Nuclear incidents and meltdowns – far more than we realised
Incidents AND MELTDOWNS AND THERE ARE FAR MORE THAN WE REALISED
FUKUSHIMA
CHERNOBYL SELLAFIELD THE INLAND SANTA SUSANA FIRES SANTA SUSANNA MELTDOWNS. INCIDENTS ANS WILDFIRES AT LOS ALAMOS
WILD FIRES AT HANFORD
THE GREEN RUN
THE NUCLEAR MELTDOWN IN 1969 IN SWITZERLAND
The recent chinese reactor nuclear incident.
INCIDENTS 1957 to 2011
with multiple fatalitIies
September 29, 1957 Mayak, Kyshtym, Soviet Union The Kyshtym disaster was a radiation contamination accident (after a chemical explosion that occurred within a storage tank) at Mayak, a Nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in the Soviet Union.
October 10, 1957 Sellafield, Cumberland, United Kingdom Windscale fire was a fire at the British atomic bomb project (in a plutonium-production-reactor) damaged the core and released an estimated 740 terabecquerels of iodine-131 into the environment. A rudimentary smoke filter constructed over the main outlet chimney successfully prevented a far worse radiation leak.
March – July 1959 , Santa Susana Field Lab , Western San Fernando Valley, USA. At least four of the ten nuclear reactors suffered accidents incl Partial meltdown, 1964, 1969 further accidents
January 3, 1961 Idaho Falls, Idaho, United States Explosion at SL-1 prototype at the National Reactor Testing Station. All 3 operators were killed when a control rod was removed too far.
October 5, 1966 Frenchtown Charter Township, Michigan, United States Meltdown of some fuel elements in the Fermi 1 Reactor at the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station. Little radiation leakage into the environment
January 21, 1969 Lucens reactor, Vaud, Switzerland On January 21, 1969, it suffered a loss-of-coolant accident, leading to meltdown of one fuel element and radioactive contamination of the cavern, which before was sealed.
December 7, 1975 Greifswald, East Germany Electrical error in Greifswald Nuclear Power Plant causes fire in the main trough that destroys control lines and five main coolant pumps
January 5, 1976 Jaslovské Bohunice, Czechoslovakia Malfunction during fuel replacement. Fuel rod ejected from reactor into the reactor hall by coolant
March 28, 1979 Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, United States Loss of coolant and partial core meltdown due to operator errors and technical flaws. There is a small release of radioactive gases.
September 15, 1984 Athens, Alabama, United States Safety violations, operator error and design problems force a six-year outage at Browns Ferry Unit 2
March 9, 1985 Athens, Alabama, United States Instrumentation systems malfunction during startup, which led to suspension of operations at all three Browns Ferry
April 11, 1986 Plymouth, Massachusetts, United States Recurring equipment problems force emergency shutdown of Boston Edison’s Pilgrim Nuclear Power
April 26, 1986 Chernobyl, Chernobyl Raion (Now Ivankiv Raion), Kiev Oblast, Ukraininan SSR, Soviet Union A flawed reactor design and inadequate safety procedures led to a power surge that damaged the fuel rods of reactor no. 4 of the Chernobyl power plant. This caused an explosion and meltdown, necessitating the evacuation of 300,000 people and dispersing radioactive material across Europe (see Effects of the Chernobyl disaster).
Around 5% (5200 PBq) of the core was released into the atmosphere and downwind.
May 4, 1986 Hamm-Uentrop, West Germany Experimental THTR-300 reactor releases small amounts of fission products (0.1 GBq Co-60, Cs-137, Pa-233) to surrounding area 0 267
December 9, 1986 Surry, Virginia, United States Feedwater pipe break at Surry Nuclear Power Plant kills 4 workers 4
March 31, 1987 Delta, Pennsylvania, United States Peach Bottom units 2 and 3 shutdown due to cooling malfunctions and unexplained equipment problems 0 400
December 19, 1987 Lycoming, New York, United States Malfunctions force Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation to shut down Nine Mile Point Unit 1 0 150
March 17, 1989 Lusby, Maryland, United States Inspections at Calvert Cliff Units 1 and 2 reveal cracks at pressurized heater sleeves
October 19, 1989 Vandellòs, Spain A fire damaged the cooling system in unit 1 of the Vandellòs nuclear power plant, getting the core close to meltdown. The cooling system was restored before the meltdown but the unit had to be shut down due to the elevated cost of the repair
March 1992 Sosnovyi Bor, Leningrad Oblast, Russia An accident at the Sosnovy Bor nuclear plant leaked radioactive iodine into the air through a ruptured fuel channel.
February 20, 1996 Waterford, Connecticut, United States Leaking valve forces shutdown Millstone Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2, multiple equipment failures found 0 254
September 2, 1996 Crystal River, Florida, United States Balance-of-plant equipment malfunction forces shutdown and extensive repairs at Crystal River
September 30, 1999 Ibaraki Prefecture, Japan Tokaimura nuclear accident killed two workers, and exposed one more to radiation levels above permissible limits.
February 16, 2002 Oak Harbor, Ohio, United States Severe corrosion of reactor vessel head forces 24-month outage of Davis-Besse reactor
April 10, 2003 Paks, Hungary Collapse of fuel rods at Paks Nuclear Power Plant unit 2 during its corrosion cleaning led to leakage of radioactive gases. It remained inactive for 18 months.
August 9, 2004 Fukui Prefecture, Japan Steam explosion at Mihama Nuclear Power Plant kills 4 workers and injures 7
July 25, 2006 Forsmark, Sweden An electrical fault at Forsmark Nuclear Power Plant caused multiple failures in safety systems that had the reactor to cool down
March 11, 2011 3 meltdowns Fukushima, Japan A tsunami flooded and damaged the plant’s 3 active reactors, drowning two workers. Loss of backup electrical power led to overheating, meltdowns, and evacuations.] One man died suddenly while carrying equipment during the clean-up. The plant’s reactors Nr. 4, 5 and 6 were inactive at the time.
September 12, 2011 Marcoule, France One person was killed and four injured, one seriously, in a blast at the Marcoule Nuclear Site. The explosion took place in a furnace used to melt metallic waste.
And this is the tip of the iceberg
Canada’s nuclear waste body ousted liaison officer for being ‘too much on the side of the community,’ lawsuit claims
Paul Austin, 62, was NWMO’s relationship manager in South Bruce, Ont., for 9 years, Colin Butler · CBC News ·: Jan 24, 2022 A former employee of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is suing the Canadian agency for $320,000, claiming he was “publicly humiliated” when he was constructively dismissed for being “too much on the side of the community.”
The NWMO is a non-profit agency funded by the nuclear industry. Its goal is to find a willing host community for the country’s growing stockpile of nuclear waste.
Currently, the agency is considering the Ontario communities of Ignace and South Bruce for a proposed deep geological repository, a sprawling $23-billion catacomb that would one day act as the tomb for Canada’s 3.3 million bundles of spent nuclear fuel that are currently in interim storage.
In South Bruce, the agency has been accused by a citizens’ group of using its financial might to groom the declining farm community into becoming a willing host for a nuclear waste storage site. The NWMO has told CBC News it only wants to leave “a positive legacy” in the community to make South Bruce a better place, regardless of its decision.
Now, in a lawsuit filed in a Toronto court in August, Paul Austin alleges he was constructively dismissed by the NWMO for being “too much on the side of the community.”
None of the allegations have been tested in court.
Agency became ‘overinvolved,’ doc says
Austin, 62, was a relationship manager for the NWMO in South Bruce from May 2012 until he considered himself to be constructively dismissed in August 2021, according to court filings.
His job, says the statement of claim, was to be the “primary contact’ with the NWMO in South Bruce, acting as a “trusted adviser, co-ordinator of resources” and “guide” to local town and band council officials “through the siting process.”
Court filings for the plaintiff said senior leaders within the NWMO started to become “overly involved” on a local level in the summer of 2020, undermining Austin’s work.
When community leaders in South Bruce complained, one executive told Austin he was “too much on the side of the community,” that its leadership “lacked the capacity to understand” the nuclear waste site selection process and “were damaging their chances at being selected as host for the project,” according to the lawsuit.
At one point, the statement of claim says, Austin was told by a senior executive that “if community leaders didn’t change their ways, he would stop defending South Bruce to the NWMO president and other vice-presidents, and ‘let the project go to Ignace.'”
Austin could ‘simply quit if he wanted to’
In the fall of 2020, the court documents claim, Austin started to lose many of his key responsibilities, and leadership started ignoring his advice and excluding him from phone calls with community leaders in South Bruce.
The NWMO also created a position for a new “site director” who would “basically be the face of the NWMO in the community” and would take over many of the responsibilities of a relationship manager, according to the statement of claim.
The agency further eroded Austin’s responsibilities in the spring of 2021, the court documents allege, overriding and rejecting some of his decisions when it came to community engagement.
When Austin complained to his boss and human resources about the change in his role and responsibilities in July 2021, court documents said he was told by the NWMO that it felt no changes had occurred and he could “simply quit if he wanted to.”
Austin claims dismissal ‘publicly humiliated’ him
At the same time, community leaders in South Bruce began asking questions about why Austin had been sidelined from his roles and responsibilities in the community, court documents said.
When Austin reported the community feedback to his bosses, Austin was accused of being “arbitrary, discourteous and inaccurate in his accounting of the facts,” the claim says.
In August 2021, Austin advised the NWMO through his lawyer “he considered himself constructively dismissed” effective Aug. 17 that year.
Austin claims the NWMO’s actions were “harsh, vindictive, reprehensible and malicious,” and the organization’s actions have caused him to be “publicly humiliated” and and suffer “mental distress.”
Court documents say Austin is asking for wrongful dismissal damages of $270,000, with another $50,000 in punitive and moral damages. ………………….. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/nwmo-lawsuit-1.6320277
Unease in Ontario about planned nuclear waste dump (nobody suggests that they stop making this trash?)
The Plan to Bury All of Canada’s Nuclear Waste in One Northwest Ontario Town
This kind of dump for high-level nuclear waste has not yet been built anywhere in the world.
JANUARY 24, 2022 ON THE MONDAY SHOW BY CANADALAND Since Canada began using nuclear energy in the 1960s, the only solutions for the waste produced have been temporary. It’s now being stored onsite at nuclear plants, in containers that last a century at most.But nuclear waste takes thousands — or tens of thousands — of years to decay.
So in 2002, the federal government created the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) and tasked it with finding a location to dispose of all of Canada’s high-grade nuclear waste.
Ignace, in Northwestern Ontario, was among the communities that volunteered to host a deep geological repository (DGR), and is now one of two sites under consideration. (The other is South Bruce, in the southern part of the province.) To create the DGR, used-up nuclear reactor cores would be placed inside canisters that would then be encased in a special clay that’s been shown to protect from water and cushion from seismic activity. The canisters would then be buried inside a rock 500 metres below ground.The NWMO is confident that the project — valued at $26 billion over the next 150 years — would pose virtually no risk to the local water supply, environment, or people. But a DGR for high-level nuclear waste has not yet been built anywhere in the world.
On this week’s CANADALAND, senior producer Sarah Lawrynuik travels to the area where she grew up, to learn about the divided reaction to the nuclear-waste project and whether the anxieties are justified:The following are edited excerpts from Sarah’s conversations with some of the residents and experts she spoke to…Our water is the most precious thing, I believe, in this country right now. Because so much in the world is polluted. Just so much. And we can’t afford to take that risk. Because no matter what they do to try to make it safe, nuclear waste is not safe and will never be safe.”
— Sylvia Green-Guenette, who lives on the shore of Wabigoon Lake in Dryden. Despite being roughly as close to the proposed site as Ignace, Dryden won’t get a say in whether the project goes ahead………………..
“I think the people who are totally for it are just looking at it through one lens. They’re looking at it through the business lens.…They’re promising a certain amount of jobs — not only for the community, but specifically for Indigenous folk as well. And I think a lot of people can see through that.”
— Maya Oversby, a Métis university student who started attending community meetings about the repository in 2015, when she was 14…………………… https://www.canadaland.com/nuclear-waste-ignace-ontario/
Call to stop the unfair Vogtle nuclear construction surcharge
Now they want US to pay for THEIR mistakes, botched work & do-overs, delays, and retesting. NO…THEY SHOULD PAY!
REPEAL THE UNFAIR VOGTLE CONSTRUCTION SURCHARGE
5 Repeal Reasons Below
It is simply wrong and disgraceful for the state of Georgia to continue to have
elderly, schools, food banks, mom & pop restaurants, churches, tire stores, car repair shops, households, gas stations, doctors offices, renters, dentists, synagogues, beauty parlors, dry cleaners, shoe stores, insurance offices, meals-on-wheels, homeless shelters, colleges and universities, Salvation Army stores, drug stores, police stations, nursing homes, car washes, pet stores, fast-food restaurants, veterinarian offices, county governments, small manufacturing businesses, hospitals, recycling centers, animal shelters, hardware stores, grocery stores, YMCA & YWCA, bookstores, healthfood stores, consignment stores, rehab centers, phone stores, barbershops, grocery stores, warehouses, franchise businesses, clothing stores…
all paying month after month an extra surcharge amount on their Georgia Power electric bill to finance, without compensation, someone else’s years overdue for-profit venture.
The nuclear finance surcharge law was for construction, not for costly, continuing re-dos, re-testing, and delays after delays.
The surcharge is clearly failing to benefit customers, as the 2009 legislature was led to believe.
STOP The Surcharge Fee On Georgia Power Customers’ Electric Bills
Repeal the Unfair 2009 Nuclear Energy Finance Act
1. The original controversial nuclear finance act of 2009 anticipated that Georgians would pay a surcharge for five years. However, Georgia Power has collected the nuclear tax for SIX YEARS LONGER than anticipated with no end in sight.
2. The original finance act DID NOT anticipate making people pay for expensive construction mistakes, costly delays, and expensive do-overs.
3. The company testifies that construction is 99% complete. Most of the current work is fixing mistakes and do-over work. Customers should not keep paying surcharges if the project is so near completion as claimed, yet so late.
4. Extensive ITAAC testing (Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria) is far from complete. Numerous problems found by testing will push startup much later than the present startup claim of late 2022, and thus continue the surcharges even longer. Note: NRC reports that, of the 399 tests, about 150, or 38% remain to be done. All tests must be complete before fuel is loaded.
5. The surcharge unfairly burdens the small and medium size residential and commercial customers, including schools, elderly, non-profit services, while it unfairly gives a pass to very large customers. These very large customers get to use rates that avoid much of the surcharge. (See Reference 1)
Surcharges started on Georgia Power bills in 2011
In 2019, they hit a high of 10.76 %
In 2020, they were 9.46 % (The NCCR-10 rate)
In 2021, they are 9.46 %
In January, 2022, they will be 3.81 % (The NCCR-11)
Background For Repealing the 2009 Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act:
The nuclear surcharge finances the new power plant Vogtle “Vortex” 3 & 4 nuclear reactors. The surcharge is money given to a private for-profit endeavor.
The surcharge takes money from Georgia electric power customers, and there is nothing in return.
The average Georgia residential customer has already paid over $ 850.00 in Vogtle surcharges. So far, Georgia Power has collected over $ 3.6 Billion from Georgians via this nuclear tax!
The nuclear finance surcharge goes on and on, month after month, years longer than proposed. This was not intended by legislators, more than half of whom have retired, when they enacted the 2009 Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing law.
The surcharge began when Vogtle nuclear construction started in 2011 and went to a high of 10.76% in 2019. Under the current law, the nuclear surcharge will stay on Georgians’ power bills until the reactor is operating and selling electricity. Ongoing massive construction delays and cost overruns make that date uncertain………… http://stopvogtlesurcharge.org/
Busting the nuclear propaganda about Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTR)
getting enough MSRs on-line to partially slake our energy glut would take 30-50 years. Given the urgency of global warming, we’ve already misspent such luxury.
Inhalation of thorium dust by townspeople near mining operations also correlated with higher lung, pancreatic and bone cancer rates than unexposed towns.
Investing in Renewable Technologies is Safer, Faster, and Cheaper. The Connecticut Examiner. BY SCOTT DESHEFY JANUARY 21, 2022, Thorium, formed by radioactive decay of uranium, is a naturally occurring radioactive metal found in rock, water, and soil. Found in monazite and other minerals, it’s 3X more abundant than uranium. Despite its radioactivity, small amounts of thorium were used in lantern mantles for brightness, ceramic glazes and welding rods. Until the 1950s, thorium dioxide was used as a contrast agent (i.e. Thorotrast) in medical radiology.
Between 1930 and 1950, after 2.5 million people were injected with Thoroplast worldwide, resulting lifelong exposures to thorium produced higher than normal incidences of liver tumors. Inhalation of thorium dust by townspeople near mining operations also correlated with higher lung, pancreatic and bone cancer rates than unexposed towns……………..
The U.S., China, France and Russia are currently exploring Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs) , including liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTRs), for improved electricity-making safety and efficiency compared to conventional nukes.
LFTRs are theoretically safer and more efficient than conventional reactors because fluoride salts will contain a nuclear reaction. But fluorine gases, which potentially could be released, are extremely lethal. Furthermore, getting enough MSRs on-line to partially slake our energy glut would take 30-50 years. Given the urgency of global warming, we’ve already misspent such luxury.
If, given declining cost and proven effectiveness, green energy was given the same government subsidies as nuclear we’d be answering the climate call-to-arms posthaste. Investing in renewable and smart-grid technologies is safer, faster, and cheaper, short-term and long. Scott Deshefy is a biologist, ecologist and two-time Green Party congressional candidate. https://ctexaminer.com/2022/01/21/investing-in-renewable-technologies-is-safer-faster-and-cheaper/
Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile
Militarized Dolphins Protect Almost a Quarter of the US Nuclear Stockpile, Military.com | By Blake Stilwell 24 Jan 22,
Situated just 20 miles from Seattle, Naval Base Kitsap houses America’s most powerful and secret deterrents, a weapon that is the first line of defense for U.S. national security: U.S. Navy dolphins.
Since 1967, the Navy has been training dolphins and sea lions (and probably other marine life) for military applications such as mine clearing, force protection and recovery missions. The U.S. Navy Marine Mammal Program deployed military dolphins as early as the Vietnam War and as recently as the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
When protecting harbors and ships from mines, as they do at Naval Base Kitsap, the dolphins use their extraordinary biological sonar to detect hazards beneath the surface, whether tethered to the sea floor or buried beneath sediment.
If a mine or other weapon is detected, the dolphin returns to its handler, who gives the animal a buoy to mark the location of the device on the surface. Passing ships know to avoid these markers while Navy explosives ordnance disposal divers neutralize the threat below.
For protection against enemy divers, dolphins will swim up to the infiltrator, bump into them and place a buoy device on their back or a limb using their mouth. The buoy then drags the outed diver to the surface for easy capture. When trained sea lions perform the same maneuver, they use a kind of handcuff with their mouths to attach the buoy………………. https://www.military.com/history/militarized-dolphins-protect-almost-quarter-of-us-nuclear-stockpile.html
Another case of the nuclear industry bribing a university
the University is pushing to have this facility on campus because the Department of Energy is paying them a lot of money to get a new reactor up and running to revive the nuclear power industry.
I don’t believe we need to take the chance of being the first ones to see if this reactor is safe and works,” Hannon said. “We don’t have to do that and there’s no mandate saying we have to. The university is acting like an experimental guinea pig and they’re effectively taking a bribe from the DOE to put it here.
West Urbana residents criticize safety, impact of University’s plans to install novel nuclear reactor system
Rachel Gardner / For CU-CitizenAccess The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s proposal for deploying a micro nuclear reactor in west Urbana has sparked concern among local residents, who are worried about how safe it is to have the reactor near their neighborhood.
“This project is really frustrating on several levels,” David Dorman, resident of West Urbana and one of the moderators for the neighborhood association’s listserv, said. “There’s a lot of unknowns because this is a brand new design and the reactor is untested. Anybody who has already made claims about its safety is just simply speculating.”
The residents said they also are concerned about environmental and economic impacts.
If approved, the new micro modular reactor (known as MMR) would be the first of its kind to be installed and running on a college campus by 2025, according to the University of Illinois.
The proposed location for the facility is near Abbott Power Plant on 1117 S. Oak Street in Champaign, about 0.3 miles, or a few blocks, away from the undergraduate dormitory Nugent Hall in Ikenberry Commons. The University expects to spend around $22 million to revise the facilities near Abbott Power Plant to accommodate the microreactor.
Dorman also said that residents on the listserv who are against the proposal are uncertain on how to oppose it effectively to the project leaders.
“The community has no voice in all of this,” Dorman said. “The University clearly wants to do it, the government wants to fund it, and it’s up to the trustees to make a final decision.”……………………..
There is no set date yet for residents for the comments or hearing.
University of Illinois Professor Emeritus of Geography Bruce Hannon said he believes that even though the facility might be beneficial for research purposes, it needs to be in a more remote location that isn’t home to over 200,000 people.
“I have suggested several different locations for the facility, but a key one is the Argonne National Laboratory in Lemont, Illinois,” Hannon said. “One of the missions of the Department of Energy (DOE) is to keep the national labs funded. There’s a bunch of them around the country but the closest one to UIUC is Argonne, which is only about 130 miles away. That’s a great location for it as far as I’m concerned.”
Hannon also said the University is pushing to have this facility on campus because the Department of Energy is paying them a lot of money to get a new reactor up and running to revive the nuclear power industry.
“I don’t believe we need to take the chance of being the first ones to see if this reactor is safe and works,” Hannon said. “We don’t have to do that and there’s no mandate saying we have to. The university is acting like an experimental guinea pig and they’re effectively taking a bribe from the DOE to put it here……………. https://www.cu-citizenaccess.org/2022/01/west-urbana-residents-criticize-safety-impact-of-universitys-plans-to-install-novel-nuclear-reactor-system/
Debate flares in Amiens over the attempt to include nuclear in the ”green taxonomy”
Hours before the window for lodging objections closes, EU environment and energy ministers meeting in France Friday differed sharply on a European Commission provision that would classify nuclear and natural gas energy as “sustainable”. The controversy pits countries led by France — where nuclear generates a world-leading 70 percent of electricity — against Germany, Austria and others in the 27-nation bloc. Debate over the Commission’s so-called “taxonomy” is not on the agenda of the informal, three-day talks in Amiens, but flared nonetheless. In late December the European Commission unveiled a classification labelling investment in nuclear gas-based energy as sustainable, in order to favour sectors that reduce the greenhouse gas emissions driving global warming. Fin24 22nd Jan 2022 https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/eu-nations-quarrel-over-whether-nuclear-gas-are-green-20220122 |
Shadowy battle – Israel’s attacks on Iran’s facilities and personnel
Attacks inside one of Iran’s most secure nuclear facilities are the latest blows in a shadowy battle with Israel, Insider, Stavros Atlamazoglou , 24 Jan 22,
- A shadowy battle between Israel and Iran has intensified since the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018.
- They have mostly avoided open clashes, but their ongoing campaigns have been punctuated by high-profile attacks and assassinations.
- ………………………. Israel has long followed a no-holds-barred strategy in which the threat justifies the means. Its shadowy campaign against the Iranian nuclear programs uses complementary diplomatic, military, and intelligence tactics.While Israel’s military has been heavily involved in that campaign, Mossad, Israel’s main intelligence service, has landed many of the blows against Iran itself.
- According to a recent report by The Jewish Chronicle, which didn’t name or describe its sources, Mossad successfully infiltrated the Iranian supply chain and used the opportunity to sell Tehran faulty materials that caused fires at the Natanz nuclear-enrichment facility in July 2020.The report also said Israeli intelligence officers recruited Iranian nuclear scientists who conducted sabotage at Natanz in April 2021 before being smuggled out of the country. Mossad is said to have used an unmanned aerial vehicle to attack the Iran Centrifuge Technology Company, a factory making centrifuges crucial for producing weapons-grade uranium.
- Facilities are easier to replace than expert knowledge, and Mossad has also gone after the hard-to-acquire know-how necessary for a nuclear-weapons capability by killing Iranian scientists working on the nuclear program.
- Attacks against Iranian scientists have become more brazen. The November 2020 assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, reportedly with a remote-controlled machine gun using advanced artificial-intelligence technology, on a highway in Iran is something straight out of a Hollywood movie………….
- In addition to those clandestine actions, the Israeli Defense Forces has been preparing and presenting Israeli policymakers with military options to take out targets associated with Iran’s nuclear program. This is standard planning for any military, and the IDF has received nearly $3 billion in additional funds to do it……
Germany’s dramatic departure from the nuclear industry. Other European States follow.
On the last day of 2021, as final preparations were being made for the New
Year’s Eve firework display in central Berlin, outside the German capital
another era was drawing to a close. It was the beginning of the end of
Germany’s decades-long dalliance with nuclear power.
On December 31, Germany shut down three of its six remaining nuclear plants. By the end of
2022, the other three will be shut as well. Two decades after an agreement
to eliminate nuclear power became law, the country’s phaseout has been
dramatic. In 2002, Germany relied on nuclear power for nearly 30 percent of
its electricity. Within a year, that percentage will be zero.
Germany isn’t the only European nation reevaluating its relationship with nuclear
energy. Its neighbor Belgium currently sources nearly 40 percent of its
electricity from nuclear power but has committed to closing down its seven
remaining reactors by 2025.
To the south, Switzerland has already shut down
one of its five remaining nuclear power plants, the first stage in what
will eventually be a total phaseout. Switzerland’s phaseout was decided
in a 2017 referendum, when the majority of the public endorsed an energy
strategy that subsidized renewables and banned new nuclear power plants.
The Swiss referendum was driven by environmental concerns raised in the
wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, when three reactors melted after a
tsunami overwhelmed the power plant. That disaster, and concerns about the
disposal of nuclear waste, also hastened Germany’s nuclear shutdown.
Shortly afterward, then-chancellor Angela Merkel—who had previously said
she didn’t agree with shutting down nuclear plants early—announced that
Germany would no longer extend the operating life of existing plants.
Ars Technica 23rd Jan 2022
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/01/europe-is-in-the-middle-of-a-messy-nuclear-showdown/
A (too) well kept secret — Beyond Nuclear International
The nuclear ban deserves a higher profile and universal endorsement
A (too) well kept secret — Beyond Nuclear International
Time to avert ‘global nuclear Holocaust’ — Beyond Nuclear International
Groups demand elimination of US land-based nuclear missiles
Time to avert ‘global nuclear Holocaust’ — Beyond Nuclear International
Biden, NATO chief, NATO Quint, EU leaders jointly threaten Russia with reinforced eastern flank, “massive consequences” — Anti-bellum
For the army of scribblers who have recently made a cottage industry out of discovering fissures in the edifice of the U.S./NATO/EU triumvirate vis-a-vis Russia. Not that the following will in any fashion slow them down. The accursed monolith has been painstakingly crafted for over thirty years and won’t be dismantled without a comprehensive effort. […]
Biden, NATO chief, NATO Quint, EU leaders jointly threaten Russia with reinforced eastern flank, “massive consequences” — Anti-bellum
Tight timetable for the Rolls Royce-led conglomeration to ever get their small nuclear reactors built
The reactors themselves will be installed at existing nuclear sites in
Britain. Rolls-Royce has not yet committed to any sites but Wylfa and
Trawsfynydd in north Wales are believed to be under consideration.
The company and its partners, which include Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund and
France’s wealthy Perrodo family, expect to decide on where to locate the
factory this year and to start construction soon after.
They face a tight timetable if they are to stay on track to meet their ambition to complete
the first 470MW plant by the early 2030s. Alongside the site selection, the
companies are putting their SMR design through the UK’s rigorous nuclear
regulatory regime, a process that is expected to take up to four years.
Irish Times 23rd Jan 2022
NB POWER seeks unprecedented 25-year licence for Point Lepreau nuclear power station
NB Power seeks unprecedented 25-year licence for Point Lepreau nuclear power station, Coast Reporter, 24 Jan 22, FREDERICTON — The licence for Atlantic Canada’s only nuclear power generating station expires in June, and the New Brunswick Crown corporation that operates the aging CANDU-6 reactor is seeking to renew it for an unprecedented 25-year term.
he Canadian Pressabout 12 hours ago
Updated about 11 hours ago FREDERICTON — The licence for Atlantic Canada’s only nuclear power generating station expires in June, and the New Brunswick Crown corporation that operates the aging CANDU-6 reactor is seeking to renew it for an unprecedented 25-year term.
The last two licences to operate the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station, located about 40 km southwest of Saint John, N.B., were for five years each.
“We are asking for a 25-year licence, which would be a first in Canada, based on some improvements that the regulator has made, but also on the very strong safety and reliability performance that we’ve seen from all the Canadian nuclear stations,” Jason Nouwens, director of regulatory and external affairs for NB Power, told reporters in a briefing on Friday.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has scheduled the first phase of the application hearing on Wednesday in Ottawa.
Gail Wylie with the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development called the request for a 25-year licence “really absurd.”
Wylie will be one of the public interveners when the safety commission holds the second phase of the application hearings in Saint John in May.
“We are very much interested in renewable energy because we know it’s clean and we know the problems and history of nuclear energy here,” she said in a recent interview. “Nuclear inherently has got its risks and the radioactive waste.”
Wylie said she’s concerned that extending the life of the 660-megawatt nuclear generator will slow the transition to what she calls cleaner and cheaper forms of renewable energy.
Point Lepreau opened in 1983 and operated until 2008, when it closed for a major refurbishment intended to extend its lifespan by 25 years. It was reconnected to the power grid in October 2012.
Wylie said NB Power’s request for a licence until 2047 exceeds the lifespan targets that were announced after the refurbishment. She said she plans to ask questions about how the utility is dealing with staffing levels during the COVID-19 pandemic, threats of cyberattacks, and impacts of climate change.
Wylie also wants to know about how plans to develop advanced small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) on the Lepreau site will impact the operation of the main reactor. Two companies, Moltex and ARC, are working with NB Power to develop the portable reactor technology.
Nouwens, however, said the licence application doesn’t include development of SMRs.
“The re-licensing process for Point Lepreau is completely separate from any licensing process for SMRs,” he said. “Our 25-year licence renewal covers the scope of what’s currently at Point Lepreau and what the plans would be for our current station operations.” …………….
Like Wylie, Dalzell said he also plans to ask questions about climate change and about how Point Lepreau’s location on the shore of the Bay of Fundy could be affected by sea-level rise and extreme weather events. Kevin Bissett, The Canadian Press https://www.coastreporter.net/the-mix/nb-power-seeks-unprecedented-25-year-licence-for-point-lepreau-nuclear-power-station-4985518
-
Archives
- February 2026 (228)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 