-PLAN/, l |
|
Plan for USA’s taxpayers to fund nuclear power exports
 US Agency Proposes Financing of Nuclear Power Exports, VOA, By Reuters June 11, 2020 WASHINGTON – A U.S. development agency proposed lifting restrictions that bar the financing of advanced nuclear energy projects abroad, a move the Trump administration hopes will help the industry compete with state-owned companies in China and Russia.
The U.S. International Development Finance Corp., or DFC, late Wednesday opened a 30-day comment period on the proposal. The idea was included in the Trump administration’s Nuclear Fuel Working Group report, released in April, on ways to modernize nuclear energy policy……. The DFC, which replaced the Overseas Private Investment Corp., launched in January with a $60 billion budget. It is seen by analysts as an attempt by Washington to provide an alternative to Beijing’s sweeping Belt and Road Initiative, which sponsors large-scale infrastructure, like nuclear projects, in developing countries. Russia’s state-owned nuclear energy company, Rosatom, is also looking to sell nuclear technology. Ed Lyman, a nuclear power expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said it is “utterly irresponsible for the Trump administration to promote the export of unproven and potentially dangerous nuclear technologies to the developing world.” He said Washington should first work with countries to create independent nuclear regulators. …….. Advanced nuclear power is expected to be less expensive than traditional nuclear stations costing tens of billions of dollars. But nonproliferation experts caution that the plants and their supply chains could become targets of attack. https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-agency-proposes-financing-nuclear-power-exports |
|
Trump’s plan for a nuclear trest – dangerous brinkmanship
A Nuclear Test Would Blow Up in Trump’s Face
The Trump administration doesn’t understand the brinkmanship concept its nuclear diplomacy is based on. Foreign Policy,
BY SARAH BIDGOOD JUNE 11, 2020,
|
The last 42 months have offered a sobering window into the Trump administration’s philosophy on nuclear arms control. On display is its penchant for withdrawing from agreements rather than engaging in dispute resolution—be they the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or, most recently, the Open Skies Treaty. While many experts see this approach as ill-conceived and damaging to U.S. national security interests, the administration often frames it as a form of brinkmanship designed to signal resolve in an era of strategic competition. The intended message appears to be that the United States will no longer play ball unless its rivals—Russia and China—agree to abide by Washington’s rules.
The latest example of this tendency comes amid reports that the administration might conduct a “rapid” nuclear test to strengthen its hand in negotiations with China and Russia. Experts around the world have denounced this proposal as dangerous, foolhardy, and “catastrophically stupid.” As they point out, were the United States to test for the first time in nearly three decades, it would open the door for the resumption of widespread explosive testing. At the same time, it would undermine the nuclear taboo, hurt the credibility of the nonproliferation regime, and diminish support for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). While all true, these arguments are unlikely to sway this administration, which has shown little regard for existing norms or the disarmament machinery writ large.
What might give decision-makers pause, though, is the fact that a nuclear test is unlikely to be an effective signal in the current context. It would not help deliver President Donald Trump’s goal of a trilateral arms control agreement, but it would provide ample opportunity for misinterpretation and a response in kind. In the process, it would likely put Washington in a worse negotiating position than when it started, making it not only risky but also pointless to boot………..
In short, if decision-makers in Washington do choose to test, this attempt at brinkmanship will certainly fail to convince Russia or China to sit down at the arms control negotiating table. Instead, it will make it all the more likely that the very outcomes trilateral arms control seems to be intended to prevent come to bear—and soon. The good news, then, is that there is plenty of time to walk this ill-conceived and ineffective plan back from the brink. In this instance, restraint—such as it is—may be the most effective nuclear signal this administration could possibly send. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/11/nuclear-test-arms-control-trump-united-states-brinkmanship/
|
|
Fire on French submarine – luckily its nuclear reactor, nuclear fuel, had been removed for overhaul
 A French Submarine Caught Fire In Drydock. It Could Lead Paris To Rethink Its Nuclear Deterrence Strategy. Forbes, Sebastien Roblin 11 June 20 A fire broke out in the rear section of the French nuclear-powered attack submarine Perle on Friday morning as she lay in drydock in the port of Toulon. White clouds of smoke poured into the sky as firefighters from Toulon and Marseilles rushed to the scene.
Finally at 9:36 p.m local time the Mediterranean Maritime Prefecture reported that the fire had been brought under control by completely flooding the rear compartments of the boat with foam, further noting that the “reactor rooms remains untouched.”…….. Just as importantly, the ship’s 48 megawatt pressurized water nuclear reactor, nuclear fuel, and (conventional-only) weapons had been removed when the submarine entered the drydock in January 2020 for an overhaul by Naval Group due for completion by February 2021. For that reason, the local maritime prefecture claims there is no possibility of radioactive contamination from the incident.
The firefighting effort reportedly involved 30 specialist naval firefighters with support from a firefighting boat, as well as additional specialists scrambled from Marseilles, 11 specialized ground-based firefighting vehicles, and at least 10 ESNA submariners to advise the firefighters. However, there are growing fear that the Perle may have sustained too much damage to be saved. A veteran submariner told the local paper Var Matin “If the thick hull [made of 80HY high-tensile steel]…is deformed, the boat is screwed.” The cause of the blaze is speculated to possibly be faulty welding or a high-pressure cutting gone awry. France’s Nuclear Submarine Force French periodical LeMonde warned that should the Perle suffer “irremediable damage,” there was the possibility “the entire organization of French nuclear deterrence may have to be rethought. And the Navy may have to give up on certain strategic missions.” The Perle does not actually carry any nuclear weapons. However, one of the primary roles of French attack submarines is protecting the four larger Triomphant-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) from hostile submarines. Indeed, the SSBN Le Téméraire conducted a test launch of an unarmed M51 nuclear ballistic missile just the day prior. France perceives these submarines as performing a vital role in strategic nuclear deterrence, or “dissuasion” as it’s called in France………. Establishing the cause of the accident that may put out of action a valuable strategic asset will also be a priority for Defense Minister Florence Parley, particularly given how much more serious the incident might have been had weapons, the reactor and/or additional personnel had been onboard. For now the citizens of Toulon can only be thankful that loss of life was averted and that there is no apparent risk of contamination. The French Navy will have to take stock of the damage, adjust its plans for its SSN fleet accordingly—and consider how it can minimize the odds of another such accident occurring. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebastienroblin/2020/06/12/a-french-submarine-caught-fire-in-drydock-it-could-lead-paris-to-rethink-its-nuclear-deterrence-strategy/#4addae213d05 |
|
|
Global heating to bring more frequent, more extreme, ocean waves
EXTREME WAVES SET TO BE BIGGER AND MORE FREQUENT
As the planet warms, researchers are warning that the frequency and magnitude of extreme wave events may rise by around 10 per cent by the end of century, increasing flood risks. Pursuit, By Dr Alberto Meucci and Professor Ian Young University of Melbourne, 13 June 20
When most of us think about what climate change will do to our coastlines we tend to focus on how sea-levels are rising as the polar ice caps melt and the oceans warm. But that is only part of the story.
What many don’t realise is that at the same time as sea levels are rising, storms are increasing in magnitude and frequency, resulting in larger ocean waves. These waves increase coastal erosion and the risk of flooding.
Our new research suggests that by the end of the century the magnitude of extreme wave events will have increased by up to 10 per cent over extensive ocean regions, and the frequency of storms that generate extreme waves will have increased by five to 10 per year.
This may not sound like a big increase, but it means that almost 60 per cent of the world’s coastline will experience larger and more frequent extreme waves.
At a time when 290 million people already live below the 100-year flood level (that is, they live below levels where there is at least a one per cent probability of flooding every year), an increase in the risk of extreme wave events may be catastrophic, as larger and more frequent storms will cause more flooding and coastline erosion.
Extremes are defined as unexpected, unusual and sometimes unseasonal events. Like extreme floods, extreme waves are classified by the frequency with which they tend to occur, and this frequency drives the design requirements for ocean structures or coastal defences. For example, defences may be designed to cope with a 100-year wave event.
Extreme ocean waves generated by strong surface winds can reach heights of over 20 meters at the high latitudes of the globe – that’s as high as four double-decker buses stacked on top of each other.
But the surface winds that drive wave heights are in turn driven by the climate system, and so are subject to climate change. A warming planet is causing stronger and more frequent storm winds which in turn trigger larger and more frequent extreme waves, and the 100-year events may begin to occur every 50 or even 20 years.
Estimating the probability of occurrence of extreme waves is challenging, let alone estimating how their frequency and magnitude may change in the future. This is due to the small number of ocean observations available.
The buoys and offshore platforms scientists use to observe ocean movements are sparsely distributed, and satellite measurements are limited in how often they sample a single location.
But advances in computing technology and the modelling of data, allows us to simulate the Earth’s changing climate under different wind conditions, recreating thousands of simulated storms to evaluate the magnitude and frequency of extreme events.
Our research used a unique statistical ensemble approach, where we pooled data from an unprecedented collection of thousands of modelled ocean wave extremes to estimate future extreme events. These extremes were derived from global wave models based on wind forces generated from seven different global climate models.
The vast amount of modelled ocean extremes generated allowed us to apply an ensemble statistical analysis that reduces the uncertainty around the estimation of future projections of extremes. …….. Co-authors of the research are: Dr Mark Hemer, CSIRO, Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart Australia; Professor Roshanka Ranasinghe, Department of Water Science and Engineering, IHE-Delft, Netherlands; and Ebru Kirezci, University of Melbourne
South African activists threaten to sue over nuclear plan
 South African activists threaten to sue over nuclear plan JOHANNESBURG, June 11 (Reuters) – South African activists have written to the energy minister threatening to take legal action if he moves to build new nuclear power plants without proper consultation.The letter to Gwede Mantashe from Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and the Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) comes after energy officials said last month they planned to procure 2,500 megawatts (MW) of new nuclear capacity by 2024.
The activists said they would go to court if Mantashe tried to procure nuclear power, or seek information about it from vendors, without following proper regulatory processes and seeking public input. Three years ago, the same groups succeeded in persuading a court to block a nuclear power agreement with Russia, signed under then-president Jacob Zuma……. https://www.reuters.com/article/safrica-nuclear/update-1-south-african-activists-threaten-to-sue-over-nuclear-plan-idUSL8N2DO5SN |
|
U.S. nuclear industry looks for salvation to hydrogen production – clutching at straws?
|
Hydrogen May Be a Lifeline for Nuclear—But It Won’t Be Easy, Power, Jun 11, 2020, by Sonal Patel Four U.S. nuclear generators—Energy Harbor, Xcel Energy, Exelon, and Arizona Public Service (APS)—are making headway on projects to demonstrate hydrogen production at nuclear plants, but scaling those efforts up to net new end-users and sources of revenue is still ridden with hurdles, company officials said in a panel discussion at the American Nuclear Society’s (ANS’s) virtual 2020 annual meeting on June 9………
The economics are especially important for Exelon, the nation’s largest nuclear generator, and exploring hydrogen production is a natural evolution to keep its plants financially afloat amid stagnating load growth and challenging economics in competitive energy markets, Greenlee said.
Energy Harbor faces similar predicaments. In 2018, the independent power producer—which was known as FirstEnergy Solutions until Feb. 27, when it completed Chapter 11 restructuring—had planned to shutter Davis-Besse in 2020; along with the twin-unit 1,872-MW Beaver Valley Power Station in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, in 2021; and the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio, in 2021. Last year, Energy Harbor pushed for and won nuclear subsidies in Ohio to keep the Davis-Besse and the Perry nuclear plants open through 2027, and this March, it said Beaver Valley would remain open.
Like Energy Harbor, Exelon helped enact the Future Energy Jobs Act in December 2016 (it went into effect in June 2017), to keep Exelon’s Clinton and Quad Cities plants running. Exelon also strongly backed New York’s Clean Energy Standard, a measure that became effective in April 2017, to preserve the at-risk Nine Mile Point, FitzPatrick, and Ginna reactors in upstate New York. And in 2018, New Jersey also enacted zero-emission credits (ZECs) to bolster profitability of the Hope Creek plant, which is owned by PSEG, and Salem, whose output Exelon owns jointly with PSEG.
As Greenlee noted, Exelon has since 2018 been seeking ways to “repurpose” its nuclear plants to make them more viable. The company’s efforts included convening academic experts, former employees, and former federal regulators in a brainstorm session. “And over the last several years, what we have boiled that table down to is, basically, hydrogen,” he said. “Hydrogen is what we want to look at going forward. We think it fits in with potentially a future hydrogen economy.” …….https://www.powermag.com/hydrogen-may-be-a-lifeline-for-nuclear-but-it-wont-be-easy/
|
|
Sellafield waste will stay on site after 2021, Cumbria County Council agrees
The Sellafield atomic fuel reprocessing site, operated by Sellafield Ltd., stands in Seascale, U.K.,
Sellafield waste will stay on site after 2021, Cumbria County Council agrees, In Cumbria, By Liam Waite @imliamwaite 11th June 20 Sellafield can continue to store 11,000 cubic metres of nuclear waste in one of its Seascale buildings, Cumbria County Council has agreed.
Permission was granted in 1992 for Sellafield to store encapsulated intermediate-level waste in a five-storey building on the site but that permission was due to expire at the end of next year due to a planning condition.At a virtual meeting of the council’s development control and regulation committee yesterday, councillors voted unanimously in favour of removing the condition and allowing the waste to continue to be stored there after an application by Sellafield Ltd.
Members were told that there was no permanent alternative available in the absence of the proposed new UK Geological Disposal Facility, the location of which has not yet been decided. …… https://www.in-cumbria.com/news/18506264.sellafield-waste-will-stay-site-2021-cumbria-county-council-agrees/
Canada’s proposed radioactive waste disposal rules are weak and industry-friendly
Proposed radioactive waste disposal rules are weak and industry-friendly
Armenia Rejects Russian Funding For Nuclear Plant Upgrade
|
Armenia Rejects Russian Funding For Nuclear Plant Upgrade, https://www.rferl.org/a/armenia-rejects-russian-funding-for-nuclear-plant-upgrade/30667786.html June 12, 2020 By RFE/RL’s Armenian Service
YEREVAN — The Armenian government has announced it has decided to use only 60 percent of a $270 million Russian loan designed to finance the ongoing modernization of its Soviet-era nuclear power plant at Metsamor. The plant’s sole functioning reactor went into service in 1980 and was due to be decommissioned by 2017. However, a previous government in 2014 decided to extend the life of the 420-megawatt reactor by 10 years after failing to attract foreign investment for the construction of a new nuclear plant. In 2015, the Russian government agreed to provide Armenia with a $270 million loan and a $30 million grant to upgrade the Metsamor nuclear power plant. The modernization work, led by Russia’s Rosatom nuclear energy agency, was due to be completed by the end of 2019, but the process fell behind schedule, preventing the full disbursement of the Russian funds. Armenia’s infrastructure minister on June 11 said the country had used only $107 million of the Russian money. Suren Papikian said Moscow had offered to extend the loan agreement by two years under the condition that Armenia agreed to use 80 percent of the money to commission equipment and services from Russian companies. The government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian backed Papikian’s proposal to reject the Russian offer and to finance the remaining work through government bond sales. Pashinian’s government said it planned to spend 63 billion drams ($130 million) to upgrade the facility over the next two years. Pashinian said that the government will now be free to select the suppliers for Metsamor, which he said will “substantially” lower the costs. Armenia’s sole nuclear plant, located 35 kilometers west of Yerevan, generates roughly 40 percent of the country’s electricity. The European Union and the United State have long pressed for its closure, saying that it does not meet modern safety standards. |
|
North Korea Vows to Boost Nuclear Program, Saying U.S. Diplomacy Failed
North Korea Vows to Boost Nuclear Program, Saying U.S. Diplomacy Failed In a statement marking the second anniversary of a historic summit meeting between Kim Jong-un and President Trump, the North said its hopes had faded into a “nightmare.” NYT,
By Choe Sang-Hun SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea on Friday said that two years of diplomacy with President Trump had “faded away into a dark nightmare,” and vowed to increase its nuclear weapons capabilities.
“Even a slim ray of optimism for peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula has faded away into a dark nightmare,” the country’s foreign minister, Ri Son-gwon, said in a statement on Friday marking the second anniversary of a historic summit meeting between Mr. Trump and the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un……. .https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-trump.html
Nuclear Regulatory Commission will prepare a full environmental impact statement (EIS) on nuclear license renewal for Columbia Fuel Fabrication Facility
Russia: commentary on its nuclear deterrence principles
The only public statement on nuclear deterrence was a standard sentence repeated in Russia’s military doctrine and other documents stating that Russia would only resort to nuclear weapons if it was attacked by weapons of mass destruction, or if an attack threatened the very existence of the state. …..
While the existence of such an ‘escalate to de-escalate’ doctrine and other details on Russia’s potential use of nuclear weapons was contested in the past, the final sentence of Article 4 of the doctrine comes closest to answering this question. It states that, once a war has started, nuclear deterrence policy is to seek to prevent it from escalating further, or from being terminated on terms unfavourable to Moscow. This is a short version of what in Russian military literature is termed ‘escalation control’. Escalation control implies that threats, demonstrations of strike capabilities, and inflicting “calibrated damage” on the enemy (which may, but does not have to, include nuclear weapons) should contain, localise, and if possible terminate a war on Moscow’s terms. …..
Article 19 deliberates on the conditions under which nuclear weapons could be released. It explicitly mentions a ‘launch on warning’ posture. This is a signal to the US that conventional or low-yield re-entry vehicles (the latter are in development) of intercontinental missiles would be treated as a full-scale attack and that Washington should therefore not think of employing them in a tactical or limited attack close to Russia’s borders. ……….
The Russian decree does not contain any detailed provisions on force structure, weapons systems (future or present), force modernisation, or references to other nuclear powers. Much detail is lacking from what one might normally expect to see in a nuclear doctrine. Article 15 states merely that nuclear deterrence needs to be adaptable, and should leave the enemy guessing about the time, scale, and manner of the use of nuclear weapons. It also says that Russia intends to maintain the minimal force required to achieve its tasks………
Taken together, all these provisions seem surprisingly minimalist. It may well be that Russia intends to signal to the United States that, if the American-Chinese arms race takes off, Moscow does not intend to follow suit and “spend itself into oblivion”, as US assistant secretary for terrorist financing in the Treasury, Marshall Billingslea, put it. Russia is hardly likely to publicly admit that in the 21st century it will most probably be a secondary nuclear power. But, in fact, it does seem to be adapting to this role.
Finally, Article 3 notes that Russia’s nuclear deterrence is flanked by other state measures to achieve its goals, including diplomatic and “information policies” (propaganda). The publication of the doctrine and the content of Article 3 effectively represent the firing of the starting pistol on a new ‘information campaign’ in the West: expect to soon see an information operation that aims to inflate the purported capabilities of Russia’s nuclear forces and induce fear (such as the new “Wunderwaffen”, presented in March 2018), and new diplomatic overtures in the fields of arms control, in particular designed to split the alliance. At least on the latter, Putin may get assistance from the White House: Trump’s clumsy and undiplomatic handling of the INF and Open Skies issues provide more opportunities to exploit than any Russian diplomat would have ever dreamed of creating. ……… https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_russias_nuclear_deterrence_principles_what_they_imply_and_what_n
Brazil government approves plan to complete third nuclear plant
|
Brazil government approves plan to complete third nuclear plant BRASILIA, June 10 (Reuters) – Brazil on Wednesday approved a plan to complete its long-delayed third nuclear reactor Angra 3, with or without a partner joining Eletronuclear, the Eletrobras subsidiary that runs two existing two nuclear plants.State-owned Eletrobras needs a private partner to help it finish the 1,400 megawatt reactor started in 2010. Possible candidates include companies in China, Russia, France and South Korea.
The private partner must be a minority stakeholder, said the Investment Partnership Program (PPI) council that gave the approval. So far, 9 billion reais ($1.8 billion) have been spent on the project that stalled in 2015 due to cost overruns and a corruption scandal involving contractors….. https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-eletrobras-nuclear/update-1-brazil-government-approves-plan-to-complete-third-nuclear-plant-idUSL1N2DN367 |
|
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (249)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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 