TODAY. Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles – a puppet of the American war industry – leading us on to WW3

We’re headed to take the brunt of USA’s next military adventure – and all to the tune of Marles repeating his mantra for AUKUS – the “fools’ based international order”.
Under the apparently mindless guidance of Richard Marles, the Australian government has leapt into full embrace of the American military-industrial-corporate-complex, – all without Parliamentary and public discussion and consent.
It has been painful to watch the transformation of the Australian Labor Party -happening slowly over the decades since 1975, but now suddenly speeded up.
The most recent revelations – that Australian tax-payers are feeding $7000 a day to shonky USA military has-beens, while Australia’s job-seekers get a lousy $50 a day. That’s the best example of the priorities of the Australian Labor government. On top of $billion deals to buy nuclear submarine, missile launchers etc, and set up military targes across the nation.

Another fine example is the government’s miserable silence on the fate of Australian citizen Julian Assange. Assange had the temerity to reveal USA”s military abuses – so his retribution is assured. And Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, weasel-word Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and of course, our brainless U.S. puppet Richard Marles toe the American line.
Don’t imagine that the Liberals and Nationals are any better – (though they’re just so poorly organised and incompetent that we might even be safer with them.)
What Australia now has a sort of joint party – the LaborNatEral Party perhaps – the sooner they sign us up as the 51st State of USA , the better the public will understand where we’re headed .
We’re headed to take the brunt of USA’s next military adventure – and all to the tune of Marles repeating his mantra for AUKUS – the “fools’ based international order”.

Stop SpaceX from crashing rockets in the Pacific.

Hawaii should not be a collateral sacrifice zone for a private space company working for the pentagon
Hawaii needs to have input on SpaceX ocean-landing plan, STAR ADVERTISER. By Lynda Williams, APRIL 27, 2023
The world watched aghast as SpaceX blew up its own spaceship on April 20, four minutes after launch due to engine failure. Even though the mission was not completed, Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX, claimed it was a success because the real goal was for the rocket to clear the launch pad at the spaceport in Boca Chica, Texas.
What most folks don’t know or realize is that Starship was always going to blow up when it crashlanded in the Pacific Ocean, just 62 nautical miles north of Kauai and a few hundred miles east of the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument.
In the next test launch, which Musk boasted will happen in the next few months, the world’s largest spaceship will descend toward Earth in free fall and blow up upon impact with a force of a ton of TNT as fuel ignites in a great explosion. On a second and third launch test, Starship will break up in the atmosphere and tumble down and crash-land in a debris field several hundred miles southwest of the island chain.
SpaceX obtained a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) commercial space launch license (experimental permit), rubber-stamped by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA) without any consultation of Hawaii’s people because, according to an email I received from the FAA: “No in-person public outreach was conducted in Hawaii as the Starship vehicle was planned to land outside of range for impacts to the residents of Hawaii.”
First of all, that is assuming everything goes exactly according to the plan, which we have all just witnessed doesn’t always happen. If the Starship goes off course by even a few degrees, the consequences could be catastrophic to Hawaii.
Secondly, I think most folks in Hawaii would agree that 62 miles north of Kauai is considered Hawaii culturally if not legally, and that is way too close for what is essentially a rocket bomb to crash-land.
SpaceX was not required to do a full environmental impact study (EIS), but a much-weaker environmental assessment (EA) that only requires the analysis of “nominal operations” or bestcase scenarios. Why was that allowed when the worst-case scenarios are so catastrophic?
In the EA, rather than doing a detailed analysis of the potential impact to marine mammals protected by the Endangered Species Act, NOAA wrote a “Biological Opinion” that argued “less than one” animal would be harmed by a 100 ton steel rocket exploding with the energy of a small nuclear bomb.
It came to that conclusion because it analyzed only one “nominal” scenario in which the rocket hits the water exactly horizontal to the surface with the fuel tanks orientated on top, which is impossible to control or predict. If the explosion is above water, NOAA argues, only a fraction of the energy will be transmitted into the ocean and travel deep enough to harm any of the 30 endangered species of whales, sharks, turtles, monk seals, dolphins and rays in Hawaii.
The EA has many unsubstantiated claims, such as no animals would be near the surface of the water during the crash — even though most are mammals that surface to breathe air.
It ignored the fact that Humpback whales migrate through the target “action area.” It assumed that most of the debris will be large enough to sink to the bottom of the ocean without encountering and injuring animals — but if any does drift into the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, then the Coast Guard would be sent to clean it up.
This alone is reason to contest the EA and demand an EIS since NOAA and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs co-manage Papahanaumokuakea and OHA should have been consulted, but was not.
The FAA and NOAA analyses are flawed, and both are failing in their duty to protect the people of Hawaii from extreme corporate and federal government abuse.
Hawaii must not become collateral damage and a colonized sacrifice zone for the government’s privatization of the space program and a billionaire’s personal ambition and corporate profits.
At minimum, the FAA must suspend the SpaceX license, conduct a full EIS and include the residents of Hawaii in the review process. The best plan is to ban SpaceX from trashing people and planet in Musk’s ego trip to Mars.
ISLAND VOICES
Port Kembla no place for a nuclear subs base, say local campaigners

Activists in Wollongong are organising against plans for nearby Port Kembla to host the East Coast base for the AUKUS nuclear submarines. Solidarity spoke to Alexander Brown from Wollongong Against War and Nukes about local opposition and how unions have dedicated this year’s May Day march to opposing the plan
The cost is around $10 billion for an East Coast submarine base. The Treasurer says they can’t afford the $24 billion required to increase Centrelink payments above poverty levels and yet they can afford to spend $10 billion on a war base. And that’s a small part of the overall $368 billion dollars for AUKUS. It’s a gross waste of money.
The strategic justification for it doesn’t make any sense. That’s being picked apart even within the Labor Party by people like Paul Keating and Bob Carr. We’re now seeing current sitting MPs start to express criticism. The submarines may arrive in between ten to 30 years, when their supporters in ASPI and the Sydney Morning Herald say we’re about to have war with China in the next three years. If so the subs are not going to be much use.
More importantly, it’s a ridiculous approach to peace making in the region to say we will arm ourselves to the teeth and that will deter China. China and its regime have many problems but they’re not a military threat to Australia now and they’re unlikely to be in the future. And if these subs are supposed to be to defend shipping, we are shipping most of our exports to China anyway, so who are we defending it against?
We need to build people-to-people solidarity with ordinary people in China to ensure peace and democracy in the whole region—not get drawn into a US provocation and starting a regional arms race.
What kind of actions have you taken to build opposition?
When Scott Morrison suggested that Port Kembla could be a site for an East Coast submarine base there was a protest called by the Student Association at Wollongong University, and different groups and individuals including unions and local councillors came to that.
We started organising a dedicated campaign group called Wollongong Against War and Nukes (WAWAN) and held a successful rally about a year ago to support the local council renewing the declaration of Wollongong as a nuclear free zone, which goes back to 1980.
We held a public meeting with former Greens Senator Scott Ludlam and the South Coast Secretary of the Maritime Union.
We had a rally here two weeks ago, because some local business interests held a defence industry conference and want to build a war industry down here.
This year when the Labor government so fully endorsed continuing AUKUS, after I think many people hoped they might back away, it created shock.
Then there was also a report in the ABC that Port Kembla was firming up as the most likely location for the submarine base. So the campaign has really picked up in the last two months.
The local South Coast Labor Council endorsed a motion to oppose having a nuclear base here.
Unions like the maritime union have put a lot of work into trying to plan for a renewable energy industry here to survive the big shocks that are coming in terms of the decline of coal and steel. They’re interested in expanding offshore wind and potentially green steel through hydrogen.
WAWAN has a community meeting in Port Kembla on 29 April, and we are calling for everyone who can get there to come and support the South Coast May Day march on Saturday 6 May, which will include opposition to the nuclear base alongside the slogan of “Peace, Jobs and Justice”.
Wollongong and Port Kembla steel works have been hotbeds of militancy since the beginning of last century and that tradition continues. The Dalfram dispute in the 1930s saw waterside workers refuse to load pig iron bound for Japan, because they knew that it would be used to make bombs and bullets for the Japanese invasion of China. Pig iron exports to Japan more or less stopped after that struggle.
In the Vietnam War there was a strong movement here and in the 1980s the anti-nuclear movement was really big in Wollongong and the unions were a major part of that. A lot of people in Wollongong have seized the opportunity to say that fighting unionism needs to look beyond the workplace at the environment that workers are going to be living in and creating.
We are wasting money and resources on the defence industry when we could be spending that money on addressing climate change and jobs through a Green New Deal.
Unions back renewable energy jobs over nuclear subs
The South Coast Labour Council, which represents unions in and around Wollongong, is opposing the submarine base as a threat to alternative jobs in the area.
Port Kembla has been assessed as an ideal spot for offshore wind developments, due to wind conditions, grid connections and the working harbour. The area is one of the NSW government’s priority Renewable Energy Zones, with at least two companies already carrying out scoping work for multi-billion dollar offshore wind projects.
Even NSW Ports and the Port Kembla Chamber of Commerce have warned that the Outer Harbour site is needed for wind turbine assembly as well as a new container port, and should not be taken by defence. This is also the likely site for the submarine base. Even the two offshore wind projects already proposed would create thousands of jobs in construction as well as over 500 ongoing jobs.
March against the nuclear base in Port Kembla
12pm Saturday 6 May, Wentworth St, Port Kembla, more details here
Sign up for travel from Sydney here
Australia pays former US defence chiefs $7000 a day for advice

By Matthew Knott, April 27, 2023 https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-pays-former-us-defence-chiefs-7000-a-day-for-advice-20230427-p5d3lh.html
The federal government is paying retired senior American military officials up to $7500 a day for advice on major defence projects such as the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine pact.
The government this week announced that, following its sweeping defence strategic review, retired United States Navy vice admiral William Hilarides would be hired to lead a snap review of the Royal Australian Navy’s surface fleet.
The review, to be handed to the government later this year, will examine whether planned fleets of Australian-made frigates and patrol vessels should be cut to free up money for smaller and more nimble vessels.
Hilarides has previously charged the Australian government US$4000 ($6000) a day for his consulting services, according to US Navy documents first reported by The Washington Post.
Hilarides has won naval consulting contracts from the federal government worth up to $1.6 million ($2.4 million) since 2016, according to figures from the Department of Defence.
Hilarides serves as chair of the Australian naval shipbuilding expert advisory panel and advised the government over the past 18 months while it finalised the deal with the United States and Britain to build a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy defended Hilarides’ appointment to the new navy fleet review this week, saying he had “a long association with Australia” and would do a good job.
In an investigation published last year The Post described Hilarides, a career submariner, as part of a large group of former senior US officials that Australia had relied upon heavily to guide its naval policies.
“To an extraordinary degree in recent years, Australia has relied on high-priced American consultants to decide which ships and submarines to buy and how to manage strategic acquisition projects,” The Post said.
Retired admiral John Richardson, who headed the United States Navy from 2015 to 2019, has received US$5000 ($7570) a day as a part-time consultant to the federal, according to documents released by the Pentagon to the US Congress.
Richardson was hired by the Department of Defence last November to provide advice on the best pathway for Australia to acquire a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
According to the documents, Richardson receives travel and lodging expenses to complete his work in Australia.
Richardson, the former US navy chief, told The Post: “I spent most of my life helping to keep America and our allies and partners safe and secure.
It’s a privilege to be invited to be able to use my experience, and help where I can to continue that work.”
Defence Minister Richard Marles on Thursday said outside advice was crucial to ensuring the government makes the correct decisions about significant defence policies.
“When we seek expert advice in relation to critical issues and challenges that we face, we have a global perspective in terms of where we seek that advice from and that’s really important because we want the very best advice,” he said.
“We make no apology for that because the kinds of challenges and decisions we’re making are profoundly important for the future of our country and where we have sought advice from those former officials in the US Navy that has been on issues of profound importance for our nation’s future.”
Greens defence spokesman David Shoebridge said he was shocked that Australia could seemingly not find local experts available to do these jobs.
“If that is true then it’s a pretty extraordinary failure on the part of the government and the ADF,” he said.
“You can only really explain this by Defence’s ongoing dependence on, and deference to, the US.”
He said it was remarkable that the US government had been more transparent than Australian government contracts than the federal government.
Chernobyl anniversary offers a bleak look at what may await other Ukrainian nuclear plants

A huge steel and concrete sarcophagus covers the site of the meltdown. Under its dome, called the New Safe Confinement, lie 200 tons of lava-like nuclear fuel, 30 tons of highly contaminated dust and 16 tons of uranium and plutonium that continue to release high levels of radiation.
April 26, 2023 by Charles Digges https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2023-04-chernobyl-anniversar
A little over a year ago, Russian troops abandoned Chernobyl after briefly occupying it during the grim opening days of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. The takeover of the site where the world’s worst nuclear disaster happened thirty-seven years ago this week offered a preview of the reckless disregard for nuclear safety that has characterized so much of this war.
While the site has been left to Ukraine to painstakingly restore since the Russian withdrawal on March 31, 2022, the new anniversary of the Chernobyl plant’s original disaster on April 26, 1986, leaves lingering questions about what, exactly, the world can do when Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure — or indeed any nuclear infrastructure — is attacked by a hostile neighbor.
The answer, at this point? Not much — aside from trying to pick up the pieces after the damage is already done.
As it stands, the Chernobyl exclusion zone is still dotted with mines planted by Russian troops when they rolled into the territory, churning up clouds of radioactive dust with hundreds of heavily armored vehicles. The mines have made treacherous any efforts to restore the territory.
Russian troops also dug trenches and set fires in an area known as the Red Forest — a gnarled expanse of irradiated trees — and scorched, according to NASA, some 14,000 hectares of land, filling the air with so much radioactive smoke that it was unsafe for firefighters to quell the blazes.
All the while, hundreds of Chernobyl employees — who oversee the site’s sprawling network of spent fuel storage facilities as well as the enormous efforts to dismantle the radioactive remnants of the exploded No. 4 reactor — were held hostage onsite, prevented from rotating out at the end of their shifts. Five workers were kidnapped and nine were killed, according to The Washington Post.
Those who remained said later that they had tried to keep the Russians from the most dangerous areas within the plant’s territory. But in what many called the worst situation they have seen in the decades since the initial disaster, Chernobyl’s power was cut by fighting, leaving them to rely on diesel generators for nearly a week to support the critical work of circulating water to cool spent nuclear fuel.
The damage the Russian soldiers did wasn’t purely technical. Doors to offices were ripped off hinges, windows smashed, walls spray-painted with graffiti.
“The poop was the icing on the cake,” Aleksander Barsukov, deputy director of the Chernobyl Ecocenter, which keeps samples of radioactive material collected from all over the world, told The Wall Street Journal after the Russian retreat.
By the time Russian troops pulled back from the plant on March 31, 2022 — amid reports of possible radiation poisoning among their ranks — Chernobyl’s technicians had been held at literal gunpoint at their workstations for more than a month.
During the retreat, according to Ukrainian accounts, Russian soldiers ransacked the site and took anything that looked valuable, looting more than 1,000 computers, and spiriting away dosimeters, software, lab tools, firefighting equipment — and in some cases even household appliances — piling them in stolen Ukrainian trucks.
“Whatever they didn’t steal, they broke,” Chernobyl Information Director Vitaly Medved told the BBC at the time.
Russian soldiers then brazenly mailed much of the booty home from across the Belarusian border. They also made off with radioactive instruments used to calibrate personal dosimeters for Chernobyl staff — substances that can cause radiation burns if handled improperly.
According to the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, which has financed much of Chernobyl’s cleanup work since the original 1986 disaster, the Russian Army’s destructive adventure in the world’s most famous radioactive wasteland will cost some €100 million to repair.
The four RBMK reactors at the enormous nuclear station in Chernobyl no longer produce power, but before the invasion nearly 6,000 workers monitored the lasting effects of the disastrous meltdown that took place in 1986, as well oversaw as processing spent nuclear fuel from other plants in Ukraine. In the days before the invasion, all but a few hundred employees were evacuated.
Located just a few miles from the Belarusian border, Chernobyl was one of the first places occupied by Russian troops. Yevhen Kramarenko, the director of the exclusion zone — the 2,6000-square-kilometer area where radiation levels remain high and public access is limited — told The Washington Post that on the first day of the invasion, a Russian general presented himself as the new leader of the station, and introduced employees from Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear corporation.
“I believe that at the time when they came,” Kramarenko told the paper, “they planned to be there permanently, they planned to take control for a long time.”
A sign of things to come?
Even before the occupation, the Chernobyl station had a post-apocalyptic air. It is situated in a dense forest, swarming with mosquitoes and gnats. Pripyat, the city where employees lived before the disaster, now stands empty and is being reconquered by nature.
A huge steel and concrete sarcophagus covers the site of the meltdown. Under its dome, called the New Safe Confinement, lie 200 tons of lava-like nuclear fuel, 30 tons of highly contaminated dust and 16 tons of uranium and plutonium that continue to release high levels of radiation.
Yet while Rosatom may have failed to keep hold of Chernobyl, the same cannot be said about Ukraine’s embattled Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant — Europe’s largest such facility — which once supplied a fifth of Ukraine’s electricity.
Since October of 2022, Moscow claims that it now controls the plant — a claim not honored by the UN’s International Atomic Energy Association, to say nothing of Kyiv.
From then on, Rosatom has begun flooding the Zaporizhzhia plant with Russian staff that it has transferred from its own Kalinin nuclear plant, 545 kilometers across the front to the northeast.
But while Russia asserts the six-reactor facility has been taken over as a protective measure, there is little to suggest that the joining of Russian and Ukrainian workforces is going smoothly. Only about 2,000 Ukrainian staff members still work at the plant, out of 11,000 before the war.
Indeed, much of Rosatom’s effort to assert itself at the plant has involved arresting and torturing Ukrainian workers opposed to the occupation as it toils to link Zaporizhzhia with the Russian electricity grid.
The plant, which lies on the south side of the Dnipro River next to the nuclear plant’s home city of Enerhodar, is on the front line of the war. Ukrainian troops are just a few of kilometers to the north, on the far bank of the Dnipro, while Russians are holed up in the power plant.Anxieties are high that the area could see renewed fighting in any Ukrainian counteroffensive.
Ukraine accuses the Russians of using the plant as a shield, hoping that the danger of causing a nuclear accident will keep Ukrainian soldiers from firing on them — the first time an atomic reactor has been put in such a position.
“They know Ukrainian troops would not dare to fire back. The nuclear power plant is a perfect hiding place from Ukrainian artillery,” Oleksiy Melnychuk, a former worker at the plant who fled from Enerhodar last July to Ukrainian-held territory, told Politico.eu. The Russians in turn accuse the Ukrainians of ignoring safety protocols and firing on areas near the plant.
The IAEA has inspectors on site and has been trying to walk a diplomatic tightrope to establish a non-military safety zone around the plant. While Moscow says it is keen to do so, Kyiv is leery of any step that could lend legitimacy to the Russian occupation.
Late last month, IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi dropped the idea, and instead is now pushing for both sides to take steps to ensure that the plant isn’t attacked.
Over the last year, four of the station’s six VVER reactors have been put into a cold shutdown to minimize the risk of an accident, while two have been restarted to produce low levels of power to keep the plant operational. The facility needs access to electricity to ensure reactor cooling and other safety functions. However, its links to the Ukrainian grid have been cut six times since last March, forcing the ZNPP to rely on diesel-powered generators for emergency backup power — a situation that IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has referred to as “rolling the dice.”
“And if we allow this to continue time after time then one day our luck will run out,” he added.
Still, even as events deteriorate, there is little the world can do but watch.
Even Grossi — who heads the world’s most respected nuclear power diplomacy body — has admitted as much. During a meeting of the IAEA’s 35-member board of governors last month, Grossi castigated his colleagues for “complacency” after the latest spate of airstrikes had again cut off Zaporizhzhia’s access to grid electricity.
“What are we doing to prevent this [from] happening?“ a flabbergasted Grossi asked the board. ”We are the IAEA, we are meant to care about nuclear safety.”
Even so, aspirations of pushing out the Russians among plant workers remain high.
“We still hope de-occupation is possible,” Melnychuk told Politico.eu. “You can’t even imagine how ready we all are to return and let our colleagues, working under tremendous pressure and fear, to finally have some rest.”
Unfortunately, the state of Chernobyl offers the clearest glimpse of what they may find if — or when — that time comes.
New nuclear tech not the answer to Canada’s climate woes, MPs say
National Observer, By Natasha Bulowski & Matteo Cimellaro, Ottawa Insider | April 26th 2023
Next-generation nuclear technology “has no part in fighting the climate emergency,” Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said Tuesday as a handful of MPs joined anti-nuclear activists to voice concern about the federal government’s intention to expand nuclear power.
“It, in fact, takes valuable dollars away from things that we know work, that can be implemented immediately, in favour of untested and dangerous technologies that will not be able to generate a single kilowatt of electricity for a decade or more,” the Saanich-Gulf Islands MP said at a cross-party press conference.
The comments came one day after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Canada must produce more nuclear power in the years to come. The federal government is funding the development of small modular reactors (SMRs) with a stated aim of replacing coal plants, powering heavy industry operations such as the oilsands and providing electricity for remote, diesel-reliant communities.
Ontario, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Alberta have agreed to a joint strategic plan for deploying SMRs to “provide safe, reliable and zero-emissions energy to power our growing economy and population.” In 2019, approximately 38 per cent of New Brunswick’s electricity generation was from nuclear, and Ontario is sitting at roughly 60 per cent.
…………critics argue the timelines, cost overruns and delays associated with building nuclear power generation facilities contrast with the need to immediately scale up fossil fuel-free energy to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. The longevity of radioactive waste, which is hazardous to human health and the environment, also raises questions among critics, as do concerns about nuclear proliferation.
Susan O’Donnell, a member of the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick, warned: “SMRs create new types of toxic radioactive waste that would be very costly and difficult to isolate from the environment for millions of years.”
Some SMRs would extract plutonium — a radioactive, silvery metal used in nuclear weapons and power plants — mixed with other substances from nuclear fuel waste. But to do so undermines global nuclear weapons non-proliferation agreements, said O’Donnell, who is also an adjunct research professor in the environment and society program at St. Thomas University.
May, Liberal MP Jenica Atwin, Bloc Québécois MP Mario Simard and NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice attended the cross-party press conference on April 25…………..
May and Boulerice pointed to the influence of the nuclear industry on Parliament Hill and the close relationship between Natural Resources Canada and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, a federal Crown corporation and the largest nuclear science and technology laboratory in the country.
“They don’t have to knock on the door to get into the house because they own the house,” said Boulerice of industry lobbyists.
“There’s no question that the nuclear industry has far more access to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission in terms of raising different concerns about SMRs” compared to the anti-nuclear camp, said O’Donnell.
The expansion and maintenance of nuclear power in Canada will have to deal with its significant waste problem. …………………..
…………………………………… not all agree Canada should remain a nuclear-dependent nation.
“I think the prime minister needs better advisers,” said O’Donnell, in reference to Trudeau’s recent comments that an expansion of nuclear energy will be necessary going forward………. https://www.nationalobserver.com/2023/04/26/news/new-nuclear-tech-not-answer-canada-climate-woes-mps-say
Survivors of Britain’s Cold War radiation experiments to have their stories recorded
Survivors of Britain’s Cold War radiation experiments are to have their
life stories recorded and stored in the British Library. The £250,000
scheme will lead to a documentary and resources to teach A-level students
about the Cold War and the impact the weapons testing programme had on the
men who took part in it, and their families.
Dr Chris Hill, one of the academics leading the project, said: “It’s about furthering their story, embedding it deeper in the public consciousness and confronting what is a
very problematic part of Britain’s history.”
Mirror 27th April 2023
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nuclear-heroes-win-250000-documentary-29833221
France to participate in Russian Rosatom’s Hungary nuclear power plant project.
Hungary: France ready to participate in Russian Rosatom’s nuclear power
plant project. The executive gave the green light to Framatome to take part
in the construction of two new reactors at the Paks power plant, arguing
that the nuclear industry is not targeted by international sanctions
against Russia.
Le Monde 27th April 2023.
Russia is preparing to defend Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
According to British intelligence, Russian occupying forces in Ukraine have
built defensive positions at the reactors of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power
plant (NPP) in Enerhodar. By reinforcing their positions, the Russians are
preparing for a counterattack by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. At the same
time, their actions increase the probability of damage to security systems.
The UK Ministry of Defence’s Twitter account published a satellite image on
April 27 showing the occupiers’ defensive positions at the Zaporizhzhia
NPP.
Emerging Europe 27th April 2023
Lawmakers propose banning AI from singlehandedly launching nuclear weapons
29 Apr 23 https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/28/23702992/ai-nuclear-weapon-launch-ban-bill-markey-lieu-beyer-buck
Yes, this is already banned, but there are logical reasons to affirm the policy.
American Department of Defense policy already bans artificial intelligence from autonomously launching nuclear weapons. But amid rising fears of AI spurred by a plethora of potential threats, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has decided to make extra-double-sure it can’t.
As announced earlier this week, Senator Edward Markey (D-MA) and Representatives Ted Lieu (D-CA), Don Beyer (D-VA), and Ken Buck (R-CO) have introduced the Block Nuclear Launch by Autonomous AI Act, which would “prohibit the use of Federal funds to launch a nuclear weapon using an autonomous weapons system that is not subject to meaningful human control.” The act would codify existing Pentagon rules for nuclear weapons, which, as of 2022, read thusly:
“In all cases, the United States will maintain a human ‘in the loop’ for all actions critical to informing and executing decisions by the President to initiate and terminate nuclear weapon employment.”
The bill, by the same token, says that no autonomous system without meaningful human oversight can launch a nuclear weapon or “select or engage targets” with the intention of launching one. “Any decision to launch a nuclear weapon should not be made by artificial intelligence,” the text reads.
If this is already forbidden, why introduce the bill? Its sponsors note that a 2021 National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence report recommended affirming a ban on autonomous nuclear weapons launches, not only to prevent it from happening inside the US government but to spur similar commitments from China and Russia.
Publicizing the bill calls attention to the potential dangers of current-generation autonomous artificial intelligence systems, a going concern in Congress and the tech world alike. And as indicated by the press release, it offers a chance to highlight the sponsors’ other nuclear non-proliferation efforts — like a recent bill restricting the president’s power to unilaterally declare nuclear war. I’ll let you make the obvious War Games joke yourself.
EDF Q1 revenues rise but nuclear output declines
PARIS, April 28 (Reuters) more https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/edf-says-q1-revenues-rise-nuclear-output-down-2023-04-28/ Reporting by Benjamin Mallet, editing by Silvia Aloisi – French nuclear power giant EDF (EDF.PA) said first-quarter like-for-like sales rose by 34.6% to 47.8 billion euros ($52.64 billion) thanks to higher electricity and gas prices, though it reported a fall in nuclear output due to reactor outages and strikes in France.
Reporting by Benjamin Mallet, editing by Silvia Aloisi
“This decrease is explained by a lower nuclear fleet availability, mainly due to outages for the controls and repairs on the pipes affected by the stress corrosion phenomenon, and to the impacts of social movements,” EDF said in a statement.
The group, which is in the process of being fully nationalised, confirmed its estimate of nuclear output in France for 2023 in a range of 300-330TWh.
Nuclear production fell to a 34-year low last year due to a record number of reactor outages at EDF, turning France into a net importer of electricity for the first time since 1980.
Plans to release nuclear wastewater into Hudson River delayed following outcry

Spectrum News, By John Camera Hudson Valley, Apr. 28, 2023
Manna Jo Greene, an Ulster County legislator and environmental director for Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, does not want to see the proposed release of nuclear wastewater from Indian Point into the Hudson River to go forward.
She says standards that deem the proposed discharge safe are outdated.
“And we’re also looking into whether or not this could impact communities that take their drinking water from the Hudson,” Greene said.
……………………………… For now, the release of about 300,000 gallons of nuclear wastewater has been slated for September, giving more time to determine the best path forward.
The next meeting from the Indian Point Decommissioning Oversight Board will take place June 15. https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/hudson-valley/news/2023/04/28/release-of-nuclear-wastewater-into-hudson-pushed-to-fall
NATO conference pushes arms procurements for Ukraine, future wars — Anti-bellum

NATOApril 26, 2023 NATO Secretary General: we must go further and faster to procure key capabilities and boost stockpiles Opening a two-day Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) session at NATO Headquarters on Wednesday (26 April 2023), Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg urged Allies to ramp up weapons and ammunition production, and rapidly replenish stockpiles. This […]
NATO conference pushes arms procurements for Ukraine, future wars — Anti-bellum
Will the West turn Ukraine into a nuclear battlefield?

Stuart Dyson died in 2008 at the age of 39…….. his cancer was later recognized in a court of law as having been caused by exposure to depleted uranium. In a landmark 2009 ruling, jurors at the Smethwick Council House in the UK found that Dyson’s cancer had resulted from DU accumulating in his body, and in particular his internal organs.
While the UK’s decision to send depleted uranium shells is unlikely to turn the tide, it will have a lasting, potentially devastating, impact.
APRIL 26, 2023 byJoshua Frank
It’s sure to be a blood-soaked spring in Ukraine. Russia’s winter offensive fell far short of Vladimir Putin’s objectives, leaving little doubt that the West’s conveyor belt of weaponry has aided Ukraine’s defenses. Cease-fire negotiations have never truly begun, while NATO has only strengthened its forces thanks to Finland’s new membership (with Sweden soon likely to follow). Still, tens of thousands of people have perished; whole villages, even cities, have been reduced to rubble; millions of Ukrainians have poured into Poland and elsewhere; while Russia’s brutish invasion rages on with no end in sight.
The hope, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, is that the Western allies will continue to furnish money, tanks, missiles, and everything else his battered country needs to fend off Putin’s forces. The war will be won, according to Zelensky, not through backroom compromises but on the battlefield with guns and ammo.
“I appeal to you and the world with these most simple and yet important words,” he said to a joint session of Great Britain’s parliament in February. “Combat aircraft for Ukraine, wings for freedom.”
The United Kingdom, which has committed well over $2 billion in assistance to Ukraine, has so far refused to ship fighter jets there but has promised to supply more weaponry, including tank shells made with depleted uranium (DU), also known as “radioactive bullets.” A by-product of uranium enrichment, DU is a very dense and radioactive metal that, when housed in small torpedo-like munitions, can pierce thickly armored tanks and other vehicles.
Reacting to the British announcement, Putin ominously said he would “respond accordingly” if the Ukrainians begin blasting off rounds of DU.
Stuart Dyson survived his deployment in the first Gulf War of 1991, where he served as a lance corporal with Britain’s Royal Pioneer Corps. His task in Kuwait was simple enough: he was to help clean up “dirty” tanks after they had seen battle. Many of the machines he spent hours scrubbing down had carried and fired depleted uranium shells used to penetrate and disable Iraq’s T-72 tanks, better known as the Lions of Babylon.
Dyson spent five months in that war zone, ensuring American and British tanks were cleaned, armed, and ready for battle. When the war ended, he returned home, hoping to put his time in the Gulf War behind him. He found a decent job, married, and had children. Yet his health deteriorated rapidly and he came to believe that his military service was to blame. Like so many others who had served in that conflict, Dyson suffered from a mysterious and debilitating illness that came to be known as Gulf War Syndrome.
After Dyson suffered years of peculiar ailments, ranging from headaches to dizziness and muscle tremors, doctors discovered that he had a severe case of colon cancer, which rapidly spread to his spleen and liver. The prognosis was bleak and, after a short battle, his body finally gave up. Stuart Dyson died in 2008 at the age of 39.
His saga is unique, not because he was the only veteran of the first Gulf War to die of such a cancer at a young age, but because his cancer was later recognized in a court of law as having been caused by exposure to depleted uranium. In a landmark 2009 ruling, jurors at the Smethwick Council House in the UK found that Dyson’s cancer had resulted from DU accumulating in his body, and in particular his internal organs……………………………………………………………………………………

Both Russia and the U.S. have reasons for using DU, since each has piles of the stuff sitting around with nowhere to put it. Decades of manufacturing nuclear weapons have created a mountain of radioactive waste. In the U.S., more than 500,000 tons of depleted-uranium waste has built up since the Manhattan Project first created atomic weaponry, much of it in Hanford, Washington, the country’s main plutonium production site. As I investigated in my book Atomic Days: The Untold Story of the Most Toxic Place in America, Hanford is now a cesspool of radioactive and chemical waste, representing the most expensive environmental clean-up project in history with an estimated price tag of $677 billion………………………………………………………….
Of course, we’ve known about the dangers of uranium for decades, which makes it all the more mind-boggling to see a renewed push for increased mining of that radioactive ore to generate nuclear power. The only way to ensure that uranium doesn’t poison or kill anyone is to leave it right where it’s always been: in the ground. Sadly, even if you were to do so now, there would still be tons of depleted uranium with nowhere to go. A 2016 estimate put the world’s mountain of DU waste at more than one million tons (each equal to 2,000 pounds).
So why isn’t depleted uranium banned? That’s a question antinuclear activists have been asking for years. It’s often met with government claims that DU isn’t anywhere near as bad as its peacenik critics allege. In fact, the U.S. government has had a tough time even acknowledging that Gulf War Syndrome exists. A Government Accountability Office report released in 2017 found that the Veterans Affairs Department had denied more than 80% of all Gulf War illness claims by veterans. Downplaying DU’s role, in other words, comes with the terrain.
“The use of DU in weapons should be prohibited,” maintains Ray Acheson, an organizer for the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons and author of Banning the Bomb, Smashing the Patriarchy. “While some governments argue there is no definitive proof its use in weapons causes harm, it is clear from numerous investigations that its use in munitions in Iraq and other places has caused impacts on the health of civilians as well as military personnel exposed to it, and that it has caused long-term environmental damage, including groundwater contamination. Its use in weapons is arguably in violation of international law, human rights, and environmental protection and should be banned in order to ensure it is not used again.”
If the grisly legacy of the American use of depleted uranium tells us anything, it’s that those DU shells the British are supplying to Ukraine (and the ones the Russians may also be using there) will have a radioactive impact that will linger in that country for years to come, with debilitating, potentially fatal, consequences. It will, in a sense, be part of a global atomic war that shows no sign of ending. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/04/26/will-the-west-turn-ukraine-into-a-nuclear-battlefield/
MPs and activists push back as Ottawa pitches expansion of nuclear energy -“a dirty dangerous distraction”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says Canada is ‘going to have to be doing much more nuclear’
John Paul Tasker · CBC News · April 26 2023
Anti-nuclear activists and a cross-partisan group of MPs urged the federal government Tuesday to drop its support for nuclear energy projects, calling the energy source a “dirty, dangerous distraction” from climate action.
…………………………………… SMR technology is still in its infancy and it isn’t widely used around the world.
As of 2022, there were only three SMR projects in operation — one each in Russia, China and India — according to the International Energy Agency.
There are dozens of others under construction or in the design and planning phase — including one at Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington nuclear site.
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s recent federal budget included a generous tax credit to spur clean energy development, including SMRs.
The industry lobby group, the Canadian Nuclear Association, has said the 15 per cent refundable tax credit is a recognition by Ottawa that nuclear power is “a fundamental and necessary component of Canada’s low carbon energy system.”
Susan O’Donnell, a professor and a member of the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick, said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet are getting bad advice about nuclear energy.
“The nuclear industry, led by the U.S. and the U.K., has been lobbying and advertising heavily in Canada, trying to convince us that new SMR designs will somehow address the climate crisis,” O’Donnell told a press conference on Parliament Hill on Tuesday.
She said SMRs will produce “toxic radioactive waste” and could lead to serious “accidents” while turning some communities into “nuclear waste dumps.”
She also said there’s “no guarantee these nuclear experiments will ever generate electricity safely and affordably,” since SMRs are still relatively untested.
“Canada is wasting time that must be urgently spent on genuine climate action,” she said. “This is a dirty, dangerous distraction. We don’t need nuclear power.”
Asked how Canada would meet its baseload power requirements — the power that is needed 24 hours a day without fluctuation — without nuclear power or fossil fuel sources like natural gas, O’Donnell pointed to promising developments in energy storage technology.
Liberal MP Jenica Atwin was at the anti-nuclear press event.
“I want to be clear, I’m here as an individual, a concerned individual and a mother,” she said — before launching into remarks that raised questions about the “associated risks” and “many unknowns” of nuclear energy development, which is expected to see a sharp increase in activity due to her government’s proposed tax policies.
“When it comes to nuclear, there’s no margin for error,” Atwin said. “This is a time of action. We don’t have the luxury of waiting to see if things will pan out.”
Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, who once sat in caucus with Atwin before she decamped to the Liberals, said government funding for nuclear projects is a “fraud.”
“It has no part in fighting the climate emergency. In fact, it takes valuable dollars away from things that we know work, that can be implemented immediately, in favour of untested and dangerous technologies that will not be able to generate a single kilowatt of electricity for a decade or more,” May said……………………………………………………https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/anti-nuclear-activists-ottawa-1.6821807
-
Archives
- February 2026 (220)
- 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