2025 January 21 « nuclear-news

Nuclear news as the Trump chaos world begins

Now we enter the chaos of Trump World. It means lies, manipulations, news that you can’t trust. I cannot keep up with the Israel, Ukraine, monster China etc stuff – though it’s all on the brink of nuclear disaster.

So, from now on, I’m confining this newsletter more narrowly to NUCLEAR news. And with an emphasis on Australia, as it now faces a nuclear industry takeover, and becoming the USA’s proxy for nuclear war against China.

TOP STORIES

California wildfires: a warning to Nuclear Regulatory Commission on climate change.

Chris Hedges: The Ceasefire Charade. Report: Israel and Hamas Agree ‘in Principle’ to Ceasefire and Hostage Deal .

Becoming a responsible ancestor – about America’s nuclear wastes.

The EPR nuclear sector: new dynamics show persistent risks -La cour des comptes .

Former nuclear energy executives face federal charges in massive Ohio bribery scheme

Noel’s notes. 2025 – Australia’s dangerous nuclear dance with Dutton? The world’s blind eye to the nightmare problem of nuclear waste disposal.

AUSTRALIA. Dutton’s new nuclear nightmare: construction costs continue to explode. Virginia, we have a problem. More Australian nuclear news at https://antinuclear.net/2025/01/20/australian-nuclear-news-13-20-january-2025/

CLIMATE. Trump’s got a radioactive time bomb under Greenland’s ice. Wildfire risks high at nuclear plants.Weatherwatch: Could small nuclear reactors help curb extreme weather? There’s a credibility gap.

ECONOMICS. French energy giant EDF launches search for Hinkley Point finance after damning audit report – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/01/19/2-b1-french-energy-giant-edf-launches-search-for-hinkley-point-finance-after-damning-audit-report/.
French auditor recommends EDF delays UK Sizewell investment decision ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/01/17/2-b1-french-auditor-recommends-edf-delays-uk-sizewell-investment-decision/Sizewell C’s future in doubt as EDF told to prioritise French nuclear power.
Cost of Sizewell C nuclear project expected to reach close to £40bn. EDF Energy Juggles Maintenance Amid UK’s Nuclear Energy Challenges.

Ukraine’s parliament has given the go-ahead for the purchase of two old Russian nuclear reactors.

ENERGY. Renewable energy sets global record…but it’s not enough.

EVENTS. Petition/email: Save Billions, Cancel Sizewell C

HEALTH. Nukes kill kids.

HUMAN RIGHTS. Amazon Is Censoring My Most Recent Magazine Issue.

LEGAL. Last Energy, Texas, Utah allege NRC overstepping in SMR regulation

MEDIA. CBS’ 60 Minutes Exposes the Biden Administration’s Complicity in Gaza Genocid.

Interviews the Whistleblowers. ‘National scandal’: The BBC’s Gaza cover-up.

Told you so: Financial Times follows Nuclear Free Local Authorities’s lead on Sizewell C cost estimate.

How Canada supplied uranium for the Manhattan Project- documentary “Atomic Reaction“

PERSONAL STORIES. Patrick Lawrence: The Nihilism of Antony Blinken.

POLITICS. Over time, over budget… will our new nuclear plants ever be built? – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2025/01/20/1-a-over-time-over-budget-will-our-new-nuclear-plants-ever-be-built/

POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. The UK military’s secret visits to Israel.

URANIUM. Saudi Arabia plans to enrich and sell uranium as Iran commences nuclear talks with E3.

WASTES. Ask the locals: NFLA Chair says it is ‘prudent and proper’ for Nuclear Waste Services to consult residents over South Copeland flooding risk. Dunfermline MP Graeme Downie calls for MoD commitment to dismantle dead nuclear submarines.

WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. Are AI defense firms about to eat the Pentagon? Outgoing CIA director says ‘no sign’ Iran developing nuclear weapons. Submarine nuclear core project faces ‘challenges’.

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Christina's notes | Leave a comment

Trump’s got a radioactive time bomb under Greenland’s ice

The U.S. would inherit an environmental dilemma of its own making if it lays claim to the massive Arctic island.

January 17, 2025 , By Seb Starcevic, https://www.politico.eu/article/trumps-got-a-radioactive-time-bomb-under-greenlands-ice/

Deep in Greenland’s frozen wilderness, a radioactive secret sleeps beneath the ice — and it could be a headache for Donald Trump if the U.S. president-elect follows through on his threat to take control of the vast Arctic island.

Its name is Camp Century, an American military base built in 1959 during the Cold War in an attempt to develop nuclear launch sites that could survive a Russian strike.

The project, which involved carving a network of tunnels through Greenland’s ice sheet and was powered by a small nuclear reactor, was deemed unfeasible due to the constantly shifting ice and abandoned in 1967.

Although the Americans dismantled the reactor and took its nuclear reaction chamber with them when they departed in ’67, they left behind thousands of tonnes of waste and debris — including radioactive residue — to be buried under the icecap forever.

But thanks to climate change, forever might come sooner than planned.

As the world warms, Camp Century — which is located in one of the most remote spots on Earth, about 1,500 kilometers north of Nuuk, Greenland’s capital city — has been the focus of renewed interest and anxiety about just how long it will remain entombed. A landmark study published in 2016 found the remains of the abandoned base could be exposed by melting ice and snow toward the end of the 21^st century.

“Our study highlights that Camp Century now possesses unanticipated political significance in light of anthropogenic climate change,” the researchers wrote (though they later revised their findings in 2021 to rule out the base reemerging from the ice until at least 2100).

The revelation caused a political storm in Greenland, a Danish territory which has been self-ruling since 1979.

Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vittus Qujaukitsoq demanded Denmark take responsibility for cleaning up the debris from abandoned U.S. military installations in Greenland, of which there are 20 to 30 mainly disused sites. Greenland, formerly a colony of Denmark, never consented to hosting them.

Nuuk and Copenhagen signed a deal in 2017 earmarking about $30 million to clean up the debris and waste — but Camp Century was not included in the agreement.

Greenlanders are “concerned that [Camp Century] will pollute as the ice melts down,” said Pipaluk Lynge, an MP from Greenland’s largest party and chair of the parliamentary foreign policy committee.

But it’s not just Camp Century, she added, referring to the other abandoned bases. “There are many places where [they] have left tons of dump,” she told POLITICO. “The U.S. has military waste all over the Arctic.”

‘Don’t poke it’

There have so far been “no attempts” to clean up Camp Century’s radioactive and toxic waste, said William Colgan, professor of glaciology and climate at the Geological Survey of Denmark who led the 2016 study into the ice surrounding Camp Century.

While Colgan did once drill deep into the site to test its radioactivity at the Danish health ministry’s request, “There is actually a conscious effort not to drill into the debris field,” he told POLITICO. “We don’t actually know the full nature of what’s down there.”

Camp Century has been described as a subterranean city, complete with a chapel, a barbershop and dormitories that once housed hundreds of people. To construct it, equipment and supplies were transported across the ice on sleds and tractor-trailers from nearby Pituffik Space Base, the northernmost U.S. military installation in the world, which is still active today.

In a 1961 report on American broadcaster CBS, TV legend Walter Cronkite visited the military base. His program filmed Camp Century’s massive ice tunnels being dug and showed U.S. army engineers relaxing in their underground, nuclear-powered barracks, reading and listening to records.

All that is now buried under thick layers of ice. Colgan said he and his team of researchers had been unable to find parts of Camp Century, such as its fuel depot, and feared disturbing it too much. “It’s cold, it’s deep, don’t poke it,” he said.

There are different ways Camp Century could contaminate the environment. One is if melting ice and snow carry toxic waste — such as the 200,000 liters of diesel fuel beneath the ice, according to Colgan — out into the ocean. Another is if the ice containing the base breaks off and forms an iceberg. Neither are likely anytime this century; while the latter would likely take thousands of years.

But the timeline shifts a little depending on how much the world warms in the coming decades. While there are different projections, a United Nations report published last October found the planet will heat up by 2.6 to 3.1 degrees Celsius this century, with no chance of limiting the temperature increase to the totemic 1.5 C target agreed in Paris in 2015.

“It’s a game of just a couple of degrees,” Colgan said. “2 or 3 C is the difference between Camp Century staying under ice or melting out.”

Climate change in microcosm

Camp Century itself was pivotal to scientists’ understanding of climate change. In the 1960s, scientists extracted an ice core there, a frozen soil sample that is still studied to this day for insights into climate patterns hundreds of thousands of years ago. The base remains a scientific “supersite,” said Colgan, who visits it annually along with many other climate researchers.

If the U.S. were to lay claim to the island — as Trump has repeatedly said it should do, calling American control of Greenland an “absolute necessity” and even threatening to use military force — it would also inherit the legacy of its own Cold War-era polluting activities at Camp Century.

“Camp Century is a microcosm of climate change,” Colgan argued. “People today are left picking up and trying to understand the climate impacts of decisions made 50 years ago, 60 years ago.”

And with the U.S. currently the second-biggest emitter of planet-warming emissions in the world, Camp Century and its “shifting fate” aren’t just a fascinating slice of Cold War trivia, but a story of climate action and responsibility today, he added.

“It is the decisions being made in the next decade or two that will put us on these trajectories that have multi-century implications,” Colgan warned.

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ARCTIC, climate change, environment | Leave a comment

UK Nuclear Power Ambitions Hampered by Delays and Soaring Costs

The construction of Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C nuclear power plants is
facing significant delays and cost overruns, jeopardizing the UK’s energy
security. Sellafield Ltd’s cybersecurity failings have raised concerns
about the safety and security of the UK’s nuclear industry.

The UK government’s ambitious plans to expand nuclear power are facing criticism
due to the high costs and potential impact on taxpayers. As the U.K.
government doubles down on plans to develop the country’s nuclear power
industry following decades of neglect, severe delays and cost increases are
hampering progress. Delays and rising costs at the Sizewell C and Hinkley C
nuclear projects have drawn public criticism, while concerns over public
safety have been brought into question due to cybersecurity failings by
Sellafield Ltd. While public support for nuclear power is at its highest
level in decades, these failings could hinder the development of a strong
nuclear power industry in the U.K.

Oil Price 19th Jan 2025, https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/UK-Nuclear-Power-Ambitions-Hampered-by-Delays-and-Soaring-Costs.html

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Northwestern Ontario nuclear waste site selection raises concerns.

The selection process has overlooked the broader impact on local and Indigenous populations near highways that could be used to transport nuclear waste north.

The Hill Times: Canada’s Politics and Government News Source, BY ERIKA SIMPSON | December 12, 2024

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization selection of two northwestern Ontario communities—Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and Ignace—as host communities for Canada’s proposed Deep Geological Repository raises concerns and controversy. Located approximately 1,500 km from Toronto, the distance highlights the geographical separation between the selected communities and Toronto, home to the Darlington and Pickering nuclear power plants that will eventually be decommissioned.

On Nov. 28—the same day of Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) announcement—the Municipality of South Bruce took many by surprise by announcing it was exiting the site selection process for the proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR). Despite South Bruce’s proximity—just 46 km from the Bruce reactor, the world’s largest-operating nuclear facility on Lake Huron’s shores—the NWMO decided to pursue the Ignace location. This raises questions about why the NWMO chose to bypass South Bruce, which, due to its location, appeared to be a more logical choice for Canada’s first DGR.

Despite being presented as a “community-driven, consent-based” process, the selection process launched in 2010 sought to narrow 22 potential sites down to just one willing community. The process has thus far overlooked the broader impact on local and Indigenous populations near highways that could be used to transport nuclear waste northward.

Media outlets like The Globe and Mail and The Hill Times report that the NWMO’s DGR plan involves transporting nuclear waste by truck for over four decades, from all Canada’s reactor sites to the nuclear facility, where the waste could be stored underground. More than 90 per cent of the waste is currently at Pickering, Darlington, and Bruce nuclear stations in Ontario, with the rest located in Point Lepreau, N.B., Quebec, Manitoba, and Ottawa.

With the NWMO selecting the Ignace site and an all-road transportation method, the trucks are expected to travel a total of 84 million km on Canadian roads. There is always the risk that radioactive material will leak while in transit or short-term storage, something that has happened in Germany and New Mexico over the past two decades.

The NWMO’s claims of a rigorous and independent process are undermined by a lack of public dialogue and transparency. Few have been aware of the proposal to build a national underground nuclear waste site. Northwatch and We The Nuclear Free North raised concerns about the NWMO’s decision involving Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation (WLON) in the project.

WLON’s Nov. 28 statement clarifies that the First Nation has not approved the project but has agreed to proceed with the next phase of site characterization and regulatory processes. Their “yes” vote reflects a commitment to assess the project’s feasibility through environmental and technical evaluations, not an endorsement of the DGR itself.

South Bruce, the other potential willing community, held a referendum on Oct. 28, which revealed deep divisions. The final tally was 1,604 votes in favor (51.2 per cent) and 1,526 against (48.8 per cent), with a total of 3,130 votes cast. A margin of just 78 votes decided a by-election with far-reaching implications for millions of people across multiple generations.

The decision to allow a local municipality to oversee the referendum on the nuclear waste disposal site has been met with significant controversy. Critics argue that the arrangement posed a conflict of interest, as municipal staff—partially funded by the NWMO—actively promoted the project, casting doubt on their impartiality and raising concerns about financial influence on the referendum’s outcome. The council’s firm opposition to allowing a paper ballot raised further suspicions. Why reject a voting method that could be physically verified?

Located about 19 km southeast of Dryden, WLON faces similar concerns regarding the fairness of the online voting process and voter eligibility. These issues could erode public confidence in municipal referendum processes, and the handling of decisions by councils.

The nuclear waste storage site selection marks an early shift to the regulatory phase, raising concerns about whether the process is premature. Over the coming year, the effectiveness of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and its regulation of all steps in the management of radioactive waste will come under scrutiny, particularly as Ontario’s new energy minister, Stephen Lecce, emphasizes the need to invest in energy infrastructure to meet rising electricity demand over the next 25 years.

Critics argue that despite evaluations with long-term implications, ethical and environmental concerns surrounding nuclear waste disposal remain long unaddressed. Ontario Power Generation’s initial 2005 proposal to the safety commission for a DGR near the Bruce reactor was rejected in 2020 following a Saugeen Ojibway Nation vote.

While many acknowledge the potential benefits of nuclear energy and DGR technology, the NWMO’s approach to the project over the past two decades has drawn significant scrutiny. Questions centre on the decision to place untested DGR technology in populated farmland near the Great Lakes, the world’s largest source of freshwater. The risks of radiation leakage into Hudson’s Bay and the Arctic over thousands of years are particularly troubling, especially as the technology remains unproven in such a critical and sensitive location.

Despite objections, the NWMO pressed forward, with its process viewed as federally approved bribery through financial incentives. South Bruce has already received millions and will receive $4-million more for its involvement, with another $4-million due in 2025. Mayor Mark Goetz has announced plans for alternative development, but critics like W.J. Noll from Protect Our Waterways question why such options weren’t considered earlier, given the risks to farmland, water sources, and the divisions left in the local farming community.

The growing influence of the nuclear industry on international and local governance has left many feeling powerless, fearing that war-torn regions, Indigenous lands, and rural communities are being sacrificed, threatening ecosystems from Ukraine and Russia to the Great Lakes and Arctic rivers.

If no Canadian community agrees to host a permanent nuclear waste depository, it may be necessary to reconsider nuclear energy expansion, halt new plant construction, and scale back capacity at existing reactors. In the interim, managing waste at above-ground sites could offer a safer alternative until technology ensures long-term environmental protection.

Erika Simpson is an associate professor of international politics at Western University, the author of Nuclear Waste Burial in Canada? The Political Controversy over the Proposal to Construct a Deep Geologic Repository, and Nuclear waste: Solution or problem? and NATO and the Bomb. She is also the president of the Canadian Peace Research Association.

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, indigenous issues, wastes | Leave a comment

Allied Groups Reach Historic Settlement on New Nuclear Bomb Part Production

Gender and Radiation Impact project celebrates the historic victory of radiation impacted communities across the nation standing together in clear conscience in a legal challenge that has successfully required the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to obey the National Environmental Policy Act and include the public in big decisions it is making! NNSA is owner of the US nuclear arsenal, which it intends to greatly expand, which would have our taxes cover trillions of dollars paid to defense contractors.

South Carolina Environmental Law Project

Gullah/Geechee Sea Island Coalition

Nuclear Watch New Mexico

Savannah River Site Watch

Tri-Valley CAREs January 18, 2025

Ben Cunningham, Esquire, SCELP,
Tom Clements, Savannah River Site Watch,
Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico,
Scott Yundt, Tri-Valley CAREs

AIKEN, S.C. — Nonprofit public interest groups have reached an historic settlement agreement with the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This is the successful result of a lawsuit against NNSA over its failure to complete a programmatic environmental impact statement on the expanded production of plutonium “pit” bomb cores, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This agreement and a joint motion to dismiss have been submitted to Judge Mary Lewis Geiger of the Federal District of South Carolina. Should the Court enter the dismissal and retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, the agreement will go into effect.

…………………….. In September 2024, Judge Lewis ruled that DOE and NNSA had violated NEPA by failing to properly consider alternatives before proceeding with their plan to produce plutonium pits, a critical component of nuclear weapons, at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico and, for the first time ever, at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The Court found that the plan’s purpose had fundamentally changed from NNSA’s earlier analyses which had not considered simultaneous pit production at two sites. Judge Lewis directed the Defendants and Plaintiffs to prepare a joint proposal for an appropriate remedy which fostered additional negotiations

In sum, the just released settlement agreement requires the National Nuclear Security Administration to:

• Complete a nation-wide programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) on expanded plutonium “pit” bomb core production within 2.5 years.

• Hold two successive rounds of public hearings, first on the scope of the PEIS and then on the draft PEIS before it is finalized. Hearings will be held in Livermore, CA; Santa Fe or Los Alamos, NM; Kansas City, MO; Aiken, SC; and Washington, DC (dates to be determined).

• Citizens will have 45 days to submit scoping comments and 90 days to comment on the draft PEIS. The last PEIS in 2008 generated more than 100,000 public comments.

• Until it issues a formal Record of Decision on the final PEIS, NNSA is enjoined from:

– Installing classified equipment at the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility’s Main Processing Facility;

– Introducing any nuclear materials into the Main Processing Facility; and

– Starting construction on a related Waste Characterization Lab, Construction Maintenance Building and Vehicle Entry Building.

………………………………………. Of added significance, the PEIS will have to assess the impacts of disposal of large quantities of radioactive plutonium wastes from pit production at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in southern New Mexico, located 2,000 feet underground in a salt deposit. Disposal of “transuranic” (TRU) wastes will challenge the congressionally mandated volume cap for WIPP, which the National Academy of Sciences has projected will be substantially exceeded. Nevertheless, NNSA expects to be able to dump TRU wastes at WIPP until at least 2050, fundamentally changing its mission from cleanup to direct support of expanded nuclear weapons production…………………………

The Settlement Agreement with plaintiffs’ and defendants’ declarations is available at https://nukewatch.org/settlement-agreement-and-exhibits (20.9 MB) more https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Settlement-Reached-in-Historic-NEPA-Lawsuit-Over-Plutonium-Pit-Bomb-Core-Production.pdf

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) proposed DGR is a speculative unproven concept.

The most worrying aspect is an expected long-term “thermal pulse” from the entombed heat-producing radioactive waste. According to an Atomic Energy of Canada environmental study,1994, the DGR temperature could reach 230 degrees C. That intense heat would cause distortion and fracturing of host rock, impacting the structure of metallic containment casks.

David Geary, 19 Jan 25

In Geology 101 we learned that geology is a descriptive science, not a predictive science. Hydrology of rock is especially unpredictable. Science can not foresee what happens to a stable rock formation once disturbed by human activity. Thus, any Deep Geological Repository (DGR) cannot be counted on to maintain the required long-term stability to contain Canada’s high-level nuclear waste.

Because leaks do happen.

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) proposed DGR is a speculative unproven concept. A study of NWMO’s literature and conceptual renderings reveals numerous unresolved scientific, engineering, and modelling challenges.

Also troublesome is that Canada’s engineered ‘vertical shaft’ design vs. the European ‘inclined ramp’ approach was flagged as potentially dangerous by NWMO’s own expert international Independent Technical Review Group (ITRG), a body composed of European scientists and engineers. Vertical shafts relying on powered lift systems frequently fail.

Geologists at previous DGR hearings noted numerous NWMO deficiencies in the hydro-geological realm. For example, the integrity of host rock would be severely compromised by underground blasting required to create the extensive lattice-work of tunnels, chambers, and vertical shafts. There’d likely be rapid and unpredictable geo-hydrological changes, including water ingress, from the fracturing that ensues.

Depicted in NWMO’s diagrams is a DGR air vent to the surface. It would carry the heat upwards while easing underground air pressure buildup. However, should nuclear waste casks become damaged or crushed by rock pressures, carcinogenic fission & activation products would leak out of them. Those radionuclides would be carried via the air vent to the surface, to the biosphere, to nearby communities, to people.

In fact, that is precisely how, in 2014, several workers near a vent far above a nuclear waste DGR in New Mexico were contaminated with radioactive plutonium.

Because geology is unpredictable.

Leaks happened and people were affected.

January 21, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment