American TV news covers wildfires, but mostly is careful not to mention climate change
Most wildfire coverage on American TV news fails to mention link to climate crisis
A media watchdog analysis found that just 15% of broadcast news segments over a September weekend made the connection to climate breakdown, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/11/american-tv-news-california-oregon-fires-climate-crisis Lois Beckett in Los Angeles and Maanvi Singh in San Francisco
Most news coverage of the wildfires raging in California, Washington and Oregon on American TV channels made no mention of the connection between the historic fires and climate crisis, according to a new analysis from Media Matters
Reviewing coverage aired over the 5-8 September holiday weekend, the progressive media watchdog group found that only 15% of corporate TV news segments on the fires mentioned the climate crisis. A separate analysis found that during the entire month of August only 4% of broadcast news wildfire coverage mentioned climate crisis.
Wildfires are raging in states across the American west, burning record acreage in California, Washington and Oregon. The wave of fires was first sparked and stoked by a spate of unusual weather in August, including rare lightning storms that hit parts of California that were vulnerable to fire because drought and heat had dried out vegetation. The fires came before low-elevation, coastal parts of the state reached peak fire season in the autumn when fierce offshore winds have driven the biggest fires in recent years.
The fires that hit Oregon in recent days were stoked by dry conditions and rare easterly winds.
Although untangling the weather conditions from climate crisis is complicated, it’s clear that overall, in recent years “fire risk is increasing dramatically because of climate change”, said Chris Field, who directs the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. Global heating has given rise to drier, hotter conditions and more frequent, extreme droughts that have left the landscape tinder-dry and prone to explosive blazes.
Although California’s landscape has long been prone to fire, climate crisis has “put pressure on the entire system”, Field said, throwing it out of balance and giving rise to more extreme, catastrophic events. The current fires expanding with such explosive force have burned more acreage within a few weeks than what has burned in previous years.
A consensus of research has made clear that extreme heat and drought fueled by global heating has left the American west tinder-dry and especially vulnerable to runaway fires. A 2019 study found that from 1972 to 2018, California saw a five-fold increase in the areas that burned annually. Another study estimates that without human-caused climate crisis, the area that burned between 1984 and 2015 would have been half of what it actually was. And a research paper published last month suggests that the number of autumn days with “extreme fire weather” – when the risk of wildfires is extremely high – has more than doubled over the past two decades. “Our climate model analyses suggest that continued climate change will further amplify the number of days with extreme fire weather by the end of this century,” the researchers write, “though a pathway consistent with the UN Paris commitments would substantially curb that increase.”
Climate crisis is not the only factor driving the barrage of blazes across the region. Ironically, a century of suppressing fires – extinguishing the natural, necessary fires in western forests and other wildlands to protect homes and timber – has led to an accumulation of fire-fueling vegetation. “A deficit of fire, concatenated with the effects of climate change have led us here,” said Don Hankins, a fire ecologist at California State University, Chico.
Media Matters singled out two TV news journalists who are regularly talking about the role of climate crisis: the CBS meteorologist and climate specialist Jeff Berardelli and NBC’s Al Roker.
The Media Matters analysis also noted that so far, 2020 has been the third year in a row during which corporate broadcast TV news discussed the impacts of climate crisis in fewer than 5% of wildfire segments.
Suffolk County Council unable to back £20billion Sizewell new nuclear power station as the present plan stands
regarding many of these issues is “very disappointing” considering how early in the development process the council raised its concerns. The draft Relevant Representation lists the areas where it believes EDF Energy needs to undertake further work. Council leader Matthew Hicks added: “Suffolk County Council has always supported the principle of a new nuclear power station at Sizewell, recognising the important contribution to the national energy strategy and the large economic boost such a development could bring
to our county.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizewell-c-not-supported-by-suffolk-county-council-1-6833606
Importance of the ocean’s biological carbon pump
|
$500 billion question: what’s the value of studying the ocean’s biological carbon pump? EurekAlert WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION, Research News 12 Sept 20, The ocean plays an invaluable role in capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere, taking in somewhere between five to 12 gigatons (billion tons) annually. Due to limited research, scientists aren’t sure exactly how much carbon is captured and stored–or sequestered–by the ocean each year or how increasing CO2 emissions will affect this process in the future. A new paper published in the journal Science of the Total Environment from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) puts an economic value on the benefit of research to improve knowledge of the biological carbon pump and reduce the uncertainty of ocean carbon sequestration estimates. Using a climate economy model that factors in the social costs of carbon and reflects future damages expected as a consequence of a changing climate, lead author Di Jin of WHOI’s Marine Policy Center places the value of studying ocean carbon sequestration at $500 billion. “The paper lays out the connections between the benefit of scientific research and decision making,” says Jin. “By investing in science, you can narrow the range of uncertainty and improve a social cost-benefit assessment.” Better understanding of the ocean’s carbon sequestration capacity will lead to more accurate climate models, providing policymakers with the information they need to establish emissions targets and make plans for a changing climate, Jin adds. With co-authors Porter Hoagland and Ken Buesseler, Jin builds a case for a 20-year scientific research program to measure and model the ocean’s biological carbon pump, the process by which atmospheric carbon dioxide is transported to the deep ocean through the marine food web. The biological carbon pump is fueled by tiny plant-like organisms floating on the ocean surface called phytoplankton, which consume carbon dioxide in the process of photosynthesis. When the phytoplankton die or are eaten by larger organisms, the carbon-rich fragments and fecal matter sink deeper into the ocean, where they are eaten by other creatures or buried in seafloor sediments, which helps decrease atmospheric carbon dioxide and thus reduces global climate change. Rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, a result of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, warms the planet by trapping heat from the sun and also dissolves into seawater, lowering the pH of the ocean, a phenomenon known as ocean acidification. A warmer, more acidic ocean could weaken the carbon pump, causing atmospheric temperatures to rise–or it could get stronger, with the opposite effect. ………. Key Takeaways * The ocean takes up an estimated five to 12 gigatons of carbon dioxide per year through a process known as the biological carbon pump. * More accurate estimates of the ocean’s capacity to remove carbon from the atmosphere will lead to more accurate climate models which could improve carbon emissions policies. * The global economic benefit of studying the ocean’s biological pump is $500 billion, if the science leads to policy decisions that mitigate the effects of climate change. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/whoi-bq091020.php |
|
Suttsu, Hokkaido, residents oppose radioactive waste dump plan
Residents Oppose Hokkaido Town’s Radioactive Waste Site Plan https://www.nippon.com/en/news/yjj2020091000878/residents-oppose-hokkaido-town%27s-radioactive-waste-site-plan.html Suttsu, Hokkaido, Sept. 11 (Jiji Press)–Many residents of a Japanese town considering hosting a final disposal facility for high-level radioactive waste have voiced opposition to the plan at a briefing session organized by the municipal government.The meeting was the fourth of its kind for residents of the town of Suttsu in the northernmost Japan prefecture of Hokkaido. The first such session was held on Monday.
At Thursday’s meeting, which was opened to the press, Suttsu Mayor Haruo Kataoka explained the reasons for considering applying for a literature survey, the first stage of a three-stage research process to select the location of the final disposal site for high-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants.
Some 260 residents attended the session, which lasted for over three hours from 6:30 p.m. (9:30 a.m. GMT).
Participating residents voiced concerns that the move will lead to harmful rumors about the town, and that if the town receives subsidies from the Japanese government as a result of applying for the literature survey, it will have no choice but to become a final disposal site. Some said that detailed discussions should be held after the mayoral election in the town next year.
Magnox nuclear clear-up cost soars to £9bn
|
Magnox nuclear clear-up cost soars to £9bn https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2020/09/11/magnox-nuclear-clear-up-cost-soars-to-9bn/ Aaron Morby, 13 Sept 20, The cost of decommissioning the Magnox nuclear reactor estate has continued to soar despite efforts to control the budget. Fresh estimates of the cost of getting all Magnox sites cleared and safely enclosed has increased by £2.7bn to £8.7bn since 2017. An investigation by the National Audit Office warns that while the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has made major progress sorting out its delivery procedures, costs are likely to continue to rise as it gets to grips with the scope of work. The expected cost is now double the original contract price when the initial clean-up deal was signed in 2014 with Cavendish Fluor Partnership to decommission two nuclear research sites and 10 Magnox sites. Since then the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority terminated the contract more than nine years early following a high court challenge to both the procurement by losing bidder Bechtel and changes in scope of work. The NAO this morning warned that costs are likely to be subject to further change, largely because of the inherent uncertainties involved in cleaning up the UK’s nuclear sites. It recommended that the NDA needs to increase its understanding of the condition of sites and the volume and complexity of remaining decommissioning work. It also said the NDA needed to explore with its subsidiaries how future contracts can better support the timely and effective management of underperformance. Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “Since the failure of the original Magnox contract in 2017, the NDA has made progress in a number of areas. “It renegotiated the contract, avoided further legal disputes and got on with decommissioning the power plants. “However, the NDA now knows that it will cost significantly more to take the sites to the care and maintenance stage of the decommissioning process, though there remains inherent uncertainty about the final cost. “It still needs to ensure it has a solid understanding of the condition of each Magnox site and the costs of cleaning them up.” |
|
|
A powerful message on the seismic dangers in Hinkley Point C nuclear construction. It would be cheaper to pull out now.
Radiation Free Lakeland 12th Sept 2020, Seismic Warnings – if not now when will the Government Scrap Hinkley C? This week there was yet another earthquake recorded in the Bristol area. It was small but significant, contributing to the well documented seismic activity of the area. If eyewatering costs, long delays, a mental and physical health crisis among the employees building Hinkley Point C are not enough to scrap this hubristic nuclear new build plan then the seismic warnings should be.
This insane project next to operational reactors has seen the geological stresses of the biggest pours of concrete in the UK
alongside three huge tunnels being bored below the seabed. German based multi-national company Herrenknecht built the hugely expensive tunnel boring machines which will be dumped under the Bristol Channel once done.
A total of 38,000 concrete segments are needed to support the tunnels, which would transfer 120,000 litres of water per second for the new nuclear plant when finished. The Bristol area is seismically active so to put increased geological stress deliberately in the vicinity of existing nuclear reactors is the kind of hubris that disaster movies are made of.
Scrapping Hinkley C now and paying off the developers would be far cheaper and far safer than continuing down this route to nuclear disaster.
UN nuclear ban treaty needs 6 more ratifications
The treaty prohibits the development, possession and use of nuclear weapons and was adopted with the support of 122 countries and territories three years ago.
Ireland and three other countries ratified the treaty last month, bringing the total number of ratifications to 44. The latest ratifications coincided with the 75th anniversaries of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, or ICAN, plans to calls on more countries to ratify the treaty in events at the UN headquarters to mark the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on October 2 and United Nations Day on October 24.
The treaty will come into effect 90 days after the number of ratifications reaches 50.
Nuclear powers, as well as Japan and other countries protected by the US nuclear umbrella, have not signed it.
The sorry history of the Vogtle nuclear boondoggle: it must be stopped.
At crucial crossroads, nuclear plant must be stopped, https://www.augustachronicle.com/opinion/20200912/guest-column-at-crucial-crossroads-nuclear-plant-must-be-stopped By Glenn Carroll, Sep 12, 2020 .
|
In 1977, a small group of thoughtful, committed Georgians started a grassroots anti-nuclear group to oppose nuclear power, nuclear weapons and radioactive waste and to promote alternative visions for renewable energy and world peace. At the same time, Georgia Power was resuming construction of Vogtle 1 and 2, having nearly gone bankrupt three years earlier while attempting to build a four-reactor nuclear compound with a budget of $1 billion. Only 10 weeks after breaking ground, incredibly, Vogtle construction ground to a halt with Georgia Power on the brink of bankruptcy. Georgia Power was saved by two emergency rate hikes thanks to the Georgia Public Service Commission and by selling shares of its hole-in-the-ground Vogtle to most of Georgia’s rural electric cooperatives and municipal power systems. So, in 1977, construction started back up for a two-unit Vogtle with a $640 million budget. In 1979, the year Georgia Power predicted would see blackouts without more power supply, Georgia Power was instead the most overbuilt utility in the country. Vogtle was only 1% complete and it was clear that there was no need for additional power, yet Georgia Power stubbornly stuck to its nuclear goals and in 1989, Vogtle 1 and 2 came on-line at a cost of $6.4 billion — a whopping 1,000% over budget. There are many compelling arguments against nuclear power: the risk of a catastrophic accident, out-of-control construction costs and the still-unsolved radioactive waste problem. Nuclear reactors produce materials that can be used to make nuclear weapons. Nuclear radiation exposure can cause birth defects and cancer. And then there’s that whiff of corporate socialism arising from nuclear’s dependence on government subsidies. All of these negative factors have spun the present-day global nuclear industry into a downward spiral towards obsolescence. Reactors are retiring faster than they are coming online. In 2001, 30 new reactors were ordered in the U.S., but the so-called “nuclear renaissance” rapidly fizzled leaving only Georgia Power and Vogtle. Meanwhile, renewable energy, in particular solar power, has become abundant and cheap, and solar and wind have been the fastest-growing energy sector for the past several years. This is the historic crossroads at which Georgia Power now finds itself building the only new reactors in the United States. Lessons learned? Let’s take a look. Some things remain the same. The unfinished Vogtle project’s budget and construction timeline have already doubled, and experts are saying Georgia Power is destined to go even further over budget and miss the deadline. Again. In the most recent construction monitoring report filed with the PSC, the company claims to have spent more than $1.5 billion in construction costs over the most recent six months. Those are total costs, Georgia Power only reports its 45.7% share of project costs which are $701 million for the six-month period. These skyrocketing costs, amounting to $8.5 million every day, have gone up, according to Georgia Power because of high absenteeism and the loss of skilled craft and management, at least in part because of having more than 800 cases of COVID-19 sidelining workers and crews since the pandemic began. Nuclear Watch South has conducted legal interventions before the PSC to call for the cancellation of Vogtle, showing that Vogtle is still not needed using Georgia Power’s own annual report performance data. Compiling 10 years of figures from Georgia Power’s SEC-filed annual reports tells a revealing story — Georgia Power’s electricity sales remain flat, showing an annual growth rate of less than .3%. Georgia Power’s existing portfolio of electric capacity is chronically underutilized. Last year, Georgia Power idled 31% of its existing capacity, even after shutting down 3,000 megawatts of polluting coal plants. Vogtle, if it is ever finished at a projected price tag of $27 billion, will add a puny 6% capacity — a radioactive capacity that the company simply does not need. But here’s the real shocker: Georgia Power’s profits have somehow skyrocketed in the midst of the Vogtle construction debacle. Georgia Power profits jumped by 20% when Vogtle construction began, steadily rising from the new high watermark. The regulated monopoly posted a whopping 20.5% profit in 2019! So one lesson was clearly learned by Georgia Power: It may not have yet learned how to pull off construction of a nuclear reactor, but it sure has mastered the art of making money. Georgia law empowers the PSC to cancel an unneeded power project. The same law protects Georgia Power to recover costs which were prudently invested in the canceled project, barring fraud or malfeasance. Georgians do not need to have one more dime extracted from them to build an unneeded radioactive waste factory in these times of economic downturn and ever-present fear of a novel coronavirus. Here at the crossroads of history in 2020, there has never been a better time to stop Plant Vogtle. The writer is coordinator of Nuclear Watch South, formerly Georgians Against Nuclear Energy. She has been active in nuclear issues for more than 30 years. |
|
Climate change and the loss of sea otters
Loss of sea otters accelerating the effects of climate change, New research published in Science reveals that the influence of a key predator governs the pace of climate impacts on Alaskan reefs EurekAlert, BIGELOW LABORATORY FOR OCEAN SCIENCES , 13 Sept 20, The impacts of predator loss and climate change are combining to devastate living reefs that have defined Alaskan kelp forests for centuries, according to new research published in Science.
“We discovered that massive limestone reefs built by algae underpin the Aleutian Islands’ kelp forest ecosystem,” said Douglas Rasher, a senior research scientist at Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences and the lead author of the study. “However, these long-lived reefs are now disappearing before our eyes, and we’re looking at a collapse likely on the order of decades rather than centuries.”
The coral-like reefs, built by the red alga Clathromorphum nereostratum, are being ground down by sea urchins. Sea urchins exploded in number after their predator, the Aleutian sea otter, became functionally extinct in the 1990’s. Without the urchins’ natural predator to keep them in check, urchins have transformed the seascape – first by mowing down the dense kelp forests, and now by turning their attention to the coralline algae that form the reef.
Clathromorphum produces a limestone skeleton that protects the organism from grazers and, over hundreds of years, forms a complex reef that nurtures a rich diversity of sea life. With kelp gone from the menu, urchins are now boring through the alga’s tough protective layer to eat the alga – a process that has become much easier due to climate change.
“Ocean warming and acidification are making it difficult for calcifying organisms to produce their shells, or in this case, the alga’s protective skeleton,” said Rasher, who led the international team of researchers that included coauthors Jim Estes from UC Santa Cruz and Bob Steneck from University of Maine. “This critical species has now become highly vulnerable to urchin grazing – right as urchin abundance is peaking. It’s a devasting combination.”………..
The results of the experiment confirmed that climate change has recently allowed urchins to breach the alga’s defenses, pushing this system beyond a critical tipping point.
“It’s well documented that humans are changing Earth’s ecosystems by altering the climate and by removing large predators, but scientists rarely study those processes together,” Rasher said. “If we had only studied the effects of climate change on Clathromorphum in the laboratory, we would have arrived at very different conclusions about the vulnerability and future of this species. Our study shows that we must view climate change through an ecological lens, or we’re likely to face many surprises in the coming years.”……..https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/blfo-los090420.php
Climate change causing major changes in Arctic insect communities
Climate change recasts the insect communities of the Arctic, EurekAlert, UNIVERSITY OF
HELSINKI Research News 12 Sept 20, Through a unique research collaboration, researchers at the University of Helsinki have exposed major changes taking place in the insect communities of the Arctic. Their study reveals how climate change is affecting small but important predators of other insects, i.e. parasitoids.”Predators at the top of the food web give us a clue to what is happening to their prey species, too. These results increase our understanding of how global warming is changing nature. At the same time, they suggest new inroads for finding answers to big questions in the field of ecology,” says Professor Tomas Roslin from the University of Helsinki and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU).
The researchers’ main discovery was that clear traces of climate change can already be seen in arctic insect communities.
“In areas where summers are rapidly warming, we find a higher proportion of cold-sensitive predators than we might expect based on the previous climate,” Roslin notes.
The study joined research teams working in Greenland, Canada, Russia, Norway, Finland and Iceland, which together compared regions where the climate has changed at different rates and in different ways in recent decades.
Parasitoids are fierce predators but sensitive to changes in climatic conditions
“The climate of the Arctic is currently changing about twice as fast as the global average. Therefore, the Arctic region provides an important laboratory when we try to understand the effects of climate change on nature,” says Tuomas Kankaanpää, lead author of the study and active at the Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Helsinki.
“To distinguish the key consequences of climate change, we have focused on some of the most important predators in the Arctic, parasitoid wasps and flies. These parasitoids are predators whose larvae develop on or within a single host individual and usually kill it in the process. And now we have found that climate change is dramatically affecting the relative dominance of different types of parasitoids.”………..https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/uoh-ccr091020.php
Donald Trump confuses the experts with his claims about secret new nuclear weapon
Trump remark about secret new nuclear weapon leaves experts scratching heads, Market Watch Sept. 13, 2020 By Associated Press, Comment by President Trump recorded by legendary political reporter Bob Woodward fits a pattern for a president who has spoken of literally invisible fighter jets and a ‘super duper’ missile. WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is expanding his arsenal of spectacular, but hard to explain, claims about U.S. military might.First, there were invisible airplanes. Then, a “super duper” missile. And now, a secret nuclear weapon. “I have built a nuclear, a weapon, I have built a weapon system that nobody’s ever had in this country before,” Trump said in an interview with journalist Bob Woodward for his book published this week. Some think Trump may have been talking about a nuclear warhead that was modified to reduce its explosive power. Weapons experts are puzzling over Trump’s words. Some think he may have been talking about a nuclear warhead that was modified to reduce its explosive power. Known as the W76-2, this weapon certainly is unknown to the general public — not because of secrecy or mystery but because of its obscurity. Asked by a reporter to clarify his comment, Trump on Thursday said he’d rather not. “There are systems that nobody knows about, including you, and we have some systems that nobody knows about. And, frankly, I think I’m better off keeping it that way,” he said. James Acton, a nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said in an interview Friday that Trump may have been referring to the W76-2 warhead. Although its existence was not a secret, the timing of its first deployment was. The warhead is on the business end of a Trident II D-5 missile carried aboard Navy ballistic missile submarines. “The timing matches up,” Acton said. The Woodward interview was Dec. 5, around the time of the first W76-2 deployment, which was not announced publicly until Feb. 4. The weapon itself is not revolutionary. It’s not even the only low-yield warhead in the U.S. arsenal. It is, however, the first major addition to the strategic nuclear force in recent decades and is a departure from the Obama administration’s policy of lessening dependence on nuclear weapons in pursuit of a nuclear-free world. Joe Biden, Trump’s rival for the White House, has said the new weapon is overkill, suggesting he might shelve it if he wins in November. Acton says Trump may well have been making a garbled reference to some other weapon. “It’s clear that the president likes boasting about military capabilities and doesn’t always have the tightest grasp on the details,” he said………… https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-remark-about-secret-new-nuclear-weapon-leaves-experts-scratching-heads-2020-09-13 |
U.S. federal government must speed up Los Alamos nuclear waste cleanup and do it properly
State lawmakers: Tougher tactics needed to speed Los Alamos waste cleanup, Santa Fe New Mexican , By Scott Wyland swyland@sfnewmexican.com Sep 10, 2020 The pace of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s legacy waste cleanup drew sharp criticism Wednesday from two state lawmakers who argued regulators should toughen oversight and consider suing federal agencies to spur quicker action.
The lab has made five shipments of higher-level nuclear waste this year to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad and hopes to move that number to 30 per year, with the aim of removing all of the lab’s legacy waste by 2027.federal governme
A U.S. Department of Energy official presented the figures to the state Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Committee on Wednesday.
But state Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, called that volume far too low, especially when compared to Idaho sending 100 to 150 waste shipments to WIPP each year.
“I frankly find that unacceptable,” Chandler said.
Chandler asked state Environment Department officials what their strategy was to prod the Department of Energy to accelerate cleanup.
We’re pushing for that progress, to not slow down at all, to make sure the cleanup continues,” replied Stephanie Stringer, director of the Environment Department’s Resource Protection Division. “So making sure that we’re pushing very, very hard and demanding a robust cleanup plan.”
Chandler said she wanted to know how the agency planned to enforce demands.
One avenue is legal action, she said. The Idaho National Laboratory is getting its nuclear waste removed at a faster rate after the state of Idaho sued the federal government……. https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/state-lawmakers-tougher-tactics-needed-to-speed-los-alamos-waste-cleanup/article_fc9fcdc8-f211-11ea-8e9b-77b752e1c0f9.html
Unmarked ?nuclear convoy with strong military police guard sweeps through Bristol city centre
This is the moment an unmarked military and police convoy stopped the traffic and stunned drivers and commuters as it swept through the city centre of Bristol this week.
The 14-vehicle convoy was captured on camera as it held up traffic on a main road into Bristol, and then headed out of the city on the M32.
The convoy began with a military police 4×4 car and then went on to include two police cars, three large police vans, another police 4×4, three large army people carriers and what appeared to be the subject of the guard of the convoy – four large LGV lorries with large unmarked containers on the trailers.
The brief video of the convoy was posted on social media within minutes of being spotted at around 7.50am on Wednesday, September 9 this week, and prompted a range of speculation as to what exactly was going on.
There was speculation that the convoy was operated by the AWE, the Atomic Weapons Establishment, an organisation which handles all the nuclear fuel for submarines and material for Britain’s nuclear weapons.
The AWE is based at Aldermaston, at a base just the other side of Newbury in Berkshire. People commenting on the video, which went viral on Facebook, said they had seen many similar convoys around that area, but they usually took place in the middle of the night so did not attract attention……… https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/watch-moment-unmarked-nuclear-convoy-4510383
-
Archives
- April 2026 (79)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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





