nuclear-news

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

‘Artificial Escalation’: Imagining the future of nuclear risk

As arms race dynamics push AI progress forward, prioritizing speed over safety, it is important to remember that in races toward mutual destruction, there is no winner. There is a point at which an arms race becomes a suicide race.

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, By Anthony AguirreEmilia JavorskyMax Tegmark | July 17, 2023

Imagine it’s 2032. The US and China are still rivals. In order to give their military commanders better intel and more time to make decisions, both powers have integrated artificial intelligence (AI) throughout their nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) systems. But instead, events take an unexpected turn and spin out of control, with catastrophic results.

This is the story told in a new short film called Artificial Escalation produced by Space Film & VFX for The Future of Life InstituteThis plot may sound like science fiction (and the story is fictional), but the possibility of AI integration into weapons of mass destruction is now very real. Some experts say that the United States should build an NC3 system using AI “with predetermined response decisions, that detects, decides, and directs strategic forces.” The US is already envisioning integration like this in conventional command and control systems: the Joint All-Domain Command and Control has proposed connecting sensors from all military services into a single network, using AI to identify targets and recommend the “optimal weapon.” But NC3-AI integration is a terrible idea.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) explored key risks of AI integration into NC3, including: increased speed of warfare, accidental escalation, misperception of intentions and capabilities, erosion of human control, first-strike instability, the unpredictability of AI, the vulnerabilities of AI to adversary penetration, and arms race dynamics. The National Security Commission on AI cautioned that AI “will likely increase the pace and automation of warfare across the board, reducing the time and space available for de-escalatory measures.”

This new rate of warfare would leave less time for countries to signal their own capabilities and intentions or to understand their opponents’ perspectives. This could lead to unintended conflict escalation, crisis instability, and even nuclear war.

As arms race dynamics push AI progress forward, prioritizing speed over safety, it is important to remember that in races toward mutual destruction, there is no winner. There is a point at which an arms race becomes a suicide race. The reasons not to integrate AI into comprehensive command, control, and communications systems are manifold:

Adversarial AI carries unpredictable escalation risk. Even if AI-NC3 systems are carefully tested and evaluated, they may be made unpredictable by design. Two or more such systems interacting in a complex and adversarial environment can push each other to new extremes, greatly increasing the risk of accidental escalation. We have seen this before with the 2010 “flash crash” of the stock market, when adversarial trading algorithms wiped trillions of dollars off the stock exchange in under an hour. The military equivalent of that hour would be catastrophic.

No real training data. AI systems require a lot of data in their training, whether real or simulated. But training systems for nuclear conflict necessitates the generation of synthetic data with incomplete information, because the full extent of an adversary’s capabilities is unknown. This adds another element of dangerous unpredictability into the command and control mix.

Cyber vulnerabilities of networked systems. AI-integrated command, control, and communications systems would also be vulnerable to cyberattacks, hacking, and data poisoning. When all sensor data and systems are networked, failure can spread throughout the entire system. Each of these vulnerabilities must be considered across the systems of every nuclear nation, as the whole system is only as strong as its weakest link.

Epistemic uncertainty. Widespread use of AI to create misinformation is already clouding what is real and what is fake. The inability to discern truth is especially dangerous in the military context, and accurate information is particularly crucial to the stability of command and control systems. Historically, there have been channels of reliable, trustworthy communication between adversaries, even when there were also disinformation campaigns happening in the background. When we automate more and engage person-to-person less, those reliable channels dissipate and the risk of unnecessary escalation skyrockets.

Human Deference to Machines. If an algorithm makes a suggestion, people could defy it, but will they? ……………………………………………………………………………

Integrating AI into the critical functions of command, control, and communication is reckless. The world cannot afford to give up control over something as dangerous as weapons of mass destruction. As the United Nations Security Council prepares to meet tomorrow to discuss AI and nuclear risk, now is the time to set hard limits, strengthen trust and transparency, and ensure that the future remains in human hands.  https://thebulletin.org/2023/07/artificial-escalation-imagining-the-future-of-nuclear-risk/

July 19, 2023 Posted by | technology, weapons and war | 2 Comments

A Scott Ritter Investigation: Agent Zelensky – Part 2

 https://www.scottritterextra.com/p/a-scott-ritter-investigation-agent?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=6892&post_id=135150924&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email17 July 23

In the intelligence business, every agent is assigned tasks by his or her handlers. In the case of Agent Zelensky, I’ve identified ten obligations that define his relationship with his foreign intelligence masters. Once you’ve examined each of these, it becomes clear why Zelensky the comedian said one thing, and Zelensky the President did another. What are the true reasons behind the current situation in Ukraine today? What kind of operation has the CIA been running in Ukraine over the course of many years? You will find the answers to these and other questions in Part 2 of my investigative documentary film, “Agent Zelensky.” Click here to watch Part 1.

July 19, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine | Leave a comment

UK government launches”Great British Nuclear” with big bribes, and big promises, for the “small nuclear reactor” industry

Shapps announces £157m in grants at launch of new UK nuclear body

Guardian, Joe Middleton, Tue 18 Jul 2023

The UK government is to offer grants of £157m as part of its launch of a new body to support the nuclear power industry.

Great British Nuclear (GBN) will be tasked with helping deliver the government’s commitment to provide a quarter of the UK’s electricity from nuclear energy by 2050.

The new body will help drive rapid expansion of nuclear power plants in the UK, boost energy security and reduce dependence on fossil fuel imports, said the energy security secretary, Grant Shapps.

It is hoped that a competition to develop small modular reactors (SMRs) will drive billions of pounds of investment into the technology, which the government hopes will be cheaper and quicker to build than traditional large nuclear power plants.

However, environmental campaigners and academics have argued that SMRs have no track record and that time and resources would be better spent on renewables such as more offshore wind.

The launch at the Science Museum in London on Tuesday was delayed from last week after it clashed with the government’s public sector pay deal announcement.

The government’s previous attempts to attract funding for conventional large reactors have so far only yielded the much delayed and over-budget Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset.

Shapps is expected to announce the winners of the competition in the autumn, with a number of manufacturing firms such as Rolls-Royce and Hitachi interested in developing SMRs.

The government said it was still committed to Hinkley Point C and also Sizewell C, a nuclear power plant in Suffolk that was announced last year and has been backed with £700m of public funds.

In addition to the competition launch, Shapps announced that up to £157m of grant funding would be available. There will be up to £77m to accelerate the development of a nuclear business in the UK and support new designs, and a further £58m for the development and design of a new advanced modular reactor that operates at higher temperatures……………………………………….

Dr Doug Parr, the chief scientist for Greenpeace UK, accused the government of “obsessing” over nuclear power and decried SMRs.skip past newsletter promotion.

“As the government tries to whip up investment for the latest generation of reactors, it is striking how many of the nuclear industry’s speculative claims are being repeated by ministers as fact,” he said. “The hype seems to have been enough to convince our government that nuclear’s last gasp is in fact a new dawn, but at their radioactive cores SMRs remain the same bad bet.

“SMRs have no track record, but initial indications are that the familiar problems of cost overruns and delays will be repeated, and the accumulation of unmanageable waste will continue.”

Parr added: “By continually obsessing about nuclear, the government is taking its eye off the net zero ball, which will have to be delivered through a predominantly renewable, modern electricity grid. No number of SMRs will fix the government’s lacklustre effort to address issues of delayed connections, smart local grids and home efficiency.”

Steve Thomas, an emeritus professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich, said: “Yet again, the British government has proved credulous to the claims of the nuclear industry that a new generation of technology will solve all the problems of its predecessors.

“SMRs are a long way from being commercially ready and at best will be as uneconomic as existing technology and at worst won’t even be technically feasible. The answers to reaching net zero with electricity are already available – energy efficiency and renewables. This announcement will only divert time and resources from these.” https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/18/grants-of-157m-offered-in-support-of-uks-nuclear-power-industry

July 19, 2023 Posted by | politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

None of the world’s 30 major banks count nuclear energy as “green”

Major banks yet to match EU with nuclear green label, study finds

None of the world’s 30 major banks have explicitly included nuclear
energy in their criteria for issuing green or sustainability-linked bonds,
researchers said on Thursday (6 July), despite an EU decision last year to
label it as sustainable.

The European Union decided last year to include
nuclear power plants in its list of investments that can be labelled and
marketed as green. The move aimed to guide investors towards
climate-friendly technologies, but split EU countries who disagree on
atomic energy’s green credentials.

So far, banks have not followed the
EU’s lead in their own green bond rules, according to an analysis by
Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. The study looked at
the 30 banks deemed systemically important by the Financial Stability
Board.

 Euractiv 6th July 2023    https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/major-banks-yet-to-match-eu-with-nuclear-green-label-study-finds/

July 19, 2023 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Safety lapses at Los Alamos National Laboratory

By Searchlight New Mexico

by Alicia Inez Guzmán, Searchlight New Mexico https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2023/07/17/safety-lapses-at-los-alamos-national-laboratory/

In a windowless corridor of PF-4, the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s plutonium processing facility, the deputy director of weapons stood among a cluster of journalists and National Nuclear Security Administration officials, all clad in anti-contamination lab coats and booties, safety goggles and dosimeters.

“It’s not that scary,” said Robert Webster, during a rare media tour of several rooms brimming with glove boxes, some almost as old as the Cold War-era building itself, others newly installed. “You just have to be careful.”

In these highly classified rooms, each task is the sum of its many protocols, a meticulous choreography that was palpable on a recent morning — June 22 — even in the absence of workers. The respirators, protective clothing, ventilation systems and dosimeters — fail-safes aimed, according to officials, at reducing or detecting the risk of exposure — are routine and required controls at “the plant,” as PF-4 is popularly known. Here, no task can be taken for granted and no movement unintended. 

Five years ago, LANL began embarking on a controversial mission — to produce an annual quota of plutonium pits, the triggers for nuclear weapons. Matt Johnson, head of the lab’s Pit Technologies division, characterized it as “probably one of the safest places in New Mexico.” 

A recent NNSA investigation portrays another version of the plant, a place cited for its  “significant lack of attention or carelessness” in protecting workers and the public, as a Preliminary Notice of Violation read. Released on May 18, the findings detailed four “nuclear safety events” that took place over a five-month period in 2021, including one glove box breach, two floods, and an instance in which too much fissionable material was placed in one area. 

The NNSA, as a result, withheld nearly $1.5 million from its 2021 contract award to Triad National Security, the organization that manages and operates the lab. (The NNSA, nonetheless, refrained from exacting additional civil penalties, which could have totalled an extra half a million dollars.)

Its 11-page report revealed an environment in which workers were either too underqualified to perform certain tasks or overburdened by too many tasks to perform them well. Another problem stemmed from faulty equipment, which had presented problems since 1990 and had not been replaced under Triad’s tenure, despite multiple requests. 

The report emphasized that Triad routinely focused on “human errors rather than on the conditions that make those errors more likely.”

That particular oversight, in part, led to water entering a ventilation system for multiple rooms and glove boxes — the windowed, stainless-steel containers where radioactive materials are handled. According to the NNSA, it amounted to a violation of “criticality safety requirements.” Water has long been known to enhance fission and, in certain circumstances, cause plutonium to go critical, sending out a blast of blue light and radiation.

The four nuclear safety events cited by the NNSA represented only a small fraction of the many “process deviations” and compliance concerns around handling nuclear materials that have beset the plant since May 2018. That’s the same year the lab was recommended as one of two sites in the country to produce plutonium pits for nuclear warheads. 

In an attempt to understand a fuller picture of risks at the plant, Searchlight New Mexico culled through the last five years of weekly reports by the Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board (DNFSB), a federal watchdog that oversees the U.S. nuclear weapons complex and makes recommendations to the Department of Energy. An analysis like this has never been conducted before, according to the DNFSB.

Searchlight counted at least 100 process deviations at the plant during that period: a mix of safety incidents, emergency events and protocol violations. The examples were wide ranging —  from construction accidents and small fires, to floods and worker contamination. Not all had the potential to be catastrophic, but at a facility like PF-4, the consequences can be much higher than in other workplaces. 

In 2019, one worker was nearly felled by a 320-pound toxic nuclear waste container and, in 2020, another inhaled plutonium oxide powder — the most dangerous form of plutonium. There was a broken finger, a mysterious head injury and several instances in which containers of toxic waste were backlogged, up to 80 at one point, in a single storage room. The all-important protective gloves inside the glove boxes have on occasion become separated from their ports in the box wall; they’ve also torn on sharp objects or been worn down by tools or overuse. The DNFSB called glove box glove failures and floods “repeat events” — serious incidents they attribute to “poor conduct of operations.” Records show at least 20 such incidents in the last five years that resulted in several instances of skin contamination, though only 2 reports indicated an “uptake” — an absorption of plutonium into the body. 

“NNSA is investing billions of dollars in production-related infrastructure at Los Alamos,” a DNFSB spokesperson wrote in an email to Searchlight, “and the Board is continuing to urge commensurate investment in the safety infrastructure needed to ensure workers and the public are adequately protected from potential accidents at PF-4.” 

In the June 2020 glove box breach, the worker underwent chelation therapy for significant radiation — on hair, skin and by inhalation — when he “pulled out of the glovebox gloves after weighing and packaging plutonium-238 oxide powder.” As a soluble form of plutonium, oxide powder can begin to circulate in the bloodstream almost immediately and eventually end up in the liver and bones, according to reports. Fourteen other workers were also exposed in that same incident. 

Searchlight found other incidents that could be considered outliers. In July 2021, for example, a 4.2 magnitude earthquake hit some 30 miles northwest of the lab, located within the Pajarito Fault System. 

The plant’s new glove boxes have been built to withstand an earthquake, according to the DNFSB. But, there are “a large number of existing gloveboxes that do not meet current seismic standards,” the agency’s email to Searchlight made clear. 

The worst possible scenario would be a cataclysmic earthquake that triggers a fire at the plant. For almost two decades, the DNFSB has argued that the building’s “passive confinement system” — essentially its capacity to prevent a release of radioactive material from leaking out and reaching the public — is insufficient. After years of back and forth on the matter, and piecemeal enhancements to the plant, the NNSA, in 2022, deemed significant upgrades, including to the ventilation system, were unnecessary — despite DNFSB’s strong recommendations to the contrary. 

Another one-off event occurred in February 2019, when two electricians were “inadvertently locked inside a caged storage location” for 40 minutes. “​​During this time,” the DNFSB reported, “the workers would have been unable to properly respond to alarms associated with a nuclear criticality, an airborne radioactive material release, fire, or other emergency situations requiring egress.” 

When asked about a recent spate of glove box and other safety matters at the plant, the lab responded with the following statement:

“PF-4 is one of the safest places in the country as a result of the many redundant safety and security measures in place to protect our workforce, the environment, and the community. We have ongoing programs to ensure the safe handling of materials at TA-55. In the case of glove box breaches, training and controls identified the breaches and allowed us to address them immediately. Employees’ personal protective equipment and the facility and room ventilation systems help keep workers safe at all times.”

Searchlight produced the interactive graphics in this story to help visualize the DNFSB reports. Searchlight’s counts are based on the findings of site inspectors and confirmed by the DNFSB. While there could be many reasons behind an incident, site inspectors categorized the events according to a complex set of procedures. The number of reported incidents in 2022 rose by 33 percent compared to the previous year. In 2022, Triad commenced round-the-clock operations.

Noah Raess contributed to the reporting of this story. 

Safety Report Graph:
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/christian.marquez/viz/Safety_Reports/Dashboard1

Searchlight New Mexico is a nonpartisan, nonprofit news organization dedicated to investigative reporting in New Mexico. 

July 19, 2023 Posted by | - plutonium, safety, USA | Leave a comment

Not nuclear, but wind and solar still cheapest – CSIRO

By Peter Roberts https://www.aumanufacturing.com.au/not-nuclear-but-wind-and-solar-still-cheapest-csiro 18 July 23

There is a huge amount of hype around new energy sources to replace fossil fuels and none more so than the phenomenon of small modular nuclear reactors (SMR).

But the hype remains just that according to the latest GenCost 2022–23 study released today by CSIRO and Australian Energy Market Operator.

While SMRs are likely cheaper to build that traditional large nuclear power stations, renewable power from onshore wind turbines and solar PV are increasingly important as the cheapest sources of new energy generation capacity according to the report.

This holds true whether the costs of integration into the grid are taken into account, or not.

Each year the two bodies work with industry to give an updated cost estimate for large-scale electricity generation in Australia, and each year wind and solar come out on top

The 2022-23 report found that onshore wind and solar PV are ‘the lowest cost generation technology by a significant margin’, despite cost increases averaging 20 per cent for new-build electricity generation in Australia.

Offshore wind is higher cost but competitive with other alternative low emission generation technologies.

CSIRO Chief Energy Economist Paul Graham said: “Innovation in electricity generation technology is a global effort that’s strongly linked to climate change policy ambitions.

“Technology costs are one piece of the puzzle, providing critical input to electricity sector analysis.

“To limit emissions, our energy system must evolve and become more diverse.”

GenCost said the next lowest cost flexible technology in 2023 is gas generation with carbon capture and storage, but only if it could be financed at a rate that does not include climate policy risk.

Fossil fuels were more expensive and faced hurdles such as government legislation and net zero targets, and historically high energy costs.

GenCost said that with SMRs, ‘achieving the lower end of the nuclear SMR range (of cost estimates) requires that SMR is deployed globally in large enough capacity to bring down costs available to Australia’.

As for SMRs, none of this should not be surprising as even the International Atomic Energy Agency does not claim nuclear power is cheaper.

The agency claims only that SMRs, advanced nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of up to 300 MW(e) per unit or about one-third of typical sizes, provide cheaper power than traditional large nuclear stations.

Their advantage over traditional nuclear is linked to the nature of their design – small and modular.

According to the IAEA more than 70 commercial SMR designs are being developed around the world.

The IAEA says on its website: “Though SMRs have lower upfront capital cost per unit, their economic competitiveness is still to be proven in practice once they are deployed.”

.

July 19, 2023 Posted by | renewable | Leave a comment

Nuclear Notebook: French nuclear weapons, 2023

Bulletin, By Hans M. KristensenMatt KordaEliana Johns, July 17, 2023

France’s nuclear arsenal has remained stable over the past decade and contains approximately 290 warheads……….. Nearly all of France’s warheads are deployed or operationally available for deployment on short notice.

…………………………………………………………………………………………

France’s nuclear doctrine

Successive heads of state, including Presidents Sarkozy, Hollande, and now Macron, have periodically described the role of French nuclear weapons. The Defense Ministry’s 2017 Defense and National Security Strategic Review reiterated that the nuclear doctrine is “strictly defensive,” and that using nuclear weapons “would only be conceivable in extreme circumstances of legitimate self-defense,” involving France’s vital interests. What exactly these “vital interests” are, however, remain unclear.

In February 2020, President Emmanuel Macron announced that France’s “vital interests now have a European dimension,” and sought to engage the European Union on the “role played by France’s nuclear deterrence in [its] collective security” (Élysée 2020). Macron clarified in October 2022 that these vital interests “would not be at stake if there was a nuclear ballistic attack in Ukraine or in the region,” apparently attempting to avoid being seen as expanding French nuclear doctrine (France TV 2022). Explicitly ruling out a nuclear role in case of Russian nuclear escalation in Ukraine appeared to contradict France’s statement at the August 2022 Review Conference for the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which explained that “for deterrence to work, the circumstances under which nuclear weapons would [or would not] be used are not, and should not be, precisely defined, so as not to enable a potential aggressor to calculate the risk inherent in a potential attack” (2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons 2022).

France does not have a no-first-use policy and reserves the right to conduct a “final warning” limitednuclear strike to signal to an adversary that they have crossed a line—or to signal the French resolve to conduct further nuclear strikes if necessary—in an attempt to “reestablish deterrence” (Élysée 2020; Tertrais 2020). Although France is a member of NATO, its nuclear forces are not part of the Alliance’s integrated military command structure. 

 If an aggressor is not deterred, President Macron explained in 2020, France’s “nuclear forces are capable of inflicting absolutely unacceptable damages upon that State’s centers of power: its political, economic and military nerve centers” (Élysée 2020).

…………………..The possibility of using the nuclear weapon first is assumed: our doctrine is neither that of no first use nor that of the sole purpose, according to which nuclear weapons are only addressed to the nuclear threat … Nuclear deterrence does not seek to win a war or prevent losing one” (Burkhard 2023; our translation).

…………………………………………………………………………… Under President Macron, France has engaged in a long-term modernization and strengthening of its nuclear forces. 

……………………………………..Submarine-launched ballistic missiles

The French force of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) constitutes the backbone of the French nuclear deterrent.

………………………………………………….Air-launched cruise missiles

The second leg of France’s nuclear arsenal consists of nuclear ASMPA (air-sol moyenne portée-amélioré) air-launched cruise missiles for delivery by fighter-bombers operated by the Strategic Air Forces and the Naval Nuclear Aviation Force. 

……………………………………………………………The French Ministry of the Armed Forces is also developing a successor to the ASMPA-R: a fourth-generation air-to-surface nuclear missile (air—sol nucléaire de 4e génération, ASN4G) with enhanced stealth and maneuverability that is scheduled to reach initial operational capability in 2035 and remain in service beyond the 2050s (Assemblée Nationale 2023)…………………………………..

The nuclear weapons complex

France’s nuclear weapons complex is managed by the Direction des Applications Militaires (DAM), a department within the Nuclear Energy Commission (Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies renouvelables, or CEA). DAM is responsible for research, design, manufacture, operational maintenance, and dismantlement of nuclear warheads.

…………………………………………….more https://thebulletin.org/premium/2023-07/nuclear-notebook-french-nuclear-weapons-2023/

July 19, 2023 Posted by | France, weapons and war | Leave a comment

These are the companies that will get the British government’s nuclear bribes.

Great British Nuclear launched with SMR competition and £157M nuclear funding package

The £157M nuclear funding package has been separated as follows

£77.1M of funding will be provided to companies to accelerate advanced nuclear business development in the UK and support advanced nuclear designs to enter UK regulations

£58M funding will go to the further development and design of a type of advanced modular reactor (AMR) and next generation fuel. AMRs operate at a higher temperature than SMRs and as a result they could provide high temperature heat for hydrogen and other industrial uses alongside nuclear power.

Of this the winning projects of this phase of funding are:

The Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation UK in Warrington which will receive £22.5M to further develop the design of a high temperature micro modular reactor, a type of AMR suited to UK industrial demands including hydrogen and sustainable aviation fuel production.

£15M will go to the National Nuclear laboratory in Warrington to accelerate the design of a high temperature reactor, following its success in Japan.

The National Nuclear Laboratory in Preston will receive £16M to continue to develop sovereign coated particle fuel capability, a type of robust advanced fuel which is suitable for high temperature reactors.

A further £22.3M from the Nuclear Fuel Fund will enable eight projects to develop new fuel production and manufacturing capabilities in the UK, driving up energy security and supporting the global move away from Russian fuel.

The winning projects of this fund are:

£10.5M will go to Westinghouse Springfields nuclear fuel plant in Preston to manufacture more innovative types of nuclear fuel for customers both in the UK and overseas, boosting jobs and skills in the North West.

£9.5M to Urenco UK in Capenhurst Chester, an international supplier of nuclear materials, to enrich uranium to higher levels, including low enriched uranium (LEU+) and high assay low enriched uranium. LEU+ will allow for current reactors and SMRs to run for longer between refuelling outages.  https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/great-british-nuclear-launched-with-smr-competition-and-157m-nuclear-funding-package-18-07-2023/

July 19, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Extreme heatwave live: Texas city confirms first heat death; northern hemisphere boils in severe weather – as it happened

 Extreme heatwave live updates: hundreds of millions from US to Europe and
Asia hit by severe heat. Here is a summary of the latest developments as
extreme heat grips large parts of the planet.

 Guardian 17th July 2023

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/live/2023/jul/17/europe-heatwave-2023-us-asia-heat-extreme-severe-weather-fires-flash-floods-flooding-record-breaking-heat-wave-stress-temperature-red-alert-climate-crisis

July 19, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Biodiversity loss

 There is widespread agreement that climate change is an existential
threat. But in our rush to address this challenge, our efforts must not
heighten another, more immediate one: the global decline of biodiversity.
We are losing species at more than 1,000 times the natural rate. If we stay
on this trajectory, we risk losing up to half of them by the middle of the
century. Science is only just beginning to quantify the magnitude of
throwing a complex system like Mother Nature out of balance. But we do know
that biodiversity loss poses a fundamental risk to health, prosperity and
wellbeing. Sadly, the singular focus on solving climate change has led to
the neglect of biodiversity. The alarming result is that many climate
efforts inadvertently accelerate nature’s destruction. Take the huge need
for solar farms. If not located properly, they will have a big impact on
ecosystems and habitats.

 FT 16th July 2023

https://www.ft.com/content/755d794a-7052-4512-86eb-6971cbeda003

July 19, 2023 Posted by | environment | Leave a comment

Bulgaria’s President: Ukraine Insists on Fighting this War but Europe Pays the Bill

 novinite.com, July 14, 2023

Ukraine insists on waging this war. But it should also be clear that the whole of Europe is paying the bill. And this war has many dimensions.

I say again, it is not only purely military – it has an economic, social and political dimension. It is a threat and a risk to all of Europe.”

This is what President Rumen Radev commented on Friday when asked about the NATO Summit in Vilnius. According to the head of state, it is high time to start thinking soberly and objectively about the war in Ukraine.

In critical times, the Bulgarian rulers do not have their own thinking, opinion and position“, he also said.

Our rulers are frantically trying to convince us that by sending military aid, they are increasing our security. On the contrary – this conflict is definitely deepening – categorically!

The number of victims is increasing. The more weapons it absorbs, the more dead people and destruction there are,” added Radev.

There were repeated phrases about how the president was proven right when he claimed that Ukraine could not be accepted into NATO while there was a war there. This was confirmed in Vilnius, and “last year they lashed out with criticism“, noted Radev with an affected tone, with which he makes his comments lately.

The president did not miss the topic of the arms aid to Ukraine and the decision of the parliament to free the military warehouses of ammunition and other weapons, whose term expires.

Should we wait, apart from the defense minister of Great Britain, who said that they cannot be a military warehouse for Ukraine, wait for other defense ministers, for our rulers to stop looking at our armed forces as a warehouse for another army?!

Our rulers are frantically trying to convince us that by sending military aid, they are helping to upgrade our armaments. This conflict is deepening,” Radev added…………………………………….  https://www.novinite.com/articles/220847/Bulgaria%E2%80%99s+President%3A+Ukraine+Insists+on+Fighting+this+War+but+Europe+Pays+the+Bill

July 19, 2023 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

SpaceX Starlink satellites had to make 25,000 collision-avoidance maneuvers in just 6 months — and it will only get worse

Space.com ,By Tereza Pultarova 7 Jul 23

Since the launch of the first Starlink spacecraft in 2019, the SpaceX satellites have been forced to move over 50,000 times to prevent collisions.

Staggering growth in Starlink collision-avoidance maneuvers in the past six months is sparking concerns over the long-term sustainability of satellite operations as thousands of new spacecraft are poised to launch into orbit in the coming years.

SpaceX‘s Starlink broadband satellites were forced to swerve more than 25,000 times between Dec. 1, 2022, and May 31, 2023 to avoid potentially dangerous approaches to other spacecraft and orbital debris, according to a report filed by SpaceX with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on June 30. That’s about double the number of avoidance maneuvers reported by SpaceX in the previous six-month period that ran from June to November 2022. Since the launch of the first Starlink spacecraft in 2019, the SpaceX satellites have been forced to move over 50,000 times to prevent collisions.

The steep increase in the number of maneuvers worries experts because it follows an exponential curve, leading to concerns that safety of operations in the orbital environment might soon get out of hand.

“Right now, the number of maneuvers is growing exponentially,” Hugh Lewis, a professor of astronautics at the University of Southampton in the U.K. and a leading expert on the impact of megaconstellations on orbital safety, told Space.com. “It’s been doubling every six months, and the problem with exponential trends is that they get to very large numbers very quickly.”

1 million maneuvers by 2028 

Data compiled by Lewis shows that, in the first half of 2021, Starlink satellites conducted 2,219 collision-avoidance maneuvers. The number grew to 3,333 in the following six-month period ending in December 2021 and then doubled to 6,873 between December 2021 and June 2022. In the second half of 2022, SpaceX had to alter the paths of its satellites 13,612 times to avoid potential collisions. In the latest report to the FCC, the company declared 25,299 collision-avoidance maneuvers over the past six months, with every satellite having been made to move an average of 6 times. ……………………………………………………………………….

Currently there are about 10,500 satellites orbiting our planet, 8,100 of which are operational, according to the European Space Agency. Things only started to get so congested fairly recently…………………………………………………

Lewis expects that, unless regulators cap the number of satellites in orbit, collisions will soon become a regular part of the space business. Such collisions would lead to rapid growth in the amount of space debris fragments that are completely out of control, which would lead to more and more collisions. ……….. https://www.space.com/starlink-satellite-conjunction-increase-threatens-space-sustainability?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=QuickFlipper%2Fmagazine%2F%5BExplorology%5D

July 19, 2023 Posted by | space travel | Leave a comment

Dumping doubts: Releasing Fukushima’s wastewater

Independent Australia, By Binoy Kampmark | 18 July 2023

Controversy surrounds the fate of wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster, with some so-called experts claiming its release to be safe. Dr Binoy Kampmark reports.

NOTHING SAID by the nuclear industry can or should be taken at face value. Be it in terms of safety, correcting defects or righting mistakes, or in terms of construction integrity, there is something chilling about reassurances that have been shown, time and again, to be hollow. 

The 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (FDNPPdisaster has forever stained the Japanese nuclear industry. Since then, the site has been marked by over 1,000 tanks filled with contaminated water that arises from reactor cooling. The attempts by the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc (TEPCO) to decommission and clean the plant have also seen a daily complement of 150 tons arising from groundwater leakage into the buildings and systems involved in the cooling process.

According to Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority, the gradual 1.3 million or so tons kept in those tanks into the Pacific over three decades is something that can be executed without serious environmental consequences. This was a view that was already entertained in 2021, expressing confidence that the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) being used in cleaning the contaminated water would be effective. Of primary concern here is the presence of a radioactive form of hydrogen called tritium, the presence of which is a challenge to remove.

There are various questions arising from this, not least the assumption that the levels of radioactivity arising from tritium will be significantly reduced by 1/40th of regulatory standards through the use of seawater.

But as has been pointed out by such scientists as Ken BuesselerFerenc Dalnoki-Veress and Antony M Hooker, there are also nontritium radionuclides that ‘are generally of greater health concern as evidenced by their much higher dose coefficient — a measure of the dose, or potential human health impacts associated with a given radioactive element, relative to its measured concentration, or radioactivity level’.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) neither recommends nor endorses the plans — a curious formulation that does little for confidence.

Its safety review of the plan to release treated water does, however, conform, in the view of the IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi, to the body’s safety standards:

“The IAEA notes the controlled, gradual discharges of the treated water into the sea, as currently planned and assessed by TEPCO, would have a negligible radiological impact on people and the environment.”

A number of countries have expressed consternation at the planned move, including concern that the IAEA may have been lent upon to reach its conclusions on the Japanese release program.  Tokyo is, after all, a generous donor to the organisation. 

For his part, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno huffed at the claim that “Japanese funding and staffing at the IAEA [could be used] to question the neutrality of the IAEA final report”. Not only did such criticism “completely miss the target but also shakes the significance of the existence of international organisations”.

Members of Japan’s fishing and agricultural industry, China, South Korea and the Pacific Island nations concerned about the fate of the Blue Pacific, have been vocal opponents. China’s Foreign Ministry opined that the report had been released in “haste”, failing “to fully reflect the views from experts that participated in the review”.

But some in the nuclear and environmental science fraternity are wondering what the fuss is all about, though their rebuttals hardly inspire optimism. University of Portsmouth’s Jim Smith, an academic of environmental science, considered all such concerns “just propaganda. The politicians don’t have any evidence in saying this”.

More to the point, other sites had also been responsible for releasing tritiated water, including a nuclear site in China and the Cap de La Hague nuclear fuel reprocessing site, which already “releases 450 times more tritiated water into the English Channel than Fukushima has planned for release into the Pacific”. What examples to emulate.    

Nigel MarksBrendan Kennedy and Tony Irwin also tell us, based on their ‘collective professional experience in nuclear science and nuclear power’, that the release will be safe. Their primary focus, however, is solely on the treatment of tritium, based on an almost heroic assumption that 62 other relevant radionuclides higher than regulatory standards have been effectively removed by the ALPS approach. 

……………………………………………….. Adding to this the inherent clandestine air that has surrounded TEPCO, scepticism should not only be mandatory but instinctive. Why not, ask such voices as Hooker and Buesseler, consider other disposal methodologies, such as solidifying the ALPS-treated wastewater within concrete? No, counter the Japanese authorities, citing insuperable technical and legal problems. 

That remains the troubling question. As Dalnoki-Veress writes, Japan’s claims to have investigated and rejected that encasement option in any comprehensive, systematic way should be dismissed out of hand…………  https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/dumping-doubts-releasing-fukushimas-wastewater,17727

July 19, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TODAY. Nuclear trash on indigenous land ?- a court decision puts Australia in a very difficult spot

Nuclear waste on Aboriginal land ?- and the Voice to Parliament?

The Australian government is in the process of holding a referendum that would give the indigenous people a Voice to Parliament. Imposing nuclear waste on Aboriginal land is not a good look, is it?

This morning, I heard Professor Ian Lowe, talking to a English journalist, about yesterday’s court decision, which supported the Barngarla people’s opposition to nuclear waste dumping on their land.

Prof Lowe eloquently summarised the importance of this legal decision:

-the Aboriginal people were not consulted when the Morrison Liberal Coalition decided to make a nuclear waste dump on their traditional land.

– this raises problems for the Australian government in selecting any land in this country for nuclear waste dumping

-this has international implications – about any country where the rulers want to impose a nuclear waste dump on indigenous land

-this has implications for the ill-advised (corrupt firm PWC was the advisor) AUKUS decision by the Albanese government to buy U.S nuclear submarines at $369billion. That decision included Australia taking responsibility for the high level radioactive trash from the nuclear submarines. Where to dump that trash?

Of course, the Australian government does have the power to impose the nuclear waste dump anyway, against indigenous wishes, even against South Australian State government wishes,

The Australian government is in the process of holding a referendum that would give the indigenous people a Voice to Parliament. Imposing nuclear waste on Aboriginal land is not a good look, is it?

July 19, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, indigenous issues, politics international, wastes | Leave a comment