Grief in Western America, as inequities, wildfires, and climate change collide
Climate change is making wildfires bigger, fiercer, and deadlier, fueling a new kind of despair on the West Coast—and beyond. Wired 16 Sept 20, GRIEF HAS SETTLED over the western US, along with the thick haze of smoke pouring from dozens of massive wildfires up and down California, Oregon, Colorado, and Washington. It’s grief over the thousands of structures and at least 33 lives lost so far; grief over another villain conspiring with Covid-19 to lock people indoors; grief that the orange-hued dystopia of Blade Runner is now a reality in smoky San Francisco; grief over losing any sense of normalcy, or indeed a clear future.Enveloping all of those emotions—packaging them into an overwhelming feeling of doom—is climate grief, as psychologists call it, the dread that humans have thoroughly corrupted the planet, and that the planet is now exacting its revenge. Wildfires were around before human-made climate change, but by pulling a variety of strings, it’s made them bigger, fiercer, and ultimately deadlier, creating what fire historian Steve Pyne has dubbed the Pyrocene, an Age of Flames.
By burning fossil fuels, we’ve primed the landscape to burn explosively, and by pushing human communities deeper and deeper into what was once wilderness, we’re provided plenty of opportunities for ignition—and plenty of opportunities for grief as these forces catastrophically combine.
“So much is out of our control,” says Adrienne Heinz, a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, who studies the effects of disasters like wildfires and the Covid-19 pandemic. “We lose our sense of personal agency over how we will live—the decisions are made for us.”
It shifts from grief over what’s happening with our climate—can we feel safe in our own communities?—to despair, the differentiator being that you don’t feel like tomorrow is going to be any better than today,” Heinz adds. “That’s where it gets really dark.”
For the people of Northern California, an exhausting parade of massive wildfires have marched across the landscape over the past several autumns, with many people having to evacuate several years in a row. Last October, the Kincade Fire burned 120 square miles. The November before, the Camp Fire destroyed the town of Paradise and killed 86 people. And in October 2017, the Tubbs Fire obliterated 5,600 structures and killed 22.
“The catchphrase—kind of with a bitterness around here—is, ‘This is the new normal,’” says Barbara Young, a licensed marriage and family therapist in Healdsburg, north of San Francisco, who had to evacuate last month. “And so with that, I think it’s implied that this isn’t going away—our climate is changing. These aren’t flukes, this is the trend. And I think everyone is very clear that this is not a one-off. This is every year now.” ……………
Thus inequities, wildfires, and climate change collide. Each massive problem on its own is difficult for the human mind to parse, much less all three together. “I am doing a lot of work with people on really increasing psychological self-care, spiritual self-care, physical self-care, and to help that fatigue,” says Young, the therapist in Healdsburg. “And I do think that is connected with climate grief. Finally, maybe we are forced to see how interconnected everything is.” https://www.wired.com/story/climate-grief-is-burning-across-the-american-west/
Western Canadians do not want ”Small” nuclear reactors in Sakatchewan
Premier asks Trudeau to support nuclear reactors in upcoming throne speech, Yorkton This Week Michael Bramadat-Willcock – Local Journalism Initiative (Canada’s National Observer) / Yorkton This Week, SEPTEMBER 16, 2020 Premier Scott Moe has sent a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau outlining Saskatchewan’s priorities ahead of the federal throne speech on Sept. 23. In it, he is asking Trudeau to support nuclear development in the province.
Moe wants the development of small modular nuclear reactors, also known as SMRs, in Saskatchewan to be part of Trudeau’s green agenda. ……..
In December, Moe signed a memorandum of understanding with the premiers of Ontario and New Brunswick to work together on further developing the nuclear industry. ……..
In his letter, the premier also focused on support for the oil and gas sectors, and pushed for pausing the carbon tax.
The Supreme Court of Canada will hear arguments on the federal carbon tax at the same time as the throne speech is delivered. …………
But western Canadians don’t all see eye-to-eye on the deployment of nuclear reactors, even small ones.
Committee for Future Generations outreach co-ordinator Candyce Paul of La Plonge at the English River First Nation earlier told Canada’s National Observer that while they haven’t been consulted on any aspects of the plan, all signs point to the north as a site for the reactors.
On Tuesday, Paul called it ironic that Moe spoke of western alienation from Ottawa when many in the north feel the same way about Regina.
“Trudeau, please represent the people of northern Saskatchewan because Scott Moe does not,” Paul said.
Paul’s group fights nuclear waste storage in Saskatchewan and was instrumental in stopping a proposal that considered Beauval, Pinehouse and Creighton as storage locations in 2011.
“When we informed the communities that they were looking at planning to bury nuclear waste up here in 2011, once they learned what that entailed, everybody said, ‘No way.’ Eighty per cent of the people in the north said, ‘No way, absolutely not.’ It didn’t matter if they worked for Cameco or the other mines. They said, if it comes here, we will not support it coming here,” Paul said in an interview last month. ………..
Paul said the intent behind using SMRs is anything but green and that the real goal is to prop up Saskatchewan’s ailing uranium industry and develop oilsands in the northwest.
“He’s put it right in the letter. His fear is they’re going to put out a green policy that will hurt the oil and gas sector,” Paul said.
“They’ve been looking for a way to bring the tar sands to northern Saskatchewan. We all know the mess that makes. Using small modular reactors is not lessening the carbon impact.”
She said in August that communities around Canada, and especially in the Far North, have long been pitched as sites for SMR development and nuclear waste storage, but have refused.
“None of our people are going to get trained for operating these. It supports people from other places. It doesn’t really support us,” Paul said.
Paul said on Tuesday that SMRs under 200 megawatts are currently excluded from environmental impact assessments, which means a lack of opportunity for public input.
She also said that interconnected water systems in the north would mean pollution would travel quickly into the ecosystem if there was a mishap at a reactor site.
Brooke Dobni, professor of strategy at the University of Saskatchewan’s Edwards School of Business, told Canada’s National Observer in August that any development of small reactors would take a long time.
“It could be a good thing, but on the other hand, it might have some pitfalls. Those talks take years,” Dobni said.
He said nuclear reactors face bigger challenges that have to be addressed before they can go ahead, such as public support for protecting the environment, the high cost of building infrastructure, and containing nuclear fallout and radiation.
“Anything nuclear is 25 years out if you’re talking about small reactors, those kinds of things to power up the city,” Dobni said.
“That technology is a long ways away and a lot of it’s going to depend on public opinion.
“The court for that is the court of public opinion, whether or not people want that in their own backyard, and that’s the whole issue anywhere in the world.”
On Tuesday, Paul asked the federal government to invest in critical infrastructure instead.
“We need money spent in a serious way. Not on small modular reactors that could happen in 25 years. We need things now. To bring us up to the standards in our health system, we need health facilities. The public doesn’t want the government subsidizing industries that are about to go bust. It’s a waste of money,” Paul said.
“We have extreme needs that aren’t being met by industry and never will be met by industry. Trudeau, put the money where you want to make some real reconciliation happen.”https://www.yorktonthisweek.com/regional-news/premier-asks-trudeau-to-support-nuclear-reactors-in-upcoming-throne-speech-1.24204052
In tropical areas, increasing heat and humidity will make life almost unbearable
Climate explained: will the tropics eventually become uninhabitable? https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-will-the-tropics-eventually-become-uninhabitable-145174 James Shulmeister– 16 Sept 20, Professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Canterbury What is the impact of temperature increases in the tropics? How likely is it that regions along the Equator will be uninhabitable due to high wet bulb temperatures such as 35℃ and more in places like Singapore? Do we have models that suggest how likely this is and at what time frames?More than 3.3 billion people live in the tropics, representing about 40% of the world’s population. Despite some areas of affluence, such as Singapore, the tropics are also home to about 85% of the world’s poorest people and are therefore particularly susceptible to the impacts of climate change.
The tropics are expected to experience rising temperatures and changes to rainfall, and the question is whether this could make this region uninhabitable. How would this happen? Heat stressHumans regulate their body temperature in warm conditions through sweating. The sweat evaporates and cools the skin. But if conditions are humid, sweating and evaporation are much less effective. Humans can survive and function in quite high temperatures if humidity is low, but as humidity increases our ability to function decreases rapidly. This effect is measured by a heat stress index which shows the apparent temperature you feel under different relative humidity conditions. From a human health point of view, the wet bulb temperature is critical. This is the temperature a thermometer covered in a wet cloth would measure, and it reflects the maximum amount of cooling that can be achieved by evaporation. High wet bulb temperatures are more problematic to human health than high absolute temperatures. Wet bulb temperatures above 35℃ are life-threatening because they cause hyperthermia, which means the body cannot cool down and the internal body temperature exceeds 40℃. Climate modelling predictions used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for the period from 2080-2100 suggest warming in the tropics of about 1.6℃ under mid-range emissions scenarios and up to 3.3℃ under high emissions scenarios, with error margins of about 0.5℃ on both predictions. Different parts of the world respond in different ways to warming from greenhouse gas emissions. The projected warming in the tropics represents about 40% of the expected temperature rise in the Arctic. High-latitude regions – far north or south of the Equator – warm more rapidly than the global average because excess heat in the tropics creates a temperature and pressure gradient. This drives heat up to higher elevations and higher latitudes through an atmospheric circulation called the Hadley cell. The stronger the gradient, the more heat is exported. Hot in the cityThere is one additional factor: urbanisation. Singapore is a good place to look at actual climate change in the tropics. Records from Singapore indicate temperatures have increased by 1.1℃ over 42 years to 2014. This is nearly twice the average global rate of warming over recent decades and is opposite to expectations. The difference appears to be due to a heat island effect caused by the city itself. This is important because changes in land use amplify background global climate change and put tropical cities at greater risk of extreme heat. As populations are concentrated in cities, this increases the risk to human health. The mean average temperature for Singapore is about 27℃, whereas Jakarta in Indonesia is slightly warmer. At the scale of predicted mean annual temperature change, neither of these cities would become uninhabitable. But even a small temperature increase would make life more challenging. This is made worse in at least some parts of the tropics, because total rainfall is increasing, suggesting a long-term rise in humidity. For example, average rainfall in Singapore increased by more than 500mm from 2,192mm in 1980 to 2,727mm in 2014. Deadly heatPeople working outdoors are at higher risk, as are vulnerable populations, including the elderly. Under the IPCC’s high-emission trajectory, heat-related deaths in Jakarta in August are expected to rise from about 1,800 in 2010 to nearly 27,000 in 2050. Even allowing for a significant increase in elderly people as the Indonesian population ages, this means about 15,000 excess deaths in this month. Estimates under high-emission predictions for the tropics and mid-latitudes suggest about a 40% decline in the ability to undertake manual work during the warmest month by 2050. These impacts will be stronger in the seasonally wet tropics (such as the Northern Territory of Australia), where more extreme warming is expected than in the equatorial zone. Predictions for Darwin, in northern Australia, suggest an increase in days with temperatures above 35℃ from 11 days a year in 2015 to an average of 43 days under the mid-range emission scenario (IPCC’s RCP4.5 scenario) by 2030 and an average of 111 (range 54-211) days by 2090. Under the higher emission scenario (IPCC’s RCP8.5), an average of 265 days above 35℃ could be reached by 2090. In summary, while absolute temperatures are expected to rise more slowly in the tropics when compared with higher latitudes and polar regions, the combination of heat and rising humidity will make life challenging, but not impossible. |
|
As Hitachi exits the project, UK government to announce funding for Wylfa nuclear project next month
Hitachi Abandons $26 Billion Nuclear Power Project in U.K. Bloomberg Green, By Stephen Stapczynski and Rachel Morison16 September 2020,
-
U.K. due to make statement on financing model next month
- U.K. government says still committed to building new nuclear
Hitachi Ltd. exited a long-planned U.K. nuclear power project despite the most generous support package for an atomic station in Britain, a bad omen for future projects.
The Japanese company announced Wednesday that it decided to withdraw from the Wylfa power project in Wales, citing a worsening investment environment due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Work has been suspended on the 20 billion-pound ($26 billion) venture since January 2019 after the company failed to reach a financing agreement with the U.K. government.
The decision is the latest setback for nuclear’s revival, which supporters promote as the carbon-free solution for reliable power at a time of growing climate change concerns. Cost overruns and cheaper competition is stifling projects and developers in Japan, the U.S. and the U.K.
Britain is one of a handful of developed countries still building nuclear reactors, with the government putting them at the middle of an effort to attract billions of pounds of investment in new low-carbon power plants and create thousands of jobs. However, financing these prohibitively expensive infrastructure projects has become a hurdle, especially in the face of cheaper natural gas and renewables.
A financing package offered to Hitachi in 2019 wasn’t enough to attract additional private investor interest. The U.K. has been considering a funding model that would have seen the state shouldering more of the construction risk. The outcome of that consultation has been delayed.
The U.K. said it had offered a package that “went well beyond what any government has been willing to consider in the past.” Atomic energy still forms a key plank of energy policy including in small and advanced modular reactors.
A financing package offered to Hitachi in 2019 wasn’t enough to attract additional private investor interest. The U.K. has been considering a funding model that would have seen the state shouldering more of the construction risk. The outcome of that consultation has been delayed.
The U.K. said it had offered a package that “went well beyond what any government has been willing to consider in the past.” Atomic energy still forms a key plank of energy policy including in small and advanced modular reactors.
Prospects for the Wylfa plant looked more optimistic last month when Horizon Nuclear Power Ltd., Hitachi’s subsidiary developing the project, said it was engaged with the U.K. government on reviving the project.
The future of how the U.K. finances new nuclear is expected to be announced in the government’s long anticipated energy white paper next month……… https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-16/hitachi-abandons-u-k-nuclear-power-project-in-blow-to-industry
Huge costs of decommissioning Britain’s ”Magnox” nuclear failities just keep going up
UK spending watchdog warns on costs of cleaning up old nuclear plants
Decommissioning charge has risen by £3bn since 2017 and there remains ‘inherent uncertainty’ over final bill, NAO finds, Nathalie Thomas in Edinburgh, SEPTEMBER 11 2020, Estimates of the cost to clear up 12 of the UK’s earliest nuclear power sites have increased by nearly £3bn since 2017 and there remains “inherent uncertainty” over the final bill, the country’s public spending watchdog has warned.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigating FirstEnergy over its involvement in the Ohio nuclear corruption scandal
Now the SEC is investigating FirstEnergy and Ohio’s $1 billion nuclear bailout bill: This Week in the CLE, By Laura Johnston, cleveland.comCLEVELAND, Ohio — Who’s investigating FirstEnergy, in relation to the $1 billion nuclear bailout bill?
We’re talking about the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission investigation on This Week in the CLE…….
Is the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission the latest agency to investigate FirstEnergy over its involvement in a $60 million bribery scheme to bail out nuclear plants and get other goodies from the Ohio Legislature? Yes. The SEC has launched a separate probe of the company tied to the $60 million House Bill 6 bribery scandal. The examination became public in a federal lawsuit the company and a consulting firm filed against a former employee. Just how little do likely voters in Ohio think of Larry Householder, the disgraced and ousted former Ohio House speaker? Householder is now rated one of the most unpopular state politicians in recent history, with a favorable rating at 7% among likely voters.………… With all the corruption talk swirling around FirstEnergy and utilities in Ohio, in the Ohio Power Siting Board really going to stand behind its inexplicable decision that is killing the proposed offshore Lake Erie wind farm? The Ohio Power Siting Board is preparing to rule that it won’t revisit its decision, even though neither side is happy. The board says the the turbines can’t move at night between March 1 and Nov. 1. ……….. https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/09/now-the-sec-is-investigating-firstenergy-and-ohios-1-billion-nuclear-bailout-bill-this-week-in-the-cle.html |
|
|
IAEA and China helping Saudi Arabia with its nuclear ambitions
China and IAEA are helping Saudi Arabia achieve its nuclear ambitionsAlthough Saudi Arabia has pledged that its nuclear program is strictly peaceful, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman said the kingdom would develop a bomb if Iran did so. The Print JONATHAN TIRONE 16 September, 2020 Vienna: The United Nations nuclear watchdog has been working in parallel with Chinese officials to help Saudi Arabia exploit uranium — the key ingredient for nuclear power and weapons — despite its inspectors being frozen out of the kingdom.
The International Atomic Energy Agency published a document ahead of its annual conference next week showing the Vienna-based organization assisting Saudi efforts to make nuclear fuel. An institute in Beijing affiliated with the IAEA has been prospecting for uranium in Saudi Arabia……..
The Saudis have stepped up their pursuit of nuclear technologies in recent years, piquing the interest of companies from South Korea to Russia and the U.S. The kingdom is nearing completion of its first reactor, a low-powered research unit being built with Argentina’s state-owned INVAP SE. It has repeatedly pledged that its nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes, but Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman said the kingdom would develop a bomb if its regional rival Iran did so.
Nuclear non-proliferation experts have long warned that without adequate safeguards, IAEA technical cooperation can unwittingly help countries develop weapons capabilities………
While Saudi Arabia has been open about its ambitions to generate nuclear power, less is known about the kinds of monitoring the kingdom intends to put in place. President Donald Trump’s administration sent a letter to Saudi Arabia a year ago setting requirements to access U.S. atomic technology. The baseline for any agreement is tougher IAEA inspections that include a so-called Additional Protocol — the same monitoring standard applied in Iran and more than 130 other nations, which allows inspectors wider access to sites including uranium mines.
The kingdom is among only 31 countries worldwide that still applies an old set of IAEA regulations that don’t allow inspections. On Monday, the agency said it was beginning a new initiative to roll back those rules because they can’t provide adequate assurance that all activity is for exclusively peaceful purposes.
“I’m approaching them, telling them that in 2020 this is no longer adequate,” Grossi said. “We have to be up to a minimum standard.”
The IAEA provided financial and technical aid to develop Pakistan’s uranium mines and improve plutonium-producing reactors even after the country tested a nuclear weapon in 1998 in defiance of a non-proliferation treaty. While that aid was intended for civilian nuclear power, scientists involved in those projects said Pakistan used uranium mined with agency help for weapons.
The IAEA similarly helped North Korea develop its uranium mines before it kicked inspectors out in 2003. Syria, under investigation since 2007 for allegedly building a secret atomic-weapons reactor, used an IAEA-built lab to produce uranium ……..https://theprint.in/world/china-and-iaea-are-helping-saudi-arabia-achieve-its-nuclear-ambitions/503674/#:~:text=The%20International%20Atomic%20Energy%20Agency,for%20uranium%20in%20Saudi%20Arabia.
Russia developing a nuclear-powered missile that can ”attack from unexpected directions”
Russia’s nuclear missile with global reach is capable of attacking from ‘unexpected directions’ https://www.wionews.com/world/russias-nuclear-missile-with-global-reach-is-capable-of-attacking-from-unexpected-directions-327492
WION Web Team New Delhi, India Sep 14, 2020 Russia is developing a nuclear-powered missile that can fly around the atmosphere for years on end ready to strike at any moment.
This does mark the first time this missile has made the headlines. Last year, this so-called missile was involved with a mysterious explosion in Russia, which reportedly left at least 5 scientists dead. This explosion had also led to a major spike in the radiation levels in the area. Now British intelligence claims that Russia is “pushing the boundaries of science, and international treaties” in developing novel weapons. So what do we know about this cruise missile? Russia calls the missile “Burevestnik” or “Storm Petrel”, while the NATO calls it “Skyfall” Putin first unveiled the Burevestnik on March 1, 2018, claiming that it was invincible. Essentially, it is a cruise missile that features a small nuclear-powered engine. This is the first of its kind, for it can fly long distances for hours or even days. The missile can also exploit loopholes in enemy defence networks. Russian president Vladimir Putin had earlier said that the testing of Burevestnik was going on successfully. The British chief of defence said the missile had global reach and could “attack from unexpected directions”. The mention of this missile came up during the Five Eyes intelligence hub including experts from the UK, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. |
|
South Korea says no use of nuclear weapons in joint operational plans with U.S
South Korea says no use of nuclear weapons in joint operational plans with U.S. The Chronicle Herald,
Hyonhee Shin, 16 Sep 20, SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korea said on Tuesday none of its joint military action plans with the United States include any use of nuclear weapons, after a book by a U.S. journalist sparked debate over whether scenarios of a full-blown war with North Korea would entail a nuclear attack from either side.
In his new book, titled “Rage,” Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward wrote that the United States had devised plans for a possible armed clash with North Korea, such as “the U.S. response to an attack that could include the use of 80 nuclear weapons.” The book was based on multiple interviews with U.S. President Donald Trump. The passage fueled debate in South Korea over whether it meant Washington or Pyongyang would detonate 80 bombs against each other. Seoul’s defense ministry said on Tuesday its joint operational plans (OPLAN) with the United States did not include any use of nuclear weapons, reiterating the view of the presidential office. A presidential official said on Monday there must not be another war on the peninsula and any use of force cannot be implemented without South Korea’s consent. “I can say clearly that the use of a nuclear weapon does not exist in our OPLANs, and it is impossible to use military force without our agreement,” the official told reporters…………. https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/world/south-korea-says-no-use-of-nuclear-weapons-in-joint-operational-plans-with-us-497135/ |
|
Long nuclear convoy near Glascow
Nuclear convoy passes near Glasgow ‘laden with six warheads’ A 26-vehicle convoy passed through Balloch and by Loch Lomond this morning, a Nukewatch UK campaigner told Glasgow Live
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/nuclear-convoy-passes-near-glasgow-18940177 ByCraig Williams 15 SEP 2020 A nuclear weapons convoy passed near Glasgow this morning carrying what is believed to have been six Trident nuclear warheads. Nukewatch UK claims the convoy left RNAD Coulport this morning on its way to Atomic Weapons Establishment Burghfield near Reading – taking a route which saw it travel over Haul Road to the A82 near Cameron House, before passing through Balloch on the A811 to Stirling. Including an estimated 26 vehicles, the unmarked convoy is then said to have travelled along the M9 towards Edinburgh, taking the Edinburgh Bypass and then the A68 towards Jedburgh. Nukewatch UK Campaigner Jane Tallents followed the convoy from the Edinburgh Bypass onto the A68. She told Glasgow Live: “The convoy took the Haul Road and travelled onto the A82 before passing through Alexandria and Balloch. It was then spotted in Drymen as it made its way along the A811 towards Stirling.” Having studied convoys like it for the last 30 years, Jane believes it was travelling with approximately six nuclear warheads to AWE Burghfield for the weapons to undergo repair works prior to being returned to RNAD Coulport and put back on the Royal Navy’s nuclear submarines. “The convoy, which numbered around 26 vehicles, included huge lead-lined lorries carrying the nuclear warheads, along with a fire engine in case of a fire, a moving workshop, a decontamination unit, tow truck and loads of MOD police. “The journey is usually made six times per year when they take the warheads down to refurbish them and then transport them back up again.” Nukewatch UK tracks and monitors the convoys that transport the UK’s Trident nuclear warheads by road from Burghfield to Coulport. Campaigner Jane believes that more people show know of the convoys that travel from Scotland to England via motorways and on small country roads. She added: “We campaign for an end of nuclear weapons. The fact there is such a risk taken with these convoys is reason enough to get rid of them. The convoys travel on small roads at various points of the journey and pass peoples’ houses – today it went through the village of Buchlyvie (around 18 miles north of Glasgow). “Residents in the village could stand on their doorsteps and the nuclear convoy travels about four feet by their doors.” |
The persistence of plastic
The amount of synthetic microfiber we shed into our waterways has been of great concern over the last few years, and for good reason: Every laundry cycle releases in its wastewater tens of thousands of tiny, near-invisible plastic fibers whose persistence and accumulation can affect aquatic habitats and food systems, and ultimately our own bodies in ways we have yet to discover. …. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/uoc–tpo091620.php
Egypt supports Bamako Convention banning import of hazardous waste, especially radioactive, into Africa
Egypt supports Bamako Convention banning import of hazardous waste into Africa: Minister. https://www.egypttoday.com/Article/1/91884/Egypt-supports-Bamako-Convention-banning-import-of-hazardous-waste-into Egypt Today, CAIRO – 12 September 2020: Environment Minister Yasmine Fouad has asserted Egypt’s support to the Bamako convention and called for cooperation among African countries to face the coronavirus pandemic without affecting the environment.
This came during her speech at a virtual meeting of the Bureau of the Bamako Convention on Saturday.
The minister also asserted that hazardous materials and waste were banned from being imported into Africa, noting the importance of controlling their trans-boundary movement.
She also underlined the importance of finding new measures to build African capabilities to deal with such hazardous materials and waste.
The Bamako Convention is a treaty of African nations prohibiting the import into Africa of any hazardous (including radioactive) waste.
The convention was adopted in 1991 and came into force in 1998 with the aim of protecting human and environmental health.
Decorum be damned. Top science editor spits the dummy with Trump
America’s Top Science Journal Has Had It With Trump
The editor of Science has abandoned staid academic-speak to take on falsehoods in the White House—decorum be damned. Wired Adam Rogers, 16 Sep 20, WITH AN ARCHIVE that goes back to 1880 and a reputation for publishing world-changing research, the journal Science is the apex predator of academic publishing. Getting an article past its gatekeepers and peer reviewers can make a researcher’s career; the journal’s news section is a model for high-level reporting on everything from quarks to viruses to blue whales to galactic clusters. Along with its competitors Cell and Nature, the journal represents not just new knowledge but also the cultural mores of the world it covers—innovation, integrity, accuracy, rectitude, fealty to data.
So it’s surprising (but maybe not as much as you think) that Science’s newish editor-in-chief has focused a laser-like stream of neural energy at calling out the crummy pandemic policies of the Trump administration. H. Holden Thorp, a chemist and longtime university administrator, became editor-in-chief of Science and five other journals published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science last October, just two months before Covid-19 started spreading around the world. The hopes of a planet full of humans looking for treatments and vaccines turned quickly to scientists, and Thorp’s journals would have been among the places that the best, most relevant work would appear. It has, of course. But Thorp also started a crusade from Science’s editorial page, calling out the ways Donald
Trump’s administration has ignored, misunderstood, and misused science for political gain. Now Thorp’s editorial page is at the forefront of a movement—with scientists casting aside the old stereotype of apolitical disinterest. On Wednesday, even the venerable magazine Scientific American endorsed a presidential candidate for the first time in its 175-year history. (It was Joe Biden.)
Thorp’s most recent broadside, “Trump Lied About Science,” appeared last week. It was the most vigorous condemnation yet, a lightning siege of criticism over Trump’s admission, to the journalist Bob Woodward, that the president knew Covid-19 was more serious than he acknowledged to the public. “This page has commented on the scientific foibles of US presidents. Inadequate action on climate change and environmental degradation during both Republican and Democratic administrations have been criticized frequently,” Thorp wrote. But this, he added, “may be the most shameful moment in the history of US science policy.”
That’d be tough stuff on any newspaper op-ed page; from a place like Science, which has in the past had a somewhat arid editorial voice, it was fire. Thorp has been activated. I asked him what did it, and how his new approach might change science—and Science. Thorp’s answers are here, edited lightly for length and clarity………………
think about what science has been putting up with. We have people telling us we’re all deep-state liberals who are trying to destroy the planet, that we’re taking away hope for people, that we’re being too melodramatic about how bad this all is. And all of the stuff that Trump and his surrogates have been saying turns out not only to be wrong, but that they knew it all along. All the snark that scientists have been putting up with, from the news and from their family members who are Fox News people—all these things that we were supposedly doing to sabotage the world were all lies and knowingly delivered, planted, by the president of the United States. ………… https://www.wired.com/story/americas-top-science-journal-has-had-it-with-trump/
|
|
The hidden stumbling block to progress on nuclear weapons
The hidden stumbling block to progress on nuclear weapons, Bulletin of the Atomic SCientists,By Ward Wilson, September 16, 2020 ”……………………Eliminating nuclear weapons is an especially important subject these days because there’s a confrontation brewing. The United States and the other nuclear-armed states are upgrading their weapons (and some are even increasing the size of their arsenals). But many non-nuclear-armed states seem to be taking the opposite position. In 2017, the United Nations passed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and more than 60 percent of the world’s countries voted for it—122 nations in all. The treaty will go into effect when 50 nations sign and ratify it. Today, there are 84 countries that have signed and 44 that have ratified. With only six more countries to go, entry into force will likely come in 2021 or, at the latest, 2022.
Once the treaty is in effect, elimination will become the center of a contentious worldwide debate. The majority of the world will have a new legal argument for pushing toward global zero, but the nine nuclear-armed states are sure to resist. So it makes sense to think a little about whether eliminating nuclear weapons is even possible.
Nuclear weapons are both weapons and symbols…….
Weapons are essentially tools to achieve a particular task. The effectiveness of a tool is objective and quantifiable—how well does it get the job done?
Symbols, on the other hand, are psychological. They can inspire and change beliefs. ……
Nuclear weapons are, in some ways, like these ceremonial swords. Their symbolic value is more important than their military utility. For example, one of the roles of nuclear weapons is as a symbol of prestige. ………
The people who make nuclear weapons policy seem to believe that they have enormous power, conflating their symbolic meaning with their practical usefulness.
But in reality, nuclear weapons are not terribly valuable as weapons. They have not been used in war for more than 75 years. And although numerous occasions have arisen since 1945 when their use was considered, each time, decision makers declined………
Once the symbolic layer has been peeled away, the remaining task will be to evaluate the military utility of nuclear weapons objectively. If it becomes clear that nuclear weapons are dangerous and have almost no military uses, it may be much easier to take [them] off. https://thebulletin.org/2020/09/the-hidden-stumbling-block-to-progress-on-nuclear-weapons/
-
Archives
- May 2024 (169)
- April 2024 (366)
- March 2024 (335)
- February 2024 (345)
- January 2024 (375)
- December 2023 (333)
- November 2023 (342)
- October 2023 (366)
- September 2023 (353)
- August 2023 (356)
- July 2023 (362)
- June 2023 (324)
-
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
- 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