nuclear-news

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

UN Chief: Nuclear Risk Highest in Decades, Calls for Disarmament

The United Nations.  https://www.miragenews.com/un-chief-nuclear-risk-highest-in-decades-calls-1197216/–– 18 Mar 24

Almost 80 years after the incineration of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear weapons still represent a clear and present danger to global peace and security, UN Secretary-General António Guterres told the Security Council on Monday.

Calling for disarmament now, he urged States with nuclear arsenals to lead the way across six areas for action that include dialogue and accountability.

“Nuclear weapons are the most destructive weapons ever invented, capable of eliminating all life on earth. Today, these weapons are growing in power, range and stealth. An accidental launch is one mistake, one miscalculation, one rash act away,” he warned.

Doomsday Clock ticking loudly

The meeting on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation was convened by Japan, Security Council president for March and, as Mr. Guterres noted, the only country that knows better than any other “the brutal cost of nuclear carnage.”

It was being held at a time “when geopolitical tensions and mistrust have escalated the risk of nuclear warfare to its highest point in decades.”

He said the Doomsday Clock – the symbol for humanity’s proximity to self-destruction – “is ticking loudly enough for all to hear”.

Meanwhile, academics and civil society groups, to Pope Francis, youth, and the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, known as Hibakusha, have been clamouring for peace and an end to the existential threat.

No ‘Oppenheimer’ sequel

Even the Oscar-winning Hollywood film Oppenheimer “brought the harsh reality of nuclear doomsday to vivid life for millions around the world,” he said, adding that “humanity cannot survive a sequel”.

Despite these appeals for the world to step back from the brink, “States possessing nuclear weapons are absent from the table of dialogue,” he said, while “investments in the tools of war are outstripping investments in the tools of peace.”

Mr. Guterres stressed that disarmament is the only path to “vanquish this senseless and suicidal shadow, once and for all.”

Dialogue and confidence-building

He appealed to States armed with nuclear weapons to take the lead in six areas, starting with re-engaging in dialogue to develop transparency and confidence-building measures to prevent any use of a nuclear weapon.

“Second, nuclear saber-rattling must stop,” he said. “Threats to use nuclear weapons in any capacity are unacceptable.”

Nuclear weapon States must also re-affirm moratoria on nuclear testing, which includes pledging to avoid actions that would undermine the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), whose entry-into-force must be priority.

From commitment to action

Furthermore, disarmament commitments must become action, together with accountability, under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The landmark accord, signed more than 50 years ago, is the only binding commitment to the goal of disarmament by States which officially stockpile nuclear weapons. 

The Secretary-General also highlighted the need for a joint first-use agreement. “Nuclear weapon States must urgently agree that none of them will be the first to use nuclear weapons. As a matter of fact, none should use them in any circumstances,” he said.

Reducing stockpiles

Finally, he called for reductions in the number of nuclear weapons. In this regard, he urged the United States and Russia – the world’s largest nuclear weapons holders – to take the lead and also find a way back to negotiations towards the full implementation of the New START Treaty and agree on its successor.

Mr. Guterres also pointed to the responsibility of non-nuclear weapon States to fulfil their own non-proliferation obligations and to support disarmament efforts.

He said the Security Council also has a leadership role, including “to look beyond today’s divisions, and state clearly that living with the existential threat of nuclear weapons is unacceptable.”

March 20, 2024 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Bulgarian nuclear experts question economic viability of new nuclear project

By Emiliya Milcheva and Krassen Nikolov | Euractiv.bg 18 Mar 24

Bulgarian nuclear experts are questioning the economic feasibility of the country’s plan to build two US nuclear reactors at the Kozloduy nuclear power plant, raising questions on funding and whether the country has the means to purchase energy from these plants.

“It will be very difficult to find banks to finance the project,” Valentin Kolev, energy expert and a member of the American Association of Energy Engineers told Euractiv. “If we assume that we will produce 15 terawatt-hours per year, in 20 years of operation, it makes 300 terawatt hours. At a price of €17.6 billion for the two reactors, a price of close to €60/MWh would result, but this is only the investment. Fuel costs and much more are not included. The price cannot be below €100-125.”

Energy Minister Rumen Radev said that the electricity from the new Kozloduy NPP reactors will cost €65/MWh.

Bulgaria will build the two nuclear reactors with loans, and only 30% of the construction costs will be financed with money from the state budget, according to an investigation by Euractiv.

At the end of last year, Bulgarian Prime Minister Nikolai Denkov told Euractiv that Greece, Serbia, and North Macedonia were interested in signing long-term contracts for the purchase of electricity from the future seventh and eighth units of the Kozloduy NPP. However, Bulgaria has not been able to attract the three neighbouring countries as investors.

European companies also showed no interest in building the new plant, with the Bulgarian parliament voting to open negotiations with the Korean company Hyundai. The nuclear reactors will be based on the AR-1000 technology of the American company Westinghouse.

Bulgarian Energy Minister Rumen Radev sets the final price for the new reactors at €13 billion, but most experts claim that the price will exceed €17.5 billion.

Kolev recalled the HSBC investment study for the abandoned Belene nuclear power plant project, set to comprise two Russian reactors. This study calculated the cost of electricity at €75/MWh, which led the government to abandon the project as the return on investment would not be high enough.

“For now, it is not clear how the new nuclear plants will be paid for,” Neykov commented.

Another Bulgarian energy expert – Georgi Stefanov – also expressed fears billions of euro might be spent from the state budget, but in the end, nothing would be built.

“The construction of a power plant should be looked at like this: How much money do we need, how much money will we earn, and then how much money will we pay for the disposal when the NPP is closed, and for the maintenance of the nuclear waste?” Stefanov said……………………………….https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/bulgarian-nuclear-experts-question-economic-viability-of-new-nuclear-project/
—

March 20, 2024 Posted by | Bulgaria, business and costs | Leave a comment

In Japan, Opposition to restarting nuclear power plants has grown, especially among women

 https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20240318/p2a/00m/0op/004000c 18 Mar 24

More against restarting nuclear plants than for after Japan Noto quake: Mainichi poll

TOKYO — Forty-five percent of people opposed restarting nuclear power plants in Japan, exceeding the 36% who support the move, as they likely realized the risk again in the wake of the Jan. 1 Noto Peninsular earthquake, according to a Mainichi Shimbun opinion poll conducted on March 16 and 17.

The same question was asked in the Mainichi questionnaire carried out in May 2022 and March 2023 in which 47% and 49% of respondents supported the idea, respectively, outweighing the 30% and 37% of those who were at odds.

There was a stark contrast between men and women in the results of the recent survey, with 55% of men answering they were for restarting nuclear power plants in contrast with the 34% against it, while 56% of women who said they were opposed to the idea outweighed the 20% in favor of it.

Younger people tended to support the idea, while older respondents were more opposed, with nearly 70% of those aged 18 to 29 in favor, and approximately 60% of those aged 70 and older against. Opinions among those in their 50s were evenly split, with about 40% for and 40% against.

(Japanese original by Hiroshi Miyajima, Political News Department)

March 20, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

A chance to break the nuclear links – Kate Hudson, CND

,
 https://labouroutlook.org/2024/03/17/a-chance-to-break-the-nuclear-links-kate-hudson-cnd/

“It’s just not possible for the UK to have an independent foreign policy, or defence and security policies, if it remains attached at the hip to the US nuclear programme.”

By Kate Hudson, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)


Whoever is in the White House after the upcoming presidential election, one thing is clear: Britain has to break its ‘special nuclear relationship’ with the US. We’re all familiar with the so-called ‘special relationship’, basically tying Britain into really bad foreign policy decisions. But not so many people know about the US-UK Mutual Defence
Agreement (MDA) – the world’s most extensive nuclear sharing agreement.

Known in full as the ‘Agreement between the UK and the USA for cooperation in the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes’, the treaty initially established an agreement between both countries to exchange classified information to develop their respective nuclear weapon systems.

At the start, the MDA prohibited the transfer of nuclear weapons, but an amendment in 1959 allowed for the transfer of nuclear materials and equipment between both countries up to a certain deadline.


This amendment is extended through a renewal of the treaty every ten years, most recently in2014 – without any parliamentary debate or vote. The British public and parliamentarians initially found out about that extension and ratification when President Obama informed the United States Congress.

Renewing such agreements on the nod, without transparency or accountability, is never a good thing. When it ties us so tightly to nuclear cooperation with the White House this is an even greater cause for concern. The time has come to really vigorously oppose this Agreement.

It also puts us at odds with our commitments under the NPT: the MDA confirms an indefinite commitment by the US and UK to collaborate on nuclear weapons technology and violates both countries’ obligations as signatories to the NPT. The NPT states that countries should undertake ‘to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to… nuclear disarmament’.


Rather than working together to get rid of their nuclear weapons, the UK and US are collaborating on further advancing their nuclear arsenals. Indeed, a 2004 legal advice paper by Rabinder Singh QC and Professor Christine Chinkin concluded that it is ‘strongly arguable that the renewal of the Mutual Defence Agreement is in breach of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’, as it implies ‘continuation and indeed enhancement of thenuclear programme, not progress towards its discontinuation’.

On every level the MDA must be challenged. It’s just not possible for the UK to have an independent foreign policy, or defence and security policies, if it remains attached at the hip to the US nuclear programme. When the US seems hell-bent on taking us into war after war, unquestioning allegiance from the UK cannot continue.

The MDA is up for renewal again this year. Now is the time to start asking the questions, raising the protest,and making the case for independence. It’s time for the special nuclear relationship to end. Watch this space!

March 20, 2024 Posted by | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

The spending horrors facing UK’s next PM from old nuclear subs to RAAC in schools

Meg Hillier warned that the next Government will face many spending ‘big nasties’ that will eat up already stretched budgets

The spending horrors facing the next PM from old nuclear subs to RAAC in
schools. Meg Hillier warned that the next Government will face many
spending ‘big nasties’ that will eat up already stretched budgets.

The influential chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has warned of the
“big nasties” of public spending that face the next Government. In an
interview with i, Labour MP Meg Hillier warned that there wasn’t
“nearly enough good project management” in Government to ensure that
the numerous issues she’s identified, from crumbling hospitals to an out
of service a nuclear submarine fleet, are dealt with.

The UK also needs to
consider how it will safely dispose of its fleet of retired nuclear
submarines, a job that is expected to be very costly for the Ministry of
Defence. The current Vanguard class of submarines are due to be phased out
by 2032 and replaced by the Dreadnought class, and it was estimated in 2016
that the renewal of the programme could cost between £167bn and £179bn
over its 30-year life span.

 iNews 17th March 2024

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/spending-horrors-facing-next-prime-minister-2960825

March 20, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Deadlines, costs, production: France’s nuclear company EDF in a moment of truth

By Paul Messad | Euractiv France,  Mar 18, 2024

EDF, the French state-owned energy giant faces criticism for rising costs and delays in its nuclear projects, its existing reactors have also been encountering problems. Euractiv looks at the implications of these challenges for EDF and the wider nuclear energy industry.

January 23, 2023: EDF, Europe’s leading energy company, announces a further extension of the costs and construction times of its two 3rd generation pressurized water reactors (EPR) located at Hinkley Point in England. The budget could increase by 70 to 90% compared to initial estimates and the start-up could be four to six years late.

……….the delays are “not likely to undermine the confidence of the British government in its nuclear strategy” , defends SFEN. Proof of this would be its reinvestment of more than a billion pounds sterling in two other reactors built by EDF in England, at Sizewell. 

For others, on the contrary, the Anglo-Saxon situation is symptomatic of the challenge faced by the largest nuclear operator in the world, in whose confidence is eroded as projects progress, while it aims, in particular, at the construction of six, then 14 EPRs in France, and one (or even four in total) in the Czech Republic for which the authorities are awaiting guarantees.

Especially since another project tarnishes the image of the French giant. On the continent, EDF is in fact building an EPR in France, in Flamanville (Normandy). But as in England, construction is experiencing significant delays (12 years) and additional costs (+470%). The start-up of the reactor planned for “mid-2024” could even be further delayed .

……………………..In France, the government intends to get started since it plans to build six EPRs — and possibly eight others. Estimated costs and deadlines for the first six: 52 billion euros and a first commissioning in 2035.  

For once, according to Les Échos , costs have already been revised upwards… by 30%. When questioned, the CEO of EDF, Luc Rémont, “does not confirm any figures” . 

“We will be there when we have made all the optimizations [engineering design, component manufacturing, etc., Editor’s note] ,” he explained on the sidelines of the Franco-Czech nuclear summit organized in Prague. on March 8 and 9. 

The deadlines, already “very demanding” , he agreed at the end of November, have since been postponed to 2040. 

This back and forth annoys the Minister of the Economy and Energy. “EDF must learn to keep its costs and its schedule ,” criticized Bruno  Le Maire at the beginning of March in Le Monde .

Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia…

It must be said that EDF is playing on its international reputation. 

In Prague, Mr. Rémont accompanied the President of the Republic, Emmanuel Macron, who came to defend EDF’s candidacy for the construction of one, or even four reactors in total, in the Czech Republic.

However, the country’s authorities have emphasized their commitment to respecting deadlines and costs. 

“We are interested in the lowest possible price, the highest possible guarantees that the plant will be built on time ,” Jozef Síkela, Czech Minister of Industry and Trade, told Euractiv .

Clearly, it is not because EDF is the only European company in the running that it will be chosen. Worse, the company is walking on eggshells, competing, as in 2009 on the reactor issue in the United Arab Emirates, by a subsidiary of the South Korean KEPCO. 

“Fifteen years later, the Flamanville EPR […] is still not in service. Three of the South Korean reactors in Abu Dhabi are there and the last one very soon [with delay, Editor’s note]” , reminded the former representative of EDF to the European institutions (1987 to 2000) Lionel Taccoen, resumed on​ 

The situation may seem all the more worrying as EDF is also interested in building reactors in the Netherlands, Bulgaria , Slovenia, Slovakia and Poland where the French firm was recently defeated . 

In addition, the Czech authorities have left the door open for the American Westinghouse to propose a new offer. The latter has also won several contracts for reactors in Europe in recent years. …………………….

The other dark spot on EDF’s picture lies in the management of its existing fleet and in particular  the annus horribilis 2022 where, in the midst of the energy crisis, production has fallen back to pre-1990 levels .

“The year in which France should have shone is exactly the year in which we had a 50% reduction in the fleet,” argued to Euractiv at the end of January Xavier Daval, vice-president of the Renewable Energies Union, the main actors’ union. of the sector in France. 

We will now have to wait until 2027, according to EDF , to once again reach production levels slightly higher than those of 1995 (around 360 TWh over the year), far from the 400-420 TWh reached between 2002 and 2015. 

As if more was needed, EDF discovered at the beginning of March new “indications” of corrosion , a nightmare of 2022, on one of the reactors in the park.

Nevertheless, the company and the nuclear industry benefit more than ever from government support. France, like the fifteen other European states, which are part of the “nuclear alliance”, supports the emergence of 30 to 45 large reactors by 2050 . Will EDF be the main architect? https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/frances-edf-faces-uphill-battle-as-europes-demand-for-nuclear-reactors-grows/

March 20, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

US and Japan seek UN resolution calling on all nations to ban nuclear weapons in outer space

The United States and Japan are sponsoring a U.N. Security Council resolution calling on nations not to deploy or develop nuclear weapons in space

ByEDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press, March 19, 2024, 

UNITED NATIONS — The United States and Japan are sponsoring a U.N. Security Council resolution calling on all nations not to deploy or develop nuclear weapons in space, the U.S. ambassador announced Monday.

Linda Thomas-Greenfield told a U.N. Security Council meeting that “any placement of nuclear weapons into orbit around the Earth would be unprecedented, dangerous, and unacceptable.”

The announcement that the U.S. and Japan had circulated a resolution follows White House confirmation last month that Russia has obtained a “troubling” anti-satellite weapon capability, although such a weapon is not operational yet.

Russian President Vladimir Putin declared later that Moscow has no intention of deploying nuclear weapons in space, claiming that the country has only developed space capabilities similar to those of the U.S.

The Outer Space Treaty ratified by about 114 countries including the United States and Russia prohibits the deployment of “nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction” in orbit or the stationing of “weapons in outer space in any other manner.”

Japan’s Foreign Minister Yoko Kamikawa, who chaired the council meeting, said that even during “the confrontational environment” of the Cold War, the rivals agreed to ensure that outer space remained peaceful. That prohibition on putting any weapons of mass destruction into orbit must be upheld today, she said.

Thomas-Greenfield said all parties to the treaty must commit to the ban on nuclear and other destructive weapons, “and we must urge all member states who are not yet party to it to accede to it without delay.”

She said the United States looks forward to engaging with the other members of the 15-nation Security Council “to forge consensus around this text.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
more https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-japan-seek-resolution-calling-nations-ban-nuclear-108261129

March 20, 2024 Posted by | politics international, space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The Hidden Reasons Behind the War on Gaza

March 20, 2024 Posted by | Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Fourth discharge of treated Fukushima water completed

 The release of the fourth batch of treated radioactive water from the
crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant into the sea concluded Sunday,
with the next round possibly starting next month, the plant’s operator
said.

 Japan Times 17th March 2024

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/03/17/japan/fourth-fukushima-water-release-completed

March 20, 2024 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans | Leave a comment

 Nuclear news – week to 18 March

Some bits of good news.  Notable wins in climate and environmental justice.   Scotland made rewilding progress.  The Danish City Reimagining Reuse.    

TOP STORIES. Why the US is trying to imprison Assange: Report from inside the Court. 

Reversing Europe’s and Australia’s slide into irrelevance & insecurity – National Press Club of Australia speech- Yanis Varoufakis. 

There is no such thing as a “nuclear waste-eating” reactor . 

Nuclear industry wants Canada to lift ban on reprocessing plutonium, despite proliferation risks. 

Cold turkeys: The demise of nuclear power. 

Conditions inside Fukushima’s melted nuclear reactors still unclear 13 years after disaster struck – also at https://nuclear-news.net/2024/03/14/3-a-conditions-inside-fukushimas-melted-nuclear-reactors-still-unclear-13-years-after-disaster-struck/

Climate. ‘Greenhushing’ Is On the Rise as Companies Go Silent on Climate Pledges.

Nuclear. Australia media – normally focussed on football, has a spasm about nuclear. Rest of the anglophone world gives climate, nuclear, a nod, amongst gaffes of UK royalty, and fashion, celebrities and sport. Gaza gets a mention, too,

Noel’s notes. Julian Assange, atrocities, nuclear war, AI, “Oppenheimer”, and the whole damn thing. AUKUS nuclear pact – a lame duck?         Nuclear power and the ignorance of journalists – it’s almost criminal.

nb. Huge number of articles on nuclear in the Australian media. From next week, I will cut them back to just a representative few.


*******************************************

 AUSTRALIA. (There are more articles than this – but I had to stop!)

NUCLEAR ISSUES

ARTS and CULTURE. The ideology of war in Ukraine and Israel.ECONOMICS. HSBC leads Sizewell C investment push as time ticks on final investment decision.
NuScale nuclear power is among Top 5 Industrials Stocks That May Fall Off A Cliff In Q1.		EMPLOYMENT, Dounreay workers vote on strike action after pay talks stall,
MEDIA.
 Hollywood stars put their name to a good message, but it’s the messengers who are problematic.
Film poses moral questions about 2011 Fukushima disaster displacement . The Film RADIOACTIVE: The women of Three Mile Island will start streaming on Apple TV and Amazon Prime Video from March 12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is3jlNhicFY 

Keep Your Money Out of Nukes! Anti-Nuclear Financial Fitness w/Domini’s Mary Beth Gallagher: PODCAST.
UN report finds Israel deliberately targeted journalists – Reuters.

OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . Bridgwater activists shine light on nuclear power in UK.
POLITICS.Japan’s Nuclear Energy Policy Disaster. Japan Ramps Up Drive to Restart World’s Biggest Nuclear Plant.

Ralph Nader: Open Letter to President Biden 3.12.24. Decision time Democrats: Oppose Biden’s genocide in Gaza or tacitly support it.

UK Steps Up Sizewell Nuclear Push With State-Backed Loans. UK’s Spring budget a ‘myopic sop’ to nuclear obsessives. UK government plans to block foreign control of newspapers – what about foreign control of Sizewell nuclear project ?The U.S. Is Betting Big on Small Nuclear Reactors (done up with green paint)		POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. French president Emmanuel Macron tells Putin ‘WE are a nuclear power and WE are ready’ in latest WW3 rhetoric.

As ‘Oppenheimer’ wins big, we should worry about lowering of nuclear thresholds.
PROTESTS. In pre-election messaging, Putin less strident on nuclear war.

PUBLIC OPINION. 
‘Don’t hold your breath’ – people living in Wylfa’s shadow have say on nuclear development plans.

SAFETY. Incidents. Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant reports shelling by Ukraine army 
Shelling continues near Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station.

Observing the 45th Anniversary of the Worst U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plant Accident.

SECRETS and LIES.
 The International Atomic Energy Agency recruiting spies?

SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS.
Musk’s SpaceX is building spy satellite network for US intelligence agency, sources say

SPINBUSTER. Exposing myths about building French nuclear power.
IAEA director’s visit to Japan widely questioned, seeks to downplay nuclear water dumping.
TECHNOLOGY. La Hague reprocessing plant: expansion and continued operation until at least 2100.
WAR and CONFLICT. Putin warns again that Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons if its sovereignty is threatened.

Will Biden’s, NATO’s military personnel in Ukraine cross the last red line to Armageddon?

Netanyahu approves Rafah ground invasion, despite Biden opposition.

War Games in Arctic: What’s Driving the West’s New Passion?


WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Paves Way for Increase in Production in Commercial Reactors of Tritium for Nuclear Weapons.

Huge UK £286bn nuclear submarine deal with US at risk for one reason warns ex Navy chief.

EU to use Russian assets to buy arms for Ukraine – Scholz.

March 19, 2024 Posted by | Christina's notes | 1 Comment

100,000 years and counting: how do we tell future generations about highly radioactive nuclear waste repositories?

Sweden and Finland have described KBS-3 as a world-first nuclear-waste management solution.

Critical questions remain about the storage method, however. There have been widely publicised concerns in Sweden about the corrosion of test copper canisters after just a few decades. This is worrying, to say the least, because it’s based on a principle of passive safety. The storage sites will be constructed, the canisters filled and sealed, and then everything will be left in the ground without any human monitoring its safe functioning and with no technological option for retrieving it. Yet, over 100,000 years the prospect of human or non-human intrusion into the site – both accidental or intentional – remains a serious threat.

International attention is increasingly fixated on “impactful” short-term responses to environmental problems – usually limited to the lifespan of two or three future generations of human life. Yet the nature of long-lived nuclear waste requires us to imagine and care for a future well beyond that time horizon, and perhaps even beyond the existence of humanity.

International attention is increasingly fixated on “impactful” short-term responses to environmental problems – usually limited to the lifespan of two or three future generations of human life. Yet the nature of long-lived nuclear waste requires us to imagine and care for a future well beyond that time horizon, and perhaps even beyond the existence of humanity.

March 19, 2024 Thomas Keating. Postdoctoral Researcher, Linköping University, Anna Storm, Professor of Technology and Social Change, Linköping University https://theconversation.com/100-000-years-and-counting-how-do-we-tell-future-generations-about-highly-radioactive-nuclear-waste-repositories-199441

In Europe, increasing efforts on climate change mitigation, a sudden focus on energy independence after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and reported breakthroughs in nuclear fusion have sparked renewed interest in the potential of nuclear power. So-called small modular reactors (SMRs) are increasingly under development, and familiar promises about nuclear power’s potential are being revived.

Nuclear power is routinely portrayed by proponents as the source of “limitless” amounts of carbon-free electricity. The rhetorical move from speaking about “renewable energy” to “fossil-free energy” is increasingly evident, and telling.

Yet nuclear energy production requires managing what is known as “spent” nuclear fuel where major problems arise about how best to safeguard these waste materials into the future – especially should nuclear energy production increase. Short-term storage facilities have been in place for decades, but the question of their long-term deposition has caused intense political debates, with a number of projects being delayed or cancelled entirely. In the United States, work on the Yucca Mountain facility has stopped completely leaving the country with 93 nuclear reactors and no long-term storage site for the waste they produce.

Nuclear power plants produce three kinds of radioactive waste:

  • Short-lived low- and intermediate-level waste;
  • Long-lived low- and intermediate-level waste;
  • Long-lived and highly radioactive waste, known as spent nuclear fuel.

The critical challenge for nuclear energy production is the management of long-lived waste, which refers to nuclear materials that take thousands of years to return to a level of radioactivity that is deemed “safe”. According to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in spent fuel half of the radiation in strontium-90 and cesium-137 can decay in 30 years, while it would take 24,000 years for plutonium-239 to return to a state considered “harmless”. However, exactly what is meant by “safe” and “harmless” in this context is something that remains poorly defined by international nuclear management organisations, and there is surprisingly little international consensus about the time it takes for radioactive waste to return to a state considered “safe” for organic life.

“Permanent” geological repositories

Despite the seeming revival of nuclear energy production today, very few of the countries that produce nuclear energy have defined a long-term strategy for managing highly radioactive spent fuel into the future. Only Finland and Sweden have confirmed plans for so-called “final” or “permanent” geological repositories.

The Swedish government granted approval for a final repository in the village of Forsmark in January 2022, with plans to construct, fill and seal the facility over the next century. This repository is designed to last 100,000 years, which is how long planners say that it will take to return to a level of radioactivity comparable to uranium found in the earth’s bedrock.

Finland is well underway in the construction of its Onkalo high-level nuclear waste repository, which they began building in 2004 with plans to seal their facility by the end of the 21st century.

The technological method that Finland and Sweden plan to use in their permanent repositories is referred to as KBS-3 storage. In this method, spent nuclear fuel is encased in cast iron, which is then placed inside copper canisters, which are then surrounded by clay and bedrock approximately 500 metres below ground. The same or similar methods are being considered by other countries, such as the United Kingdom.

Sweden and Finland have described KBS-3 as a world-first nuclear-waste management solution. It is the product of decades of scientific research and negotiation with stakeholders, in particular with the communities that will eventually live near the buried waste.

Critical questions remain about the storage method, however. There have been widely publicised concerns in Sweden about the corrosion of test copper canisters after just a few decades. This is worrying, to say the least, because it’s based on a principle of passive safety. The storage sites will be constructed, the canisters filled and sealed, and then everything will be left in the ground without any human monitoring its safe functioning and with no technological option for retrieving it. Yet, over 100,000 years the prospect of human or non-human intrusion into the site – both accidental or intentional – remains a serious threat.

The Key Information File

Another major problem is how to communicate the presence of buried nuclear waste to future generations. If spent fuel remains dangerous for 100,000 years, then clearly this is a time frame where languages can disappear and where the existence of humanity cannot be guaranteed. Transferring information about these sites into the future is a sizeable task that demands expertise and collaboration internationally across the social sciences and sciences into practices of nuclear waste memory transfer – what we refer to as nuclear memory communication.

In a project commissioned by the Swedish Nuclear Waste Management Company (SKB), we take up this precise task by writing the “Key Information File” – a document aimed at non-expert readers containing only the most essential information about Sweden’s nuclear waste repository under development.

The Key Information File has been formulated as a summary document that would help future readers understand the dangers posed by buried waste. Its purpose is to guide the reader to where they can find more detailed information about the repository – acting as a “key” to other archives and forms of nuclear memory communication until the site’s closure at the end of the 21st century. What happens to the Key Information File after this time is undecided, yet communicating the information that it contains to future generations is crucial.

The Key Information File we will publish in 2024 is intended to be securely stored at the entrance to the nuclear waste repository in Sweden, as well as at the National Archives in Stockholm. To ensure its durability and survival through time, the plan is for it to be reproduced in different media formats and translated into multiple languages. The initial version is in English and, when finalised, it will be translated into Swedish and other languages that have yet to be decided.

Our aim is for the file to be updated every 10 years to ensure that essential information is correct and that it remains understandable to a wide audience. We also see the need for the file to be incorporated into other intergenerational practices of knowledge transfer in the future – from its inclusion into educational syllabi in schools, to the use of graphic design and artwork to make the document distinctive and memorable, to the formation of international networks of Key Information File writing and storage in countries where, at the time of writing, decisions have not yet been made about how to store highly radioactive long-lived nuclear waste.

Fragility and short-termism: a great irony

In the process of writing the Key Information File, we have discovered many issues surrounding the efficacy of these strategies for communicating memory of nuclear waste repositories into the future. One is the remarkable fragility of programs and institutions – on more than one occasion in recent years, it has taken just one person to retire from a nuclear organisation for the knowledge of an entire programme of memory communication to be halted or even lost.

And if it is difficult to preserve and communicate crucial information even in the short term, what chance do we have over 100,000 years?

International attention is increasingly fixated on “impactful” short-term responses to environmental problems – usually limited to the lifespan of two or three future generations of human life. Yet the nature of long-lived nuclear waste requires us to imagine and care for a future well beyond that time horizon, and perhaps even beyond the existence of humanity.

Responding to these challenges, even partially, requires governments and research funders internationally to provide the capacity for long-term intergenerational research on these and related issues. It also demands care in developing succession plans for retiring experts to ensure their institutional knowledge and expertise is not lost. In Sweden, this could also mean committing long-term funding from the Swedish nuclear waste fund so that not only future technical problems with the waste deposition are tackled, but also future societal problems of memory and information transfer can be addressed by people with appropriate capacity and expertise.

March 19, 2024 Posted by | Finland, Sweden, wastes | Leave a comment

How Biden’s budget plunged the Aukus submarines pact into doubt

Alarm in Australia as the US suddenly struggles to fortify its own fleet

Matt Oliver, INDUSTRY EDITOR, 18 March 2024 

 A year on from the trio’s meeting, the Aukus partnership is suddenly
looking decidedly more fragile. Inside defence circles, there are growing
doubts about America’s ability and willingness to deliver following a
shock proposal from the Biden administration that cuts to the heart of the
deal.

Amid a row at home over government budgets, the White House this
month suggested halving the number of Virginia-class submarines it builds
next year – the very same type it has promised to Australia under Aukus.
That means the US faces a shortfall itself, raising the prospect it may
refuse to sell its existing vessels and leave Canberra in the lurch.

 Telegraph 18th March 2024

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/18/biden-budget-aukus-nuclear-submarine-doubt-uk-australia

March 19, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Money is “The Achilles Heal” of the nuclear state

Paul Richards, 19 mar 24

Integrated, with the first lies, and weasel words, becoming memes out of public and private orations, Lewis Strauss, uttered during his term in the quasi-U.S. government, Atomic Energy Commission [AEC]1953 to 1958.

Even after being rebuked by, U.S. electricity cartels, behind the meter, Lewis Strauss, modified his orations.

“Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter…

….will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours, as disease yields and man comes to understand what causes him to age….” Lewis Strauss. 1954 National Association of Science Writers Founder Day Dinner.

Strauss, then promised the Plutonium Economy overproduction of nuclear or carbon, fuelled heat, resulting in excess electricity, and the ensuing growth we have suffered in the 21C, the primary cause of global warming.

This legacy linear economy business model, reflects the fundamental flaw, in the so-called modern economic theory, putting profit before the Planet and people

March 19, 2024 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Exposing myths about building French nuclear power

How French nuclear construction times and costs have been getting longer and longer – for a long time

DAVID TOKE, MAR 16, 2024,  https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/exposing-myths-about-building-french

It has been standard in the UK to talk about the wonders of the French nuclear programme and how if only we copied them nuclear power would get cheaper and cheaper. The story has gone ‘If only we built a series of nuclear power plant like they did’. But it turns out that the idea that the French nuclear programme was ever getting any cheaper was a myth.

In the UK Government policy documents would use their own language to describe nuclear prospects. Special terms are used that are not usually used to discuss other energy developments. These include the acronym ‘FOAK’ which stands for ‘First of a Kind’. In other words the first plant will be relatively more expensive than the plants of the same model that followed them. Another term used of course is ‘overnight’ costs – that is a wonderful piece of euphemism given that nuclear power plants are anything but built overnight. Its use obscures the fact that very large interest costs mount up during the time that the plant is being constructed, costs which are not included in the total cost estimates. That is because the plant in the spreadsheet is being built overnight (?!).

But when we examine the actual ‘overnight’ costs of French nuclear power, as reported, they have always been increasing. Look at the analysis by Arnulf Grubler published in the journal Energy Policy in 2010: [graph on original]

Grubler’s analysis did not include the length of time taken to construct the latest French nuclear power plant at Flamanville. This is an EPR (the same design as is being built at Hinkley C and planned for Sizewell C. Construction of the Flamanville EPR began in 2007 but it has still not been completed. Hence the Figure below includes the time taken to build Flamanville up until now, with the proviso that the plant still has not been completed.

It should be understood that, broadly speaking, the cost of building reactors is proportionate to the amount of construction time. So the cost has gone up, and in recent years cost has been going up at a rapid rate,.

In my forthcoming book ‘Energy Revolutions – Profiteering versus Democracy’ I outliner four reasons for the increasing difficulties of building nuclear power plants:

‘First is the fact that nuclear power plant designers have incorporated safety features designed to minimise the consequences of nuclear accidents, but in doing so the plants have become much more complicated and difficult to build without great expense.

A second reason is that large construction projects of whatever type, at least in the West, tend to greatly overrun their budgets. In the West, improvements in health and safety regulations to protect construction workers have no doubt played a part in this.

A third factor is that, in the West at least, the cheap industrialised labour force that dominated the industrial economies of the past and which could be used to develop nuclear programmes (in the way that France did in the 1980s) has ceased to exist.

A fourth factor is simply that renewable energy technologies, especially wind and solar power, can be largely manufactured offsite in a modular fashion and their costs have rapidly fallen, leaving nuclear power increasingly uncompetitive.’ (page 30)

This book shows how we can move forward to an energy system powered by renewable energy rather than nuclear power or ‘carbon capture’ fossil fuels. It reveals how selective public ownership and targeted interventions, as part of an energy democracy programme will protect consumer interests better than the chaotic energy supply system that failed consumers so expensively in the recent energy crisis. We want no more of that!

Essentially, the idea of using nuclear power as a significant measure to engineer the global energy transition is at best a tremendous waste of resources. It is not just France that is seeing its nuclear power programme stall. It is a global phenomenon. Renewable energy is, by contrast, expanding at ever-incredible rates. As can be seen from the following graphs which is taken from my book ‘Energy Revolutions’. [on original]

March 19, 2024 Posted by | France, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Concerns and complaints continue as fourth Fukushima wastewater discharge completed

 https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-03-18/Concerns-continue-as-fourth-Fukushima-wastewater-discharge-completed-1s4JAJ539w4/p.html

Concerns and complaints from home and abroad remain while Japan’s crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant has finished its first year of discharging nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean.

The plant completed its fourth and final round of discharge for the current fiscal year, which ends in March, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) said on Sunday.

As per the initial plan, approximately 31,200 tonnes of wastewater containing radioactive tritium has been released into the ocean since August 2023, with each discharge running for about two weeks.

Earlier this week, International Atomic Energy Agency Director-General Rafael Grossi emphasized continued efforts to monitor the discharging process.

Stressing that the discharge marks merely the initial phase of a long process, Grossi said that “much effort will be required in the lengthy process ahead,” and reiterated the organization’s stance on maintaining vigilance throughout the process.

While the Japanese government and TEPCO have asserted the safety and necessity of the process, there are still concerns from other countries and local stakeholders regarding environmental impacts.

Sophia from the U.S. complained that the release of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea made her fear for the future.

Najee Johnson, a college student from Canada, suggested the Japanese government find a different plan because it could pollute our ocean and harm our sea life.

Haruo Ono, a fisherman in the town of Shinchi in Fukushima, said “All fishermen are against ocean dumping. The contaminated water has flowed into what we fishermen call ‘the sea of treasure’, and the process will last for at least 30 years.”

“Is it really necessary, in the first place, to dump what has been stored in tanks into the sea? How can we say it’s ‘safe’ when the discharged water clearly consists of harmful radioactive substances? I think the government and TEPCO must provide a solid answer,” said Chiyo Oda, a resident of Fukushima’s Iwaki city.

The recent leakage of contaminated water from pipes at the Fukushima plant also fueled concerns among the Japanese public.

Besides, the promised fund of more than 100 billion yen (around $670 million) to compensate and support local fishermen and fishing industry remains doubtful as a court ruling last December relieved the government of responsibility to pay damages to Fukushima evacuees.

A Tokyo court ruled that only the operator of the tsunami-wrecked Fukushima nuclear power plant has to pay damages to the evacuees, relieving the government of responsibility. Plaintiffs criticized the ruling as belittling their suffering and the severity of the disaster. The court also slashed the amount by ordering the TEPCO to pay a total of 23.5 million yen to 44 of the 47 plaintiffs.

The ruling backpedaled from an earlier decision in March 2018, when the Tokyo District Court held both the government and TEPCO accountable for the disaster, which the ruling said could have been prevented if they both took better precautionary measures, ordering both to pay 59 million yen in damages.

March 19, 2024 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »