New Nuclear Energy: Assessing the National Security Risks

https://youtube.com/watch?v=iw979CWKtVs%3Fsi%3DVOWfA5_epiZp1O2_

https://blogs.gwu.edu/elliott-iistp/research-2/ 26 Apr 24

IISTP Research Professor Sharon Squassoni publishes a comprehensive report assessing the risks of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.

Read the complete report: “New Nuclear Energy: Assessing the National Security Risks“.

GWU REPORT: NATIONAL SECURITY RISKS GROW WITH NEW NUCLEAR ENERGY

Drone strikes against Ukraine’s nuclear reactors highlight risks

WASHINGTON, DC – April 23, 2024 – Proliferation of nuclear weapons, nuclear terrorism, sabotage, coercion and military operations – these risks associated with nuclear energy can all be expected to grow as countries seek to implement their new nuclear energy objectives, according to a new report published today by George Washington University’s (GWU) Sharon Squassoni. The aim of 22 countries to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, announced on the margins of COP-28, was adopted with little thought to the national security implications. The promotion of small modular reactors (SMRs)– specifically tailored to developing countries – will heighten, not diminish risks.

The report by GW professor Sharon Squassoni, “New Nuclear Energy: Assessing the National Security Risks,” comes as drone strikes against Ukrainian nuclear power plants highlight nuclear reactor vulnerabilities. Other national security risks will accompany significant nuclear growth as renewed interest in nuclear energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions sparks programs across the globe. Squassoni, a professor at GWU’s Elliott School of International Affairs, now researches risk reduction from nuclear energy and nuclear weapons after serving in the State Department, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and the Congressional Research Service.

Proliferation and nuclear terrorism are the top two national security risks, but sabotage, coercion and military operations pose other risks. An attempt to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers – a national security risk itself — using nuclear energy could worsen the risk of proliferation by motivating fuel cycle independence. SMRs are still in development, with few restrictions on designs. Reactors fueled with highly enriched uranium or plutonium will increase risks of proliferation and terrorism because those materials are weapons-usable. Reactors designed to include lifetime cores will build up plutonium over time. Fast reactor designs that require reprocessing, especially continuous recycling of fuel, could ultimately confer latent nuclear weapons capabilities to many more states. In sum, the kinds of reactors now under consideration do nothing to reduce known risks, and some pose heightened risks. There appears to be no attempt to forge agreement among suppliers or governments to restrict reactor choices that pose greater proliferation risks.

If the mass production of small modular reactors lowers barriers to entry into nuclear energy, there will be many more states deploying nuclear power reactors, including those with significant governance challenges. Russian and Chinese programs to promote nuclear energy target many of those states. Cooperation among key states essential to minimize the safety, security and proliferation risks of nuclear energy is at an all-time low. The call to triple nuclear energy coincides with the disintegration of cooperation, the unraveling of norms and the loss of credibility of international institutions that are crucial to the safe and secure operation of nuclear power.

April 28, 2024 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | safety, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

1 Comment »

Whether it is the new, “hyped,” “SMR”s” mini-nukes or the old boiling water or pressurize water nuclear reactors, they are all too dangerous, too expensive, take too long to build, have no long term storage for their deadly, toxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic wastes for 450,000 years from which both “dirty bombs,” & nuclear weapons can be made. They are all totally unnecessary for our energy needs or to fight climate change. We can power the planet with just wind, photovoltaic, geothermal and hydroelectric power now. All we lack is the political will to do so. Because the dying, profit addicted nuclear power and centralized, for profit electric utility industries have bought the votes of our elected leaders from both Political Parties in both the Federal and State Governments in the USA. We have the technology and the natural resources to do so now. What we need is an “Apollo, Lunar Landing Project Campaign,” to get off both fossil fuels and nuclear power, “with all deliberate speed.” Go to the websites of The Solutions Project and the Rocky Mountain Institute for the plans for all 50 of the United States, 146 Countries all across the globe and for the research projects on renewable energy. We will not “starve and freeze in the dark,” nor “wreck our economy in the process.” Contrary to the lies and propaganda of the nuclear industry and centralized, for profit electrical utility industries.

Comment by paulrodenlearning | April 28, 2024 | Reply

nuclear-news

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