nuclear-news

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

America’s Nuclear Weapons Quagmire

what are the American people really getting for all of this new nuclear weapons spending?

The United States is locked in a strategic and ideological battle with itself over the purpose and future of its nuclear arsenal

STIMSON, By  Geoff Wilson, Defense Policy & Posture, August 7, 2024

The United States is on track to spend the equivalent of more than two Manhattan projects per year in one of the most expensive nuclear arms races in history. Yet, all of the systems being developed are all significantly over budget and behind schedule, and several might be actively eroding America’s national security by destabilizing global strategic stability and legitimizing the idea of “limited” nuclear use. How did we get here and might there be better alternatives?

Over the past decade, the United States has launched one of the most expensive nuclear arms races in history. As it stands now, this new nuclear modernization comes with a price tag of approximately $1.7 trillion over 30 years.1 To put this in perspective, adjusted for inflation to 2023 dollars, the four years of the Manhattan Project cost approximately $30 billion.2

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the United States is set to spend some $756 billion on nuclear weapons modernization programs between fiscal 2023-2032,3 which averages out to $75 billion a year on nuclear weapons. That is more than two Manhattan projects every year for the next eight years.

Put in other terms, it is nearly all the money the United States spent on nuclear weapons and delivery systems for World War II, spent every year, for the next eight years. When combined with the Department of Defense’s conventional weapons portfolio over the same period, nuclear modernization will drive annual peacetime Pentagon budgets to unprecedented levels.

If you compare the technical obstacles faced by the United States during the nuclear development of the 1940s, to the higher costs for the relatively marginal benefits of the current American nuclear modernization program, it begs the question: what are the American people really getting for all of this new nuclear weapons spending?

Nuclear weapons proponents have framed these expenses as part of a modernization effort to update and refurbish aging systems developed in the 1970’s and 80’s or as a necessity to maintain U.S. global nuclear dominance.4 But this branding masks a serious escalation in disruptive nuclear posture changes, one that includes new weapons and missions that were eliminated by former presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush after being identified as  unnecessary and destabilizing to both strategic stability and nuclear deterrence.

Set against this backdrop, it appears that the United States is in a new global nuclear arms race, a new Cold War 2.0, with the United States set firmly in the driver’s seat. But amidst increased global nuclear risks, the United States is inflicting unnecessary self-harm by expending resources on systems that may actually erode strategic stability and drawing resources away from other critical national security priorities – with very little real future security benefit to show for it.

The Problem

Fundamentally, the problem with rapid new nuclear weapons development is that it is strategically destabilizing. If one nation learns that a rival is rapidly developing systems that could overwhelm or defeat its defenses, a realist response dictates that that nation must do the same to offset any strategic advantage its rival might gain to maintain deterrent parity.

The alternatives are to consider attacking that rival before they have produced new weapons that can defeat your existing forces, or to find a way to negotiate with those rivals to produce verifiable diplomatic agreements to limit the production and deployment of new and destabilizing forces.

History provides many examples of this dynamic. The United Kingdom and Germany engaged in a serious naval arms race that contributed to the tensions preceding World War I…………………………………………….

 nuclear modernization plan has now grown from just updating older systems, to the development of entirely new ones as well.

………………………………………………………….. other nuclear powers have taken notice.

Challenges of a New Global Nuclear Arms Race

Since the launch of the new modernization plan, every single nuclear-armed nation has begun redeveloping or expanding their nuclear arsenals.19

………………………………………………… Even more concerning for global strategic stability are growing calls in the United States for entirely new nuclear missions and systems. Already, the United States is in the process of developing, producing, or deploying at least three new weapons systems that can be alternatively called: less-than-deterrent, non-strategic, tactical, or battlefield nuclear weapons. These are weapons that are not meant to reinforce the deterrence-first approach that many Americans have come to believe the U.S. nuclear arsenal is based around today. Instead, they are part of a murkier Cold War-style nuclear warfighting strategy meant to fight and “win” a limited nuclear war at the theater level.

…………………………………………… This class of weapons is incredibly dangerous considering they are viewed as being smaller and less destructive and have been argued as being more usable. Add to that the fact they are traditionally meant to be deployed alongside conventional forces, and their mere possession can be seen as increasing the likelihood of their use under pressure or in crisis situations.25

They also pose a significant discrimination problem to enemy leaders, by building uncertainty into U.S. missile launches, forcing them to constantly evaluate if they are under a conventional or nuclear strike………………………………………………..

,…………………………………………….. Senator Edward Kennedy drove this issue home in 2003 when he argued on the Senate floor, “Some may say that smaller weapons are less dangerous than the larger weapons already in our arsenal. But these nuclear weapons are actually more dangerous… [and they are made] more usable by lowering the thresholds for the first use of nuclear weapons.”

Kennedy warns that this view is deceptive, “Nuclear war is nuclear war is nuclear war. We don’t want it anywhere, anytime, anyplace. Make no mistake, a mini-nuke is still a nuke. ……………………………………………………………………………

…………………………Nuclear Brass Tacks

On the whole, the extremely high costs of these weapons will be a significant factor in the coming defense spending crisis. Spending $1.7 trillion dollars on new nuclear weapons over 30 years – about the total cost of all U.S. student debt – is unsustainable.29

The U.S. defense industrial base has so far proven itself incapable of actually absorbing all of the new nuclear spending. Even if it could, the risks of rampant waste and production delays challenge the industry’s ability to produce these weapons. It thus becomes difficult to say whether or not the United States is actually reaping any benefit from this modernization effort while actively encouraging its rivals to also make new nuclear investments to maintain their own perceived deterrent.

Indeed, national security establishment leaders have been so concerned with whether they can spend more money on nuclear weapons, there has been very little consideration of whether they should.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Conclusion

Among the lessoned learned from the first Cold War, the conflict demonstrated that simply possessing more nuclear weapons did not make the United States any safer. While humanity survived the last nuclear arms race, that outcome was far from certain, and the prospect of a new game of nuclear chicken in the Pacific or Europe should be viewed with as much cynicism as can be mustered………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.stimson.org/2024/americas-nuclear-weapons-quagmire/

August 9, 2024 Posted by | USA | Leave a comment

US, UK boycott Japan nuclear bomb memorial after Israel snubbed

The Mayor of Nagasaki said that there was a possibility of protests against the Israeli presence over it’s war on Gaza.

The New Arab Staff & Agencies, 07 August, 2024

Ambassadors from Western countries – including the US and UK – will skip a ceremony marking the 79th anniversary of the nuclear bombing of Nagasaki after Israel was snubbed, officials said Wednesday.

Nagasaki’s mayor said last week that Israel’s ambassador Gilad Cohen was not invited to Friday’s event in the southern Japanese city because of the risk of possible protests over the Gaza conflict.

The US and UK embassies said on Wednesday their ambassadors would not take part as a result and that their countries would be represented by lower-ranking diplomats.

Media reports said Australia, Italy, Canada, and the EU, who together with the US, UK, and Germany signed a strongly worded joint letter to Nagasaki’s mayor last month, would follow suit.

US ambassador Rahm Emanuel will not attend “after the mayor of Nagasaki politicised the event by not inviting the Israeli ambassador”, an embassy spokesperson told AFP.

nstead, Emanuel, 64, who was ex-president Barack Obama’s chief of staff, will go to a separate event at a temple in Tokyo, the spokesperson said.

Emanuel is fiercely pro-Israel, with his father being a former member of the Irgun, a Jewish paramilitary group that targeted British soldiers and Palestinian civilians in mandatory Palestine. 

The British embassy said Ambassador Julia Longbottom would also not be in Nagasaki, adding that not inviting Israel “creates an unfortunate and misleading equivalency with Russia and Belarus – the only other countries not invited to this year’s ceremony”.

A spokesperson for the French embassy said its number two would attend, telling AFP that the “decision not to invite the representative of Israel is regrettable and questionable”.

The European Union’s ambassador would not take part “due to his agenda” and the bloc would be represented by a lower-level diplomat, a spokesperson told AFP.

The German embassy told AFP that the head of its political division would attend, with the decision made “in light of the absences and availability” of senior embassy staff………………………………………………………………………………….https://www.newarab.com/news/us-uk-boycott-japan-nuclear-bomb-memorial-after-israel-snubbed

August 9, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

US atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remembered amid growing threat of nuclear war

 https://peoplesdispatch.org/2024/08/07/us-atomic-bombing-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-remembered-amid-growing-threat-of-nuclear-war/

US bombings of the Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9 of 1945 are the only incidents of nuclear bombings in world historyAugust 07, 2024 by Abdul Rahman

Over 50,000 people, including representatives from 109 countries, joined an event marking the 79th anniversary of the US’s bombing of Hiroshima. The main ceremony was held at Hiroshima’s Peace Memorial Park on Tuesday, August 6.  

A total of 344,306 people were killed during the bombing as well as in the aftermath. Despite knowing the widespread destruction and irreversible losses caused by the attack, the US dropped another nuclear bomb on Nagasaki just three days later on August 9, killing 40,000 people immediately. The number of people killed in Nagasaki would double that figure in most estimates.    

Speaking during the ceremony, Hiroshima city Mayor Matsui Kazumi expressed concerns that the world is moving towards greater reliance on military forces to solve issues. “Our unity will move leaders now relying on nuclear deterrence to shift their policies,” Kazumi said.

Kazumi cited the wars in Ukraine and Gaza as examples of how growing reliance on military solutions may end up causing irreparable damage to humanity. 

Israel was not invited to the ceremony due to its genocidal war in Gaza, which has killed close to 40,000 Palestinians and wounded nearly 100,000 since October of last year. 

Marking the day, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said, “nuclear weapons and the threat of their use are not confined to history books. They have once again appeared in the daily rhetoric of international relations. They represent a real and present danger that remains with us today.”     

Kazumi also demanded that Japan join the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The third conference of the parties to this treaty is scheduled to be held in March of next year in New York. 

As per a UN General Assembly resolution, a conference was first held in 2017 which adopted the TPNW. The treaty “includes a comprehensive set of prohibitions on participating in any nuclear weapon activities. These include undertakings not to develop, test, produce, acquire, possess, stockpile, use or threaten to use nuclear weapons.” The TPNW entered into force in January 2021.    

Although over 90 countries have signed the TPNW thus far, the treaty does not include a single nuclear power.

Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio also attended the ceremony. The Kishida government has remained vague regarding its position on the treaty. Representatives of the atomic bomb survivors met him on the sideline of the memorial, demanding that Japan join the treaty. Kishida responded by averting any direct commitment, claiming instead that he wants “to move forward together with those working on the treaty.”

Several survivors quoted by HKS Japan also emphasized the need for complete abolition of nuclear weapons. Survivor Suemasa Sadako, now 90, maintains that “nuclear weapons and humans can’t coexist.” 

“Atomic bombs will lead to the destruction of mankind,” Sadako articulated.

The Japanese Communist Party is leading a campaign to press the government to sign the TPNW. The party has opposed Japan’s recent abandonment of its defensive military strategy and its push towards armament and militarization, and firmly stands with the push towards nuclear disarmament.  

August 9, 2024 Posted by | history | Leave a comment

The deceitfulness of the nuclear weapons industry -as it plays the jobs jobs jobs card

World-Ending Maneuvers? Inside the Nuclear-Weapons Lobby Today, TomDispatch, By Hekmat Aboukhater and William D. Hartung August 7, 2024

“……………………………………………………………………………Playing the Jobs Card

The argument of last resort for the Sentinel and similar questionable weapons programs is that they create well-paying jobs in key states and districts. Northrop Grumman has played the jobs card effectively with respect to the Sentinel, claiming it will create 10,000 jobs in its development phase alone, including about 2,250 in the state of Utah, where the hub for the program is located. 

As a start, however, those 10,000 jobs will help a miniscule fraction of the 167-million-member American workforce. Moreover, Northrop Grumman claims facilities tied to the program will be set up in 32 states. If 2,250 of those jobs end up in Utah, that leaves 7,750 more jobs spread across 31 states — an average of about 250 jobs per state, essentially a rounding error compared to total employment in most localities.

Nor has Northrop Grumman provided any documentation for the number of jobs the Sentinel program will allegedly create. Journalist Taylor Barnes of ReThink Media was rebuffed in her efforts to get a copy of the agreement between Northrop Grumman and the state of Utah that reportedly indicates how many Sentinel-related jobs the company needs to create to get the full subsidy offered to put its primary facility in Utah.

A statement by a Utah official justifying that lack of transparency suggested Northrop Grumman was operating in “a competitive defense industry” and that revealing details of the agreement might somehow harm the company. But any modest financial harm Northrop Grumman might suffer, were those details revealed, pales in comparison with the immense risks and costs of the Sentinel program itself.

There are two major flaws in the jobs argument with respect to the future production of nuclear weapons. First, military spending should be based on security considerations, not pork-barrel politics. Second, as Heidi Peltier of the Costs of War Project has effectively demonstrated, virtually any other expenditure of funds currently devoted to Pentagon programs would create between 9% and 250% more jobs than weapons spending does. If Congress were instead to put such funds into addressing climate change, dealing with future disease epidemics, poverty, or homelessness — all serious threats to public safety — the American economy would gain hundreds of thousands of jobs. Choosing to fund those ICBMs instead is, in fact, a job killer, not a job creator………………………………  https://tomdispatch.com/world-ending-maneuvers/

August 9, 2024 Posted by | employment, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Why US nuclear waste policy got stalled. And what to do about it.

The lack of a repository doesn’t seem to worry nuclear enthusiasts anymore, probably because it doesn’t threaten what reactor licensing there is. Recent legislation—the ADVANCE Act—to accelerate approval of new nuclear technologies does not mention nuclear waste at all. The focus is on subsidizing new reactor projects and “streamlining” licensing.

A difficulty is that current law requires that, before the Energy Department can go forward with a surface storage facility to consolidate the used fuel, it has to have already selected a new geologic repository site, which isn’t happening.

Bulletin, By Victor Gilinsky | July 31, 2024, Victor Gilinsky is a physicist and was a commissioner of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission during the Ford, Carter, and Reagan administrations

It is often said—somewhat accusingly—that it isn’t technical issues that stand in the way of siting a US geologic repository for highly radioactive waste, but political and social ones. In fact, the issues are inextricably connected. The root of the US failure lies in the original motive of the nuclear establishment in siting such an underground repository. It was not to protect public safety, but to protect continued licensing of nuclear power plants from attack in the courts on grounds that there were no provisions for dealing with the plants’ highly radioactive waste.

The disdain for public safety and the rush to open a repository infected the design process and fostered slapdash decisions. These ultimately sank the technical case for the repository at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain. And while in the end the project was shelved by a political act, behind it were Energy Department and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) actions that left a deep residue of public distrust, so deep that there isn’t likely to be a US geologic repository, ever.

The contrast with successful waste repository projects in Sweden and Finland is clear. Their regulatory standards were much tighter than those applied by the NRC, the sites were chosen carefully from a scientific point of view, and the designs strictly focused on public safety. It is not surprising that the Scandinavian authorities were able to gain the confidence of their public, and not just because they took pains to consult the public—which the Energy Department did not. They presented a good case for a sound underground facility.

Waste become a problem. ………………………………………………..

Selecting a bad site. Yucca Mountain was initially advertised as being very dry. It turned out there was lots more water in the mountain than the Department expected……………………………. It became clear the waste canisters would corrode much more rapidly than forecast and radioactive leakage beyond the site boundary would exceed even the lax standards imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency and adopted by the NRC……

A flawed licensing process. While the Energy Department wanted credit for the 11,000 drip shields in the NRC review of its license application, it didn’t intend to install them with the waste canisters. For one thing, the cost of the needed 55,000 tons of titanium alloy was substantial, and putting in drip shields would have complicated the waste installation process and required new, as yet undesigned, equipment. Instead, the Energy Department’s plan “postponed” drip shield installation until the repository closed for good, in 100-300 years. But by then it would be impossible to install drip shields over the waste canisters: The internal underground transportation system would not be functioning, and rockfall would anyhow make passage impossible. Asked how the NRC could possibly accept this fantastical commitment, I remember an Energy Department official responding that “the NRC may not question the promise of a sister agency.”

The Energy Department refused to run any computer analyses on how the repository would perform if the drip shields didn’t get installed. Nevada managed to do this and found that, without drip shields, the repository failed the licensing requirement for radioactive leakage from the site. ………………………………………………………

NRC staff participates in all agency licensing hearings. Since at that point staffers had already reviewed the application favorably, they supported the license applicant. In the Yucca Mountain case, the staff outdid itself in its support of the Energy Department. …………………………..

Stop the stalemate. The Yucca Mountain project was stalled indefinitely by the Obama administration before any substantive licensing hearing took place. It was not irrelevant that Nevada Senator Harry Reid was the Democratic majority leader, and his former assistant was NRC chairman. But the technical failures were a vital part of the background leading to this decision.

The 2012 report of a “Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future” recommended a “consent-based approach” to managing nuclear waste. The Energy Department got religion and formed an Office of Consent-Based Siting, whose website explains that consent-based siting “prioritizes the participation and needs of people and communities and seeks their willing and informed consent to accept a project in their community.” But the department still didn’t get it. It’s not making a show of consulting the public that gains trust. You need a good technical plan to start with and demonstrated competence and sense of responsibility to carry it out, as was the case in the Scandinavian countries. In my judgment, it’s too late for the Energy Department. I don’t think any state would ever trust the Energy Department to build and operate a nuclear waste repository.

The lack of a repository doesn’t seem to worry nuclear enthusiasts anymore, probably because it doesn’t threaten what reactor licensing there is. Recent legislation—the ADVANCE Act—to accelerate approval of new nuclear technologies does not mention nuclear waste at all. The focus is on subsidizing new reactor projects and “streamlining” licensing.

The United States, however, does need a better system for storing highly radioactive used fuel than the current situation of keeping it at over 80 storage locations in 36 states. A difficulty is that current law requires that, before the Energy Department can go forward with a surface storage facility to consolidate the used fuel, it has to have already selected a new geologic repository site, which isn’t happening. This restriction was inserted into the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to prevent the government from siting a “temporary” storage facility and then giving up on an underground repository for permanent disposal of the waste. Now, because of this restriction, the United States has neither centralized storage nor a repository, and the waste keeps piling up. Relaxing the provision in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that has prevented temporary consolidated storage has to be the starting point of a sensible nuclear waste policy. https://thebulletin.org/2024/07/why-us-nuclear-waste-policy-got-stalled-and-what-to-do-about-it/?utm_source=Newsletter+&utm_medium=Email+&utm_campaign=ThursdayNewsletter08012024&utm_content=NuclearRisk_NuclearWastePolicyStalled_07312024

August 9, 2024 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

The United States is launching a new nuclear arms race: to catch up and outsmart Russia and China

August 6th, 2024
Подробнее: https://eadaily.com/en/news/2024/08/06/the-united-states-is-launching-a-new-nuclear-arms-race-to-catch-up-and-outsmart-russia-and-china

Under the slogan of “nuclear deterrence”, the United States began investing in nuclear weapons. Washington plans to modernize and adopt new systems in order to catch up with Russia and China and be able to confront two adversaries at once.

“As a result of investments made under the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, NNSA was able to deliver more than 200 upgraded nuclear weapons to the Department of Defense last year. This is our largest delivery in one year since the end of the Cold War,” Jill Hruby, administrator of the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA), said at the breakfast of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies “Peace through Strength.“

She noted that the situation with US nuclear weapons has undergone significant changes compared to what it was just a few years ago. The representative of the NNSA explained the reasons for the sharp turn in US policy by external threats.▼ читать продолжение новости ▼

“This is a unique, unprecedented time in the field of global nuclear security. We face growing threats of nuclear weapons from Russia and an expanding nuclear arsenal in China. Russia has deployed nuclear weapons in Belarus, strengthened its partnership with China, and developed new military partnerships with North Korea and Iran.… It is also exploring the possibility of using nuclear weapons in space, which poses an asymmetric threat to the West. In addition to ramping up the pace of nuclear weapons production, China has demonstrated an amazing ability to improve its delivery systems, including deploying hypersonic missiles faster than the United States. If this direction does not change, China will become an equal nuclear adversary with significant economic power,” said Jill Hurby.

In her opinion, the current situation represents a fundamentally different “nuclear” landscape than the last 80 years.

“In general, this is a less predictable and more dangerous time, and our thinking about deterrence needs to be adjusted,” the representative of the department explained. She added that the situation is complicated by the fact that nuclear power is on the verge of revival to combat climate change.

“If this renaissance happens, there will be more nuclear materials and know-how in the world than ever before. In addition, advanced nuclear reactor technology is likely to use higher-grade low-enriched uranium instead of 5 percent low-enriched uranium. Reactor types and reactor fuels are likely to evolve. Despite the fact that this renaissance will bring the necessary options for an environmentally friendly electric power base, it will challenge the current nuclear non—proliferation regime,” the NNSA also notes the potential of breakthrough technologies such as artificial intelligence, which can simplify and accelerate the design of nuclear devices.

But for now, the United States is focusing on confrontation with Russia and China.

“Russia and China are ready to change and expand their nuclear arsenals. But so will we, if we continue to invest and support the program. This means that although we are facing a deteriorating global security situation, we do not need to panic. There is still a lot of work to do, but we also need to prepare well, take the time and think intelligently about the future,” Jill Hurby continued.

According to her, over the past few years, the United States has continued to implement five programs to modernize the weapons of the nuclear triad (strategic aviation, intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear submarines).

“Last year we added two more types of weapons to the existing program. These new systems directly respond to emerging deterrence needs and expand the nuclear capabilities available to the president,” the NNSA representative said that we are talking about the B61—13 nuclear bomb and the SLCM−N sea-based cruise missile.

“We now have seven systems that should be developed and put into production by the mid-2030s. This program is not only a major modernization of all three components of the nuclear triad, but also adds new deterrence capabilities that do not currently exist,” said Jill Hurby.

According to her, for 2025, NNSA has applied for the allocation of $ 25 billion from the state budget.

Since the end of the Cold War, a significant part of the scientific and industrial infrastructure in the United States has fallen into disrepair and needs to be restored and modernized, the NNSA representative noted.

“Some of the buildings that we currently use for key processes belong to the Manhattan project or use manufacturing technologies that are less safe and efficient than modern methods. Therefore, in our budget request over the past few years, approximately equal amounts have been spent on inventory modernization and infrastructure modernization,” said Jill Hurby.

The main priority, she added, is to restore the ability to produce new plutonium cores.:

“NNSA is implementing a production strategy at two sites at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and at the Savannah River site in South Carolina. When both sites are fully operational, we expect that we will have the necessary capacity: Los Alamos will produce 30 cores per year, and Savannah River will produce at least 50.”

The construction of a uranium processing plant in Tennessee is also considered a priority in the United States. It is planned to complete its construction in 2027, and bring it to full capacity by 2031.

This year, the United States is completing work on the creation of a scheme that will identify high-priority facilities needed for science, production, safety and security until 2050.

“Our thinking about deterrence needs to be changed in order to create an effective deterrence of two equal opponents. Although we all recognize that Russia and China are innovating in their means of deterrence, we have not yet fundamentally changed our own thinking. But we know that we need to outsmart our opponents. It’s time to start this work seriously, not in a panic,” added Jill Hurby.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Biden administration lies on Ukraine war are monstrous

 https://heartlandprogressive.blogspot.com/ 6 Aug 24

Notice mainstream news has imposed a virtual blackout of news about US proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. One can watch 24/7 and see nary a story on a war that could go nuclear in a heartbeat.

Couple of reasons for this. Mainstream news understands the US is suffering a staggering defeat in its effort to save its proxy state Ukraine in order to weaken Russia. Neither Republican nor Democratic media want to touch covering America’s dysfunctional war policy. Bleeding only leads when it’s the other side doing all the bleeding.

A second reason is media fatigue from the Biden administration endless lies for all 30 months of this war without a single truth worth reporting.

The original and biggest lie was the one that kicked off this war on February 24, 2022. Biden claimed Russian President Putin woke up one morning and decided to recreate the Soviet Union…starting by gobbling up Ukraine.

The truth is the US had been provoking the Russian invasion starting with President George W. Bush’s 2008 pledge to entice Ukraine into NATO to weaken, isolate Russia. Russia allowing this senseless US provocation to go on for 14 years is something America would never have done if the situation were reversed. It took the US about 14 hours to respond militarily to Russian missiles in Cuba 60 years earlier.

Biden’s next big whopper was framing the resulting conflict as democracy versus authoritarianism. He proclaimed Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky ‘The 21st Century Churchill’, saving Ukrainian democracy from Russian authoritarianism.

But for the past 30 months Zelensky has snuffed out every vestige of the touted Ukraine democracy. He’s cancelled elections under martial law, essentially making him president for the war’s life. No wonder he’s doing nothing to negotiate its end. When the war ends, so does Zelensky’s grasp on power, and possibly his life.

Additionally, Zelensky has banned opposition parties, squelched Ukraine’s free press, curtailed religious freedom and erased any hint of Russian culture among Ukrainian citizens so inclined.

But Biden’s most monstrous lie was that he’d do nothing in supporting Ukraine that could trigger nuclear war, something he said was a real possibility.at the war’s start. For 30 months he’s done the opposite, steadily arming Ukraine with nuclear capable F-16 fighters, Abram tanks and long-range missiles that can hit the heart of Russia. Telling Ukraine to be cautious not to provoke nuclear war with them is akin to giving matches to a kid, then telling him to use them judiciously.

There are many more in Biden’s blizzard of lies over the US proxy war in Ukraine. The saddest for the dying country of Ukraine being sacrificed on the altar of Biden’s lust to weaken, isolate Russia is this. “We will stand with Ukraine forever. We will never abandon Ukraine to Russian aggression.” Biden abandoned Ukraine 30 months ago. The US press and citizenry, weary of Biden’s endless lies on Ukraine, have moved on.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

‘It made me cry’: photos taken 15 years apart show melting Swiss glaciers

 A tourist has posted “staggering” photos of himself and his wife at
the same spot in the Swiss Alps almost exactly 15 years apart, in a pair of
photos that highlight the speed with which global heating is melting
glaciers. Duncan Porter, a software developer from Bristol, posted photos
that were taken in the same spot at the Rhône glacier in August 2009 and
August 2024. The white ice that filled the background has shrunk to reveal
grey rock. A once-small pool at the bottom, out of sight in the original,
has turned into a vast green lake. “Not gonna lie, it made me cry,”
Porter said in a viral post on social media platform X on Sunday night.

 Guardian 6th Aug 2024

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/06/it-made-me-cry-photos-taken-15-years-apart-show-melting-swiss-glaciers

August 9, 2024 Posted by | climate change, Switzerland | Leave a comment

EU member warns West not to ‘burn bridges’ with Russia

“Ghosting” doesn’t work in international relations, Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg has said

30 Jul 2024  https://www.rt.com/news/601844-austria-west-burn-bridges-russia/

Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg has warned against “ghosting” Russia when it comes to peace efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict, insisting that all channels of communication should be used. 

The diplomat’s comments come after condemnation from EU officials over Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s visit to Russia earlier this month as part of his Ukraine “peace mission.” 
“One cannot burn all bridges… Ghosting doesn’t work in foreign policy. I’m a realist and I have to deal with the world as it is, and Russia is part of it,” Schallenberg told Austrian broadcaster ORF on Sunday.

Last month, Switzerland hosted a ‘Peace in Ukraine’ summit to which Russia was not invited. The event focused on Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s ‘peace plan’ to end the conflict, which calls on Russia to withdraw from all territories that Kiev claims as its own. The plan has been dismissed by Moscow as being detached from reality.

Schallenberg added that there are “channels of communication” with Russia and insisted that they must be used.

Austria is an EU member but is not part of NATO. Like Hungary, Vienna announced last year that it would not send weapons to Ukraine, countering the trend among the EU. Schallenberg last week also ruled out sending Austrian military instructors to Ukraine.

In March, Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer spoke against the idea of using the profits from Russian assets frozen in the EU to provide weapons for Kiev.

In his interview on Sunday, Schallenberg also claimed Russia was not showing willingness to engage in “serious dialogue,” which he said makes it important to involve countries such as India, Brazil, and China in talks, “because they may have more influence on Moscow than others.” 

During his controversial peace mission, Orban also visited China, which has long insisted on a diplomatic resolution to the Ukraine conflict. Beijing did not send a delegation to the conference in Switzerland in June, despite being invited.

Russia has repeatedly stated that it is open to dialogue on Ukraine. It has pointed out, however, that any talk of negotiations is pointless unless Zelensky rescinds a law banning Kiev from negotiating with the current leadership in Moscow.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Extreme heat in South Korea kills 11 and decimates livestock

 Eleven people and more than 250,000 livestock have died in extreme heat in
South Korea as record temperatures continue across Asia. The number of
people treated in hospital for heat-related conditions since May is 1,546,
the interior ministry said on Monday. Three women died at the weekend after
losing consciousness, raising the death toll to 11 over the past three
months.

 Times 5th Aug 2024

https://www.thetimes.com/world/asia/article/extreme-heat-in-south-korea-kills-11-and-decimates-livestock-js92jl0bv

August 9, 2024 Posted by | climate change, South Korea | Leave a comment

UK’s Astute nuclear submarines stuck in port waiting for maintenance

No Astute-class boat — the Royal Navy’s largest and most powerful — has completed an operational voyage this year

 Britain’s “hunter-killer” submarines have been stuck in port for up
to two years because of a shortage of maintenance docks. The Astute-class
submarines, the newest in the Royal Navy’s fleet, were designed to hunt
Russian submarines and torpedo targets from up to 14 miles away. They are
the largest and most powerful attack submarines the navy has operated.
However, none of the class has completed an operational voyage so far this
year, while one has been stuck in Faslane — HMNB Clyde — for two years,
The Sun reported.

 Times 5th Aug 2024

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/attack-submarines-stuck-in-port-waiting-for-maintenance-jmgs5kn3x

August 9, 2024 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Radioactive Waste Management – Public Attitudes Survey for Scotland

5 August 2024, Director-General Net Zero Directorate, Environment and Forestry Directorate  https://www.gov.scot/publications/radioactive-waste-management-public-attitudes-survey-scotland/

This report summarises findings from a representative survey of the Scottish public that provides new insights into the perceptions and views towards radioactive waste management in Scotland.

Research Context

The Scottish Government commissioned independent researchers, Diffley Partnership, to conduct a public attitudes survey for Scotland exploring attitudes towards radioactive waste management. The primary aim of this study was to design and deliver research that will help develop a deeper understanding of the views of the Scottish public on a range of radioactive waste management issues, including safety and trust in government and industry.

Approach

An online survey was used to measure public attitudes to radioactive waste management. The survey was conducted between 8th and 11th January 2024 and received 2,160 responses. The questionnaire contained both closed questions (analysed quantitatively) and open response questions (analysed qualitatively).

Key Findings

Knowledge of Radioactive Waste Management

Self-reported levels of knowledge of radioactive waste management among respondents were limited. The vast majority (89%) of respondents reported that they were either not very well informed or not at all informed about radioactive waste management in Scotland.

There was a mixed appetite for more information, with just over half of respondents (55%) indicating they would like to know more about radioactive waste management.

Respondents placed the most trust in scientists/academics to provide information on radioactive waste management over other bodies and institutions such as the nuclear industry, the Scottish Government and the media.

The majority of respondents believed that the regulators of the Scottish Nuclear Industry (82%), the Scottish Nuclear Industry itself (81%) and the Scottish Government (79%) should do more to educate the public about radioactive waste management.

Attitudes towards Radioactive Waste Management

Most respondents agreed that public education is important in the management of radioactive waste (70%).

Overall, there was clear recognition that it is vital for Scotland to have a robust strategy for radioactive waste management (84%). This was linked with concerns about the impact of radioactive waste management on the environment (72%), future generations (68%) and health (55%).

Priorities in Radioactive Waste Management

The protection of human health was the biggest priority in radioactive waste management among the respondents, followed closely by the protection of the environment and the security of radioactive waste management facilities.

Safe containment of radioactive waste (64%) and the protection of the environment (67%) were the highest perceived benefits in the creation of new facilities for managing radioactive waste.

Potential for radioactive leaks (72%) was one of the main concerns about the development of new facilities, along with the possible environmental effects (73%) and health impacts (71%).

Decision-Making in Radioactive Waste Management

Most respondents felt that they have no influence over decision making processes relating to radioactive waste management, either locally (75%) or nationally (67%).

Respondents who stated that they have no influence over decision making felt this way because they felt decisions are made without talking to people (61%), that they have no opportunity to have an influence (48%) and they don’t know how to influence decision making (39%).

There was a mixed appetite for wanting to be involved in decision making with just under half of respondents (47%) wanting to be involved.

 

August 9, 2024 Posted by | public opinion, UK | Leave a comment

Too short, ill-timed and clumsy: Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities critical of Trawsfynydd radioactive waste consultation

 https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/too-short-ill-timed-and-clumsy-welsh-nflas-critical-of-trawsfynydd-consultation/ 6 Aug 24
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities are critical of a recent consultation conducted by Natural Resources Wales on plans to leave low-level radioactive building waste in-situ at the former Trawsfynydd nuclear power station and remain fearful that without remedial action in the long-term there could be further contamination that runs off into the lake.

Natural Resources Wales launched its consultation on plans by Nuclear Restoration Services on 6 July and this has just ended today.

The NFLAs made clear in its response its criticism of the timetable and process. NRW only allowed a four-week window for responses on the proposals, despite a typical consultation period in the nuclear industry being twelve weeks. The consultation was also held during summer holiday season when many people take holidays with their families. NRW also made things worse by failing to publish all the documents relating to the consultation on their website; instead interested parties had to ring, or email, a case officer to obtain them after an inevitable delay. Other enquirers reported to the NFLA Secretary that they had been informed there would be a charge for supplying the documents. Consequently, we described the consultation as ‘too short, ill-timed and clumsy’.

Nuclear Restoration Services which is responsible for decommissioning the former Trawsfynydd plant and safely deal with the residual radioactive waste is proposing to leave contaminated building rubble on site by burying it in the now redundant cooling pond complex and covering them with a concrete cap.

The NFLAs are concerned that this will prove an inadequate long-term solution as a report published by the International Atomic Energy Agency detailed issues with historic contamination of the joints in the ponds, and contamination from the ponds of surrounding land.

Trawsfynydd Lake was also routinely the permitted dumping ground for radioactive liquid discharges from the plant, including the water from the cooling ponds when they became redundant, and so it is contaminated. A scientific study indicated that there were abnormal levels of cancer amongst residents of the local area, including amongst some who have consumed the trout that were introduced into the lake and are now fished.

The NFLAs are obviously anxious to ensure that no more radioactive contamination can come from the rubble, however low level, into the land or lake and we would like to see Nuclear Restoration Services to either look to build a bespoke above ground facility or at least look to place the rubble into a relined cooling pond complex.

August 9, 2024 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment