nuclear-news

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

Trump’s transactional instincts could help forge a new Iran nuclear deal

Mohamad Bazzi, 265 Apr https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/25/trump-iran-nuclear-deal

The president has a chance to make good on his reputation as a dealmaker as Iran moves closer to a nuclear weapon.

In May 2018, Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear deal and reimposed American sanctions that crippled the Iranian economy. Trump tore up the 2015 agreement, which had taken years for Iran to negotiate with six world powers, under which Tehran limited its nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions. Trump insisted he would be able to negotiate a better pact than the one reached by Barack Obama’s administration.

Today, in his second term as president, Trump is eager to fix the Iran deal he broke nearly seven years ago.

While Trump’s overall foreign policy has been chaotic and has alienated traditional US allies in Europe and elsewhere, he has an opportunity to reach an agreement with Iran that eluded Joe Biden. Since Trump walked away from the original deal, Iran has moved closer to having a nuclear weapon than it has ever been. It has enriched enough uranium close to weapons-grade quality to make six nuclear bombs, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But analysts believe that even after enriching enough uranium for a bomb, Iran would still need up to a year to develop an actual nuclear warhead that could be deployed on a ballistic missile.

Last month, Trump sent a letter to Iran’s supreme leader, the 86-year-old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying the US wanted to negotiate a new deal. Trump followed up with a public threat, saying if Iran’s leaders did not agree to renewed talks, they would be subjected to “bombing the likes of which they have never seen before”. After Trump’s threats and a buildup of US forces in the Middle East, Iran’s military said it would respond to any attack by targeting US bases in the region, which house thousands of American troops.

But Iranian leaders also agreed to indirect negotiations, rather than the direct talks Trump had proposed. Trump dispatched his special envoy, the real estate developer Steve Witkoff, to lead a team of US negotiators to meet indirectly with top Iranian officials, including the foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. The two sides held two rounds of productive talks so far this month, under the mediation of Oman. And the US and Iranian teams are due to meet again this weekend in Muscat, the capital of Oman, where they will start talks on technical details of a potential agreement.

While Trump and Iran’s leaders both changed their tones in recent weeks, there are many obstacles before a deal can be reached, including hardliners in Iran and Washington, as well as opposition from Israel’s rightwing government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, who has spent years working to undermine negotiations between the US and Iran. The main barrier will be whether the Trump administration insists on a total dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program – the so-called “Libya model”, named after the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, who decided to eliminate his country’s nuclear weapons program in 2003 under pressure from the US. But that decision deprived Gaddafi of a major lever to stave off western military intervention after the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011, which led to his regime’s fall and his killing by Libyan rebels.

Some foreign policy hawks in Washington, including Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Waltz, and the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, insist on this maximalist strategy, which echoes Netanyahu’s demand that Iran must completely dismantle its nuclear enrichment activity and infrastructure as part of any deal with the US. If Trump takes a similar approach, negotiations would probably break down and Trump could follow through on his threat to carry out military strikes.

Iran has made clear that it will not agree to the total end of its nuclear program, but would accept a verification-based approach, as it did under the 2015 deal negotiated by the Obama administration along with China, France, Russia, the UK and Germany, together with the European Union. That type of agreement would place strict limits on Iran’s ability to enrich uranium and impose an inspections regime involving international monitors. Several of Trump’s advisers, including Witkoff and the vice-president, JD Vance, seem to favor this solution.

“I think he wants to deal with Iran with respect,” Witkoff said of Trump’s outreach to the Iranian regime, in a long interview last month with Tucker Carlson, the rightwing media host who has been highly critical of Republican hawks agitating for war with Iran. “He wants to build trust with them, if it’s possible.”

Iran’s leaders apparently got that message – and have tried to stroke Trump’s ego and convey that they respect him in ways they never respected Biden. In a Washington Post op-ed published on 8 April, Iran’s foreign minister seemed to be speaking to Trump directly when he blamed the failure of earlier negotiations on a “lack of real determination by the Biden administration”. Araghchi also played to Trump’s oft-repeated desire to be a peacemaker who ends America’s legacy of forever wars, writing: “We cannot imagine President Trump wanting to become another US president mired in a catastrophic war in the Middle East.”

And the minister appealed to Trump’s reputation as a deal-maker, citing the “trillion-dollar opportunity” that would benefit US companies if they could gain access to Iran after a diplomatic agreement. Iran’s leaders evidently understand that Trump loves to frame his foreign policy as being guided by his desire to secure economic deals and benefits for American businesses.

In this case, Trump’s transactional instincts and bulldozer style of negotiations could lead to a positive outcome, avoiding war with Iran and undermining the hardliners in Washington, Iran and Israel. Trump has already adopted a significant shift toward Tehran from his first term, when he had insisted that Iran was the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and the greatest threat to US interests in the Middle East.

After he took office in 2017, Trump wanted to tear up the Iran deal partly because it was one of Obama’s major foreign policy accomplishments. Trump also surrounded himself with hawkish advisers who reinforced the danger of an Iranian threat, including HR McMaster, who served as national security adviser, and James Mattis, who was defense secretary. Both men commanded US troops during the occupation of Iraq, and they fought Iraqi militias funded by Iran. Trump later appointed John Bolton, another neoconservative and advocate of the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, as his national security adviser.

In his second term, Trump has banished most of the neocons from his administration. Trump also seems to realize that Netanyahu could become one of the biggest obstacles to an Iran deal, as he was during the Obama and Biden administrations. It was no accident that the president announced his plan for renewed talks with Iran while Netanyahu sat beside him at an Oval Office meeting on 7 April. Netanyahu had arranged a hasty visit to Washington to seek an exemption from Trump on new tariffs on Israeli exports. But he left empty-handed and embarrassed by Trump’s Iran announcement. That meeting was a signal to Iran’s leaders: that Trump would not allow Netanyahu to steamroll him, as the Israeli premier had done with other US presidents.

If Trump continues to resist Netanyahu, along with hawkish Republicans and some of his own advisers, he might well be able to negotiate a dramatic deal with Iran – and repair the nuclear crisis he unleashed years ago.

  • Mohamad Bazzi is the director of the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern studies and a journalism professor at New York University.

April 27, 2025 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Weatherwatch: sage advice 50-odd years ago on UK nuclear power still relevant

Ministers might care to heed conclusions of 1976 Flowers report before they go ahead with latest energy policy plans

Paul Brown, 25 Apr 25, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/apr/25/weatherwatch-sage-advice-50-odd-years-ago-on-uk-nuclear-power-still-relevant

Gathering dust somewhere in Whitehall is the 1976 royal commission’s sixth report on environmental pollution, known afterwards as the Flowers report after its chair, Sir Brian Flowers. It dealt with the future of the nuclear industry, warning about the dangers of producing large quantities of plutonium amid fears of potential threats from terrorists. The report particularly emphasised the pressing need to find a way of disposing of nuclear waste and recommended there should be no great expansion of nuclear power until a satisfactory way had been found of disposing of it.

The report was written before climate change and the current extremes of weather were of public concern, but the commission was exercised by the pressing need to increase the electricity supply. The report did not rule out the expansion of nuclear power but urged the government to look at wave power and other renewables as much more desirable alternatives.

Fast-forward almost half a century and the UK is still no nearer to dealing with its ever increasing pile of nuclear waste, costing billions every year just to keep safe. However, the Flowers commission would be delighted that wind, solar and other renewables have largely replaced nuclear power, and be puzzled that the government seems poised to ignore sage advice and expand nuclear energy again.

April 27, 2025 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Tankers travel from Alton Water to Sizewell C every day

Tankers full of water are travelling 30 miles up the A12 and B1122 to keep Sizewell C’s offices topped up because the local water company cannot cope with demand.

 Essex and Suffolk Water is the company that supplies the north
east of the county – and it has long been known that it has problems in
coping with increasing demand. The company is operating at near capacity –
and this problem has forced some development or expansion plans in the area
to be cancelled or postponed. It is not able to supply water to the offices
that have been built at Sizewell so a temporary deal has been signed with
Anglian Water to bring in supplies.

 Ipswich Star 25th April 2025,
https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/25110191.tankers-travel-alton-water-sizewell-c-every-day/

April 27, 2025 Posted by | UK, water | Leave a comment

UN: Gaza Is Facing Worst Humanitarian Situation Yet Due to Israeli Blockade.

Hunger is spreading & deepening, deliberate & manmade,” “Two million people: a majority of women & children are undergoing collective punishment.”

The Israeli blockade on humanitarian aid and all other goods entering Gaza has been imposed for 50 days

by Dave DeCamp April 22, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/04/22/un-gaza-is-facing-worst-humanitarian-situation-yet-due-to-israeli-blockade/

The UN’s humanitarian office, OCHA, warned on Tuesday that Gaza is facing its worst humanitarian situation yet, as a total Israeli blockade on humanitarian aid and all other goods has been imposed for more than 50 days.

“Right now is probably the worst humanitarian situation we have seen throughout the war in Gaza,” Jens Laerke, a spokesperson for OCHA, said at a press briefing in Geneva, according to Turkey’s Anadolu Agency.

Also on Tuesday, the UN’s Palestinian relief agency, UNRWA, said Gaza had become a “land of desperation” and warned of spreading hunger.

“Hunger is spreading & deepening, deliberate & manmade,” UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini wrote on X. “Two million people: a majority of women & children are undergoing collective punishment.”

Lazzarini said that aid trucks, including 3,000 from UNRWA, are ready to enter Gaza but are being blocked by Israel. “The siege must be lifted, supplies must flow in, the hostages must be released, the ceasefire must resume,” he said.

The US has strongly backed Israel’s collective punishment of the civilian population of Gaza. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee released a video statement on Monday in response to calls for him to pressure Israel to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza and blamed Hamas for the Israeli blockade.

Last week, 12 major aid organizations issued a statement that said the “people of Gaza – particularly women and children – are paying the price” and that “famine is not just a risk, but likely rapidly unfolding in almost all parts of Gaza.”

April 26, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, Gaza, Israel | Leave a comment

Scottish nuclear plant emptied of fuel as UK winds down ageing gas-cooled reactors.

the cost of decommissioning should be taken into
account when the government decided on new nuclear plants as “no scheme can be guaranteed to meet a cost more than a century into the future”.

 The first of the UK’s seven advanced gas-cooled reactor nuclear power
stations has been emptied of fuel, kick-starting a decommissioning process
that will cost at least £27bn in total and take almost a century.

EDF said on Thursday it had defuelled Hunterston B, on the west coast of Scotland,
paving the way for the transfer of the site and 250 staff from the French
power company to the UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority next April. The
site provided most of Scotland’s energy for more than 40 years from its
launch in 1976 until its final closure in 2022.

EDF owns seven advanced gas-cooled reactors (AGRs) plants in the UK, which were built between the 1960s and 1980s and differ from newer nuclear plants that use water for
cooling. Just four are still operating.

The uranium fuel has been packaged
into 350 large flasks, which will be stored by the NDA at the Sellafield
nuclear site in Cumbria for at least 50 years until a longer-term
underground facility has been built.

Although the process took just three
years and £400mn, it will take almost a century to eradicate the radiation
from the land and buildings, EDF has said. The decommissioning of the seven
AGRs is separate to a much wider £105bn decommissioning programme, which
will cover an additional 17 closed nuclear sites over the next 120 years,
according to the NDA.

The closures will leave the UK with just one nuclear
power plant still running by 2030 — Sizewell B in Suffolk, which is also
managed by EDF and uses a pressurised water reactor. The NDA said it was
“acutely aware of the costs associated with delivering our mission”.

The cost of decommissioning nuclear power plants is under scrutiny as the
UK presses ahead with new nuclear projects, including the £40bn Sizewell
C, which is expected to get government go-ahead this spring, and the £46bn
Hinkley Point C, which is still under construction and will open by 2030 at
the earliest.

Steve Thomas, emeritus professor of energy policy at
Greenwich university, said the cost of decommissioning should be taken into
account when the government decided on new nuclear plants as “no scheme
can be guaranteed to meet a cost more than a century into the future”.

Although EDF has owned Hunterston B and the seven other AGR nuclear plants
since 2009, the cost of decommissioning is being paid for through the
ringfenced Nuclear Liabilities Fund (NLF), which was set up in 1996 after
privatisation and is valued at £20.6bn. Decommissioning costs have soared
over the past three decades, with the fund requiring cash injections from
the Treasury, including £5bn in July 2020 and a further £5.6bn in March
2022, according to the NLF.

 FT 24th April 2025, https://www.ft.com/content/c31af2d6-eeaa-4a3d-a2c0-81c63b29cb1d

April 26, 2025 Posted by | decommission reactor, UK | Leave a comment

EDF’s two nuclear plants in Britain should be negotiated as one, French minister says.

Guy Taylor, Transport Reporter, 25 April 2025

EDF’s two nuclear construction schemes at Hinkley Point and Sizewell C should be treated as one financial venture in negotiations, according to France’s energy minister.

Marc Ferracci told the FT he had held discussions with the UK’s energy minister Ed Miliband at the sidelines of a conference in London on Thursday.

“France and EDF are very committed to deliver the projects but we have to find a way to accelerate them and we have to find a way to consolidate the financial schemes of both projects,” he said.

The French government has been pushing ministers in the UK to lend a hand with Hinkley Point’s floundering finances over the last year.

Costs on the nuclear project have risen to as high as £46bn and it argues EDF, the French state-owned energy firm, should not be forced to cover the overruns.

EDF’s equity stake in Sizewell C, a 3.2 gigawatt nuclear station on the Suffolk Coast, is smaller than Hinkley Point.

Ferracci denied that the French government was looking to use Sizewell as “leverage” against the financial troubles at Hinkley………………….. https://www.cityam.com/edfs-two-nuclear-plants-should-be-negotiated-as-one-french-minister-says/

April 26, 2025 Posted by | France, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

The Australian Labor Party is No Friend of the Nuclear-Free Cause.

 https://theaimn.net/the-australian-labor-party-is-no-friend-of-the-nuclear-free-cause/ 26 Apr 25

I’m thinking that the nuclear lobby loves the ALP even more than it loves the Liberal Coalition opposition party.

Advance Australia, and the U.S-controlled Atlas Network are powerful and well-funded groups dedicated to molding public opinion on behalf of wealthy right-wing groups. They did a fine job in 2023 of destroying Australian support for the 2023 Australian referendum on the indigenous Voice to Parliament.

I was expecting them to pretty much run riot in support of the Liberal Coalition’s plan for a nuclear Australia. That does not seem to have happened. Why not?

Advance “kicked off with outright lies“, but has been rather quiet lately. And the Atlas Network is nowhere in sight, although its modus operandi is secretive anyway, spreading simplistic memes.

My conclusion is that Peter Dutton’s Liberal Coalition campaign is so inept, so incompetent, that it has turned out to be counter-productive to the party’s cause. There’s just so much evidence of this ineptitude – particularly when it comes to the estimated costs of setting up seven nuclear power plants around Australia. The latest of many examinations of these costs is – “Coalition’s nuclear gambit will cost Australia trillions – and permanently gut its industry.” Half-baked plans to keep old coal-power plants running for many years until nuclear is “ready”, no mention of plans for waste disposal, – the tax-payer to cop the whole cost. Even a suave sales magician like Ted O’Brien has not been able to con the Australian public. The party’s incompetence is on show in other ways, too, unconnected to the nuclear issue.

But what of Labor? They have been remarkably quiet on the nuclear issue – focussing on their own rather ha[f-baked plans for housing. It’s all cost-of-living issues – and I don’t deny that this is important. But nuclear rarely gets a mention – except when Labor finds it useful to mention the costs.

It doesn’t look as if Peter Dutton’s Liberal Coalition has a hope in hell of getting a majority win for its nuclear platform.

But does the nuclear lobby really care? I’m afraid not. You see, the Labor Party, supposedly opposed to the nuclear industry, has a long tradition of caving in on nuclear issues. From 1982 – a weak, supposed “no new uranium mines” policy became a “three mines uranium policy” 1984 then a pathetic “no new mines policy” in the 1990s. Backing for South Australia’s uranium mines further weakened Labor anti-nuclear policy.

Over decades, Labor luminary Gareth Evans has been acclaimed for his supposed stance against nuclear weapons. But he’s done a disservice to the nuclear-free movement, in his long-standing position in favour of “the contribution that can be made by nuclear energy capable of providing huge amounts of energy, and just as clean as renewables in its climate impact”. Evans has always been close to the International Atomic Energy Agency, in his complacency that nuclear power has nothing to do with nuclear weapons!

Labor has always been officially opposed to nuclear power, but at the Federal level, and some State levels, there have always been significant Ministers like Bob Hawke, and Martin Ferguson, who pushed for the nuclear industry. To his credit, Anthony Albanese for a long time held out against the nuclear industry. Even up until 2024, he was still trying .

But the crunch had already come – Albanese on Thursday, 16th September 2021 –We accept that this technology [nuclear-powered submarines ] is now the best option for Australia’s capability.”

Why did Albanese agree to this deal, arranged between the Morrison Liberal government, and the USA and UK? Apparently, he did so, after just a two-hour briefing, with no documents provided, on the previous day. Labor Caucus was presented with it as a fait accompli. No vote was taken.

I can only conclude that Albanese’s decision was based on that time-honored fear of Labor looking “weak on security”.

In one fell swoop, Labor’s anti-nuclear policy was wrecked. The nuclear submarines will mean nuclear reactors on Australia’s coast. The will mean nuclear waste disposal in Australia, including foreign nuclear waste from the second-hand submarines. They will surely eventually mean nuclear weapons, as who can really tell if a nuclear-powered submarines has or has not got nuclear weapons? (The Chinese will be very wary about them.)

Since 2021, Australia’s nuclear submarine arrangement has been largely in the hands of Defence Minister Richard Marles, who worked with that dodgy company PWC to set it up, and who is a committed supporter of Australia’s solidarity with the USA.

March 2023 – Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak  unveiled the path to acquiring nuclear-powered submarines.

“In 2024, Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, made undisclosed “political commitments” with its AUKUS partners in an agreement for the transfer of naval nuclear technology to Australia, sparking concerns about the potential for high-level radioactive waste to be stored in the country. “

The global nuclear lobby works across national boundaries to promote its industry. It does well with Russia – as government clamp-down on dissent makes it easier to expand the industry in all its forms, and to market nuclear power to Asian ana African countries.

The nuclear industry is well aware of the problems in maintaining the belief that nuclear is clean, cheap, and climate friendly. But above all, it’s the nuclear-waste problem that its most expensive and difficult obstacle. Here’s where Australia has always looked appealing. All this nonsense about getting small nuclear reactors is just a distraction . The industry knows that small nuclear reactors are fraught with difficulties – too expensive, requiring too much security, public opposition at the local level, still needing too much water……… But to keep the global industry going, a nuclear-waste-welcoming country would be such a boost.

Well, it is early days, even for the prospect of those AUKUS nuclear submarines ever actually arriving. But in the meantime – the whole AUKUS thing has quietly introduced the Australian public to the idea that nuclear submarines are OK, and so are their wastes, and so are USA nuclear weapons based in Australia.

So, really, the Australian Labor Party has done a much better job of promoting the nuclear industry, than the fumbling Liberal Coalition could.

We are fortunate inn Australia to have proportional representation in our election. If you care about keeping Australia nuclear-free, you don’t have to vote for either of the big parties.

April 26, 2025 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, Christina's notes, politics | Leave a comment

Before the Elephant’s Foot: True Story of Chernobyl’s Reactor Explorers | Chornobyl Uncharted Ep 22

What happened inside the Chernobyl Sarcophagus after 1986? Where was the missing nuclear fuel? And who were the first people to go in? In this episode of Chornobyl Uncharted, we reveal the untold story of the Soviet scientists and nuclear experts who became the first explorers of Reactor 4 — after the explosion, after the fires, and after the construction of the Shelter. Led by the Kurchatov Institute of Atomic Energy, these early missions faced deadly radiation, pitch darkness, and structural chaos. Using boreholes, detectors, periscopes, and even a robot built from a toy rover, they began the search for the melted nuclear core — and unknowingly discovered what would later be known as the Elephant’s Foot.

But, that was just the beginning. With newly translated reports from Oleksandr Borovoi and Volodymyr Shykalov, we follow their first steps into the ruins of Unit IV, the surprising data they uncovered, and the moment they realized: the reactor shaft was nearly empty. This is the true story of the people who dared to enter the Sarcophagus first — and what they found inside.

April 26, 2025 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

China, Russia may build nuclear plant on moon to power lunar station, official says

By Eduardo Baptista, April 24, 2025,
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-led-lunar-base-include-nuclear-power-plant-moons-surface-space-official-2025-04-23/

  • Summary
  • China and Russia plan nuclear reactor for lunar base by 2035
  • China and Russia-led ILRS aims to rival NASA’s Artemis program
  • China-Russia cooperation strengthened by tensions with West

SHANGHAI, April 23 (Reuters) – China is considering building a nuclear plant on the moon to power the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) it is planning with Russia, a presentation by a senior official showed on Wednesday.

China aims to become a major space power and land astronauts on the moon by 2030, and its planned Chang’e-8 mission for 2028 would lay the groundwork for constructing a permanent, manned lunar base.

In a presentation in Shanghai, the 2028 mission’s Chief Engineer Pei Zhaoyu showed that the lunar base’s energy supply could also depend on large-scale solar arrays, and pipelines and cables for heating and electricity built on the moon’s surface.

Russia’s space agency Roscosmos said last year it planned to build a nuclear reactor on the moon’s surface with the China National Space Administration (CNSA) by 2035 to power the ILRS.

The inclusion of the nuclear power unit in a Chinese space official’s presentation at a conference for officials from the 17 countries and international organisations that make up the ILRS suggests Beijing supports the idea, although it has never formally announced it.

“An important question for the ILRS is power supply, and in this Russia has a natural advantage, when it comes to nuclear power plants, especially sending them into space, it leads the world, it is ahead of the United States,” Wu Weiren, chief designer of China’s lunar exploration program, told Reuters on the sidelines of the conference.

After little progress on talks over a space-based reactor in the past, “I hope this time both countries can send a nuclear reactor to the moon,” Wu said.

China’s timeline to build an outpost on the moon’s south pole coincides with NASA’s more ambitious and advanced Artemis programme, which aims to put U.S. astronauts back on the lunar surface in December 2025.

Wu said last year that a “basic model” of the ILRS, with the Moon’s south pole as its core, would be built by 2035.

In the future, China will create the “555 Project,” inviting 50 countries, 500 international scientific research institutions, and 5,000 overseas researchers to join the ILRS.

Researchers from Roscosmos also presented at the conference in Shanghai, sharing details about plans to look for mineral and water resources, including possibly using lunar material as fuel.

April 26, 2025 Posted by | Russia, space travel | Leave a comment

They didn’t know their backyard creek carried nuclear waste. Now, they’re dying of cancer.

By Skyler Henry, Cait Bladt, https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/coldwater-creek-st-louis-missouri-nuclear-waste-manhattan-project/?fbclid=IwY2xjawJ5WlNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETE3b0JDR3JZZ0xqRkNqVU1oAR6r1OHnTIbzQszYmq5UdxWm2CDEhfSw2CBAqIbrvNc_QJ0mnVpSMlz18FoZ6A_aem_HBiqzbUxMZqObYI2gfOYx April 24, 2025 

This story is part one of a two-part series that examines the effects of nuclear waste contamination in Coldwater Creek on the surrounding community in St. Louis, Missouri. Part two aired Wednesday, April 23 on “CBS Evening News.”


When Linda Morice and her family first moved to St. Louis in 1957, they had no idea they had anything to fear. Then, people started getting sick.

“It was a slow, insidious process,” Morice said.

After the death of Morice’s mother, her physician uncle took her aside and gave her a stark warning: “Linda, I don’t believe St. Louis is a very healthy place to live. Everyone on this street has a tumor.”

Their neighborhood was bordered by Coldwater Creek, a 19-mile tributary of the Missouri River It wound through their backyards, near baseball fields, schools and cemeteries — and past lots where leaking barrels and open-air dumps of nuclear waste leeched into its waters.

“It was shocking that this creek was likely making people sick,” Morice said.

Starting in 1942, roughly one ton of pure uranium was produced per day in downtown St. Louis. It was then shipped to labs across the country for the top secret Manhattan Project that created the first nuclear bomb.

The leftover waste was dumped around the city. 

“That material was in 82 different spots throughout St. Louis County. It spilled. Children played in it. It seemed to me that there wasn’t an attempt to absolutely get to the bottom of it,” Morice said.

In Morice’s family alone, her mother, father and brother died of cancer, leaving her to think differently about her childhood.

“All that time, all those fun things were happening, but that whole time we, and the rest of the community were being exposed to some pretty dangerous stuff,” Morice said.

Now her husband, who also lived in the area, is fighting cancer. He’s being treated by urologic oncologist Dr. Gautum Agarwal. For the last several years, Agarwal has been tracking which of his patients lived near Coldwater Creek.

“I was seeing patients who are young, who had developed pretty significant cancers from areas that there’s been some contamination with nuclear waste,” Agarwal said.

While radiation is known to cause cancer, experts say they can’t pin down the specific cause of the disease in a given patient.

But a 2019 study from the Department of Health and Human Services found that people who lived and played near Coldwater Creek from the 1960s to 1990s “could be at an increased risk of developing lung cancer, bone cancer or leukemia.”

“The people there deserve for us to look at this much closer than we have,” Agarwal said.

April 26, 2025 Posted by | health, USA | 1 Comment

Chernobyl’s shadow highlights Australia’s potential nuclear risks

April 26, 2025

April 26, 2025, Don’t Nuke the Climate

On 26 April 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine exploded, spewing uncontrolled radiation across Europe and beyond.

Chernobyl caused massive human, environmental and economic impacts. The ongoing clean-up is set to continue for another four decades, with parts of the exclusion zone likely to remain uninhabitable for many hundreds of years.

Against the shadow of Chernobyl, Peter Dutton’s proposal to build nuclear power plants at seven sites around the country could put up to 200,000 Australians in direct danger.

Advocacy group Don’t Nuke the Climate has produced an online resource based on real world data from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. This detail has been transposed to Australia to help people understand the extent of nuclear contamination from a potential reactor accident.

The maps at www.nuclearplume.au show how far radioactive fallout from a Fukushima-sized accident would spread under different wind conditions from the seven sites identified for nuclear reactor by the federal Coalition. They highlight how a nuclear accident at one of the proposed reactor sites would affect nearby communities, including schools and hospitals.

Don’t Nuke the Climate is sharing this research to assist with evidence-based decision making that reduces nuclear risks and prioritises environmental responsibility and a safe future ahead of the coming federal election.

Dave Sweeney – Nuclear analyst, Australian Conservation Foundation says:

‘Australia should heed the lessons of Chernobyl and Fukushima and keep the door shut on domestic nuclear power. Nuclear isn’t just dangerous, it’s an irresponsible distraction from real climate action that makes no economic or environmental sense in Australia.’

‘Instead of the threat of radiation blowing in the wind we should be using the wind to generate clean electricity. Australia’s energy future is renewable, not radioactive.’

Dr Jim Green – Nuclear campaigner, Friends of the Earth Australia says:

‘Emergency Leaders for Climate Action recently warned that nuclear reactors would introduce significant and unnecessary risk to Australian communities and emergency responders, including firefighters already stretched by escalating climate fuelled disasters.’

‘The Coalitions nuclear push is risky and reckless. It is a high cost, high risk thought bubble, not a credible national energy policy.’

April 26, 2025 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament will be shining a spotlight on theBritish government’s ongoing cover-up of plans for a US nuclear weapons deployment to Britain.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament will be shining a spotlight on the British government’s ongoing cover-up of plans for a US nuclear weapons deployment to Britain, during a blockade of the main gate of RAF Lakenheath on Saturday, 26 April.
 
Campaigners will be joined by ‘Donald Trump’ and ‘Keir Starmer’ along with replicas of the B61-12 guided nuclear bomb. CND activists are coming from across the country to take part in the blockade of the main gate of the base from 12 noon. 
 
•    Saturday, 26 April
•    Blockade starts at 12 noon 
•    RAF Lakenheath Gate 1, Brandon Road, Suffolk, IP27 9PN
 The blockade takes place on the final day of the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace* peace camp, which has seen a continuous presence of campaigners outside the main gate of the base since 14 April, as well as events highlighting Lakenheath’s role in Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, the role of the military in climate breakdown, and NATO’s nuclear network in Europe.
 
The blockade comes as CND’s lawyers forced the Ministry of Defence to declassify a significant nationwide exemption certificate, issued in March 2021 by former Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, on the grounds of ‘national security’. The document shockingly exempts US Visiting Forces from adhering to British nuclear safety regulations at its bases across Britain, which includes RAF Lakenheath. 
 
CND is calling on PM Keir Starmer to come clean about this cover-up and to publicly announce that US nuclear weapons will not be deployed to Britain. 

CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt said:
 
“Trump’s reckless ‘America First’ agenda is increasing international tensions every day.  Siting US nuclear bombs in Britain will put us on the frontline of any military confrontation. The British government needs to step back from its so-called ‘special relationship’ with the US and refuse to host these deadly bombs.  The US has poured millions of dollars into upgrading the base in preparation for siting new nuclear bombs. Yet the government refuses to come clean. 
 
“RAF Lakenheath has a history of near nuclear accidents which were covered up for decades. The best way to protect people in East Anglia and across the country is to not have nuclear weapons in the first place. With nuclear dangers on the rise, the presence of US nuclear weapons in Britain makes us a target in the event of a nuclear war – with catastrophic consequences. Any accidents involving a nuclear weapon would have a devastating environmental and humanitarian impact which no amount of drilling could prepare us for. CND is calling on everyone who is concerned about this to join us at the blockade on RAF Lakenheath’s main gate this Saturday, 26 April.”
 

April 25, 2025 Posted by | Events, UK | Leave a comment

The Ever-Expanding War Machine

Dismantling the Government While Pumping Up the Pentagon

By William D. Hartung, April 22, 2025 https://tomdispatch.com/the-ever-expanding-war-machine/

Under the guise of efficiency, the Trump administration is taking a sledgehammer to essential programs and agencies that are the backbone of America’s civilian government. The virtual elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and plans to shut down the Department of Education are just the most visible examples of a campaign that includes layoffs of budget experts, public health officials, scientists, and other critical personnel whose work undergirds the daily operations of government and provides the basic services needed by businesses, families, and individuals alike. Many of those services can make the difference between solvency and poverty, health and illness, or even, in some cases, life and death for vulnerable populations. 

The speed with which civilian programs and agencies are being slashed in the second Trump era gives away the true purpose of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In the context of the Musk-Trump regime, “efficiency” is a cover story for a greed-driven ideological campaign to radically reduce the size of government without regard for the human consequences.

So far, the only agency that seems to have escaped the ire of the DOGE is — don’t be shocked! — the Pentagon. After misleading headlines suggested that its topline would be cut by as much as 8% annually for the next five years as part of that supposed efficiency campaign, the real plan was revealed — finding savings in some parts of the Pentagon only to invest whatever money might be saved in — yes! — other military programs without any actual reductions in the department’s overall budget. Then, during a White House meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on April 7th, Trump announced that “we’re going to be approving a budget, and I’m proud to say, actually, the biggest one we’ve ever done for the military . . . $1 trillion. Nobody has seen anything like it.”

So far, cuts to make room for new kinds of military investments have been limited to the firing of civilian Pentagon employees and the dismantling of a number of internal strategy and research departments. Activities that funnel revenue to weapons contractors have barely been touched — hardly surprising given that Musk himself presides over a significant Pentagon contractor, SpaceX.

The legitimacy of his role should, of course, be subject to question. After all, he’s an unelected billionaire with major government contracts who, in recent months, seemed to have garnered more power than the entire cabinet combined. But cabinet members are subject to Senate confirmation, as well as financial disclosure and conflict-of-interest rules. Not Musk, though. Not only hasn’t he been vetted by Congress, but he’s been allowed to maintain his role in SpaceX.

A Hollow Government?

The Trump and Musk hollowing out of the civilian government, while keeping the Pentagon budget at enormously high levels of funding, means the United States is well on its way to becoming the very “garrison state” that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against in the early years of the Cold War. And mind you, all of that’s true before Republican hawks in Congress like Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS), who is seeking $100 billion more in Pentagon spending than its officials have asked for, even act.

What’s at stake, however, goes well beyond how the government spends its money. After all, such decisions are being accompanied by an assault on basic constitutional rights like freedom of speech and a campaign of mass deportations that already includes people with the legal right to remain in the United States. And that’s not to mention the bullying and financial blackmailing of universities, law firms, and major media outlets in an attempt to force them to bow down to the administration’s political preferences.In fact, the first two months of the Trump/Musk administration undoubtedly represent the most blatant power grab by the executive branch in the history of this republic, a move that undermines our ability to preserve, no less expand, the fundamental rights that are supposed to be the guiding lights of American democracy. Those rights have, of course, been violated to one degree or another throughout this country’s history, but never like this. The current crackdown threatens to erase the hard-won victories of the civil rights, women’s rights, labor rights, immigrant rights, and LGBTQ rights movements that had brought this country closer to living up to its professed commitments to freedom, tolerance, and equality.

Continue reading

April 25, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

On Neo-Nazi Influence in Ukraine

The Azov Battalion, which arose during the coup, became a significant force in the war against the Russian-speaking people of the Donbass, who resisted the coup. Its commander, Andriy Biletsky, infamously said Ukraine’s mission is to “lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival … against the Semite-led Untermenschen.”

the Azov backer’s television channel had by this time aired the hit TV show Servant of the People (2015-2019), which catapulted Volodymyr Zelensky to fame and ultimately into the presidency under the new Servant of the People Party. The former actor and comedian’s presidential campaign was bankrolled by Kolomoisky, according to multiple reports.

Zelensky was elected president on the promise of ending the Donbass war. About seven months into his term he traveled to the front line in Donbass to tell Ukrainian troops, where Azov is well-represented, to lay down their arms. Instead he was sent packing. The Kyiv Post 

A short history of neo-Nazism in Ukraine in response to some who say, “There is no evidence that Nazism has substantial influence in Ukraine.” Joe Lauria reports. 

By Joe Lauria, Consortium News, 20 Apr 25

The U.S. relationship with Ukrainian fascists began after the Second World War. During the war, units of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B) took part in the Holocaust, killing at least 100,000 Jews and Poles. 

Mykola Lebed, a top aide to Stepan Bandera, the leader of the fascist OUN-B, was recruited by the C.I.A. after the war, according to a 2010 study by the U.S. National Archives. 

The government study said, “Bandera’s wing (OUN/B) was a militant fascist organization.” Bandera’s closest deputy, Yaroslav Stetsko, said: ““I…fully appreciate the undeniably harmful and hostile role of the Jews, who are helping Moscow to enslave Ukraine…. I therefore support the destruction of the Jews and the expedience of bringing German methods of exterminating Jewry to Ukraine….”

The study says: “At a July 6, 1941, meeting in Lwów, Bandera loyalists determined that Jews ‘have to be treated harshly…. We must finish them off…. Regarding the Jews, we will adopt any methods that lead to their destruction.’”

Lebed himself proposed to “’cleanse the entire revolutionary territory of the Polish population,’ so that a resurgent Polish state would not claim the region as in 1918.” Lebed was the “foreign minister” of a Banderite government in exile, but he later broke with Bandera for acting as a dictator. The U.S. Army Counterintelligence Corps termed Bandera “extremely dangerous” yet said he was “looked upon as the spiritual and national hero of all Ukrainians….”

The C.I.A. was not interested in working with Bandera, pages 81-82 of the report say, but the British MI6 was. “MI6 argued, Bandera’s group was ‘the strongest Ukrainian organization abroad, is deemed competent to train party cadres, [and] build a morally and politically healthy organization….’”  An early 1954 MI6 summary noted that, “the operational aspect of this [British] collaboration [with Bandera] was developing satisfactorily. Gradually a more complete control was obtained over infiltration operations …

Britain ended its collaboration with Bandera in 1954. West German intelligence, under former Nazi intelligence chief Reinhard Gehlen, then worked with Bandera, who was eventually assassinated with cyanide dust by the KGB in Munich in 1959.

Instead of Bandera, the C.I.A. was interested in Lebed, despite his fascist background. They set him up in an office in New York City from which he directed sabotage and propaganda operations on the agency’s behalf inside Ukraine against the Soviet Union.  The U.S. government study says:

“CIA operations with these Ukrainians began in 1948 under the cryptonym CARTEL, soon changed to AERODYNAMIC. … Lebed relocated to New York and acquired permanent resident status, then U.S. citizenship. It kept him safe from assassination, allowed him to speak to Ukrainian émigré groups, and permitted him to return to the United States after operational trips to Europe. Once in the United States, Lebed was the CIA’s chief contact for AERODYNAMIC. CIA handlers pointed to his ‘cunning character,’ his ‘relations with the Gestapo and … Gestapo training,’ [and] the fact that he was ‘a very ruthless operator.’”

The C.I.A. worked with Lebed on sabotage and pro-Ukrainian nationalist propaganda operations inside Ukraine until Ukraine’s independence in 1991. “Mykola Lebed’s relationship with the CIA lasted the entire length of the Cold War,” the study says. “While most CIA operations involving wartime perpetrators backfired, Lebed’s operations augmented the fundamental instability of the Soviet Union.” 

Bandera Revival

The U.S. thus covertly kept Ukrainian fascist ideas alive inside Ukraine until at least Ukrainian independence was achieved. “Mykola Lebed, Bandera’s wartime chief in Ukraine, died in 1998. He is buried in New Jersey, and his papers are located at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University,” the U.S. National Archives study says.  

The successor organization to the OUN-B in the United States did not die with him, however.  It had been renamed the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), according to the International Business Times (IBT).

“By the mid-1980s, the Reagan administration was honeycombed with UCCA members. Reagan personally welcomed [Yaroslav] Stetsko, the Banderist leader who oversaw the massacre of 7,000 Jews in Lviv, in the White House in 1983,” IBT reported.  “Following the demise of [Viktor] Yanukovich’s regime [in 2014], the UCCA helped organise rallies in cities across the US in support of the EuroMaidan protests,” it reported.

That is a direct link between Maidan and WWII-era Ukrainian fascism.

Despite the U.S. favoring the less extreme Lebed over Bandera, the latter has remained the more inspiring figure in Ukraine.

In 1991, the first year of Ukraine’s independence, the neo-fascist Social National Party, later Svoboda Party, was formed, tracing its provenance directly to Bandera. It had a street named after Bandera in Liviv, and tried to name the city’s airport after him. (Svoboda won 10 percent of the Rada’s seats in 2012 before the coup and before Sen. John McCain and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland appeared with Svoboda’s leader the following year.)

In 2010, pro-Western Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko declared Bandera a Hero of Ukraine, a status reversed by President Viktor Yanukovych, who was overthrown with the help of Ukrainian neo-Nazis in 2014. 

More than 50 monuments, busts and museums commemorating Bandera have been erected in Ukraine, two-thirds of which have been built since 2005, the year the pro-American Yuschenko was elected. A Swiss academic study says:


“On January 13, 2011, the L’vivs’ka Oblast’ Council, meeting at an extraordinary session next to the Bandera monument in L’viv, reacted to the abrogation [skasuvannya] of Viktor Yushchenko’s order about naming Stepan Bandera a ‘Hero of Ukraine’ by affirming that ‘for millions of Ukrainians Bandera was and remains a Ukrainian Hero notwithstanding pitiable and worthless decisions of the courts’ and declaring its intention to rename ‘Stepan Bandera Street’ as ‘Hero of Ukraine Stepan Bandera Street.’”

Torchlit parades behind Bandera’s portrait are common in Ukrainian cities, particularly on Jan. 1, his birthday, including this year

Mainstream on Neo-Nazis

From the start of the 2013-2014 events in Ukraine, Consortium News founder Robert Parry and other writers began providing the evidence NewsGuard, which bills itself as a news-rating agency, says doesn’t exist. Parry began reporting extensively on the coup and the influential role of Ukraine’s neo-Nazis. At the time, corporate media also reported on the essential part neo-Nazis played in the coup. [See: ROBERT PARRY: Ukraine’s Inconvenient Neo-Nazis]

As The New York Times reported, the neo-Nazi group, Right Sector, had the key role in the violent ouster of Yanukovych. The role of neo-fascist groups in the uprising and its influence on Ukrainian society was well reported by mainstream media outlets at the time.  

The BBC, the NYT, the Daily Telegraph and CNN all reported on Right Sector, C14 and other extremists’ role in the overthrow of Yanukovych. The BBC ran this report a week after his ouster:

After the coup a number of ministers in the new government came from neo-fascist parties.  NBC News (100 percent NewsGuard rating) reported in March 2014: “Svoboda, which means ‘Freedom,’ was given almost a quarter of the Cabinet positions in the interim government formed after the ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych in February.”

Svoboda’s leader, Tyahnybok, whom McCain and Nuland stood on stage with, once called for the liberation of Ukraine from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” The International Business Times (82.5 percent) reported:

“In 2005 Tyahnybok signed an open letter to then Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko urging him to ban all Jewish organisations, including the Anti-Defamation League, which he claimed carried out ‘criminal activities [of] organised Jewry’, ultimately aimed at the genocide of the Ukrainian people.”

Before McCain and Nuland embraced Tyahnybok and his social national party, it was condemned by the European Parliament, which said in 2012:

Continue reading

April 25, 2025 Posted by | history, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine | Leave a comment

‘I guarded Britain’s nuclear sites – our security can’t cope with new mini reactors’

mini reactors do not pose miniature hazards. “On security, size doesn’t matter. When it comes to the fuel and the byproducts, they are equally dangerous.”

“You get less energy, but you’re still going to have exactly the same security concerns,” says Okuhara. “How enthusiastic is a site operator going to be paying for security when that’s eating into their bottom line?”

INTERVIEW . Matthew Okuhara, a former armed officer with the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, fears that current security plans will be inadequate to protect the UK’s next generation of nuclear power plants..

Rob Hastings, Special Projects Editor , April 22, 2025

Sometimes he would patrol rural lanes on foot, carrying his assault rifle, looking out for any terrorists hiding in the countryside. On other assignments he would man machine guns mounted on armoured ships, watching for any sign of hostile vessels coming his way. Or he would drive in weapons-laden road convoys, monitoring potential threats from vehicles.

While serving as an armed officer with the Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC), Matt Okuhara saw every aspect of how the UK’s nuclear power stations and their radioactive fuel are protected from terrorists.

He spent years escorting the transport of uranium fuel to and from plants, which would be planned for months in advance. “Nuclear material is at its most vulnerable when it’s in transit,” he explains. “You’ve got to move it as secretly as possible.”

Working for the specialist force, Okuhara always felt confident the country’s civil nuclear programme was in safe hands. “Any threat has been detected long before it’s been able to cause any problems,” he says.

However, he believes the situation is “definitely more dangerous now” than when he was serving. Terrorism has become more advanced and there are new fears about so-called hybrid warfare from geopolitical adversaries including Russia.

“You don’t have to be a James Bond super-villain to realise where the vulnerable parts of a site are. You can just look on Google Maps and say, ‘We’ll attack that bit,’ especially now we’ve got drones. The threat has really shot up.”

With new technology also on the horizon, he believes the nuclear industry must face up to big security questions.

The CNC currently guards just a handful of sites, all in relatively remote locations. But experts believe the Government’s planned array of cutting-edge mini nuclear power stations could lead to a “proliferation” of reactors around the country, potentially much closer to towns and cities. This may also lead to their fuel being transported more often.

Small modular reactors (SMRs) are seen as an essential source of green energy for the UK in decades to come. Proponents say they will be quicker and cheaper to build than conventional plants, because they will be largely prefabricated.

But security experts are worried about the complex implications for how SMRs will be policed and protected, as The i Paper revealed this week. Analysts say that thousands more armed officers would have to be recruited, co-ordination with local police would have to be strengthened, and a new national infrastructure force may even have to be created.

Okuhara shares these concerns. “I don’t think the CNC’s current policing model would be able to cope with any more sites,” he says. “The generating sites, they’re kept well away from the public for good reasons.

“One, they’re easier to protect. And two, if something goes wrong, the contingency engineers have got some space to work with.”

What is the Civil Nuclear Constabulary?

  • The CNC is a specialist armed force with about 1,600 officers and staff. It was created in 2005 to guard civil nuclear sites and material.
  • “The CNC will deter any attacker whose intent is the theft, sabotage or destruction of nuclear material, whether static or in transit, or the sabotage of high consequence facilities,” its web page explains.
  • It adds: “If an attack occurs, CNC will defend that material and those facilities and deny access to them. If material is seized or high consequence facilities are compromised, the CNC will recover control of those facilities and regain custody of the material.”

New small reactors, same big risks 

After fighting in the Iraq War with British infantry, Okuhara joined the CNC in 2006 and served for six years. He describes how he helped to protect Gloucestershire’s Oldbury Power Station – which is now undergoing decommissioning – in his new book, Nuclear Copper. “Based within the high metal fences and fortress-like security measures of the power station, there was a heavily armed police presence on duty at any given time,” he writes.

To deter and prevent terrorism, the team patrolled surrounding roads and villages, wearing body armour and carrying G36C assault rifles. They benefited from the rural location by building relationships with local farmers and villagers, who “could recognise an unfamiliar car or person instantly” and knew to inform officers.

Rules currently state that nuclear power stations can only be placed in “semi-urban” settings. A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero insists: “All new nuclear projects, including SMRs, are prevented from being built in densely populated areas.” The Government is loosening restrictions on them being built in the countryside.

But a majority of industry figures believe that “new nuclear technologies could be safely located closer to densely populated areas,” according to an official consultation paper.

The Whitehall document says that the semi-urban restriction will be reviewed every five years “to ensure it remains relevant and effective,” and the Government is “open to revising” this rule in future……………………….

The nuclear industry argues that SMRs will be small enough to build in urban settings, but Okuhara argues this would rob officers of a key advantage. “An intervention zone around a site gives you plenty of space where you can detect things,” he explains.

And he underlines that mini reactors do not pose miniature hazards. “On security, size doesn’t matter. When it comes to the fuel and the byproducts, they are equally dangerous.”

At the moment, energy companies cover much of the CNC’s costs. But having many smaller sites is likely to make security operations proportionately more expensive.

He continues: “If you think about the largest sites in the UK, places like Sellafield or Dounreay, they’ve got hundreds of officers. There are plenty of people out on patrol. Are these SMRs going to be given sufficient resources? Or are the companies going to be saying: ‘It’s a small reactor, we don’t need as many bodies on the ground’?”

The Government offers reassurance that any SMR will “need to have the highest levels of security in place.” A spokesperson said: “All operators are answerable to a robust and independent regulator – the Office for Nuclear Regulation – which must approve their security plan covering physical, personnel and cyber security.” The CNC declined to comment.

Vetting failures 

If potentially thousands more armed officers must be recruited to guard SMRs, the CNC must improve its vetting procedures. That much is clear because of one man: Wayne Couzens.

Couzens’ name became infamous after he raped and murdered Sarah Everard in Surrey in 2021, having used his Metropolitan Police ID to falsely arrest her.

Couzens had previously been an authorised firearms officer with the CNC, serving at Sellafield and Dungeness. He had passed the CNC’s vetting procedures in 2011 despite previously being accused of numerous sexual offences, including harassment, assault and indecent exposure. He transferred to the Met in 2018.

The CNC’s Chief Constable, Simon Chesterman, apologised “unreservedly” on behalf of the force in 2024, “for the part CNC played in his entry as a full-time police officer.”………………………………………………

No matter whether they’re protecting groundbreaking SMRs, or conventional nuclear sites, or convoys of radioactive fuel, “every officer in the CNC should have the top level of vetting,” he says. “They’ve got access to firearms. They can access some of the most toxic material that has ever existed.”

It’s a reminder that when it comes to nuclear security, sometimes the biggest threats can come from insiders.

Nuclear Copper: The Secret World of Nuclear Policing’ by Matt Okuhara is out now (£22.99, Amberley Publishing) @robhastings.bsky.social https://inews.co.uk/news/crime/i-guarded-britains-nuclear-sites-security-mini-reactors-3649782

April 25, 2025 Posted by | safety, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment