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

To 20 October – coronavirus, climate and yes, NUCLEAR, news

Covid-19 cases across the globe hit 40 million Monday with the United States leading the world with the highest numbers of infections and deaths.  World round-up of coronavirus. cases and restrictions.

Climate change just keeps on – cycloone, floods and landslides.– Vietnam, India.  It becomes important to devlop strategies to adapt to global heating.

Nuclear news items stress the need for international agreements on arms control.

But , on the ”peaceful nukes” scene, it is quite extraordinary that propaganda has ramped up enormously, even while the pandemic has actually slowed down nuclear building and other activities, as well as the demand for electricty.

What we’re seeing is a frenzy of  small nuclear reactor (SMR) propaganda handouts masquerading as real journalism. In English language news, it’s all about America selling these uneconomic and pretty useless gimmicks to their own population and to overseas countries. The most often praised model, NuScam’s reactor, is even now being touted as ”foreign development aid”.   No doubt the global industry is doing the same confidence trick in Russian and Chinese. They need a global burst of tax-payer funded SMR building,  to stave off the collapse of the industry.

Some bits of good news We’ve had so many wins’: why the green movement can overcome climate crisis. International Monetary Fund recommends a carbon price, for the economy as well as for the climate.  Solar energy is here with a vengeance – look at South Australia.


The attack on journalism – launched with the persecution of Julian Assange.

On climate: instead of denial or despair, there’s determined resolve.  Carbon emissions are deeply embedded in our lifestyle – the challenge post-pandemic.  Climate disasters – Earth is becoming uninhabitable for millions of humans.

Elimination of nuclear weapons is vital to the “survival of life on this planet”.

Nuclear waste – a danger for countless generations to come.

Resisting nuclear colonialism on Indigenous Peoples’ Day

Offshore Wind Energy, Not Nuclear, Is the Future.  Study shows that renewable energy is clearly better that nuclear at cutting greenhouse emissions.


Thorium not likely to revive the nuclear energy industry.

NEW ZEALAND. Climate and clean energy leaders win big in New Zealand, ACT elections.

ARCTIC.  Global heating is unravelling the Arctic, much faster than expected.  Climate change: Arctic Circle teens call for help to save their homes.  Reopening of a Cold-War era submarine base, as USA struggles to beat Russia to control the Arctic.

JAPAN.  Japan’s government is appealing the landmark ruling about its responsibility for Fukushima nuclear accident. Japan’s government planning to dump into the sea, the radioactive water from Fukushima No. 1 nuclear reactor.  Fukushima ‘blank spaces’ in limbo, left out of decontamination plan.

Struggling Japanese towns look to nuclear waste storing and the money associated. Mansion without a toilet: Towns in Japan seek to house, store nuclear waste out of necessity.  800-meter-long seawall being constructed, as Japan plans to reopen damaged Onagawa nuclear complex.

Japan’s government ignores U.N. nuclear ban treaty, puts out feeble anti-nuclear weapons resolution.

SOUTH ASIA. Neighbouring countries oppose Japan’s plan to release nuclear waste water into the Pacific.

RUSSIA. Putin suggests extending the START nuclear weapons control treaty for another year.



CANADA. Nuclear industry stagnates, renewables thrive- small nuclear reactors will be a terrible mistake for Canada. Small modular nuclear reactors create intensely radioactive wastes. Divisive nuclear waste programme mapped out in South Bruce, Ontario.  Canada’s government caught up in the Small Nuclear Reactor Ponzi Scheme.

NORTH KOREA.  North Korea, with its new intercontinental-range ballistic missile makes it clear that it is a nuclear weapons nation. New North Korean missile will prove a big diplomatic headache for US, expert warns.

SOUTH KOREA. After 23 yearrs and huge expense, South Korea is to close down its efoort to develop nuclear spent fuel reprocessing .

MIDDLE EAST. Policy of no uranium enrichment, no reprocessing, essential for Middle East to prevent nuclear arms proliferation.

FRANCE. France has more nuclear waste than shown in official inventory, reports the nuclear regulator. France’s nuclear company EDF promises a new design pressurised water nuclear reactor (EPR).

INDIA. India’s young anti-nuclear protestors still in trouble, police cases pending, 10 years after teir demonstration.  Cybersecurity concerns about India’s nuclear reactors.

BULGARIA. USA to market nuclear reactor to Bulgaria.

TUVALU. Tuvalu – the 47th nation to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

SOUTH AFRICA.  South Africa the first sucker to get American experimental nuclear reactor + $billions

AUSTRALIA.  USA election result, and Australia’s response– the world’s climate in the balance. Australia a leader in the worst sense – biodiversity loss and risk of ecosystem collapse.  Morrison government’s devastating cuts to Environmental research and teaching.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | Christina's notes | 2 Comments

The frenzy to promote small nuclear reactors – shown in Google news headline articles today when you search ”nuclear”

Google nuclear headlines today pointed to 96 articles on nuclear issues

By far the topic most covered most was the ”need” for new generation nuclear reactors for energy. –    24 articles in all,  mostly enthusing about small nuclear reactors.   Several of these involved  the marketing of USA reactors to other countries.

The next most popular pro nuclear topic was nuclear  fusion . (7 articles.) Other prominent pro nuclear themes were claims on safety, and action on climate. There were 50 pro nuclear articles in all.

There were 21 anti-nuclear articles. A few denied the claims on nuclear safety, and action on climate. Others dealt with the Fukushima nuclear waste water to be released into the Pacific ocean, with questions on nuclear economics.

There were 13 articles that didn’t ‘take sides’ –  basically  factual articles about nuclear wastes, safety, and international politics.

On the subject of nuclear weapons all of the articles opposed them, although one could be interpreted as suggesting that there’s a need to counteract China’s developments.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | 2 WORLD, marketing | Leave a comment

Nuclear industry stagnates, renewables thrive- small nuclear reactors will be a terrible mistake for Canada

October 19, 2020 Posted by | Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Anti-science in America – climate denial to coronavirus denial

America  re-discovers anti-science in its midst, Environmental Health News,16 Oct 20 

Fauci, Birx, Redfield & Co. are in the middle of a political food fight. They could learn a lot from environmental scientists.

Let’s start with the story of a scientist who beat back a powerful global denial movement without any help from social media or modern, sophisticated organizing campaigns.

It took Galileo 359 years to wrangle an apology out of the Vatican for his heretical belief that the Earth revolved around the sun.

I’m glad he didn’t take it personally. Science denial is neither new nor purely American—but we sure are finding ways to make it lethal and lasting.

Climate scientists have been dealing with anti-science, largely unnoticed by the general public, for 20 years. Doctors face a growing wave of anti-vaccination zealots. Now a pandemic with a seven-figure global death toll and a stranglehold on the world’s economy has opened the doors wide for some multi-front anti-science blowback.

Americans, many refusing to wear masks and ignoring social distancing guidelines, appear to be gathering at frat parties, raves, political rallies, nightclubs and more in defiance of what credentialed experts say are the most vital ways to restrict the spread of COVID-19.

Major sporting events, notably college football, are backing down from previously self-imposed restrictions.

And, lo and behold, positive test rates are going back up in a big way.

Past is deadly prologue

Here are a couple recent, high profile examples of anti-science fervor in the U.S.:………

But nothing in science can quite match the decades-long assault on climate science and climate scientists. On the high end, there are PR campaigns backed by fossil fuel money, well-heeled litigation, and unhinged attacks from national pols and pundits. Then, there are the confounding, face-palming antics of the Coal Rollers—pickup truck owners who modify their rides with “Prius Repellent”—thick sooty black smoke intended to make a bizarre anti-science, pro-climate denial statement. Yes, people do this.

Penn State’s Michael Mann is arguably the highest-profile climate scientist in the U.S. Let’s make a minor leap of faith and say Mann’s climate stature is the closest equivalent to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s standing on coronavirus.

Right now, Dr. Fauci’s main public tormentor is President Trump. Their conflicts are tame compared to the deniers’ gang-up on Mann, which has lasted more than a decade and may offer Fauci a few tips on being a scientist in the middle of a political peeing match…….

Make no mistake, Fauci’s a heroic public servant in an awful bind who, as far as I know, may not even be interested in the killer tell-all book that now resides in his head.

But after COVID-19 is finally conquered, Mike Mann and a thousand others will still be getting bashed, and the worst impacts of climate change will still be ahead of us.

Peter Dykstra is our weekend editor and columnist and can be reached at or @pdykstra

October 19, 2020 Posted by | climate change, spinbuster, USA | Leave a comment

Small Nuclear Reactors on the moon- desperate hope for the failing nuclear industry

Fly me to the moon, but don’t put reactors there, By Linda Pentz GunterNot content to desecrate our terrestrial landscape with hundreds of thousands of tons of nuclear waste — much piled up with nowhere to go, the rest released to contaminate our air, water and soil — humankind, in all its folly, now plans to do the same to the Moon. And, eventually to Mars.

While our species’ insatiable scientific curiosity has undoubtedly led to some beneficial inventions, it has also drawn us inexorably towards our own downfall. Our zeal to create the atomic bomb ignored logic, ethics, consequences and the fundamentals of human rights.

The bomb brought us so-called civil nuclear power reactors, the ugly and irresponsible spawn of a weapon that leaves us perched perpetually on the precipice of extinction. But there is nothing “civil” about nuclear power.

At the dawn of the nuclear energy age, not a thought was given to the legacy of deadly radioactive waste it would produce. That can was kicked summarily down the road. Now we are far down that road and no solution has been arrived at, while we ignore the one obvious one: stop making more of it!

So now comes the news that the US wants to put nuclear power reactors on the Moon.

In the news stories that followed the announcement, replete with the usual excitement about space exploration (never mind the cost and bellicose implications) there was not one single mention of the radioactive waste these reactors would produce.

The problem, like the waste itself, will simply be kicked into some invisible crater on the dark side of the Moon.

NASA, the US Department of Energy and assorted nuclear labs are pushing the small modular reactor for nuclear projects on the Moon and Mars. Desperate to stay relevant and to continue gobbling up taxpayer dollars, this is music to the failing nuclear industry’s ears. Financially disastrous and technically unresolved on Earth, the SMR, say these “experts”, is ideally suited to the needs of humans living for extensive periods in space. 

Since each of these mini-reactors will likely have an uninterrupted output of only 10 kilowatts, it will take multiple reactors on the Moon or Mars to fulfill the necessary functions for their human inhabitants.

Needless to say, so far there is no certified design, no test reactor, no actual reactor, and no fool-proof way to send such a reactor to the Moon. (Rockets have an unfortunate habit of sometimes blowing up on — or shortly after — launch.) Nevertheless, the year 2026 is the ambitious target date for all systems go. In keeping with the theme, “pie in the sky” springs to mind.

While no reactor design has been identified, it will most likely need to use highly enriched uranium (HEU) which puts the reactor firmly in violation of non-proliferation standards. As Dr. Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists told PBS Newshour, “This may drive or start an international space race to build and deploy new types of reactors requiring highly enriched uranium.”

Given the utility of HEU for nuclear weapons use, and the probes currently being sent to the Moon and Mars by “unfriendly” countries such as China and the United Arab Emirates, it does not take much of an imagination to envisage the temptation for theft by force. Will the US deploy guards around its lunar reactors.? Will we see terrorism on the Moon, even war?

What is this really all about? Profit? Prestige? Proliferation? The Idaho National Laboratory, which is eager to develop the lunar SMR prototype, sees this as an opportunity to emphasize “the United States’ global leadership in nuclear innovation,” the lab’s John Wagner told Newshour.

This echoes the mantra parroted by almost every federal institution and corporation seeking to justify some new and exorbitant nuclear expense: we cannot let China and Russia take over; the US must retain — or regain — pre-eminence in the nuclear sector and in space. And so on.

It’s not being cute to call this lunacy. With the ever-expanding crises on Earth, caused by the ravaging effects of climate change as well as the current pandemic, spending exorbitant sums to stick reactors on the Moon or Mars is more than madness; it is morally irresponsible. It abandons most of us on Earth to our fate, while, just maybe, possibly, someday, a handful of people will head off to the Red Planet. Never to return.

Yet undeterred by immorality and expense, and apparently without the slightest concern for the radioactive dirt pile these reactors will produce, NASA and the Department of Energy are eagerly soliciting proposals.

And what will these lunar reactors do? They will enable “capability for a sustained lunar presence, particularly for surviving a lunar night,” NASA’s Anthony Calomino told Space News.  “The surface of the moon provides us an opportunity to fabricate, test and flight qualify a space fission system,” he said.

The Moon is seen as our launchpad to Mars. Now, it seems, it will also become our latest nuclear dustbin. If there is a meltdown, or a cascade of accidents among the cluster of small identical reactors there, all of which could suffer the same failure at the same time, it will become our next nuclear wasteland.

I am happy to say “goodnight moon.” But I don’t wan’t to say “goodbye.”

October 19, 2020 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, space travel, USA | Leave a comment

USA spends taxpayers’ money on weapons, endless wars, not health – coronavirus chaos is the result

October 19, 2020 Posted by | health, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Neighbouring countries oppose Japan’s plan to release nuclear waste water into the Pacific

World worries about release of Fukushima nuclear water, By Xu Keyue Source: Global Times  2020/10/18 

1Neighboring countries oppose ‘irresponsible’ plan,    The world public, especially those in Japan’s neighbors such as China and South Korea, have expressed deep concerns over environmental pollution and human health, and opposition to the Japanese government’s plan to dump radioactive water from the disabled Fukushima nuclear plant into the ocean.

Analysts said that Japan should think twice before making the decision as the move would have disastrous consequences for the marine environment and human health, which could lead to criticism by related international organizations, countermeasures by affected countries including cessation of imports of Japanese seafood, and harm to the country’s image.

Japanese media said that the country’s government will hold a related cabinet meeting as early as this month to make the final decision on the plan to release more than 1 million tons of radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean after reducing the level of radioactivity.

The plan has not gotten much rolling coverage in Japan, but there are still many Japanese netizens expressing their disagreement. According to a poll on Yahoo Japan, 41.5 percent of the 31,035 respondents disagreed with the plan
Local fishermen in Fukushima publicly announced their opposition, saying the plan will undo years of work rebuilding their industry’s reputation since the plant was wrecked by a huge tsunami in March 2011.

The public of South Korea has repeatedly voiced concern, claiming that discharging the water represents a “grave threat” to the marine environment.

A South Korean Foreign Ministry official told reporters that a meeting of related ministries regarding this issue was elevated to vice-ministerial status last month to step up the response to Japan’s move, reported South Korea’s KBS News on Friday. The official said the government will continue to closely monitor Tokyo’s activities and take measures based on cooperation with the international community.

Japan’s plan also sparked outrage among Chinese netizens, many of whom criticized Japan’s practice, saying it is throwing its responsibility onto the world to share.

Sun Yuliang, a nuclear expert at Tsinghua University in Beijing, told the Global Times on Sunday that whether to dump the waste water should depend on an authoritative scientific assessment to determine whether the processed radioactive water meets international standards for release.

Sun called on the Japanese government to invite professional teams from related international organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct a complete field investigation.

Liu Junhong, a research fellow at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, urged Japan to further communicate with the international community and share information transparently.

Liu said that the Japanese government should give priority to safeguarding public health and safety and the environment, rather than the cost of the rehabilitation work after the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

Liu noted that the seas in Asia are mostly connected and many of them are semi-closed, so that the contaminants from the Fukushima water could subside and then rise, which would severely affect the local marine and coastal environment and the health of people nearby.
Therefore, Japan’s neighboring countries including China and South Korea would be the first to react to the plan, Liu said.

He noted that if the Japanese government releases the water, these  countries are likely to stop imports of seafood from Japan, and foreigners could be reluctant to visit the country and enjoy its food, which would harm Japan’s economy.

Other analysts noted that the plan goes against Japan’s long-established image of being friendly to the marine environment.

Another expert on nuclear safety, who requested anonymity, said that the issues is not only one of Japan’s own business but also relates to the interests of the global community, so countries and related organizations in the international community should cooperate and assist Japan to deal with the contamination.

The Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima went into meltdown and released radioactive material in the aftermath of a tsunami in March 2011.
The disaster cast doubts over the safety of nuclear power worldwide, leading China to launch a campaign to review and upgrade the safety systems of all its nuclear power stations.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | ASIA, wastes | Leave a comment

Hypocrisy prize to U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), for pretending that NuScam’s Small Nuclear Reactors are ”foreign aid”

October 19, 2020 Posted by | AFRICA, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, spinbuster, USA | Leave a comment

Canada’s government caught up in the Small Nuclear Reactor Ponzi Scheme

Why is the federal government funding new nuclear power reactors? Susan O’Donnell, October 15, 2020

 In its September throne speech, the federal government signalled its intention to fund the development of new nuclear reactors (SMRs) as part of its climate action plan.

Today, the government made its first SMR funding announcement: $20 million from ISED’s Strategic Innovation Fund for the company Terrestrial Energy to develop its prototype SMR in Ontario.

Anyone interested in evidence-based policy is wondering: Why are they doing this? There is no evidence that nuclear power will achieve carbon reduction targets, while there is considerable research indicating the contrary.

In fact, in today’s funding announcement, federal Natural Resources Minister Seamus O’Regan confirmed that the new reactor will take more than a decade to develop and will contribute nothing to Canada’s 2030 target for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The same week as the throne speech, the release of the 2020 World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) confirmed, as did its previous reports, that developing new nuclear energy is too slow and uneconomical to address the climate crisis compared to deploying renewable energy technologies.

Last week, research based on data from 123 countries over a 25-year period made a similar finding. December 2019 research from Stanford professor Mark Z. Jacobson refutes claims that nuclear energy is zero-carbon. A November 2019 article in the American business magazine Forbes argues that building new nuclear reactors instead of investing in more climate-effective energy resources actually makes climate change worse.

SMRs, the nuclear reactors promoted by the federal government, are in particular over-hyped as a climate crisis solution. SMRs have been proposed as a solution for remote communities and mining sites currently relying on diesel fuel but new research has found the potential market is too small to be viable. 

SMRs exist only as computer models and nobody knows for sure if they will work. Last month, the Canadian energy watchdog The Energy Mix interviewed WNISR lead author Mycle Schneider, who called SMRs “PowerPoint reactors, not detailed engineering.”

Given all the research evidence pointing away from funding nuclear energy in a climate action plan, why is the federal government proposing to do it?

In a webinar presentation earlier this year, the president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility Gordon Edwards put it bluntly: “The nuclear industry is desperate.”

Edwards believes the federal government’s push for new reactor development is coming from the nuclear industry. “If they can, the nuclear industry will convince governments to pour public money into this for whatever reason, by misrepresenting its advantages and minimizing or even ignoring its disadvantages.”……….

Nuclear reactor promoters are “barely keeping themselves alive,” said Edwards, and have realized for quite a while that “they are in trouble.”

The federal government created the nuclear industry in Canada and has funded it since the late 1940s. For more than 70 years Canada has been spending vast sums of public money to keep it going. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), a Crown corporation with a mandate to promote and support nuclear science and technology and manage nuclear waste in Canada, received $826 million from the federal government in 2017-2018. Most of the public funds are turned over to a private-sector entity, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, whose majority partner is SNC Lavalin.

One description of the nuclear industry in Canada is that it can be understood as a kind of Ponzi scheme. In its current corporate plan, AECL listed a cost liability of almost $6.4 billion for decommissioning and waste management provision and $988 million for contaminated sites in 2017-18.

The industry needs new nuclear reactors as a replacement revenue stream. New reactors require capital investment but no banks or private investors are willing to invest due to the poor return on investment. Public funding is the only option to keep the industry alive and pay off its liabilities, and more public money is always required or the entire scheme will collapse. ……..

a revolving door shuttles senior government personnel involved in nuclear energy files to the CNA lobby. In one recent example, the former parliamentary secretary to the minister of natural resources who was responsible for nuclear policy is now a consultant for the CNA.

Former senior AECL executives and government nuclear energy staff are now establishing and managing various start-up nuclear companies actively seeking public funding from the federal government. And according to the throne speech, the money is available…….

The Canadian government’s plans to invest in nuclear energy contrast with the European Union’s proposed Green New Deal released in June this year that specifically excludes investment in nuclear energy because of its harmful environmental impacts. The decision followed sustainable finance guidelines also adopted this year and developed in a process that included environmental and other civil society groups as well as energy industry representatives……….

October 19, 2020 Posted by | Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

The biggest radioactive spill in US history

The biggest radioactive spill in US history      How the US poisoned Navajo Nation. By Ranjani Chakraborty and Melissa Hirsch  Oct 13, 2020, (Excellent photography) For decades, Navajo Nation was a primary source for the United States’ uranium stockpile during the nuclear arms race. It was home to more than 700 uranium mines, which provided jobs to Navajo residents. But the mining industry came with impending peril. Cases of lung cancer and other diseases began cropping up in a community that had previously had few of them. Land, air, and water was poisoned. And on July 16, 1979, the mining led to the biggest radioactive spill in US history.

Watch the video above to hear from residents in Church Rock, New Mexico, who’ve lived with the effects of the spill. More than 40 years later, the site still hasn’t been properly cleaned up, and residents continue to face illnesses, tainted water, and the loss of livestock. Today, with the Environmental Protection Agency’s new plan for cleanup, they’re worried it could wipe out their entire community.

If you want to learn more about mining in Navajo Nation, check out Doug Brugge, Esther Yazzie-Lewis, and Timothy Benally’s book on the subject. Or the feature documentary The Return of Navajo Boy by Groundswell Educational Films.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | incidents, indigenous issues, USA | Leave a comment

Climate change: Arctic Circle teens call for help to save their homes

Climate change: Arctic Circle teens call for help to save their homes

Teenagers living in remote Arctic communities say they’re worried about the effects of climate change. Scientists warn that melting ice and warming temperatures show rapid climate change is taking place.

Rarely heard young people from multiple countries within the Arctic Circle say their way of life is at risk and governments must act.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | ARCTIC, climate change | Leave a comment

Putin’s proposal for 12 month renewal of NewSTART arms control treaty is rejected by USA

US rejects Putin’s proposal on nuclear disarmament treaty as ‘nonstarter’  American Military News, 18 Oct 20, The United States says Russian President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to extend the New START nuclear disarmament treaty without freezing nuclear warheads is a “nonstarter.”

White House national-security adviser Robert O’Brien made the statement on October 16 on Twitter in response to Putin’s proposed extension of the bilateral treaty for one year without preconditions. …………   The U.S. envoy for arms control, Marshall Billingslea, also reacted on Twitter………

Putin proposed extending the bilateral treaty for one year without preconditions to keep it from expiring and to allow talks to revive it to continue.

Putin also instructed Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at a meeting with permanent members of Russia’s Security Council on October 16 to work out Russia’s position on New START and inform the United States of developments.

“In this regard, I propose…extending the current treaty without any conditions for at least a year so that meaningful negotiations can be conducted on all the parameters of the problems…,” Putin said, adding it would be “extremely sad” if the treaty expired………..

The issue of the New START treaty comes less than three weeks before the U.S. presidential election.

Democratic challenger Joe Biden supports extending New START “to use that as a foundation for new arms-control arrangements.” If Biden wins, the treaty will expire just weeks after he is inaugurated.

Biden calls the treaty — which was negotiated when he was vice president under President Barack Obama — an “anchor of strategic stability between the United States and Russia.”……..

On October 13, more than 75 lawmakers across Europe called on the United States to extend New START before its expiration.

The Trump administration has already left the landmark Cold War-era Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), accusing Russia of violating it. Washington also unilaterally exited Open Skies, a treaty that permits the United States and Russia to conduct reconnaissance flights over each other’s territory.

October 19, 2020 Posted by | politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

U.S. Deputy Sheriff Australia bought a lemon with an obsolete $90 billion submarine

October 19, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics international | Leave a comment

Ask pro-HB 6 lawmakers seeking reelection what they plan to do about the nuclear bailout bill 

Ask pro-HB 6 lawmakers seeking reelection what they plan to do about the nuclear bailout bill Oct 18, 2020, By Thomas Suddes,

House Bill 6, which Ohio’s House and Senate passed last year, requires Ohio’s electricity consumers to bail out two nuclear power plants formerly owned by FirstEnergy Corp. – Perry, in Lake County, and Davis-Besse, in Ottawa County.

HB 6 also requires electricity customers to subsidize two coal-burning power plants, one of them in Indiana. Evidently, our General Assembly has solved all Ohio’s problems and now has the time, not to mention the wisdom, to address an Indiana problem.

True, Ohio’s House and Senate usually favor utilities over consumers. That’s not news. But this was: In July, a federal grand jury indicted then-House Speaker Larry Householder, a Republican from Perry County’s Glenford, and four other Statehouse figures because of an alleged racketeering conspiracy, “involving approximately $60 million,” to pass HB 6 – “a billion-dollar nuclear plant bailout.” (Householder and the others are presumed innocent unless convicted.)

Soon after, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who last year had signed HB 6 almost before its ink dried, asked the legislature to repeal HB 6. But the House (61-38 Republican) and Senate (24-9 Republican) haven’t. True, a House Select Committee on Energy Policy and Oversight, appointed by new Speaker Robert Cupp (a Lima Republican who voted “yes” on HB 6) is “studying” HB 6. Maybe the committee could save time by reading the federal indictment.

Oh yes, the Senate will consider repealing HB 6 – but only after the House repeals it. There’s no reason why the Senate (led by President Larry Obhof, a Medina Republican who voted “yes” on HB 6) can’t repeal HB 6 before the House does. Maybe the real reason is that GOP senators think the House will never repeal it.

About all that Ohio electricity consumers can do is ask those members of the General Assembly who voted “yes” on House Bill 6 whether they will now vote to repeal it.

The Senate passed the bill 19-13. The House sent HB 6 to DeWine in a 51-38 vote (with 50 votes required). Some legislators who voted “yes” on HB 6 are Democrats. But most “yes” votes came from Householder, Cupp and other Republicans. Whether incumbents are Democrats or a Republicans, voters might care to ask reelection candidates what they’ll do about HB 6.
A Greater Cleveland state senator who voted “yes” on HB 6 is asking voters to reelect him: Sen. Matt Dolan, a Chagrin Falls Republican, of the 24th District.
These Greater Cleveland Ohio House members also voted “yes” on HB 6 and are asking voters to reelect them: Democratic Reps. Terrence Upchurch, of Cleveland; Tavia Galonski, of Akron; and Thomas West, of Canton.

These Greater Cleveland House members also voted “yes” on HB 6 and are asking voters to reelect them: Republican Reps. Thomas F. Patton, of Strongsville; Jamie Callender, of Concord Township (HB 6′s co-sponsor); Diane V. Grendell, of Chesterland (whose district includes parts of Geauga and Portage counties); Darrell Kick, of Loudonville (whose district includes Ashland County and part of Medina County); Scott Oelslager, of North Canton; Bill Roemer, of Richfield; Dick Stein of Norwalk (whose district includes part of Lorain County); and Scott Wiggam, of Wooster.

Even if legislators run unopposed, they’re still answerable to residents of their districts.

Legislators who voted “yes” on HB 6 will likely tout “savings” – not “costs” – electricity consumers will see thanks to HB 6. If that’s the answer a voter gets, she or he should ask where the numbers came from. (HB 6 analyses with differing dates are floating around.) The answer a Statehouse politician gets about what a bill costs depends on how she or he asks the question.
Still, these are crucial questions that never get good answers from pro-House Bill 6 General Assembly members:

If HB 6 is such great legislation, why did it only attract 51 “yes” votes in the 99-member House – just one more “yes” vote than the 50-vote constitutional minimum?

And why did 15 of the House’s 61 Republicans – one in four – vote “no” on HB 6 even though then-GOP leader Householder wanted it passed?

Finally: Why would anybody allegedly spend $60 million in dark money to pass a bill that’s supposed to be such a great deal for Ohio electricity consumers – unless it isn’t?

Thomas Suddes, a member of the editorial board, writes from Athens.
To reach Thomas Suddes:, 216-408-9474

October 19, 2020 Posted by | election USA 2020, politics | Leave a comment

Thorium not likely to revive the nuclear energy industry

Could Thorium Revive The Nuclear Energy Industry?   Oil Price,  – Sep 27, 2020,………..It still remains to be seen whether the new thorium fuel will actually see the light of day.

The main sticking point to the promotion of thorium as a cleaner nuclear fuel is that it remains unproven on a commercial scale. Thorium MSRs (Molten Salt Reactors) have been in development since the 1960s by the United States, China, Russia, and France, yet nothing much ever came of them.

Nuclear radiologist Peter Karamoskos, of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) has advised the world not to hold its breath:

Without exception, [thorium reactors] have never been commercially viable, nor do any of the intended new designs even remotely seem to be viable. Like all nuclear power production they rely on extensive taxpayer subsidies; the only difference is that with thorium and other breeder reactors these are of an order of magnitude greater, which is why no government has ever continued their funding.”

Nuclear power enthusiasts can only hope that ANEEL will not also fall victim to the thorium curse.


October 19, 2020 Posted by | 2 WORLD, thorium | Leave a comment