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

‘No greenwashing’: Fossil gas and nuclear must not be defined as clean, ministers tell IEA summit

No greenwashing’: Fossil gas and nuclear must not be defined as clean, ministers tell IEA summit    Medium- and long-term policy clarity is essential to attract the private finance needed to reach net zero by 2050, event hears Recharge   31 March 2021 By Leigh Collins   Greenwashing must be eliminated, fossil gas and nuclear must not be labelled as green technologies, and long-term policy clarity will be essential in order to finance the energy transition and reach net-zero emissions by 2050, the International Energy Agency-COP26 Net Zero Summit was told on Wednesday.

“We know we are at the crossroads in [20]21 — the decisions we make today will decide if we deliver on the Paris Agreement or not, and we are the last generation of politicians who can deliver on the Paris Agreement,” Austrian energy and climate minister Leonore Gewessler told the event’s Mobilising Clean Energy Investment panel.

“We know the transition will not be for free. We know it will be even more expensive if we invest in the wrong things, if we choose not to act… As the challenge is big, as it won’t be for free, I think there’s one thing we cannot afford — that’s greenwashing.

“It’s crucial to avoid lock-in effects, [and] stranded investment, so we need clear and consistent frameworks that will be important to ensure the confidence and the transparency on the financial markets and thereby also reduce greenwashing.”

Defining what is or isn’t green energy — particularly inside the EU — will be key, she added, referring to fears that the European Commission will officially label fossil gas and nuclear power as sustainable energy solutions.

“I think it’s really key that we provide clear and scientifically sound basis for defining what’s a sustainable economic activity. It must not be open to greenwashing, it must also not be open to whether gas or nuclear can be defined as green in the taxonomy, no matter whether they replace coal or not.

“I think we really must make sure that we invest in renewables and efficiency as the most important alternatives.

Claude Turmes, energy minister of Luxembourg, a notable financial centre, agreed

“EU taxonomy is very, very important… we had a good decision a year ago [in the European Commission’s Energy System Integration Strategy] where we were science-based, and now we risk to go from a science-based system to a lobby-based system where fossil energy comes back, nuclear would enter. …………

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The “Sortir du nuclear” Network denounces the attempts by France and the industrial nuclear lobby to include this technology in the European taxonomy (classification) project supposed to define “green” investments.

Nuclear power, eligible for green investments? An environmental and climatic aberration, based on cynical and dishonest reasoning! April 2, 2021
The “Sortir du nuclear” Network denounces the attempts by France and the industrial nuclear lobby to include this technology in the European taxonomy (classification) project supposed to define “green” investments.

By promoting nuclear power at European level, France is sabotaging the fight against climate change

While nuclear has so far been excluded from “green” investments because of its environmental impacts, France has resorted to the worst strategies to create a balance of power favoring its inclusion. Already, at the European Council in December 2019, it did not hesitate to ally itself with states that are great defenders of coal to defend nuclear power. It is now open to making fossil gas eligible for “green” investments, as the Hungary of Viktor Orban wishes, in the hope that nuclear power will in turn find its place [1].

The nuclear lobby to manipulate the European Commission

We also denounce the undermining work carried out by the European atomic lobby. Dissatisfied with the previous work of the European Commission, for whom the nuisances caused by nuclear power prohibited its inclusion in green investments, it pushed for the drafting of another more favorable report (see the text unveiled by Politico). Entrusted to the Joint Research Center, an organization historically linked to Euratom and close to the Foratom lobby [2], this new report arrives at surrealistic conclusions: nuclear power would represent “no more danger to human health” than renewable energies! In an incantatory fashion, he insists that nuclear power would not have a significant environmental impact, everything being well managed and the waste problem being solved. An observation that only exists in the minds of nucleocrats.

To present as non-harmful a polluting, dangerous technology, which must be the subject of permanent monitoring and which produces waste that will remain dangerous for periods exceeding human time, is a matter of deep intellectual dishonesty. It is unacceptable that the nuclear lobby can thus dictate its conclusions and influence European policy.

No, nuclear power will not save the climate!

This strategy aimed at promoting nuclear power as a solution to climate change in order to allow it to benefit from new sources of financing reveals the great difficulties of a sector which, however, already survives only thanks to significant public support. Heavily indebted, struggling to manage its waste and dismantle its facilities, EDF is unable to finance itself the construction of the six new reactors that it wants to see emerge from the ground in the coming decades.

Allowing nuclear power to benefit from the financial windfall of the European Green Deal would however be an absurdity which would seriously prejudice the fight to reduce our emissions. Vulnerable to extreme weather conditions, this energy is also out of the game in the face of emergencies. It is impossible to drastically reduce our emissions in less than a decade, as recommended by the IPCC, by relying on expensive technology, slow to develop and subject to significant delays, as illustrated by the EPR project. from Flamanville. Any euro directed towards nuclear would then be sorely lacking in the development of real solutions and in the necessary transformation of our production and consumption systems.

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Secretive and corrupt plan to make Labrador, Canada, the world’s nuclear toilet

Plans they had for a meeting in April 2020 with partners in Japan were foiled by pandemic-related health restrictions. 

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien part of secretive project to store nuclear waste in Labrador, emails show,   
Marie-Maude Denis
Jacques TaschereauDaniel Tremblay  · CBC News ·Apr 01, 2021   As borders closed and lockdowns hit last spring, a group of entrepreneurs and lawyers had something else on their minds: setting up a facility in Labrador for international nuclear waste. 

The meeting was to bring together former U.S. government nuclear adviser Tim Frazier, Montreal business executive Albert Barbusci, as well as influential figures in Japan’s nuclear and public relations industries. 

Emails drafted in 2019 and 2020, obtained by Radio-Canada’s Enquête investigative program, reveal they were going to discuss a secretive project to bury nuclear waste from foreign countries in Labrador. 

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien was a player in the initiative. Another backer of the plan highlighted Chrétien’s ties to the current Liberal government and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Chrétien has acted as counsel for the project’s promoters, who are clients of his law firm, Dentons. 

In a letter Chrétien wrote in summer 2019 to an executive at a major Japanese public relations agency, Hisafumi Koga, he argues in favour of storing other countries’ nuclear waste in Canada and said he will help move the project forward……….

Experts puzzled by secrecy

But some nuclear energy experts, who spoke to Enquête after reviewing the emails, question the safety of such a project and raise concerns around the lack of government involvement, and secrecy surrounding it. 

“I must say I was really stunned that there is a small group of very high-profile representatives … that are coming together to form this conspiracy,” said Mycle Schneider, an international consultant on nuclear energy based in Paris. 

Schneider, whose expertise is sought after around the world, said this type of project should be led by governments, not industrialists. 

“We are not talking about building a garage somewhere,” he said. 

“We’re talking about a highly complex project that no country in the world has so far successfully implemented and, you know, storing radioactive material.”

Schneider also takes issue with the group’s explicit wishes to keep their plans covert, considering “the dangers of the substances involved.”

The group wants to bury the imported nuclear waste in what is known as a “deep geological repository” or DGR. ……..

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization has for years tried to build a DGR to bury waste from Canadian nuclear power plants, including in Ontario.

But the emails show this project is different, focusing instead on working with other nations to store their waste — starting with Japan — something that hasn’t been done before, according to Schneider. 

“And there are good reasons,” he said. “This is extremely radioactive material. From a meter away, if spent fuel is not protected, it would deliver a lethal dose to a human being within a minute.”……..

Emails reveal project may be years in the making

When Radio-Canada reached out to Albert Barbusci, the Montreal entrepreneur promoting the project, and to Chrétien, both appeared to minimize its importance, as well as their involvement…….

A June 2020 email from Barbusci refers to a “smooth transition” after former Newfoundland and Labrador premier Dwight Ball’s resignation, which took effect in August…….

Four years ago, Ball’s chief of staff, Greg Mercer, was found to have failed to report his previous lobbying activities on time. Some of his lobbying involved the company at the heart of the group’s nuclear storage project, Terravault. 

Frazier, the former U.S. nuclear adviser and another key player in the project, is one of Terravault’s major shareholders. He refused to speak with Radio-Canada. 

Mercer was found at the time to have been more than a year late declaring his lobbying activities with Terravault before working for Ball. 

Ball also said Thursday Chrétien mentioned the idea of a DGR in Labrador to him. ……………..

Translated by CBC Montreal’s Verity Stevenson

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear power, eligible for green investments? An environmental and climatic aberration, based on cynical and dishonest reasoning!

Nuclear power, eligible for green investments? An environmental and climatic aberration, based on cynical and dishonest reasoning! | Exit Nuclear

By promoting nuclear power at European level, France is sabotaging the fight against climate change While nuclear has so far been excluded from “green” investments because of its environmental impacts, France has resorted to the worst strategies (.. .)

The “Sortir du nuclear” Network denounces the attempts of France and the industrial nuclear lobby to include this technology in the European taxonomy (classification) project supposed to define “green” investments. By promoting nuclear power at European level, France is sabotaging the fight against climate change While nuclear has so far been excluded from “green” investments because of its environmental impacts, France has resorted to the worst strategies (.. .)

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Labrador’s Inuit Regional Government kept in the dark about nuclear waste dump plan

‘Zero possibility’ of nuclear waste stored in Labrador, says Fureym  

Nunatsiavut government ‘surprised’ to learn about project through media

CBC News ·Apr 02, 2021   There is no possibility of the government of Newfoundland and Labrador approving a secretive project that would see nuclear waste stored in Labrador, says Premier Andrew Furey, while the Nunatsiavut government said it is not aware of any proposed project.

“Zero possibility,” Furey said Thursday, in reaction to the story from Radio-Canada’s Enquête investigative program.

Emails drafted in 2019 and 2020, obtained by Radio-Canada’s Enquête, reveal a group of business executives and former prime minister Jean Chrétien have been discussing a secretive project to bury nuclear waste from foreign countries in Labrador, with Chrétien saying that, as a supplier of uranium, Canada has a responsibility to safely dispose of it.

Furey said his government has never had any formal discussion about the proposal, which would see that waste stored in Labrador, nor has he seen any applications.

However, Furey said it was mentioned during a discussion with Chrétien in 2020, when Furey was running for leadership of the provincial Liberals. It was a 15-minute discussion, Furey said, in which Chrétien offered him advice on political life and public service, and mentioned the project.

………. Furey said to his knowledge, no one in his government’s administration has had any formal discussions on nuclear waste storage……..

Governments ‘have a legal duty to consult’

News of the secretive plans also came as a surprise for the Nunatsiavut government.

“The Nunatsiavut government is not aware of any proposed plans to dispose nuclear waste in Labrador, and was surprised to learn of it through the media,” reads a statement issued by Nunatsiavut on Thursday.

“The constitutionally protected Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement clearly defines Inuit rights and titles within Nunatsiavut. Under the agreement, the provincial and federal governments have a legal duty to consult with the Nunatsiavut government.”

The statement added that Nunatsiavut is gathering more information and will be getting in touch with the provincial and federal governments before releasing anything further.

Torngat Mountains MHA Lela Evans said there have been previous discussions about nuclear storage in Labrador, but said the level of secrecy of this latest story isn’t a total shock.

Four years ago, she noted, Ball’s chief of staff, Greg Mercer, was found to have failed to report his previous lobbying activities on time. Some of his lobbying involved the company at the heart of the group’s nuclear storage project, Terravault. 

“There’s so much secrecy. Back in 2017, people couldn’t find much detail, it was all very secretive, hush hush, with ties to the provincial Liberal party,” Evans said.

Now it’s being revealed again and it’s all very secretive. There’s no consultation with the people of Labrador and it reminds us of the old colonialism type of government.”

Evans said projects in Labrador can’t be approved without consultation with the people who live there.

“What we’re asking for is a voice. The Labrador people need to be consulted, and this level of secrecy and having it revealed again is really insulting to the Labrador people,” she said.

“I don’t think there’s any support in Labrador to actually be a waste disposal site for radioactive material.”……………….

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear power- the killer of our future – France and beyond.

Nuclear power kills the future – we must stop it Sortir du Nucleaire April 2021

Hand in hand with the nuclear lobby, the French government is preparing the continuation, or even the revival, of nuclear power. Extending nuclear power plants and plants means operating cracked tanks, worn out pumps, dilapidated electrical equipment, corroded piping …At the same time, there are no longer any new projects in this industry between low-cost EPR, centralized swimming pool, laundry or even a waste storage and treatment unit … The nuclearisation of the territories seems to be underway ..

More than ever, a leap is needed to prevent the extension of dilapidated factories and dangerous reactors and block new absurd projects. This is why the “Sortir du nuclear” Network is launching its new national campaign with the slogan:


EPR reactors, polluting factories …
Let’s reject new nuclear projects in our territories, call on our local elected officials!
Petition addressed to the Mayors of France, elected municipal officials and inter-municipal presidents

A drifting nuclear industry …

The site of the EPR nuclear reactor under construction in Flamanville, Normandy, continues to get bogged down. According to the latest estimates, it will be more than 10 years late and cost 9 billion euros more than expected … What a waste! This fiasco is indicative of the general state of the nuclear industry, where cases of poor workmanship and organized fraud are piling up, symptom of a generalized drift in the industry. The Nuclear Safety Authority itself points to a dangerous loss of skills and doubts the capacity of the nuclear industry to carry out major jobs.

In fact, EDF is in virtual bankruptcy despite the recapitalization of the State to the tune of 3 billion euros in 2017.

Today, the nuclear industry is in disarray, that is a fact.

… but who is going to attack the rural areas!
And yet, with the complicity of the government, the nuclear industry wants to implement new projects in our counties , hoping in this way to revive this dying energy!

Thus, despite the EPR fiasco, EDF intends to launch the construction of six new reactors on three different sites! For the regions concerned, that would mean living with the risk of accidents for decades!   And rather than stopping the production of radioactive waste, the nuclear industry wants to continue to dot our territories with new sites dedicated to an illusory “management” of this mountain of substances.

In addition to the Cigéo radioactive waste landfill project in the Grand Est region, we can mention the ICEDA installation, where waste from decommissioning would be stored on the banks of the Rhône, the spent nuclear fuel storage project on the banks of the Loire, or a radioactive laundry on the banks of the Marne … Whether or not these projects are implemented directly in your territory, they concern you!

In exchange for the installation of its deadly projects in your communities, the nuclear industry dangles before you infrastructure, jobs, financing of economic and cultural projects … But what your territories will reap in the medium term is the desertification of a region plagued by nuclear power. It is the degradation of the image of the products of your region, and a loss of attractiveness for your municipalities. It means living with the risk of accidents, pollution from chemical and radioactive discharges, waste, high-risk transport, with the disregard of real local development, the health and safety of populations.

And even if these projects are not located near you, they concern you too. Because given the disastrous financial health of the nuclear industry, they will be financed out of state money, to the detriment of the public services that our territories need. And because in the event of an accident at one of these new facilities, the pollution will not stop at the border of your municipality.

I ask you to oppose the senseless revival of this industry which is a financial abyss, which prevents a real energy transition and which weighs on us the sword of Damocles of a nuclear accident and on our territories irreversible pollution. The protection and health of populations must come before the short-term financial interests of the nuclear industry! Ladies and Gentlemen, Mayors, local elected officials and inter-municipal presidents, don’t be fooled, refuse the establishment of the nuclear industry in your territories! They deserve better than this! Nuclear power has no future, let’s stop it! 

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear weapons potential triggers escalation in South Asia

Nuclear arms potential triggers escalation in South Asia’

New report cites fears that region could break into 2 camps, with China, Pakistan on one side while India, US on other, Express Tribune 

Anadolu Agency April 02, 2021, KARACHI:

Expressing concerns over “external trends filtering into the region,” a new report on nuclear challenges in South Asia sees nuclear warheads as “potential triggers for accidents or further escalation,” particularly when deployed at a tactical level.

It also warned that the contrasting focus and pattern of nuclear engagement between China and the US could break the volatile region into two camps, with Washington and New Delhi on one side, and Beijing and Islamabad on the other.

The report, “South Asia’s Nuclear Challenges: Interlocking Views from IndiaPakistan, China, Russia, and the United States,” was released by Sweden-based think tank Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) on Thursday.

According to the institute, the report is “without attribution” based on 119 interviews conducted last year with experts, researchers, military officials, and politicians from India, Pakistan, China, Russia, and the United States.

It said: “Their [the experts’] insights demonstrate the need for a greater and more flexible engagement to enhance not merely understanding of South Asia, but rather how it interlocks with broader international nuclear dynamics.”

The discussions revealed a number of interlocking points that offer building blocks for both official and unofficial engagement on issues such as “no first use (NFU), lowered nuclear thresholds, conventional and nuclear entanglement, escalate to de-escalate, and emerging technology development.”

The report has cited a slew of “escalatory events” in South Asia involving China, India, and Pakistan under “nuclear shadow” – in which these nuclear countries conduct low-intensity military operations against each other over disputed territories.

These included the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan following attacks on the Indian parliament in 2001, in the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and in Balakot in 2019, as well as the China–India tensions over the Depsang incursion, the 2017 Doklam stand-off, and the 2020 Galwan River Valley skirmishes.

“While each case has elicited debate, less attention has been given to the role of nuclear weapons, or lack thereof, in these various stand-offs,“ the report said………..

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Failed AREVA, failed ORANO leave a toxic uranium mess in Niger

RFI 31st March 2021, Niger: closure of one of the largest uranium mines. One of the world’s
largest underground uranium mines is closing. The Akouta Mining Company (Cominak), a subsidiary of Orano Cycle (French multinational, ex-Areva), which had been exploiting uranium deposits in the province of Agadez, north
of Niger since 1978, stops production on Wednesday March, 31st.

A closure carried out in unsatisfactory conditions for the NGOs which denounce, beyond the social cost, a heavy legacy which will have health and environmental consequences.

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Ohio nuclear bailout ends – showing the folly of subsidising nuclear power

Ohio Ends Nuclear Bailout Scheme: Here’s What it Means

April 1, 2021  
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed the bill repealing the state’s $1.1 billion nuclear bailout yesterday. Ohioans have been fighting to stop and then repeal the bailout law (HB6), since 2019. Their struggle goes back even further, to 2014, when FirstEnergy launched into a series of four other failed nuclear and coal bailout schemes. It took a $61 million corruption conspiracy for FirstEnergy to get HB6 enacted two years ago — for which four lobbyists and the former Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives were indicted last year.

This is a huge victory for everyone in Ohio who worked to make it happen!

Notably, Energy Harbor, the company that now owns the two nuclear power plants in Ohio, says that it no longer needs the nuclear bailout, signaling that it won’t be coming back to the legislature for a sixth bite at the apple. Energy Harbor was formed as a corporate spinoff, resulting from the bankruptcy of FirstEnergy’s former subsidiary, FirstEnergy Solutions. Energy Harbor’s statement underscores the point that the bailout and the corruption scheme were ultimately a ploy to get FirstEnergy’s creditors in the bankruptcy case to approve the stand-alone, spun-off corporation that only owns unprofitable nuclear and coal power plants.

Energy Harbor is now free to run into the ground, as far as FirstEnergy is concerned. But who knows – maybe it will continue running the Davis-Besse and Perry reactors without a bailout, just like it decided to do with its Beaver Valley 1&2 reactors in 2020, despite having already notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that it would close all four by the end of this year. Whatever the case, it shows that nuclear bailouts have never been a supposed “bridge” to a clean energy future – they are an opportunistic scheme by nuclear utilities to make the public assume the costs of their own short-sighted, self-interested business decisions.

To underscore that point, the nuclear bailout repeal leaves everything else in HB6 in place: the coal plant bailout, the limited funding for already-approved solar projects, and the rollback of the renewable portfolio and efficiency standards. Even FirstEnergy’s decision to rebate $26 million in utility subsidies is part of a court settlement in a lawsuit, not a result of the nuclear bailout repeal. Why? Because dirty energy interests still have too much influence in Ohio politics.

Ironically, Ohio’s other major utility conglomerate, AEP, is now the biggest beneficiary of HB6, since it is the largest co-owner of the bailed-out coal plants (which were originally built to power the federal government’s massive uranium enrichment plant in southern Ohio). AEP gave up its appeals for coal plant subsidies after failing in 2015, but FirstEnergy came back again and again, eventually cutting AEP and the coal plants in on HB6 to buy enough political support to pass the nuclear bailout.

The bailout repeal also leaves in place other anti-renewable energy laws FirstEnergy lobbied for, including the 2014 law imposing severe restrictions on siting wind power projects that have effectively killed onshore wind in Ohio.

Other states should take a lesson from Ohio, as nuclear utilities propose more bailout and spinoff schemes. In New Jersey, PSEG and Exelon are pushing to extend their $300 million/year nuclear bailout, while both companies are trying to pass off ownership of their power plants. PSEG announced last year that it plans to sell off all of its power plants except for its Hope Creek and Salem 1&2 reactors, presumably holding onto the latter for now because no other company will buy reactors that PSEG has argued for years are not profitable enough without subsidies.

Then, in February, Exelon, by far the largest nuclear power company in the US, announced that it plans to spin off all of its power plants into a separate company, while still promoting an expanded bailout for its reactors in Illinois and a longer-term “carbon charge” subsidy for its reactors in New York. (As of today, New Yorkers are four years and more than $2 billion into a 12-year, $7.6 billion bailout.) Exelon co-owns the Salem reactors with PSEG in NJ, as well. Exelon’s spin-off plan is a stark vote of no confidence in the future of nuclear power: if Exelon can’t make nuclear power plants profitable enough to hold onto — even with $1 billion/year in ongoing subsidies — then who could?

Over the last several years, nuclear bailouts have been sold to policymakers and the public as a “bridge” to a clean energy future. In reality, they are a bridge to nowhere — just public subsidies for corporate restructuring schemes. Electricity customers in New York, Illinois, and New Jersey have paid over $3.5 billion in nuclear subsidies since 2017, for reactors that Exelon now just wants to get rid of.

This is no way to solve the climate crisis. The only bridge to a zero-emissions, renewable energy future is to build more and more zero-emissions renewable energy, efficiency, and supporting infrastructure. Wasting time and money propping up old nuclear and fossil fuel companies is only holding us back.

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

US, Iran say they’ll begin indirect talks on nuclear program

US, Iran say they’ll begin indirect talks on nuclear program,   SMH Ellen Knickmeyer and Raf CasertApril 3, 2021 — The United States and Iran say they will start indirect talks with other major world powers next week to try to get both countries back into an accord limiting Iran’s nuclear program, nearly three years after President Donald Trump pulled the US out of the deal.

State Department spokesperson Ned Price called the resumption of negotiations, scheduled for Tuesday in Austria, “a healthy step forward”. But Price added, “These remain early days, and we don’t anticipate an immediate breakthrough as there will be difficult discussions ahead”.

Trump pulled the United States out of the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, and President Joe Biden has said rejoining the agreement is a priority for his administration. The Biden administration and Iran have differed on any conditions for that to happen, including the timing of the lifting of US sanctions against Iran, and the stalemate on those points had threatened to pose a major foreign policy setback for the new Biden administration.

Agreement on the start of multi-party talks – being held to get Iran and the United States over their differences on conditions for returning to the 2015 nuclear deal – came after talks on Thursday brokered by other governments that have remained in the accord, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.Price said next week’s talks will be structured around working groups that the European Union was forming with the remaining participants in the accord, including Iran………

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

No need for a nuclear reactor at Bradwell, UK

Essex Gazette 1st April 2021, A NATIONAL anti-nuclear campaign group has spoken out against the
technology proposed for a new nuclear power station at Bradwell B.

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities attended the webinar hosted by the Environment Agency, which was a consultation on the next stage of the generic design assessment for the nuclear reactor being developed by CGN.
Alongside the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group, the national campaign group felt there was a “real frustration” during the meeting, citing oncerns with nuclear safety issues. NFLA steering committee chairman David
Blackburn said:

“The reductions in the costs of renewable energy and the ease with which they are being developed are clear indications that the need for new nuclear is reducing. “The huge costs of Hinkley Point C also mean any further new nuclear reactors are only likely to happen with an effective huge public subsidy. “Our view is there is no need for a new
nuclear reactor at Bradwell and as such this generic design assessment should be concluded.”

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

In view of the pandemic situation, the examination of Sizewell C nuclear project should be delayed

Stop Sizewell C (accessed) 2nd April 2021, We are now into the first step in the DCO process- the Preliminary Meeting
– which is taking place online (livestreamed and recorded), in two parts:
Part 1 on 23 & 24 March (completed). Part 2 on 14 April (no agenda yet).

The Planning Inspectorate is inviting new written (emailed) submissions by
end of Wednesday 7 April (Deadline B). The Scottish Power Renewables DCO
examination has just been extended by 3 months (now running until early

This is in recognition of the impact of the pandemic on people’s
ability to respond, and the extensive amount of new information. Given the
“unusually large and complex application” (the words of EDF’s
counsel) and ongoing restrictions on face to face meetings, we feel a delay
to the start of the Sizewell C examination would be totally appropriate.

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Lawsuit over Alabama nuclear plant appears headed to trial after judge’s ruling

By Paul Gattis |

Efforts by both parties involved in a lawsuit over the sale of an unfinished Alabama nuclear plant have failed and the 2½ -year-old case appears headed for trial.

Nuclear Development LLC and TVA both filed motions for summary judgment, asking U.S. District Judge Liles Burke to ruling in their favor in resolving the suit before it went to trial. Nuclear Development sued TVA in November 2018 after the federal utility declined to complete the agreed-upon sale of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant near Scottsboro.The judge denied both parties’ motions in a lengthy order issued Wednesday.

No trial date has been set.TVA has said it opted not to complete the sale of the company created by Tennessee developer Franklin Haney because Nuclear Development had not secured the appropriate licenses to take ownership from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Nuclear Development has said the licenses should not be an obstacle to the sale and filed a breach of contract suit against TVA the day the deal was supposed to have been completed.“Because there remain genuine disputes of material fact,” the issues of the lawsuit could not be decided “as a matter of law,” Burke wrote in concluding his order……..

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

April 2 Energy News — geoharvey

Opinion: ¶ “How Joe Biden’s Ambitious Infrastructure Bill Will Impact Renewable Energy” • Rob Gramlich, Grid Strategies President, joins Yahoo Finance Live to break down President Joe Biden’s ambitious infrastructure bill and its impact on renewable energy. The discussion starts with the initiatives that are included in the American Jobs Act. [Yahoo Finance] Solar array […]

April 2 Energy News — geoharvey

April 2, 2021 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment