nuclear-news

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

Ageing nuclear plant in Florida at risk from climate crisis, advocates warn

 we also have to consider the risks of climate on the plants. “We have to be clear-eyed about those risks, and we have to be elevating, fortifying, preparing these plants for storms, for floods, for sea level rise, for drought, and for heat.”

  Guardian, Richard Luscombe , 2 Mar 25

Regulators extended the life of two of the oldest US reactors in Miami. Millions of people in the area are now vulnerable

A decision by regulators to extend the life of two of the oldest reactors in the US decades beyond their original permits has elevated the risk of a nuclear disaster in heavily populated south Florida, environmental groups are warning.

The Miami Waterkeeper says the ageing Turkey Point facility in south Miami-Dade county, which was built in 1967 and generates power for a metropolitan area covering about 3 million people, is especially vulnerable to flooding and excessive heat from the climate emergency, in part because of its low-lying position and coastal exposure to a major hurricane.

One of the major risks, the group told a packed public meeting in Miami this week, is contamination of drinking water in the Biscayne Aquifer on which the plant and its two nuclear units sit.

Consultants said last month that the plant’s owners, Florida Power & Light (FPL), will not meet a crucial deadline to clean up a toxic hyper-salinated water plume produced in the reactors’ network of cooling canals that has been creeping closer to freshwater wells.

More generally, the activists fear the potential consequences of an unprecedented decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to extend Turkey Point’s operating license to 2053, a reversal of its earlier refusal.

They point out that the Florida plant’s two nuclear power reactors are already among the oldest of 94 currently operating in the US, and beyond the age of both the Three Mile Island reactor in Pennsylvania that suffered a partial meltdown in 1979 in the country’s worst nuclear accident and radiation leak; and Ukraine’s Chornobyl plant, site of the 1986 catastrophe.

Turkey Point is also the same age as the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan, which is similarly located on a coastline exposed to severe weather events, and where a 2011 earthquake and tsunami triggered a nuclear disaster.

“Nobody needs to be reminded what a worst-case scenario looks like, but I will say this plant is within 30 miles of millions of people,” said Rachel Silverstein, the chief executive of Miami Waterkeeper, which has worked with Friends of the Earth and the Natural Resources Defense Council on legislation to try to block the license extension.

“Turkey Point was the first reactor in the country to apply to run for a total of 80 years, and no one in the world has ever run a nuclear power plant for 80 years. They all came online in the early 1970s and have gone through their first license extensions into the 2030s, more or less.

“Now, because the world is looking for low-carbon energy sources, we’re looking into extending the operating license of all of these plants into the coming decades. Our position is not anti-nuclear, but if we’re going to rely on nuclear in the coming decades as a primary source of energy that’s going to help us address climate risks, we also have to consider the risks of climate on the plants.

“We have to be clear-eyed about those risks, and we have to be elevating, fortifying, preparing these plants for storms, for floods, for sea level rise, for drought, and for heat.”

Silverstein’s group has partnered with the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, whose ancestral homelands cover much of south Florida, to appeal the NRC’s decision allowing Turkey Point to become the first to test the outer limits of its “80-year rule” for license extensions for nuclear power reactors.

They argue that the regulators failed to properly acknowledge a critical report from the Government Accountability Office published last year that stated climate change “was expected to exacerbate natural hazards that pose risks” to Turkey Point.

The report also noted that, instead of issuing a citation or fines, the regulators’ response to FPL’s breach of the maximum allowable cooling water temperature of 100F (38C) during an incident in 2014 was to raise the acceptable figure to 104F, the amount of the overage.

Environmentalists, meanwhile, insist the true operational lifespan of nuclear power generating facilities is far below the NRC’s eight-decade guideline, and point to data showing that among US plants built before 1973, half were decommissioned within 40 years.

According to the New Hampshire-based Seacoast Anti-Pollution League: “In most cases the plants simply wore out, broke down, or never functioned properly.”……………………………………  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/01/nuclear-power-plants-miami-florida?fbclid=IwY2xjawIweO1leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHWBZlpSR5NRSL4LqL1lZ0b75I0XzH-D6EPnvsLdoGDbj9-XZOy6MV4–YQ_aem_3Qx31WNB3HCZKhro973QUQ

March 4, 2025 Posted by | climate change, USA | Leave a comment

Techno-Fascism Comes to America

American techno-fascism is no longer a philosophical abstraction for Silicon Valley to tinker with, in the vein of intermittent fasting or therapeutic ketamine doses. It is a policy program whose constitutional limits are being tested right now as DOGE, staffed with inexperienced engineers linked to Musk’s own companies, rampages through the federal government.

Silicon Valley is premised on the idea that its founders and engineers know better than anyone else: they can do better at disseminating information, at designing an office, at developing satellites and advancing space travel. By the same logic, they must be able to govern better than politicians and federal employees.

The historic parallels that help explain Elon Musk’s rampage on the federal government.

