nuclear-news

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

  • Home
  • 1 This Month
  • ACTION !
  • Disclaimer
  • Links
  • PAGES on NUCLEAR ISSUES

Torres Strait Islanders claim climate change affects their human rights – Australia govt tries to stifle their claim

Australia asks UN to dismiss Torres Strait Islanders’ claim climate change affects their human rights

Complaint argues Morrison government has failed to take adequate action on emissions or adaptation measures, Guardian, Katharine Murphy Political editor 14 Aug 20  The Morrison government has asked the human rights committee of the United Nations to dismiss a landmark claim by a group of Torres Strait Islanders from low-lying islands off the northern coast of Australia that climate change is having an impact on their human rights, according to lawyers for the complainants.

The complaint, lodged just over 12 months ago, argued the Morrison government had failed to take adequate action to reduce emissions or pursue proper adaptation measures on the islands and, as a consequence, had failed fundamental human rights obligations to Torres Strait Islander people.

But the lead lawyer for the case, Sophie Marjanac, says the Coalition has rejected arguments from the islanders, telling the UN the case should be dismissed “because it concerns future risks, rather than impacts being felt now, and is therefore inadmissible”.

Marjanac said lawyers for the commonwealth had told the committee because Australia is not the main or only contributor to global warming, climate change action is not its legal responsibility under human rights law.

“The government’s lawyers also rejected arguments that climate impacts were being felt today, and that effects constituting a human rights violation are yet to be suffered”.

A spokesman for the attorney general, Christian Porter, said submissions to the human rights committee were not publicly available……

Lawyers for the islanders have alleged that the catastrophic nature of the predicted future impacts of climate change on the Torres Strait Islands, including the total submergence of ancestral homelands, is a sufficiently severe impact as to constitute a violation of the rights to culture, family and life.

The challenges associated with sea level rise in the Torres Strait have been well documented. A report from the Climate Council on the risks associated with coastal flooding notes that Torres Strait Island communities are extremely low-lying and are thus among the most vulnerable in Australia to the impacts of climate change.

The report concludes the shallowness of the strait “exacerbates storm surges and when such surges coincide with very high tides, extreme sea levels result”. It cites sea level data collected by satellite from one location in the Torres Strait between 1993 and 2010 that indicated a rise of 6 mm per annum, “more than twice the global average”,

Although the report notes this was a single dataset, low-lying islands in the Pacific – and Torres Strait islands such as Masig and Boigu – are likely to be at the forefront of forced displacement. Some forecasts have predicted up to 150 million people could be forcibly displaced by climate change by 2040 – larger than the record number of people already forced from their homes globally.

The non-profit group ClientEarth is supporting the complaint. A spokesman for the group said: “It is shameful that Indigenous communities on Australia’s climate frontline are being told that the risk of climate change to their human rights is merely a future hypothetical issue, when scientists are clear these impacts will happen in coming decades”.

“Climate change risk is foreseeable and only preventable through immediate action in the present. States like Australia have legal duties to protect the human rights of their citizens”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/14/australia-asks-un-to-dismiss-torres-strait-islanders-claim-climate-change-affects-their-human-rights

August 15, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA, climate change | Leave a comment

Climate Change Is a Security Threat to the Asia-Pacific

Climate Change Is a Security Threat to the Asia-Pacific

Climate change is likely to alter the local physical and strategic environment profoundly, and potentially catastrophically.

The Diplomat, By Shiloh Fetzek and Dennis McGinn, August 10, 2020 This week the ASEAN Joint Task Force on Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) will meet via video conference, with the COVID-19 pandemic escalating just as some countries in the disaster-prone Indo-Asia Pacific enter their cyclone, drought, heatwave, or monsoon seasons. The overlaying of the pandemic with existing complex challenges is a timely reminder that planning for HADR capacities – and regional security – needs to be attuned to the increasing likelihood of multiple, overlapping hazards and converging security risks, especially in a future where climate change alters the context in which other disasters and crises take place. Developing a clearer recognition of how climate change can reshape the strategic environment will be essential for preserving regional security, stability, and prosperity in the face of complicated and interlocking challenges, as we argue in a new report on the Indo-Asia Pacific published by the International Military Council on Climate and Security (IMCCS).
The Indo-Asia Pacific is highly exposed to climate change impacts. Climate change is likely to alter the local physical and strategic environment profoundly, and potentially catastrophically. More frequent or intense extreme weather, sea level rise, and ocean acidification (among other climate impacts) will create a range of threats to the well-being and security of countries in the region, many of which are already threatened by disaster vulnerability and increasingly complex security tensions.
As well as the immediate physical impacts, climate change will increase food and water insecurity, contribute to forced migration and displacement, and challenge disaster response and recovery capabilities …….. https://thediplomat.com/2020/08/climate-change-is-a-security-threat-to-the-asia-pacific/

August 15, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ASIA, climate change | Leave a comment

$6.6 trillion in annual GDP at risk as Asian climate warms – McKinsey Global Institute

McKinsey sees $6.6 trillion in annual GDP at risk as Asian climate warms, https://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/mckinsey-sees-6-6-trillion-in-annual-gdp-at-risk-as-asian-climate-warms-20200813-p55ley.html  By Bloomberg News, August 14, 2020  Lethal heatwaves, droughts, floods and typhoons will become more common in Asia-Pacific, which faces more severe potential impacts from climate change than many parts of the world, McKinsey & Co. researchers warn.Asia is particularly at risk because it has such a high number of poor people, who tend to rely more on outdoor work, living in areas most vulnerable to extreme increases in heat and humidity, McKinsey Global Institute said in a new report published on Thursday. By 2050, the loss of that labor could cost the region as much as $US4.7 trillion ($6.6 trillion) a year in GDP, about two-thirds of the global total at risk.

The report underscores the economic risks of delaying investments that mitigate or adapt to climate change. The potential for widespread damage is similar to the region’s experience during the current pandemic, according to McKinsey.

What we have seen is that countries, cities and people can take resolute actions and if we do take these actions and sustain them, we can cooperate globally and see positive outcomes,” said Oliver Tonby, McKinsey’s Asia chairman, who co-authored the report.

The projections are based on a scenario in which the world fails to cut greenhouse gas emissions and Asia warms by 2 degrees Celsius. They show that by 2050, between 500 million and 700 million people living in places like India, Bangladesh and Pakistan could experience heatwaves that exceed the survivability threshold.

The loss of outdoor labour during those times could shave off 7 per cent to 13 per cent off GDP in those three countries, resulting in losses of $US2.8 trillion to $US4.7 trillion across the whole of Asia on average per year, according to the report.

Extreme precipitation events could rise three- or four-fold by 2050 in parts of Japan, China, South Korea and Indonesia, according to McKinsey. Increased riverine flooding could cause $US1.2 trillion in damage in Asia, about 75 per cent of the global impact.

Conversely, as the earth warms, parts of southwestern Australia could spend more than 80 per cent of a decade in drought conditions by 2050 and regions of China could experience droughts 40 per cent to 60 per cent of the time.

Climate change will also increase the likelihood of severe typhoon strikes from the Philippines and Vietnam to Northeast Asia. It will also create winners and losers, increasing surface water supply in parts of northern India and China while depleting reservoirs in Australia.

To face the business risks, Tonby said companies need to assess their exposure and take it into consideration when making plans. A significant opportunity lies in infrastructure development in Asia as the region is still rapidly urbanising.

August 15, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ASIA, climate change | Leave a comment

UK: Nuclear site evacuated after chemical found 

UK: Nuclear site evacuated after chemical found  Bomb disposal squad deployed after chemical found in small amounts at site, AA Karim El-Bar   |14.08.2020   LONDONA nuclear power site in Britain has been evacuated and a bomb squad deployed after a chemical was found needing removal, local media reported on Friday.

The chemical is organic peroxide and was found in small amounts on the site, which underwent a controlled evacuation as a precautionary measure.

The incident took place at the Magnox Reprocessing Plant, which is part of the Sellafield site.

The plant was non-operational and will remain so until the chemical is disposed of. The plant is also segregated from the nuclear section, and as such as the incident was declared a conventional safety risk rather than a nuclear safety risk………..

Sellafield is Europe’s largest nuclear site, with over 200 nuclear facilities and 1,000 buildings covering an area of two square miles. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/uk-nuclear-site-evacuated-after-chemical-found/1942144

August 15, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | incidents, UK | Leave a comment

Armenia’s Metsamor nuclear power plant poses threat to region 

Armenia’s Metsamor nuclear power plant poses threat to region  AZERNEWS, 12 August 2020, By Akbar Mammadov

Armenia poses a threat to regional security not only through its military provocations and policy of occupation but also with its outdated Metsamor nuclear power plant (NPP), which experts consider to be dangerous.

“Armenia’s Metsamor nuclear power plant, which is located in a seismic region, poses a threat to the region,” Azerbaijani Ambassador to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Galib Israfilov has said in an interview with the weekly edition of the Nuclear Intelligence Weekly of the energy company Energy Intelligence Group.

Israfilov said that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) does not have mechanisms to address these concerns as Armenia is unwilling to consider these issues.)
……….. despite Metsamor NPP’s risk to the region, Armenia seeks to operate this nuclear plant until 2026. The Armenian government has agreed with Russian nuclear agency Rosatom to keep the plant running beyond its original closing date of 2016.

Experts have long been voicing concerns over Metsamor’s danger to the region.

Antonia Wenisch of the Austrian Institute of Applied Ecology in Vienna has called Metsamor ‘among the most dangerous’ nuclear plants still in operation, saying that a rupture ‘would almost certainly immediately and massively fail the confinement,’ in an article published at National Geographic.

“There is an open reactor building, a core with no water in it, and accident progression with no mitigation at all”.

“It is in the midst of a strong seismic zone that stretches in a broad swath from Turkey to the Arabian Sea near India,” the article said.

Polish politician and Member of the European Parliament Anna Fotyga also raised the questions about the possible threat of the nuclear power plant to the regional security in 2017

Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant in Armenia is the last of its kind outside Russia that still uses an outdated model from the 1960s. The Soviet model of using a pressurised water reactor is often cited as the most dangerous kind of nuclear power plant, as it does not meet the minimum required safety standards. In addition, Metsamor is situated in an active earthquake zone just 30 km from Yerevan, and as such poses a potential threat to the Armenian capital and the whole South Caucasus region,” Fotyga said.

MEP Fotyga noted that smuggling of nuclear and radioactive materials from Armenia was observed, thus Georgia’s security services could prevent a number of such cases such as smuggling of highly enriched uranium.

Metsamor, which was built in 1969 during the USSR and now is the only VVER 440, Model 230, operating outside of Russia, is still functioning.

It should be noted that the Metsamor nuclear plant does not have any containment vessel. Its VVER-440 reactor lacks a shell that would contain radiation in the event of an accident.

he US government has called the NPP “ageing and dangerous, while the EU envoy had called Metsamor “a danger to the entire region”. Armenian expert on energy at the UNDP Ara Marjanyan told “BBC” that “the design of our VVR-type reactors is rather old. For instance, they do not have concrete containment domes to contain possible explosion debris.”

Five years ago, the Members of the EU Parliament Heidi Hautala and Ulrike Lunacek, who served as Vice President of the EUP as well, also questioned the threat and out-of-dated design of the Metsamor NPP in a parliament session and reminded that in 2012, the parliament adopted a resolution recommending the closure of the Metsamor plant before 2016. https://www.azernews.az/aggression/167884.html

August 15, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | EUROPE, safety | Leave a comment

Surviving the nuclear bomb at Nagasaki 75 years ago showed me nuclear weapons shouldn’t exist — IPPNW peace and health blog

[Entire article at NBC News] Dr. Masao Tomonaga, IPPNW regional vice president It has been 75 years since August 9, 1945, when the atomic bombing of Nagasaki opened the nuclear weapon age. I was 2 years old, and only 1 1/2 miles from ground zero of the nuclear explosion in there; I was, fortunately, unhurt […]

via Surviving the nuclear bomb at Nagasaki 75 years ago showed me nuclear weapons shouldn’t exist — IPPNW peace and health blog

August 14, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A new splurge on nuclear weapons marks the Hiroshims/Nagasaki anniversary

75 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the arms race isn’t over,  Independent Australia By Binoy Kampmark | 12 August 2020,  The twin bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945 are always moments that warrant a tick on the commemorative calendar.This has become fairly functional fare: those were the only occasions where atomic weapons were used on humans, mostly civilians. In the United States, the occasion has had to be regaled with a degree of necessary patriotic gush. No other country has ever used them in war.

Much ink and paper have been expended on the justifications, the salvations and the guiding considerations behind using these killers to conclude the Second World War. U.S. President Harry S. Truman either comes out a torn, anguished statesman who did what the thought best in a terrible situation, or a devilish huckster determined to score a success that would not merely knock out Japan but prevent the rise of Soviet (USSR) influence in East Asia.

The USSR was far from intimidated. For one, Soviet officials knew well in advance of the race for the weaponised atom between the Allies and Nazi Germany, and kept abreast of advances made by the U.S.-led Manhattan Project, the name given to the development of the world’s first atomic weapon. Despite the acclaimed secrecy of the project, regular gobbets of information were conveyed back to Moscow via a network of well-planted Soviet agents. ………..

The arms race that followed between the United States and USSR was horrendously costly, needless and indicative how the human species can have those shuddering moments when extinction might just be around the corner. Both sides attempted various methods of restraint through arms-control agreements but these made only modest efforts to empty their respective arsenals.

What international instruments from the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks I (SALT) to New START did was create employment for an industry that has never been threatened by termination: that of nuclear disarmament.

The nuclear club also expanded, though membership numbers were restricted, at times poorly, to an elite.  The international document doing so was the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

The United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs is not being ironic in describing the NPT ‘as the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime and an essential foundation for the pursuit of nuclear disarmament’.

Roguish claims to master the nuclear option presented themselves in due course. South Africa, India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea have all sought membership via back channels and duplicity.

Now, the 75th anniversary of the bombings has caused discomfort amongst the pundits and policy wonks. Is there a new arms race before us? Ishaan Tharoor, writing in The Washington Post, fears that might be the case. The Trump Administration’s withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and mutterings about not renewing the New START Treaty in 2021 are cited as possible incentives to avoid limiting arsenals.

Ruadhán Mac Cormaic, assistant editor of the Irish Times, is even more pessimistic…..

Cormaic rattles off the list of Trump’s destabilising treaty withdrawals, all doing their bit to foster the spirit of international insecurity. To the INF treaty already noted by Tharoor, he also adds Washington’s repudiation of the Iran nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) and exiting from the Open Skies Treaty permitting state parties to conduct, according to the Arms Control Association, unarmed reconnaissance flights over each other’s territory on military forces and activities.

Not renewing New START or finding some successor could fire “the starting gun” on ‘a new arms race between the cold war’s protagonists’.

From the Russian perspective, encouragement for a splurge of spending, particularly in the field of tactical nuclear weaponry, abounds. …….. https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/75-years-after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-the-arms-race-isnt-over,14192

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Survey finds that U.S. Democrats and Republicans both want to phase out land-based nuclear missiles

Democrats And Republicans Agree: Phase Out Land-Based Nuclear Missiles   https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewkorda/2020/08/12/democrats-and-republicans-agree-phase-out-land-based-nuclear-missiles/#74441be7109d  Matt Korda I write about the nexus between nuclear weapons, climate change, and injustice.   Although Democrats and Republicans increasingly seem worlds apart, when it comes to nuclear weapons issues, they’re actually much closer than one might think.

According to a new report by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, 61 percent of Americans–including both Democratic and Republican majorities–are in favor of phasing out the United States’ aging fleet of 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles. This finding is highly noteworthy, as it runs in direct contrast to the Pentagon’s current plan of spending approximately $100 billion to buy a brand-new generation of ICBMs by 2030.

The survey, entitled “Common Ground of the American People,” is a compilation of studies conducted over the past five years, collecting data from nearly 86,000 individuals throughout the polling process. It specifically aimed to place the respondents into the shoes of a policymaker: respondents were first given an issue briefing, and were then asked to evaluate arguments for and against various policy proposals, before finally offering their recommendations.
The survey’s unique methodology is highly illuminating, because it allows readers of the report to see which arguments were deemed to be most or least convincing, and by whom. For example, Republicans preferred a proposal to phase out ICBMs while maintaining the same number of deployed warheads, while Democrats preferred a proposal to phase out ICBMs and reduce the arsenal to a lower number of deployed warheads.
The main takeaway though, is that–regardless of how the ICBM phase-out takes place–69 percent of Democrats and 53 percent of Republicans agree that the land-based leg of the nuclear triad should be eliminated entirely.

It makes sense that both Democrats and Republicans would agree on phasing out ICBMs: they are outdated, destabilizing, and very expensive.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles are largely relics of the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union alike feared a “bolt-from-the-blue” nuclear attack. At the time, it was believed that both countries having large land-based nuclear arsenals would prevent each other from launching a massive surprise attack. However, in today’s multipolar nuclear environment, the likelihood of such an attack is extremely slim, and so ICBMs no longer hold much strategic value. Given the abundance of more flexible options in the U.S. arsenal, U.S. Strategic Command would certainly turn to nuclear bombers or submarines–not ICBMs–in the event of a low-level nuclear crisis.
Additionally, the inherent vulnerability of the ICBM fleet actually creates a psychological pressure to launch them during a nuclear crisis, before an adversary’s missiles can wipe them out. This is why siloed ICBMs–like those deployed across the United States––are commonly referred to as “use ‘em or lose ‘em” weapons. In the event of a false alarm, accident, or miscalculation, this pressure to “use ‘em” could inadvertently trigger a nuclear war. No other nuclear weapon in the US nuclear arsenal comes with this kind of destabilizing psychological pressure. ……

Perhaps knowing this, the Pentagon argues that ICBMs are necessary as a “hedge” in case technological advances suddenly render the United States’ nuclear-armed submarines vulnerable. However, the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review admits that “When on patrol, [ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs)] are, at present, virtually undetectable, and there are no known, near-term credible threats to the survivability of the SSBN force.” This condition is likely to continue as US submarines get even quieter, thus making these fears seem relatively exaggerated.

On top of this, replacing the ICBMs with brand-new missiles would be extremely expensive. The latest estimate for the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, as the replacement program is called, totals approximately $100 billion. In reality, these costs are expected to rise, given that the contract will be sole-sourced to Northrop Grumman NOC -0.7% after Boeing BA -2.6% pulled out of the competition last year. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee has called this development “very troubling,” and the sole-source contract has since triggered a Federal Trade Commission investigation into Boeing’s allegations that Northrop Grumman was engaging in anti-competitive behavior.
Given these underlying programmatic and strategic concerns––in addition to the new survey demonstrating that both Democrats and Republicans want to phase out ICBMs entirely––why is this $100 billion project still moving forward? In the midst of an election, a recession, and a devastating pandemic, it seems like common sense to delay the program at the very least.
However, a robust lobbying effort by weapons contractors has impeded public scrutiny of the program. Northrop Grumman––the only bidder for the ICBM replacement contract––spent more than $162 million on lobbying between 2008 and 2018, with the bulk of the contributions going to members of the “ICBM Caucus”––a coalition of Senators from states where ICBMs are deployed. In 2018, this lobbying effort helped kill an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act which called for a feasibility study on extending the life of the current ICBM force, rather than rebuilding it from scratch. This has had the effect of suppressing public debate over the future of the ICBMs; without studies like this one, the public is being asked to blindly swallow the pro-ICBM claims of those that would materially benefit from their replacement.
The University of Maryland’s report offers a new tool to push back against the “business” of nuclear policy. The survey suggests that corporate lobbying and “special interests” are alienating the public from their elected representatives, and dividing the two political parties even further. Therefore, treating its respondents as neutral “policymakers” clearly demonstrates that without the presence of moneyed interests, Democrats and Republicans agree on much more than one might think. And in this particular instance it is clear: majorities from both parties want to phase out intercontinental ballistic missiles.

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, public opinion, USA | Leave a comment

Arctic permafrost is thawing, as the region experiences unprecedented heat

In June, the Russian Arctic reached 100.4F, the highest temperature in the Arctic since record-keeping began in 1885. The heat shocked scientists, but was not a unique or unusual event in a climate-changed world. The Arctic is warming at nearly three times the rate of the global average, and June’s single-day high was part of a month-long heatwave. This relentless heat has melted sea ice and made traditional subsistence dangerous for skilled Indigenous hunters. It’s fueled costly wildfires, some of which are so strong they now last from one summer to the next. And it’s sped up permafrost thaw, buckling roads and displacing entire communities.
As the tundra burns, we cannot afford climate silence’: a letter from the Arctic https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/11/arctic-tundra-paris-climate-agreement, Victoria Herrmann

I study the Arctic. The decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord is reprehensible – but we can’t give up hope

When you stand facing an exposed edge of permafrost, you can feel it from a distance.

It emanates a cold that tugs on every one of your senses. Permanently bound by ice year after year, the frozen soil is packed with carcasses of woolly mammoths and ancient ferns. They’re unable to decompose at such low temperatures, so they stay preserved in perpetuity – until warmer air thaws their remains and releases the cold that they’ve kept cradled for centuries.

I first experienced that distinct cold in the summer of 2016. I was traveling across Arctic Europe with a team of researchers to study climate change impacts. We were a few hours past the Finnish border in Russia when we stopped to first set foot on the tundra. The ground was soft but solid beneath our feet, covered with mosses and wildflowers that stretched into the distance until abruptly interrupted by a slick, towering wall of thawing permafrost.

As we stood facing the muddy patch of uncovered earth, the sensation of escaping cold felt terrifying.

The northern hemisphere is covered by 9m sq miles of permafrost. This solid ground, and all the organic material it contains, is one of the largest greenhouse gas stores on the planet. Frozen, it poses little threat to the 4 million people that call the Arctic home, or to the 7.8 billion of us that call Earth home. But defrosted by rising temperatures, thawing permafrost poses a planetary risk.

When the organic material begins to decompose, permafrost thaw can destabilize major infrastructure, discharge mercury levels dangerous to human health and release billions of metric tons of carbon. We witnessed small-scale damage in Russia that summer through slumped landscapes and uneven roads. At the time, the larger, more dramatic changes were predicted to unfold over the course of this century.

Four years later, those changes are happening much sooner than scientists predicted. The carbon-laden cold of the Arctic’s permafrost is leaking into Earth’s atmosphere, and we are not ready for the consequences.

In June, the Russian Arctic reached 100.4F, the highest temperature in the Arctic since record-keeping began in 1885. The heat shocked scientists, but was not a unique or unusual event in a climate-changed world. The Arctic is warming at nearly three times the rate of the global average, and June’s single-day high was part of a month-long heatwave. This relentless heat has melted sea ice and made traditional subsistence dangerous for skilled Indigenous hunters. It’s fueled costly wildfires, some of which are so strong they now last from one summer to the next. And it’s sped up permafrost thaw, buckling roads and displacing entire communities.

Watching the heat of 2020 devastate the Arctic, I think back to the fear we experienced while watching that permafrost thaw in 2016, but I also remember feeling hopeful.

Just weeks before our expedition began, 174 countries had signed the Paris agreement on the first day it opened for signatures. Barack Obama and China’s President Xi Jinping released a joint statement of climate commitments for the world’s two largest greenhouse gas emitters. It seemed like every world leader had finally dedicated themselves to climate action. Throughout our trip across the Arctic, my colleagues and I discussed the difficulties of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees, but, with the momentum of Paris, we agreed that it was still possible to contain a climate catastrophe.

It is much harder to find hope today than it was four years ago – but it’s not impossible.

The Arctic’s skies are blackened with wildfire smoke and we are not even halfway through summer. The Trump administration has reversed 100 environmental rules and stands on the precipice of pulling the US out of the Paris agreement in November 2020.

Things may seem hopeless, but we are not helpless.

Every individual has a skill, a voice, a career to wield as a tool to address climate change. Ultimately, climate action is not powered by the Paris agreement – it’s powered by people. From presidents to protesters, we each have a part to play in limiting the devastation of the climate crisis.

Climate change cannot be stopped. The Arctic’s ice will melt and large swaths of frozen ground will thaw. Climate change is already causing devastating loss of life, destroying irreplaceable cultural heritage and inundating the places we hold dear. With every degree we allow our world to warm, the more we lose. But by demanding climate action from our governments, and demanding climate action from ourselves, we can work today to avert the worst damage and adapt to the impacts we can no longer avoid.

As the Arctic burns, we cannot afford climate silence from anyone. The cost of inaction is too high.

  • Dr Victoria Herrmann is the president and managing director of the Arctic Institute

 

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ARCTIC, climate change | Leave a comment

Andreyeva Bay’s damaged spent nuclear fuel to be removed in 2021

Damaged spent nuclear fuel to depart Andreyeva Bay next year, say officials  https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2020-08-damaged-spent-nuclear-fuel-to-depart-andreyeva-bay-next-year-say-officials
A milestone process to remove damaged spent nuclear fuel at a former Arctic submarine base will commence next year, officials have said, as part of an ongoing process to rid Russia’s Northwest of its radioactive Cold War legacy.   August 11, 2020 by Anna Kireeva, translated by Charles Digges

A milestone process to remove damaged spent nuclear fuel at a former Arctic submarine base will commence next year, officials have said, as part of an ongoing process to rid Russia’s Northwest of its radioactive Cold War legacy.

The base, called Andreyeva Bay, in Russia’s Murmansk Region, has been the subject of an international nuclear cleanup operation that picked up steam 2017. In the years before, Bellona played an instrumental role in guiding the efforts of European governments toward addressing the dangers the site poses to the environment of Northwest Russia and neighboring Scandinavia.

Those dangers are considerable. Beginning in the early 1960s and continuing for the next quarter of a century, Andreyeva Bay served as a submarine refueling point for the once-feared Soviet Northern Nuclear Fleet. During the time of its operation, the site accrued 22,000 spent nuclear fuel assemblies, many of them badly damaged. When authorities finally closed it in 1992, they failed to put a plan in place to handle the contamination that was, by then, emerging.

The situation was dire. In 1982, the site’s now notorious Building No 5 bean to leak, threatening to dump a toxic stew of plutonium, uranium and other fission products into Litsa Fjord, only 50 kilometers from the Norwegian border on the Barents Sea.

Technicians at the base rushed much of that nuclear fuel into temporary containment structures at the site and cemented them in – an arrangement that over time became permanent.

Still other fuel at Andreyeva Bay was stored out in the open, unshielded from the harsh arctic elements. The conditions of neglect led many experts to fear that the radioactive morgue might spark an uncontrolled chain reaction and explode.

Along with the spent fuel assemblies left behind by some 100 nuclear subs, the base has amassed 17,000 cubic meters of solid radioactive waste and another 1,300 cubic meters of liquid radioactive waste.

The cleanup, which is funded in part by the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, is overseen by Russia’s Northwest Center for Radioactive Waste Management, or SevRao. For the past three years, SevRAO has been sending parcels of spent nuclear fuel to Atomflot, the Murmansk-based nuclear icebreaker port, on a ship specially designed for the purpose. From there, it is loaded onto trains and sent to Mayak, the nuclear fuel reprocessing site in the southern Urals.

Valery Eremenko of SevRAO says that the international agreements governing the cleanup operation require that cleanup workers send three trainloads of fuel per year to Mayak. Last year, they managed four, thanks to a financial boost from the northerly Norwegian regions of Tromsø and Finnmark.

In 2020, Eremenko expected to send three trainloads of spent nuclear fuel south, two of which have already departed. The fuel itself is packaged in casks called TUK containers, each of which holds several assemblies. Each train carries 14 casks.

Some of the fuel, however, is difficult to load into casks because it is damaged. Of all 22,000 assemblies, says Eremenko, some 8,000 of them are defective and have mechanical flaws and distortions.  Special technology is required to handle these assemblies.

“We currently have the necessary technology and equipment to work with the defective assemblies,” says Eremenko. “They’re waiting in the wings and we’ll start working with them directly next year.”

Building No 5

Beginning in the 1960s, a wet storage facility – known now as the notorious Building No 5 – was built at Andreyeva Bay to house spent nuclear fuel assemblies. The interior of the building was divided up into rectangular pools lined with thin layers of steel. Spent nuclear fuel was then packed into cassettes, which could hold from 5 to 7 assemblies each, and these cassettes were then submerged in the pools on special brackets. A protective 4-meter layer of water protected personnel from radiation.

In 1982, Building No 5 suffered cracks and radioactive water began spilling from the structure. To prevent widespread radiation contamination, Andreyeva Bay personnel rushed the fuel from the draining pools to temporary storage in other facilities at the base. Over the years, however these precarious facilities – known as 2A, 2B and 3A – became permanent. During the hasty move from Building No 5, fragments of spent fuel broke off the assemblies, and settled at the bottom of the storage pools.

Cleanup workers finally succeeded in removing those fragments last November with the help of robotic arms. They were in turn loaded into TUK containers and are waiting to be sent to Mayak.

In 2022 or 2023, SevRAO will start work on spent fuel containers that, until 2011, had been stored in the open air, exposed to the elements. These 19 containers are now in a shelter that was built alongside Building No 5, Eremenko says.

The government contracts financing the cleanup envision that all spent fuel and radioactive waste at Andreyeva Bay will be removed by 2025 or 2026.

“The work is proceeding on schedule,” says Eremenko. “We will safely and stably remove the spent nuclear fuel from tanks [at 2A and 2B] by 2024.”

The Andreyeva Bay cleanup has been a long time in the coming. Bellona and the Norwegian government spearheaded efforts to draw funders to the problem as far back as 1995. The EBRD took up the gauntlet, assembling multi-million dollar donations from Sweden, Finland, Belgium, France, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Italy and the United Kingdom.

“Bellona Murmansk has always attached great importance to efforts to improve nuclear and radiation safety on the Kola Peninsula,” says Andrei Zolotkov, head of Bellona’s offices in Murmansk.  “When I saw with my own eyes the state of Andreeva Bay in 1990, and then more than 25 years later, one can undoubtedly talk about progress. I couldn’t even imagine that things would go at such a good pace. And, of course, one cannot discount the international financial and technical support in the implementation of projects not only in Andreeva Bay, but also in Sayda Bay, Gremikha and the Lepse project.”

He added: “There is a hope that, despite various political collisions in the modern world, officials in  Murmansk, SevRAO and Rosatom will continue international cooperation, because there is another goal ahead – the lifting of sunken and dumped nuclear hazards in the Arctic Ocean.”

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Biden Condemns Trump’s Nuclear Plans, (but he himself supports nuclear power)

Uranium Week: Biden Condemns Trump’s Nuclear Plans,  Fn ArenaAug 11 2020

Presidential nominee Joe Biden has reiterated his objection to President Trump’s nuclear energy plan. FN Arena  By Mark Woodruff

Presidential nominee Joe Biden used Twitter last week to declare he would create a clean energy economy that will generate “millions of well-paying union jobs ..….without jeopardising the places we hold dear.”

Biden was responding to President Trump’s recent plan to mine uranium around the Grand Canyon. To achieve this, the President would need to lift the current 20-year ban on new mining in the area.

In a further statement he also reiterated condemnation for President Trump’s nuclear energy plan, released in April this year, which outlined the creation of a US$150m uranium reserve in the coming decade.

Last month, according to the Washington Post, Joe Biden unveiled a proposal to transform the nation’s energy industry and significantly reduce the United States’ reliance on fossil fuels and the 15-year timeline for 100% clean electricity standard.

However, unlike some of his Democratic primary opponents, Biden backs nuclear power, according to energyworld.com. https://www.fnarena.com/index.php/2020/08/11/uranium-week-biden-condemns-trumps-nuclear-plans/

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | election USA 2020 | Leave a comment

Flooding might have damaged Bort Korea’s nuclear reactor site

North Korea nuclear reactor site threatened by recent flooding, U.S. think-tank says https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-floods/north-korea-nuclear-reactor-site-threatened-by-recent-flooding-u-s-think-tank-says-idUSKCN25908S, Josh Smith  12 Aug 20SEOUL (Reuters) – Satellite imagery suggests recent flooding in North Korea may have damaged pump houses connected to the country’s main nuclear facility, a U.S.-based think-tank said on Thursday.

Analysts at 38 North, a website that monitors North Korea, said commercial satellite imagery from August 6-11 showed how vulnerable the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center’s nuclear reactor cooling systems are to extreme weather events.

The Korean peninsula has been hammered by one of the longest rainy spells in recent history, with floods and landslides causing damage and deaths in both North and South Korea.

Located on the bank of the Kuryong River about 100 km (60 miles) north of North Korea’s capital, Pyongyang, Yongbyon is home to nuclear reactors, fuel re-processing plants and uranium enrichment facilities that are thought to be used in the country’s nuclear weapons programme.

The five-megawatt reactor – believed to be used to produce weapons-grade plutonium – does not appear to have been operating for some time, and an Experimental Light Water Reactor (ELWR) has not yet come online, but such flooding in the future would likely force a shutdown, the 38 North report said.

“Damage to the pumps and piping within the pump houses presents the biggest vulnerability to the reactors,” the report said. “If the reactors were operating, for instance, the inability to cool them would require them to be shut down.”

While there was further flooding downstream, it did not appear to reach the Yongbyon facility’s Uranium Enrichment Plant and by August 11 the waters appear to have somewhat receded, 38 North said.

South Korea’s Ministry of Defence declined to comment on the report, but said it is always monitoring developments related to North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes and maintaining close cooperation with the U.S. government.

At a summit with U.S. President Donald Trump in Vietnam in 2019, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un offered to dismantle here Yongbyon in exchange for relief from a range of international sanctions imposed over North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes.

At the time Trump said he rejected that deal because Yongbyon is only one part of the North’s nuclear programme, and was not enough of a concession to warrant loosening so many sanctions.

Reporting by Josh Smith. Additional reporting by Hyonhee Shin.; Editing by Lincoln Feast.

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, North Korea, safety | Leave a comment

Hazards in U.S, government’s plans for more locations for low level nuclear wastes

Feds Propose More Sites For Nuke Waste Storage (Not Disposal) Forbes , Ed Hirs 12 Aug 20, 
 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing that more locations around the country be used to dispose of very low level radioactive waste. This proposal has raised the ire of environmentalists and nuclear waste storage proponents alike…….

One intractable problem has been what to do with spent fuel rods, which generate very significant levels of radiation for a long time. They come only from nuclear power plants, for the most part, these spent rods are stored onsite while the reactors operate and even after decommissioning.
The very low level radioactive waste is at the heart of the NRC’s current proposal. Under current regulations, the user is required to store the contaminated materials onsite until “either until it has decayed away and can be disposed of as ordinary trash” or until it can be safely contained and shipped to one of four active NRC or state licensed storage facilities. For many of these items—medical waste, syringes, gloves, clothing—the half-life of material is numbered in days, with a rapid decline to levels that are considered safe for disposal as ordinary trash. However, radioactive waste from the decommissioning of nuclear reactors, coal ash, construction debris, and oilfield drilling remains radioactive above normal background levels for hundreds of years. Carelessly concentrating this material in landfills can create hazards, as can careless security.

Bad actors can make a considerable profit at the expense of public health. As the United Steelworkers union noted in their public comment urging the NRC against the ruling:  “[the ruling]…requires workers with little to no training to handle contaminated material leading to a greater probability of mishandling or improper disposal; and the proposed rule lack[s] requirements to monitor surrounding soil and ground water from any exempt waste location to ensure there is no increase of radiological contamination outside of the potential dumping sites.”

Safe disposal does not equal safety when materials remain active for generations. To improve safety landfills need to keep records for generations, and to deal with low-level contamination appropriately. Over time landfills become golf courses, sources of methane for electricity generation, and mines for reclaiming metal. These activities result in exposure to radiation that future generations must be prepared for. This means meticulous record keeping, which is unlikely to be present across multiple changes of ownership and decades of time.

What the NRC proposes is an expansion of opportunities for things to go wrong.  In the past this approach has given us names that remain infamous today: think Love Canal. Brio Refinery. Savannah River and DuPont. It gave us the remains of leaded gasoline.

Water supplies are particularly vulnerable. Historically, the dictum of chemists has been “dilution is the solution.” That works for chemicals. It does not work for radiation, which is being generated continuously.

The current system is better than what is being proposed. Expanding the opportunities for things to go wrong is a step backwards.  If the proposal is adopted, today’s laxity and profits will become tomorrow’s health problems and remediation expenses. If we care about coming generations we should leave well enough alone. https://www.forbes.com/sites/edhirs/2020/08/11/hazardous-nuclear-waste-storage-its-not-disposal/#2086a6624ad3 

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Fuel finally removed from Russia’s most radioactive ship

Dismantlement of Russia’s most radioactive ship reaches milestone   https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2020-08-dismantlement-of-russias-most-radioactive-ship-reaches-milestone
The Lepse nuclear service ship, long one of the most dangerous Soviet era radiation hazards in Northwest Russia, has finally been emptied of the aged spent nuclear fuel in its holds, marking a major milestone in an international cleanup effort that Bellona helped bring to the fore.   August 12, 2020 by Charles Digges

The Lepse nuclear service ship, long one of the most dangerous Soviet era radiation hazards in Northwest Russia, has finally been emptied of the aged spent nuclear fuel in its holds, marking a major milestone in an international cleanup effort that Bellona helped bring to the fore.

The new developments came in late July, when the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, which is funding the project, announced that the last of hundreds of spent nuclear fuel assemblies had been removed from the ship’s hull and sent away for reprocessing.

The fuel removal effort has been one of the most technically demanding nuclear legacy cleanup operations in modern history, representing decades of preparation and the coordination of numerous international partners in often troubled political circumstances.

“This has been a technically complex and challenging task given the uncertainties associated with both the conditions of the old storage facility and spent nuclear fuel,” says Balthasar Lindauer, the EBRD’s director for nuclear safety. “Its successful completion advances nuclear and radiological safety in the region, addressing a serious danger to the people and the environment of the Barents Sea region.”

The news also marks another giant step toward cleaning up the Cold War’s naval and civilian nuclear debris in Northwest Russia. Early last month, officials at Andreyeva Bay, near the Norwegian border, announced they were just a year from removing some of that site’s most complex spent nuclear fuel assemblies.

The Lepse, which was used to unload spent nuclear fuel from Soviet nuclear icebreakers, spent more than two decades languishing at the Atomflot icebreaker port in Murmansk, just four kilometers from the city’s population of 300,000.

Its irradiated holds contained 639 spent nuclear fuel assemblies, many of which were damaged when the vessel refueled the Lenin Icebreaker in 1965 and 1967, and defied removal by conventional means.

The boat was finally towed from Atomflot to the Nerpa naval shipyard in September 2012, after more than a decade of strenuous and often tedious negotiations among Bellona, the Russian government and financial institutions – most notably the EBRD – geared toward ensuring its disposal.

Now, all the spent fuel assemblies from the Lepse have been transported from Nerpa back to Atomflot, from where they will be sent by rail for reprocessing at the Mayak Production Association, Russia’s nuclear fuel processing center in the Ural Mountains.

The vessel and its dangers caught Bellona’s eye in 1994, and the organization mobilized to lobby the European Union to allocated funding for its removal from Murmansk harbor and its safe dismantlement.  In 2001, Bellona built a dormitory for Lepse’s cleanup technicians, who had before that lived amid the radiation aboard the ship itself.

Bellona’s connection to the Lepse runs even deeper. Andrei Zolotkov, the head of its Murmansk office, once worked in the vessel’s radiation safety service back in 1974.

“It was there that I worked with the technological water in the cooling tanks, where radiation levels approached some 1 Curie per kilogram,” says Zolotkov. “These are pretty serious radioactivity levels that spoke to the unsatisfactory condition of [the Lepse’s] spent fuel assemblies.”

He adds that it took more than a quarter of a century to fully address those dangerous conditions – and countless discussions and seminars. But Zolotkov now says that “the end of the project has become visible.”

The Lepse’s dismantlement has been supported by the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership of the EBRD, whose Nuclear Window program has drawn together funds to address radioactive relics of the Cold War. Aside from the Lepse and Andreyeva Bay, the EBRD manages the Chernobyl Shelter Fund.

Funding for Nuclear the Window program have been contributed by Norway, Belgium, Canada, the United Kingdom, Finland, France, Germany and the Netherlands, as well as by the European Union.

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

What about Vermont Yankee’s nuclear waste? Or dealing with it?

Famette/Rice: And the nuclear waste?    12 Aug 20, 

What about Vermont Yankee’s nuclear waste? Or dealing with it?

High-Level Nuclear Waste (HLNW) is a byproduct of nuclear power plants and is extremely dangerous for thousands of years. The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, in Vernon, has been shut down since 2014 and the HLNW it produced over the years of operation has been transferred into stainless steel and concrete dry casks stored onsite. Currently, our federal government has not come up with a permanent site to store HLNW safely over time.

NorthStar, the corporation which now owns Vermont Yankee, wants to transport that waste to a Centralized “Interim” Storage (CIS) site that it owns in Texas. To transport this waste is a dangerous proposition since an accident would likely result in great damage to the environment and the life forms in the surrounding area. We should only move the material once to a permanent repository. Also, if Vermont Yankee’s HLNW is allowed to be transported across the country on our highways, railways and waterways to a temporary open-air storage site, such a precedent would likely result in thousands of shipments across the country as other nuclear plants are shut down during the coming four decades.

Communities in the Southwest are speaking out in opposition to accepting our toxic waste. As members of the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance (VYDA), we support their concerns and are against the transportation and interim storage of Vermont Yankee’s waste at a CIS. We feel it is safer to keep our waste within our state in monitored, hardened, onsite storage in stainless steel and concrete dry casks while a scientifically-based permanent storage site is located.

For the above reasons, join us in contacting U.S. Rep. Peter Welch and urge him to vote against any bill that would authorize Centralized Interim Storage of High-Level Nuclear waste? https://www.timesargus.com/opinion/commentary/famette-rice-and-the-nuclear-waste/article_436e1a1b-deb3-5b6a-87a9-228cfb16afbc.html

Audrey Famette lives in Montpelier. Nancy Rice lives in Randolph Center.

August 13, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | election USA 2020, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »

1 This Month

of the week – Shut Down Drone Warfare!

Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko

​https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/tell-the-ukrainian-government-to-drop-prosecution-of-peace-activist-yurii-sheliazhenko/?clear_id=true&link_id=4&can_id=f0940af377595273328101dea28c2309&source=email-yurii-has-been-abducted&email_referrer=email_3153752&email_subject=yurii-has-been-abducted&&

Petition to revoke the licensing of the Near Surface Nuclear Disposal Facility (NSDF)  at Chalk River. https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7247

​To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com

  • Categories

    • 1
      • Arclight's Vision
    • 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
      • business and costs
        • employment
        • marketing
      • climate change
      • culture and arts
      • ENERGY
        • renewable
          • decentralised
          • energy storage
      • environment
        • oceans
        • water
      • health
        • children
        • psychology – mental health
        • radiation
        • social effects
        • women
      • history
      • indigenous issues
      • Legal
        • deaths by radiation
        • legal
      • marketing of nuclear
      • media
        • investigative journalism
        • Wikileaks
      • opposition to nuclear
      • PERSONAL STORIES
      • politics
        • psychology and culture
          • Trump – personality
        • public opinion
        • USA election 2024
        • USA elections 2016
      • politics international
      • Religion and ethics
      • safety
        • incidents
      • secrets,lies and civil liberties
        • civil liberties
      • spinbuster
        • Education
      • technology
        • reprocessing
        • Small Modular Nuclear Reactors
        • space travel
      • Uranium
      • wastes
        • – plutonium
        • decommission reactor
      • weapons and war
        • Atrocities
        • depleted uranium
      • Women
    • 2 WORLD
      • ANTARCTICA
      • ARCTIC
      • ASIA
        • Burma
        • China
        • India
        • Indonesia
        • Japan
          • – Fukushima 2011
          • Fukushima 2012
          • Fukushima 2013
          • Fukushima 2014
          • Fukushima 2015
          • Fukushima 2016
          • Fukushima continuing
        • Malaysia
        • Mongolia
        • North Korea
        • Pakistan
        • South Korea
        • Taiwan
        • Turkey
        • Vietnam
      • EUROPE
        • Belarus
        • Bulgaria
        • Denmark
        • Finland
        • France
        • Germany
        • Greece
        • Ireland
        • Italy
        • Kazakhstan
        • Kyrgyzstan
        • Russia
        • Spain
        • Sweden
        • Switzerland
        • UK
        • Ukraine
      • MIDDLE EAST
        • Afghanistan
        • Egypt
        • Gaza
        • Iran
        • Iraq
        • Israel
        • Jordan
        • Libya
        • Saudi Arabia
        • Syria
        • Turkey
        • United Arab Emirates
      • NORTH AMERICA
        • Canada
        • USA
          • election USA 2020
      • OCEANIA
        • New Zealand
        • Philippines
      • SOUTH AMERICA
        • Brazil
    • ACTION
    • AFRICA
      • Kenya
      • Malawi
      • Mali
      • Namibia
      • Niger
      • Nigeria
      • Somalia
      • South 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
      • thorium
    • Reference
      • Reference archives
    • resources – print
    • Resources -audiovicual
    • Weekly Newsletter
    • World
    • World Nuclear
    • YouTube
  • Pages

    • 1 This Month
    • ACTION !
    • Disclaimer
    • Links
    • PAGES on NUCLEAR ISSUES
      • audio-visual news
      • Anti Nuclear, Clean Energy Movement
        • Anti Nuclear movement – a success story
          • – 2013 – the struggle for a nuclear-free, liveable world
          • – 2013: the battle to expose nuclear lies about ionising radiation
            • Speakers at Fukushima Symposium March 2013
            • Symposium 2013 Ian Fairlie
      • Civil Liberties
        • – Civil liberties – China and USA
      • Climate change
      • Climate Change
      • Economics
        • – Employment
        • – Marketing nuclear power
        • – Marketing Nuclear Power Internationally
        • nuclear ‘renaissance’?
        • Nuclear energy – the sick man of the corporate world
      • Energy
        • – Solar energy
      • Environment
        • – Nuclear Power and the Tragedy of the Commons
        • – Water
      • Health
        • Birth Defects in the Chernobyl Radiation Affected Region.
      • History
        • Nuclear History – the forgotten disasters
      • Indigenous issues
      • Ionising radiation
        • – Ionising radiation – medical
        • Fukushima FACT SHEET
      • Media
        • Nuclear Power and Media 2012
      • Nuclear Power and the Consumer Society – theme for December 2012
      • Peace and nuclear disarmament
        • Peace on a Nuclear Free Earth
      • Politics
        • – Politics USA
      • Public opinion
      • Religion and ethics
        • -Ethics of nuclear power
      • Resources – print
      • Safety
      • Secrets and lies
        • – NUCLEAR LIES – theme for January 2012
        • – Nuclear Secrets and Lies
      • Spinbuster
        • 2013 nuclear spin – all about FEAR -theme for June
        • Spinbuster 1
      • Technology
        • TECHNOLOGY Challenges
      • Wastes
        • NUCLEAR WASTES – theme for October 2012
        • – Plutonium
      • Weapons and war
      • Women
  • Archives

    • April 2026 (114)
    • 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
      • Arclight's Vision
    • 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
      • business and costs
        • employment
        • marketing
      • climate change
      • culture and arts
      • ENERGY
        • renewable
          • decentralised
          • energy storage
      • environment
        • oceans
        • water
      • health
        • children
        • psychology – mental health
        • radiation
        • social effects
        • women
      • history
      • indigenous issues
      • Legal
        • deaths by radiation
        • legal
      • marketing of nuclear
      • media
        • investigative journalism
        • Wikileaks
      • opposition to nuclear
      • PERSONAL STORIES
      • politics
        • psychology and culture
          • Trump – personality
        • public opinion
        • USA election 2024
        • USA elections 2016
      • politics international
      • Religion and ethics
      • safety
        • incidents
      • secrets,lies and civil liberties
        • civil liberties
      • spinbuster
        • Education
      • technology
        • reprocessing
        • Small Modular Nuclear Reactors
        • space travel
      • Uranium
      • wastes
        • – plutonium
        • decommission reactor
      • weapons and war
        • Atrocities
        • depleted uranium
      • Women
    • 2 WORLD
      • ANTARCTICA
      • ARCTIC
      • ASIA
        • Burma
        • China
        • India
        • Indonesia
        • Japan
          • – Fukushima 2011
          • Fukushima 2012
          • Fukushima 2013
          • Fukushima 2014
          • Fukushima 2015
          • Fukushima 2016
          • Fukushima continuing
        • Malaysia
        • Mongolia
        • North Korea
        • Pakistan
        • South Korea
        • Taiwan
        • Turkey
        • Vietnam
      • EUROPE
        • Belarus
        • Bulgaria
        • Denmark
        • Finland
        • France
        • Germany
        • Greece
        • Ireland
        • Italy
        • Kazakhstan
        • Kyrgyzstan
        • Russia
        • Spain
        • Sweden
        • Switzerland
        • UK
        • Ukraine
      • MIDDLE EAST
        • Afghanistan
        • Egypt
        • Gaza
        • Iran
        • Iraq
        • Israel
        • Jordan
        • Libya
        • Saudi Arabia
        • Syria
        • Turkey
        • United Arab Emirates
      • NORTH AMERICA
        • Canada
        • USA
          • election USA 2020
      • OCEANIA
        • New Zealand
        • Philippines
      • SOUTH AMERICA
        • Brazil
    • ACTION
    • AFRICA
      • Kenya
      • Malawi
      • Mali
      • Namibia
      • Niger
      • Nigeria
      • Somalia
      • South 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
      • thorium
    • Reference
      • Reference archives
    • resources – print
    • Resources -audiovicual
    • Weekly Newsletter
    • World
    • World Nuclear
    • YouTube
  • RSS

    Entries RSS
    Comments RSS

Site info

nuclear-news
Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • nuclear-news
    • Join 2,078 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • nuclear-news
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...