New Yorker By Kyle Chayka, February 26, 2025

When a phalanx of the top Silicon Valley executives—Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Google’s Sundar Pichai—aligned behind President Trump during the Inauguration in January, many observers saw an allegiance based on corporate interests. The ultra-wealthy C.E.O.s were turning out to support a fellow-magnate, hoping perhaps for an era of deregulation, tax breaks, and anti-“woke” cultural shifts. The historian Janis Mimura saw something more ominous: a new, proactive union of industry and governmental power, wherein the state would drive aggressive industrial policy at the expense of liberal norms. In the second Trump Administration, a class of Silicon Valley leaders was insinuating itself into politics in a way that recalled one of Mimura’s primary subjects of study: the élite bureaucrats who seized political power and drove Japan into the Second World War. “These are experts with a technological mind-set and background, often engineers, who now have a special role in the government,” Mimura told me. The result is what, in her book “Planning for Empire” (2011), she labelled “techno-fascism”: authoritarianism driven by technocrats. Technology “is considered the driving force” of such a regime, Mimura said. “There’s a sort of technicization of all aspects of government and society.”

In the nineteen-thirties, Japan colonized Manchuria, in northeastern China, and the region became a test ground for techno-fascism. Nobusuke Kishi, a Japanese commerce-ministry bureaucrat, was appointed to head the industrial program in Manchuria, in 1936, and, with the collaboration of a new crop of the Japanese conglomerates known as zaibatsu, he instituted a policy of forced industrial development based on the exploitation of the local population. When Kishi returned to national politics in Japan, in 1939, along with a clique of other Japanese technocrats who had worked in Manchuria, he pursued similar strategies of state-dictated industrialization, at the expense of private interests and labor rights. This fascistic regime would not be structured the same way as Mussolini’s or Hitler’s, with power concentrated in the hands of a single charismatic leader, although Kishi had travelled to Germany in the nineteen-twenties, as the Nazi movement expanded, and drew inspiration from German industrialization for his Manchurian project. Instead, Mimura said, Japan “kind of slid into fascism” as bureaucrats exercised their authority behind the scenes, under the aegis of the Japanese emperor. As she explained, techno-fascist officials “acquire power by creating these supra-ministerial organs and agencies, subgroups within the bureaucracy that are unaccountable.” Today, Elon Musk’s DOGE is the Trumpian equivalent.

American corporations of the twentieth century flirted with a merging of state and industrial power. The entrepreneur Henry Ford promoted a system of industrial organization that came to be known as “Fordism,” whereby the state would intervene in the economy to guarantee mass production and consumption. In the nineteen-thirties, I.B.M. did business with the Nazi government through a German subsidiary, lending its technology to projects like the 1933 census, which helped identify Jews in the country.  As a recent feature in the Guardian by Becca Lewis laid out, Silicon Valley itself has exhibited right-wing tendencies for decades, embracing misogynist and hierarchical attitudes about achievement. The journalist Michael S. Malone was issuing warnings about emerging “technofascism” way back in the late nineties, when he warned about “IQ bigotry” in the tech industry and the willingness of people to push forward digital revolution while “tossing out the weak and wounded along the way.” But our current moment marks a new conjunction of Internet entrepreneurs and day-to-day government operations.

American techno-fascism is no longer a philosophical abstraction for Silicon Valley to tinker with, in the vein of intermittent fasting or therapeutic ketamine doses. It is a policy program whose constitutional limits are being tested right now as DOGE, staffed with inexperienced engineers linked to Musk’s own companies, rampages through the federal government.

Musk has slashed the ranks of federal employees, shut down agencies whose authority challenges his own, and leveraged artificial intelligence to decide where to cut, promising a government executed by chatbots such as Grok, from Musk’s own A.I. company. DOGE has gained access to Americans’ private data and developed tools to e-mail the entire federal government at once, a digital megaphone that Musk recently used to demand that employees send in a list of their weekly accomplishments. As Mimura put it, “You try to apply technical concepts and rationality to human beings and human society, and then you’re getting into something almost totalitarian.” 

The techno-fascist opportunism goes beyond Musk; one can sense other tech entrepreneurs and investors slavering to exploit the alliance between Trumpism and Silicon Valley capitalism, building infrastructure on a national scale. Sam Altman, the C.E.O. of OpenAI, has arranged his own deals with Trump’s government, including Stargate, a heavily hyped data-center project worth a potential five hundred billion dollars. Apple recently announced its own five-hundred-billion-dollar investment campaign in the U.S. over the next four years, including a plan to begin building A.I. servers in Texas.

However nebulous, these extravagant plans signal a spirit of collaboration. On Truth Social, Trump posted approvingly that Apple’s plans demonstrated “FAITH IN WHAT WE ARE DOING.”

Erin McElroy, a geographer at the University of Washington who studies Silicon Valley, has used the term “siliconization” to describe the way that places such as San Francisco or Cluj-Napoca, Romania, to which many western tech companies have outsourced I.T. services, have been remade in the image and ideology of Silicon Valley. 

According to McElroy, the first signs of Washington’s current siliconization can be traced back, in part, to the Administration of Barack Obama, who embraced social-media platforms such as Facebook as a vector of government communication. For a time, digital platforms seemed to support democratic government as a kind of communal megaphone; but now, a decade later, technology seems to be supplanting the established authority of the government. “There is a crisis of the state,” McElroy said, and Silicon Valley may be “trying to corrode state power” in order to more quickly replace it.

Silicon Valley is premised on the idea that its founders and engineers know better than anyone else: they can do better at disseminating information, at designing an office, at developing satellites and advancing space travel. By the same logic, they must be able to govern better than politicians and federal employees. Voguish concepts in Silicon Valley such as seasteading and “network states” feature independent, self-contained societies running on tech principles. Efforts to create such entities have either failed or remained confined to the realm of brand-building, as in the startup Praxis, a hypothetical plan for a new tech-driven city on the Mediterranean. 

 Under the new Trump White House, though, the U.S. government is being offered up as a guinea pig, McElroy said. “Now that we’ve got Musk running the state, I don’t know if they need their little offshore bubbles as much as they thought they did before.”

Such visions of a technologized society represent a break from the Make America Great Again populism that drove the first Trump Administration. MAGA reactionaries such as Steve Bannon tend to be skeptical of technological progress; ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.newyorker.com/culture/infinite-scroll/techno-fascism-comes-to-america-elon-musk?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Science_030125&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5be9d23d24c17c6adf3bf435&cndid=30183386&hasha=432fc0d0ad6543e820e2dfcd39f76c35&hashb=e1c24f6a6459c7d1d625eb2ea55d9dfbbb4633bf&hashc=ac5a1f5526e7292c73f49dfa8fb6d5d0cb87d8773cec3b9b03d38a4ce482d7c8&esrc=subscribe-page&mbid=CRMNYR012019&utm_term=TNY_Science_Tech

March 4, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | 1 Comment

New report details nuclear power’s demise

March 3, 2025 AIMN Editorial, EnergyScience Coalition ,  https://theaimn.net/new-report-details-nuclear-powers-demise/

A new report by the EnergyScience Coalition corrects false claims by the federal Coalition and others that ‘the world is going nuclear’.

Co-authors Assoc. Prof. Darrin Durant, Prof. Jim Falk and Dr. Jim Green note that:

  • The number of operating power reactors worldwide has fallen to 411, which is 27 fewer than the peak of 438 reactors in 2002.
  • In 2024 there were 666 gigawatts (GW) of global renewable power additions compared to nuclear growth of 4 gigawatts, a ratio of 155:1. In China the ratio was 100:1.
  • Nuclear power’s contribution to global electricity production fell to 9.15 percent last year, barely half of its peak of 17.5 percent in 1996. Conversely, the International Energy Agency expects renewables to jump sharply from 30 percent of global electricity generation in 2023 to 46 percent in 2030.
  • Global nuclear power capacity is no greater than it was 20 years ago.
  • Of the 32 countries operating power reactors, less than one-third (10) are building new reactors.
  • The number of countries building nuclear power reactors fell from 15 to 13 last year. Seven percent of the world’s countries are building reactors; 93 percent are not.
  • The number of potential nuclear ‘newcomer’ countries with reactor approvals secured and funding in place, or construction underway, is just three and those projects are all heavily funded by the Russian state.
  • The ‘small modular reactor’ sector continues to go nowhere with setbacks in 2024 including the suspension of the Nuward project in France and the bankruptcy of US company Ultra Safe Nuclear.

Report co-author Prof. Jim Falk said: “Reactor construction projects in countries with vast expertise and experience ‒ such as France, the US and the UK ‒ have run literally tens of billions of dollars over-budget and construction schedules have slipped by many years. Since those countries have failed to build reactors on-time and on-budget, it would be naïve to believe that a nuclear ‘newcomer’ country such as Australia could do so.”

Co-author Dr. Jim Green said: “This report provides a factual rebuttal to the pro-nuclear disinformation campaign currently underway in Australia. Simple facts are ignored by the nuclear lobby, such as the fact that there has been zero growth in nuclear power over the past 20 years and the number of countries operating reactors is the same as it was in the late 1990s.”

The report, titled ‘Nuclear Power’s Global Stagnation and Decline’, is co-authored by Assoc. Prof. Darrin Durant (Associate Professor in Science and Technology Studies at the University of Melbourne), Prof. Jim Falk (Professorial Fellow in the School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Melbourne; Emeritus Professor at the University of Wollongong) and Dr. Jim Green (President of Friends of the Earth Australia and a member of the Nuclear Consulting Group).

March 4, 2025 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Israel seen as likely to attack Iran’s nuclear programme by midyear

Reuters, February 13, 2025,  https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-israel-seen-as-likely-to-attack-iran-by-midyear/?fbclid=IwY2xjawIweXtleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHTyVoerHeMoOkbmz2sR-4a0lveMK8ur9BHOtpEZn2L3SWnF0gbx4LTMdwQ_aem_FR1Zy_kD1oyRJKFZoi095Q

U.S. intelligence warns that Israel is likely to launch a pre-emptive attack on Iran’s nuclear program by midyear, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday, citing multiple intelligence reports.

Such an attack would set back Iran’s nuclear program by weeks or months while escalating tension in the region and risking a wider conflict, according to multiple intelligence reports from the end of the Biden administration and start of the Trump administration, the newspaper reported.

Reuters could not immediately confirm the report. The White House declined to comment. The Post said the Israeli government, CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency and Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.

Brian Hughes, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, told the Post that President Donald Trump “will not permit Iran to get a nuclear weapon.”

“While he prefers negotiating a resolution to American’s long-standing issues with the Iranian regime peacefully, he will not wait indefinitely if Iran isn’t willing to deal, and soon,” Hughes told The Post.

The most comprehensive of the intelligence reports came in early January and was produced by the intelligence directorate of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Post said.

It warned that Israel was likely to attempt an attack on Iran’s Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities.

Current and former U.S. officials familiar with the intelligence said Israel has determined its bombing of Iran in October degraded Iran’s air defences and left the country exposed to a follow-on assault, said the Post, which did not name the officials.

Iran and Israel engaged in tit-for-tat strikes last year amid wider tensions over Israel’s war in Gaza.

The intelligence reports envisioned two potential strike options that each would involve the United States providing aerial refuelling support and intelligence, the Post said.

Trump told Fox News in an interview that aired on Monday he would prefer to make a deal with Iran to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon, saying he also believed Iran would prefer a deal over an armed conflict.

“Everyone thinks Israel, with our help or our approval, will go in and bomb the hell out of them. I would prefer that not happen,” Trump said.

The United States under President Barack Obama and European allies negotiated an agreement with Iran to halt its nuclear program, but Trump in his first term in office, encouraged by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, withdrew the United States from the landmark accord and ordered sanctions reimposed on Tehran in 2018.

Iran has since restarted its nuclear program and is enriching uranium, according to the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran, Britain, France and Germany have met in Geneva to search for a way to resume nuclear talks, Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi told Iran’s state TV in January.

March 4, 2025 Posted by | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The National goes to the UN: The fight for nuclear disarmament

1st March, By Xander Elliards

 Next week will see the third Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on
the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (3MSP TPNW, for short). In practice,
that means that delegates from across the globe will attend a meeting at
the UN in New York to discuss how to push for wider acceptance of a
worldwide ban on nuclear weapons. The TPNW is backed by 73 states parties,
including Austria, Ireland, New Zealand, Mexico, and South Africa, and 21
others are signatories, including Colombia, Brazil, and Barbados.

The SNP has committed an independent Scotland to signing the TPNW – but the UK,
as a nuclear power, has declined to sign it. Thanks to a partnership with
the philanthropic fund Lex International, The National will be on the
ground in New York and at the UN building as thousands of delegates from
across the globe meet to discuss how to push nuclear states like the UK
into action.

 The National 1st March 2025,
https://www.thenational.scot/news/24969230.national-goes-un-fight-nuclear-disarmament/

March 4, 2025 Posted by | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

The Guardian view on PM’s gamble: exploiting crisis to remake Labour was a step too far for an ally

 Guardian 28th Feb 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/28/the-guardian-view-on-pms-gamble-exploiting-crisis-to-remake-labour-was-a-step-too-far-for-an-ally
The exit of a soft-left intellectual politician from government highlights a growing unease about the reordering of the party’s priorities.

The resignation of Anneliese Dodds, the international development minister, from Labour’s cabinet may not have been entirely unexpected. Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to cut the aid budget to “pay” for increased defence spending was wrong. Making the world’s poorest foot the bill for Britain’s security is reckless and self-defeating. Slashing aid fuels instability – it won’t buy safety. From her perch in government Ms Dodds, who was Sir Keir’s first shadow chancellor, knew this better than most.

The former cabinet minister’s letter is right to warn that the cuts will mean the UK withdrawing from many developing countries and having a diminished role in global institutions like the World Bank, the G7 and climate negotiations. She pointedly argued Britain will find it “impossible” to deliver on its commitment to maintain development spending in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine with the shrunken budget. Sir Keir rebuffed this charge, but Ms Dodds is right to say his move is being seen as following the Trumpian lead in cutting USAid – a framing that implies the UK is losing its independent foreign policy direction.

Like many others, including this column, she understood that in an increasingly volatile world, defence spending must rise. But rather than a collective discussion on whether the government’s fiscal rules and tax policies remain fit for purpose, the prime minister chose to gut aid budgets to fund defence spending with little debate, as if stability abroad weren’t essential to security at home. Such high-handed treatment left Ms Dodds, a soft-left intellectual politician, with no choice but to resign.

Her departure had been in the air since Sir Keir made his announcement – but she held off until he returned from Washington. Sir Keir now owns the decision, and its consequences will define his leadership. That he was shaped by events rather than shaping them will not be lost on his MPs.

Clive Lewis, a leftwing Labour MP and former soldier, has called for a wealth tax to fund defence. This is a sensible idea that merits wider discussion, as does relaxing borrowing rules – a debate already under way in Europe. The party’s right wing wants to frame Sir Keir’s move as more than fiscal, briefing that Sir Keir has made a deliberate break from the party’s pro-aid stance. It is reported that the Treasury didn’t push this – it was the prime minister’s personal call. Ms Dodds’ rise and fall mirrors his hardening leadership style.

Sir Keir is seizing this crisis to remake his party. His government has embraced militarisation, welfare cuts, climate backtracking and nationalist asylum policies. The political rationale is to ward off attacks from the extreme right and particularly Reform, which has seen its support rise. Why amplify rightwing narratives instead of challenging them? If this is just tactical positioning, fine. If not, he risks losing Labour’s soul – a perilous path as concerns over the lack of good jobs, equality, child poverty and pensioner support are likely to keep growing. Labour voters may turn away if “hard-headed” geopolitics trumps fairness. The reaction from MPs and the electorate will determine whether this gamble pays off – or exposes rifts within Labour’s coalition.

March 4, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

‘The climate crisis is the biggest security threat of them all’: Anneliese Dodds quits government over aid budget cuts

Michael Holder, 28 February 2025

 Anneliese Dodds has today quit the Cabinet over plans to raid the
international aid budget to boost defence spending, warning in her
resignation letter the decision risks damaging the UK’s interests and
undermining efforts to tackle a climate crisis that “is the biggest
security threat of them all”.

Dodds, who resigned as Minister of State for
both International Development and Women and Equalities, said while she
fully supported the government’s decision to increase defence spending, she
disagreed that the UK overseas development budget should “absorb the entire
burden”.

 Business Green 28th Feb 2025,
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4410216/climate-crisis-biggest-security-threat-anneliese-dodds-quits-government-aid-budget-cuts

March 4, 2025 Posted by | climate change, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Donald Trump was rude to Zelensky, but he did tell him the hard truths.

Much of what President Trump told Ukraine President Zelensky in their contentious public meeting Friday was valid…and needed to be said to achieve peace. A sampling of the truths Trump told Zelensky:

1. Ukraine must seek immediate ceasefire not more war

2. Why? The war is lost with Zelensky having “no more cards to play” to achieve his unrealistic, indeed delusional war objectives.

3. Only the US can achieve war’s end thru a negotiated peace with Russia. What Trump omitted is that this has always been America’s war simply using Ukraine proxies to fight it.

4. Ukraine is running out of soldiers, relying on old men and conscripts snatched off the street to fight a lost cause.

5. Zelensky could start WWIII with his efforts to keep war going by attacking deep into Russia.

Trump’s comments signaled a near complete break with predecessor Biden’s embrace of the weak, compliant Zelensky to fight the war to weaken Russia and keep it out of the European political economy.

Trump knows the war has nothing to do with Europe or America’s national security interests and must be ended.

If the Oval Office dustup offends people who want this war to continue indefinitely, possibly going nuclear, then by all means be outraged. But if you want to end this lost war utterly destroying Ukraine so US can weaken Russia, then join the peace community in supporting Trump’s peace initiative.

This war has put peoplekind at risk of nuclear annihilation for all 1,100 days since it began. That must end.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine, USA | 4 Comments

As Freed Palestinians Describe Torture, Trump OKs $3 Billion Arms Package for Israel

Like the Biden administration, Trump is claiming an “emergency” in order to bypass Congress.

Common Dreams, Brett Wilkins, 28 Feb 25

As Palestinians released from Israeli imprisonment recount torture and other abuse suffered at the hands of their former captors, the Trump administration on Friday approved a new $3 billion weapons package for Israel.

The new package, reported by Zeteo‘s Prem Thakker, includes nearly $2.716 billion worth of bombs and weapons guidance kits, as well as $295 million in bulldozers. The Trump administration said that “an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale,” allowing it to bypass Congress, as the Biden administration did on multiple occasions. However, the weapons won’t be delivered until 2026 or 2027.

From October 2023 to October 2024, Israel received a record $17.9 billion worth of U.S. arms as it waged a war of annihilation against the Gaza Strip that left more than 170,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and millions more displaced, starved, or sickened. Israel is facing genocide allegations in an International Court of Justice case brought by South Africa. The International Criminal Court has also issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

Reporting on the new package came after U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Monday announced an effort to block four other arms sales totaling $8.56 billion in offensive American weaponry to Israel.

Meanwhile, some of the approximately 1,000 Palestinians released by Israel as part of a prisoner swap described grim stories of abuse by Israeli forces. The former detainees, who were arrested but never charged with any crimes, “have returned visibly malnourished and scarred by the physical and psychological torture they say they faced in Israeli prisons,” according toThe Washington Post. Some returned to what were once their homes to find them destroyed and their relatives killed or wounded by Israeli forces.

Eyas al-Bursh, a doctor volunteering at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City when he was captured by Israeli troops, was held in Sde Teiman and the Ofer military prison in the illegally occupied West Bank for 11 months.

“The places where we were held were harsh, sleep was impossible, and we remained handcuffed and blindfolded,” al-Bursh told the Post……………………………………………………………………

Rahdi also said that Mohammed al-Akka, a 44-year-old detainee held with him, died last December. Al-Akka is one of dozens of Palestinian prisoners who have died in Israeli custody, some from suspected torture and, in at least one case, rape with an electric baton. A number of Israeli reservists are being investigated for the alleged gang-rape of a Sde Teiman prisoner. https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-arms-to-israel

March 3, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Small modular reactor plans edge closer, amid claims that the technology makes no economic sense

By Simon Hacker, Punchline Gloucester 28th Feb 2025

 …………………………………….Dale Vince, the owner of Stroud-based green energy group Ecotricity, has
roundly condemned the technology for “defying the economic laws of
gravity”.

Speaking on his weekly Zerocarbonista podcast, Mr Vince said:
“When you come to small nukes, the government and the nuclear industry have
consistently said that we will get lower bills, but they don’t put a number
on it. They are ecomonists without numbers!

Energy minister Ed Miliband: keen to move ahead on SMR plans. Big nuclear is the most expensive electricity we have ever made, it’s off the charts compared to renewable
energy and one of the fundamental laws of physics is that the economies of
scale come by making something bigger, not by making something smaller –
it always costs money to miniaturise.

So here they are, saying we can
miniatarise nuclear reactors that famously went decades late and billions
over budget… and they’ll be cheap. I don’t believe that for a second and
what we are of course doing is proliferating the risk.”

He added: “It’s always worth imagining what it would be like if the Romans had nuclear
power. If they did, Bath would be a toxic no-go zone. It’s only 2,000 years
ago and sounds like a long time, but not in the context of toxic nuclear
waste.” Whether Berkeley and neighbouring site Oldbury-on-Severn progress
with Rolls Royce’s SMR bid, the technology’s pathway to viable commercial
models for energy production remains challenging: as of today, only China
and Russia have operational SMRs, with China’s HTR-PM pebble-bed reactor
connected to the grid and Russia’s floating Akademik Lomonosov plant
utilizing two 35MW SMRs. https://www.punchline-gloucester.com/articles/aanews/smr-plans-edge-closer-amid-claims-the-technology-makes-no-economic-sense

March 3, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Rachel Reeves eyes cuts to nuclear in spending review

Energy industry insiders fear the Chancellor could target Britain’s mini-nuke programme

Matt Oliver, Industry Editor, Telegraph 28th Feb 2025

Rachel Reeves is eyeing cuts to Britain’s £20bn mini-nuclear reactor programme amid a scramble to slash government expenditure, insiders fear.

Sources believe the Chancellor is considering approving a smaller number of reactors than previously expected in an attempt to reduce the costs of the programme, which is part of wider efforts to transform Britain’s power grid.

The competition to design and build the first small modular reactors (SMRs) entered its last phase on Friday, with four finalists – Rolls-Royce, GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse and Holtec – told to submit final bids by mid-April.

It was previously suggested that up to three winners would be chosen by Great British Nuclear (GBN), the quango in charge of running the contest.

But sources said there was concern this has quietly been scaled back to a “maximum” of two – raising the possibility that only one winner will be chosen. Fewer reactors would be built overall as a result………………………………………

The Chancellor is struggling to balance the books as weak economic growth makes it harder to meet her self-imposed “fiscal rules” for borrowing.

Everything is on the table’

Industry sources said there had as yet been no suggestion that ministers had decided to scale back the SMR programme.

But the final outcome has been linked to the spending review and there remains uncertainty about how many vendors will be chosen.

One person briefed on the discussions warned: “It all comes down to the spending review. Everything is on the table.”……………………..

the nascent technology remains commercially unproven, with a string of European countries and the US all currently pursuing their own individual competitions to fund the first examples of the technology.

Scaling back Britain’s SMR programme would represent a significant retreat for Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, who this month announced plans to speed up the development of the mini reactors and vowed to “build, baby, build”.

………there are fears that Mr Miliband, the Energy Secretary, is under pressure to choose which energy schemes he will prioritise as he scrambles to deliver Labour’s promise…

………….The competition has suffered repeated delays, with ministers in the previous Conservative government originally suggesting it would be concluded last spring.

This week it emerged there had been yet another delay, with the deadline for final bid submissions moved back from the end of March to mid-April.

……………………….The Treasury was contacted for comment.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/28/reeves-eyes-cuts-to-nuclear-in-spending-review/

March 3, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear powers down as global reactor numbers shrink.

By Jennifer Dudley-Nicholson, March 3 2025 –  https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8906917/nuclear-powers-down-as-global-reactor-numbers-shrink/

The number of nuclear reactors operating around the world is shrinking, a report has found, and renewable energy generation is outpacing the technology.

The EnergyScience Coalition released the findings on Monday in a report analysing progress on renewable and nuclear energy generation, as well as investments in each.

It found nuclear power generation was “stagnating rather than growing” despite claims to the contrary, and that only three countries were planning to add nuclear reactors to their energy mix, while another three were planning to phase it out.

The report comes after the coalition pledged to establish nuclear power plants in seven Australian locations if it won the upcoming federal election, and after warnings that Australia could miss its climate targets by years under a nuclear plan.

The EnergyScience Coalition study, authored by academics from the University of Melbourne and the Nuclear Consulting Group, found the number of nuclear power plants worldwide had shrunk from 438 in 2002 to 411 last year.

Nuclear reactors also generated just 9.15 per cent of the world’s energy in 2024, it noted, compared to 17.5 per cent in 1996, and gained 4.3 gigawatts during the year.

By comparison, renewable energy sources added 666 gigawatts, according to the International Energy Agency, and were expected to overtake coal-fired power generation this year.

Claims about the number of countries investing in nuclear reactors had also been overstated in Australia, co-author and Nuclear Consulting Group member Jim Green said.

Nuclear reactors were being built in 13 countries, the study found, but only three were new to nuclear energy: Egypt, Bangladesh and Turkey.

“This report provides a factual rebuttal to the pro-nuclear disinformation campaign currently underway in Australia,” Dr Green said.

“There has been zero growth in nuclear power over the past 20 years and the number of countries operating reactors is the same as it was in the late 1990s.”

Four countries had already phased out nuclear power generation, including Italy and Germany, the report said, and another three were planning to phase out the technology, including Switzerland and Spain.

Recent nuclear power projects in countries where the technology was well established had also suffered significant cost and time blow-outs including a project the US state of South Carolina that was abandoned and the Hinkley Point reactor in the UK that was expected to cost 11.5 times more than its original estimate.

The examples proved Australia would face a significant challenge to build nuclear reactors within deadlines and budgets, co-author and University of Melbourne Professor Jim Falk said.

“Reactor construction projects in countries with vast expertise and experience, such as France, the US and the UK, have run literally tens of billions of dollars over budget and construction schedules have slipped by many years,” he said.

“Since those countries have failed to build reactors on time and on budget, it would be naive to believe that a nuclear newcomer country such as Australia could do it.”

The coalition’s nuclear plan would establish five large nuclear reactors and two small modular reactors across five states, with the first forecast to be operational by 2035.

But a recent report from the Climate Change Authority found switching from a renewable energy pathway to nuclear would delay Australia’s progress to its 2030 climate goal by 12 years.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Beyond Nuclear files two relicensing legal actions

February 27, 2025, https://beyondnuclear.org/beyond-nuclear-files-two-legal-relicensing-actions/

In February 2025, Beyond Nuclear and the Sierra Club (“petitioners”) filed two legal actions challenging extreme relicensing decisions by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to qualify and extend US reactor operating licenses beyond 60 years to 80 years. The petitioners have argued that these license renewals are based on faulty analyses of the environmental impacts for extreme reactor operations that are irrational, unreasonable, incomplete, unsupported, arbitrary and capricious. Beyond Nuclear contends that the NRC has failed to satisfy requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for both its generic and site-specific relicensing applications.

On February 20, 2025, Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club (“petitioners”) filed a 76-page legal brief in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in response to the NRC issuance of its new rule and Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal (GEIS). The lawsuit draws attention to the federal agency ignoring the petitioners’ comments submitted earlier in 2024 on the Draft GEIS compiled. The petitioners’ substantial comments are supported by expert witness testimony of a retired NRC senior risk analyst and nuclear engineer focused on the materials facts that the new rule and rewrite of the GEIS, effective September 15, 2024, does not meet the legal standard for “adequate protection” of the public health and safety during the extended reactor operations from the destructive impacts of age-related degradation of critical reactor safety systems, structures and components (SSC). These SSCs include the large and irreplaceable steel reactor pressure vessels, reactor internal components, the massive concrete containment buildings and foundations. Other critical safety systems also include the miles and miles of the by and large inaccessible, uninspected buried control, instrumentation and power electrical cables and similarly extensive and inaccessible safety-related buried pipe systems.

The petitioners further challenge that the new rule and final GEIS do not meet the legal standard of “adequate protection” from the projected impacts of climate change on the increase of severe reactor accident risk and frequency as well as radiological accident consequences during the projected license renewal period.

In both the cases of age-related degradation of safety-related SSC operations and climate change impacts of severe accident risk and consequences, the NRC GEIS further fails to acknowledge an extensive list of  identified “knowledge gaps” and even broader uncertainties that erode the reliability of projecting operational risk, accident frequency and consequences into the license renewal period.

The petitioners are specifically challenging the NRC GEIS finding that the environmental impacts of a nuclear reactor accident “during the initial (40 to 60 years) and subsequent (60 to 80 years) license renewal term” would be insignificant or “SMALL” and, as a result, the NRC does not need to evaluate less impactful alternatives to extended reactor operations.

The petitioners are asking the federal court to vacate the NRC rule and Final GEIS. They further request that the Court order the NRC to more thoroughly investigate the adverse impacts, gaps and uncertainties of operational aging degradation of reactor safety margins. Furthermore, given that the NRC GEIS further claims that the adverse impact of climate change on reactor operations is “out of scope” of the agency’s environmental reviews for license extension, the petitioners assert that the court should require the NRC to take a “hard look” at the impact of climate change (sea level rise, increasingly severe storms, hurricanes, flooding, wild fires, etc) on severe nuclear accident risk and environmental consequences.

On February 24, 2025, petitioners Beyond Nuclear and Sierra Club additionally filed an appeal to the NRC Office of the Commissioners regarding an Atomic Safety Licensing Board order on a 60 to 80 year license renewal application of Duke Energy’s Oconee Units 1, 2 & 3 nuclear power station in Seneca, South Carolina for operations out to 2053 and 2054. The licensing board order now under appeal to the NRC Commissioners denies their request for a hearing, dismisses all of the petitioners’ contentions and terminates the relicensing proceeding.

Oconee nuclear station operates beneath and downstream of two large hydroelectric dams; the Jocassee Dam, a 385 feet high earthen rock-filled dam, ten miles upstream of the Oconee reactors roughly 300 feet below the top of the Lake Jocassee water level of more than 1 million acre feet of water and; the Keowee Dam, a 175 feet earthen dam that immediately abuts the nuclear power station that is sited roughly five feet below the top level of Lake Keowee and an additional 990,000 acre feet of water.

The three reactors were originally designed, constructed as a “dry site” where dam failure was considered an “incredible” event. Only precipitation directly onto the reactor site was analyzed for its flooding impact risk and dismissed. The only dam failure evaluated was for a “sunny day failure” or a structural failure unrelated to severe flooding. The “initial” 40 to 60 years license renewal application was approved without any challenge or consideration of a flood induced dam failure resulting in severe nuclear accident consequences that were analyzed in an environmental review or the NRC Environmental Impact Statement.

The NRC site-specific Environmental Impact Statement for Oconee has concluded that determining the projected impact of climate change on the reliable operation of Oconee safety systems including climate change induced extreme flooding events is “out of scope” of an environmental review.

Both of the petitioners’ legal actions as filed February 20 and 25, 2025 stem from previous Commission Orders issued three years ago on February 24, 2022. These NRC orders were won on appeal  in the first round of Subsequent License Renewal Applications filed by the intervenors that resulted in the NRC rescinding the original subsequent license renewals for the Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 and Peach Bottom 2 & 3 nuclear power plants, as well as suspend other active subsequent license renewal proceedings pending a rewrite of the GEIS as reported by the Associated Press . These same NRC Orders required the NRC staff to rewrite a new rule and Generic Environmental Impact Statement because the previous 2013 GEIS as written only applied to the license renewal period for the “initial” 20 year license extension of 40 to 60 years, not the “subsequent” license renewal of 60 to 80 years.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

IAEA mission arrives at nuclear plant in Ukraine through Russia

By Reuters, March 2, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/new-iaea-mission-arrives-russian-held-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-russia-says-2025-03-01/

March 1 (Reuters) – A new monitoring mission from the U.N. nuclear watchdog arrived on Saturday at the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine for the first time through Russian territory, a Russia-installed head of the plant said.

The IAEA rotation came after weeks of delay caused by military activity around the site with each side blaming the other for violating rules to ensure the team’s safe passage to the plant.

“It is fundamentally important that the route passed through the territory of the Russian Federation for the first time,” Yuri Chernichuk, the Russia-installed head of the Zaporizhzhia plant in southeastern Ukraine, said in a video on Telegram.

The arrival of three inspectors, he added, was ensured by Russia’s defence ministry and national guard and followed “intense” consultations between the heads of Russia’s state nuclear power company Rosatom and IAEA.

Reuters could not independently verify the report. The IAEA could not be reached outside business hours to comment on the Russian statement. There was no immediate comment from Ukraine.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

UK Energy Secretary Signals China Pivot

By Irina Slav – Feb 28, 2025,
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/UK-Energy-Secretary-Signals-China-Pivot.html

UK’s energy secretary is reportedly scheduled to travel to China next month in a bid to forge a closer relationship with the country, despite it being seen by previous governments in London as a threat to national security.

The report comes from Reuters, which spoke to unnamed sources close to Ed Miliband, who said the top energy member of the UK cabinet will discuss alternative energy sources in China. What he will not discuss, per the sources, is nuclear energy.

The UK’s Labour government is looking to mend fences with China after the last series of Conservative cabinets all demonstrated mistrust and suspicion to Beijing, in sync with the EU and the United States. However, the Starmer government has signaled it was willing to change this, diverging from the EU/U.S. course of import tariffs and accusations of national security attacks on the part of the Chinese.

In the energy sector, Chinese equipment and components are crucial for the Starmer government’s transition efforts as the country is the largest producer of things such as solar panels, wind turbines, and inverters. It is also the lowest-cost producer, ironically thanks to the amount of coal-powered generation Chinese manufacturers use to make the transition components.

The UK has some of the most ambitious transition goals in the world, aiming to generate as much as 95% of its electricity from non-hydrocarbon sources. As part of efforts to achieve this, the government has committed to doubling onshore wind energy by 2030, quadrupling offshore wind, and trebling solar power by the end of the decade.

To do this, the Starmer government would need to speed up the pace of growth in wind and solar capacity considerably. In offshore wind alone, the government would need to approve more offshore capacity in the next two annual renewable energy auctions, than it has approved in the last six auctions, the country’s grid operator warned last year.

March 3, 2025 Posted by | renewable, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »