How to get filthy rich via Small Modular Nuclear Reactors.

Well, I hasten to warn you that you need to be already rich, for this to work. It has already worked for some alert rich investors. What they did was – they noted the soaring share prices of small nuclear reactor companies, a soaring that was accompanied by an awful lot of media hype.
And then they noted some salient facts about those companies – for example:
OKLO – has a market cap of $8 billion, and its shares jumped more than 12% on Aug. 25 Sounds great doesn’t it? BUT:
- OKLO had a net loss of $81.6 million in the second quarter this year.
- It went public through a SPAC (special purpose acquisition company) in 2025.
- It generates no commercial energy income today.
- Its first Small Modular Reactor (SMR), the Aurora Powerhouse, isn’t expected to enter commercial operation for years.
- Oklo is incurring tens of millions in operating losses annually.
- It is $78.6 million in debt, so interest and loan payments eat into its earnings.
- OKLO is still in discussions with the regulator NRC, regarding the fuel, high-assay low-enriched uranium, or HALEU, and other supply chain issues.
Similarly, stocks of both NuScale Power, and Nano Nuclear have soared over the past year. Yet both are making little or no money, and both have suffered operational losses over this year. NuScale is now facing a class action by investors who claim that the company misrepresented the prospects for small nuclear reactors.
So – what have the smart rich investors done? Basically, they’ve gambled on these stocks being over-priced, and soon to go down. Investment strategies are not my strong point, but it seems that short selling is one hedge fund strategy. So these clever investors, noting the unsustainable rise in share prices, borrow shares and soon sell them at the inflated price, and can buy them back later as the price plunges down.
So , it’s estimated that investors made over $2 Billion over the past months by short selling shares in these three small nuclear reactor companies – OKLO, NuScale, and Nano Nuclear.
The rage for investing in SMRs is still on, as the world is gripped by the mania for AI hyperscalers. (AI hyperscalers are companies investing grotesque amounts of money in building data centres world-wide)
Neither the hyperscalers nor the small reactor companies are actually making money at present. But the hype is all-consuming.
This is the prevailing hype –
The AI Boom Is Making Nuclear Power Bankable Again – America’s nuclear power landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation, driven by the immense energy needs of artificial intelligence. Tech giants like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta are directly financing nuclear projects, committing billions to secure nearly 10 gigawatts of capacity. ………..
Almost everything tech companies are funding—Meta, Amazon, most of Google’s bets—is small modular reactors: compact designs.
Will AI kickstart a new age of nuclear power? IAEA Director General Manuel Grossi believes that the nuclear industry is destined to be the energy partner of the AI revolution. “Only nuclear energy can meet the five needs of low-carbon power generation, round-the-clock reliability, ultra-high power density, grid stability and true scalability”……………………..the IAEA is working closely with regulators and the industry to make them a viable proposition and we could soon be seeing large numbers of small reactors being deployed to meet the demand.
So- we have the Trumpian process in the USA, of the weakening of radiation and safety regulation of nuclear reactors, and of the government already funding 8 SMR companies.
With the claim that nuclear power combats climate change, with the accepted belief in the necessity for AI hyperscale, governments, academia, the corporate media, and the UN all promote this new marriage of nuclear and Big Tech. So – all the stars are aligned for the rise and rise of small nuclear reactors.

Incidentally, don’t look to the UN, the World Health Organisation (WHO)or anyone like that to cry foul. I think that most people have forgotten, if they ever knew it , but the 1959 agreement between the WHO and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) effectively prevents the WHO from criticising things nuclear.
One important part – “Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement.”

And, in this time of vulnerability of nuclear sites, to war and terrorism, you wonder how Rafael Grossi, Director of the IAEA reconciles his conflicting duties, that of promoting nuclear power and of assuring of its safety.
But I digress. We are talking about money, and how to get rich through investing in small nuclear reactors. Well, that is still a goer. But perhaps you’d better be quick, as investment advisors are now dithering about the share price of commercial SMR companies, even though the Big Tech- SMR teams are apparently still booming.
However, the global nuclear lobby is now turning its attention to military microreactors, so there’s hope for future stock market gains as governments splurge tax-payers money into companies in that area.
Expert Comment: New nuclear capacity won’t fix today’s energy problems




Dr Bettina Wittneben, Lecturer in Management at Oxford’s Saïd Business School and Associate Fellow at Pembroke College and the School of Geography and the Environment, sets out four risks that policymakers should weigh before committing to new nuclear capacity.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2026-08-20-expert-comment-new-nuclear-capacity-wont-fix-todays-energy-problems
The Fukushima nuclear disaster on 11 March 2011, triggered by a tsunami and leading to multiple reactor meltdowns, shook confidence in nuclear safety well beyond Japan. In Germany, it was a turning point: Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government suspended nuclear power’s earlier lifetime extensions and ultimately pursued a phase out, with broad parliamentary support.
Fast forward to today, and in parts of Europe, nuclear power is being re-cast as the answer to decarbonisation and energy insecurity, as highlighted by the Israel/US-Iran conflict. Some German politicians went so far as to call the country’s decision to end nuclear power a mistake.
This is a useful reminder that nuclear policy is not only about engineering and economics; it is also about political legitimacy and how much risk the public is willing to accept.
But despite recent enthusiasm for nuclear power, a close examination shows that the risks of increasing nuclear capacity are high. Policy makers and the public need to consider four types of risk: climate, security, capacity and financial risks.
Climate risk: Nuclear power plants are not climate resilient
As Europe experiences climate impacts such as heatwaves and drought, several nuclear power plants have had to be at least partially shut down to accommodate low water levels and risks to aquatic life in natural water systems. When a nuclear plant is shut down, it continues to draw on electricity generated elsewhere to avoid a meltdown.
Given that global heating is a reality today, nuclear power generation is no longer a viable long-term option in hotter temperatures and drier climates. In Britain, we have had to come to terms with the fact that an approaching wildfire could have catastrophic consequences for a nuclear power plant.
The strategic point for policymakers is straightforward: If the climate is changing how we operate existing plants, it should also shape the way we assess the benefits of new build.
Nuclear power is sometimes hailed as a climate mitigation instrument as it is low carbon at the point of generation. However, the bulky concrete structures mean that it has a large amount of embodied carbon and, of course, it is not a renewable energy as it requires the mining of uranium, bringing with it carbon costs in terms of extraction and transport. Nuclear waste disposal and decommissioning must also be factored into the carbon budget of nuclear energy generation.
Security risk: Nuclear power poses real security risks
As we have seen in Ukraine and now also in the UAE, nuclear power plants are favoured sites for drone and other attacks and can be the scene of intense battles. A small drone exploding on the radiation shield of the ill-fated Chernobyl nuclear reactor caused major global concern as repairs to this vital safety structure are risky, and the associated costs of maintaining safety are extremely high.
Capacity risk: Nuclear power contributes to grid overload during electricity generation peaks
For the past decade, energy experts have insisted that, as consumers of solar and wind-generated electricity, we need to be concerned about the times when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow, referred to as Dunkelflaute (dunkel=dark, flaute=lull). How do we keep the lights on and the economy whirling away during these dark, windless times? This is also the narrative of fossil fuel advocates, who present fossil gas as the saviour of the baseload, or the electricity that is available when renewables fall short. Fossil fuel sceptics point instead to nuclear power as a reliable baseload technology.
Making decisions based on Dunkelflaute anxiety is no longer rational, however. With renewables rapidly expanding – driven by low prices and the need for energy independence – grids are facing the opposite problem: energy surplus. For example, in May 2025 Germany experienced negative electricity prices on 21 days of the month. These occurrences resulted from the Hellbrise (hell=bright, brise=breeze): a situation where wind and solar generated more electricity than national demand.
In many European countries national grids cannot cope with these peaks of production meaning that electricity is either wasted or diverted if it cannot be stored. Nuclear power plants, which are slow and costly to turn off, only amplify our grids’ Hellbrise challenge.
Financial risk: Nuclear power generation remains very costly
Back in 2011, the Fukushima accident turned the public against nuclear power in Germany. Over the past decade, the nuclear industry has reeled from this. The solution from this industry is to build smaller, modular reactors, with the aim of diminishing risks and reducing costs via economies of scale.
Unfortunately, this reasoning is flawed. Nuclear waste is expensive to store safely, and engineers continue to struggle to identify long-term waste disposal sites.
Decommissioning costs must be factored into the financing of the power plant as it is highly expensive to dispose of the large concrete buildings and remaining radioactive materials. Otherwise, decommissioning and long-term waste storage falls to the taxpayer of the future.
Back in 2011, the Fukushima accident turned the public against nuclear power in Germany. Over the past decade, the nuclear industry has reeled from this. The solution from this industry is to build smaller, modular reactors, with the aim of diminishing risks and reducing costs via economies of scale.
Unfortunately, this reasoning is flawed. Nuclear waste is expensive to store safely, and engineers continue to struggle to identify long-term waste disposal sites.
Decommissioning costs must be factored into the financing of the power plant as it is highly expensive to dispose of the large concrete buildings and remaining radioactive materials. Otherwise, decommissioning and long-term waste storage falls to the taxpayer of the future.
In addition, there are other financial costs and risks: acts of war are still entirely possible and exceedingly dangerous; uranium mining commits providers to continued social and environmental impacts; renewables remain more competitive on cost.
Given the risks of nuclear power, there are better energy solutions
Nuclear power production does not help us cope with the challenge emerging from our power grids and the future of electricity production – the Hellbrise.
Instead, we should focus on improving flexibility of grids and energy demand, increasing energy efficiency, and addressing the technical challenges of energy storage. This strategy will more effectively support economies than nuclear power ever could.
Nuclearelectrica CEO steps down amid ‘shortcomings’ in 462 MW Doicești (NuScale) SMR project

August 26, 2026, by Vladimir Berbatović,
https://balkangreenenergynews.com/nuclearelectrica-ceo-steps-down-amid-shortcomings-in-462-mw-doicesti-smr-project/
Cosmin Ghiță, CEO of Romania’s state-controlled nuclear power producer Nuclearelectrica, has resigned amid “shortcomings” related to the joint venture developing a 462 MW small modular reactor (SMR) project in Doicești, as well as the project itself. Ghiță’s resignation comes after a government body identified the issues and recommended determining the accountability of Nuclearelectrica’s top executives and other individuals.
Last month, Acting Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan’s control body said that it had identified several shortcomings related to Nuclearelectrica’s partnership with state-owned energy company Nova Power&Gas in a joint venture called RoPower Nuclear, established to develop the nuclear power plant in Doicești using US-based NuScale’s SMR technology, according to Profit.ro.
The body said that it had also identified shortcomings related to the Doicești project itself, and it recommended “an analysis of the possibility of holding accountable” the top people of Nuclearelectrica and other individuals.
Shortcomings have also been identified concerning the SMR project itself
Nuclearelectrica has rejected the findings.
The Ministry of Energy said it “respects” the resignation and that it had been informed the CEO’s decision came “in the context of a new professional opportunity.”
According to government spokesperson Ioana Dogioiu, Ghiță’s 90-day notice period may be shortened by mutual agreement, after which a selection process for a new CEO will take place.
Ghiță has been at the helm of Nuclearelectrica for nearly nine years, since September 2017. He previously served as advisor to Romania’s prime minister on energy security and energy policies, according to Nuclearelectrica’s website.
The Ministry of Energy also said that Nuclearelectrica and its Cernavodă nuclear power plant continue to operate as usual and that it will take all necessary steps to maintain the company’s stability and continuity.
Cernavodă, Romania’s only nuclear power plant, has been offline since August 13. The plant, which normally generates about 20% of Romania’s electricity, has been unable to ensure enough reactor cooling water from the Danube due to heatwaves and drought.
You’re A Terrorist If You Resist Genocide Or Mass Surveillance, And Other Notes
Caitlin Johnstone, Aug 28, 2026
The US has joined the UK in adding the activist group Palestine Action to its list of designated terrorist organizations.
The UK proscribing Palestine Action was already arguably the most insane attack on free speech in recent western history, and now it’s the official position of the US government as well. Western support for Israel is poisoning our entire civilization.
The US has also made the unprecedented move of adding the Italian tech support collective Autistici/Inventati to its list of banned terrorist groups, not because they’ve been accused of any crimes, but explicitly because the company allows people to communicate with each other while staying “anonymous, untraceable, and beyond the reach of the law.” Americans are now strictly forbidden from any transactions with the banned company.
In this dystopia, mass surveillance is now so normalized that you can be designated a terrorist for helping people avoid being surveilled.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has been issuing statements thanking Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli President Isaac Herzog for their support, gushing about the “bilateral cooperation, trade partnerships, and strong people-to-people bonds” between the two countries.
These statements have been causing a lot of cognitive dissonance for a particularly annoying category of western progressive. You know the type. The ones who say both “Slava Ukraini” and “Free Palestine” and act like cheerleading for a NATO proxy war is an act of anti-imperialist resistance.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent just tweeted, “As the Iranian people struggle to afford basic necessities, the corrupt regime continues to squander enormous sums abroad. Instead of funneling billions of dollars to its terrorist proxies, the regime should spend that money for its people.”
Which is just hilarious, given what country this is coming from.
It’s so funny that US officials keep making this criticism of Iran. The United States is literally the single most egregious offender on the planet when it comes to spending obscene amounts of money on militarism and proxy warfare overseas while its own people struggle to afford basic necessities. I myself have built an entire career on slamming the United States for doing precisely this.
Saying you’re both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel is nonsensical.
I have a friend who was savagely raped by a guy in her social circle, and her friends told her they didn’t want to take sides about it because they valued their friendship with both her AND her rapist.
That’s what saying “I’m both pro-Palestine AND pro-Israel” reminds me of.
Europeans stopped fighting constant wars with each other like ten seconds ago and yet the average white westerner will tell you “the middle east has always been at war so all the bloodshed there is an unsolvable dilemma”. The only reason the middle east didn’t join the rest of the world in entering into a period of relative peace and stability after the second world war is because the west created Israel right after WWII and has been aggressively destabilizing and abusing the region ever since.
❖
AI isn’t going to save us. Techno utopianism only sounds reasonable when you don’t know the tech is run by an alliance of narcissistic billionaires and psychopathic government agencies who have no interest in creating a better world and would happily incinerate billions of people to obtain more money and power.
Europeans stopped fighting constant wars with each other like ten seconds ago and yet the average white westerner will tell you “the middle east has always been at war so all the bloodshed there is an unsolvable dilemma”. The only reason the middle east didn’t join the rest of the world in entering into a period of relative peace and stability after the second world war is because the west created Israel right after WWII and has been aggressively destabilizing and abusing the region ever since.
❖
AI isn’t going to save us. Techno utopianism only sounds reasonable when you don’t know the tech is run by an alliance of narcissistic billionaires and psychopathic government agencies who have no interest in creating a better world and would happily incinerate billions of people to obtain more money and power.
The latest wave of Hasan Piker hysteria shows that there is nothing these freaks won’t pretend to believe in order to stomp out criticism of Israel and shut down all leftward movement in US politics. The guy made the completely obvious and indisputable observation that Jews are endangered by the Zionist tactic of painting all Jews as a monolith who support Israel, and now the top Democrats in Washington are pretending to believe he said Jewish people deserve to be attacked. The way they’re all just lining up behind a narrative they all know is false has got to be one of the most nakedly cynical uses of this smear I’ve ever seen employed.
Writing about “antisemitism” smears in the year 2026 is so tedious, because everyone already knows this tactic is bullshit and everything worth saying about it has already been said. But it really is fascinating how they’re looking us right in the eye and telling us they’re going to keep using this weapon to slash at the left until the blade has completely broken rather than simply espousing popular policies that make the world a better place.
The push to clear nuclear power’s waste-disposal hurdle

The technical issues have mostly been solved, but the long-term potential peril of radioactive material has made it difficult to find politically acceptable sites.
Nature, By Brian Owens, 26 August 2026
Inside a nondescript warehouse in an industrial park in Oakville, Canada, sits a squat forklift truck that requires no driver. When activated by its remote operator, the vehicle trundles to a stack of huge clay blocks, each weighing 8,000 kilograms, and carries them into a narrow rock tunnel. Another custom-built machine then fills the spaces around the blocks with crumbled clay.
Each block is made of bentonite clay and encases a copper-coated steel container built to hold spent fuel from a nuclear reactor. The blocks will be sealed behind yet more clay and concrete in tunnels deep underground, and the radioactive material inside will be left to slowly decay over thousands of years.
Or it would be, if there were any nuclear waste stored on-site. The warehouse is a test facility for the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO), the group in Toronto, Canada, that is responsible for dealing with the long-term storage of the country’s nuclear waste. The life-sized mock-up, complete with simulated rock tiling, enables Peter Keech, manager of engineered barrier science at the NWMO, and his colleagues to test technologies that will be used to store the waste and to demonstrate the storage process to the public.
The metal fuel containers, for example, are designed to withstand the pressure of being buried under a 3-kilometre-thick glacier, should the next ice age arrive before the radiation has decayed fully. But Keech and his team take the testing much further, subjecting several canisters to crushing forces equivalent to being more than 6 km under the ocean. The containers looked like toothpaste tubes that had been squeezed in the middle — but they were still fully sealed.
“These are much higher forces than they will ever see in the repository, but we take it to failure to understand the materials,” says Keech. “And even in failure it still offers containment.”
Canada’s real waste repository will be built roughly 1,600 km to the northwest of the test facility, hosted by the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and the town of Ignace. It is buried some 750 metres under the hard rock of the Canadian Shield, which was once the base of a vast mountain range. When the facility opens in around 2040, its 80–100 km of tunnels will be capable of storing the nearly 6 million bundles of spent fuel that will be produced by Canada’s four nuclear-power plants over their operational lives, isolating the waste from people and the environment until long after the material’s radiation levels return to that of natural uranium.
World tour
Almost every country with a nuclear-power industry is working on some variation of this plan. Finland’s is the most advanced: its Onkalo repository on the country’s west coast is expected to open later this year.
The storage facility is built 430 metres below ground in a hard crystalline bedrock, and will eventually consist of about 50 km of tunnels that can store around 6,500 tonnes of spent uranium fuel, says Linda Kumpula, a nuclear-safety engineer at Finland’s Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment in Espoo.
A site in Sweden, also built into hard crystalline rock, is expecting to begin accepting radioactive waste in the 2030s. France and Switzerland have each selected a site in natural clay formations and are in the process of gaining regulatory approval. And in December 2025, China completed the first stage of construction for its underground laboratory in the Gobi Desert, a facility that will test the area’s suitability for long-term waste storage.
In the United States, plans for a spent-fuel repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada have been a political hot potato for decades, and the project is currently stalled. But the nation does already have one permanent facility: the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, a repository for radioactive waste from the country’s nuclear-weapons programme that is located in salt caverns beneath New Mexico’s desert. That facility has been a major source of learning for other countries, says Keech — particularly how to protect communities when transporting waste to the site and how to minimize the time the material spends on the surface when it arrives.
These issues and other technical ones, such as how best to build a deep geological repository, have now mostly been resolved. “We’ve been working on this for a long time and it is no longer a major technical or scientific challenge,” says Stefan Mayer, team leader of radioactive waste disposal at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

The real challenge is political and social. “You have to find a site that’s technically suitable, but you also need a site that is hosted by a community that is willing,” says Allison Macfarlane, a geologist at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, and former chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “It turns out that the latter problem is harder than the former.”
Types of waste
Waste from nuclear plants generally falls into four categories: materials with very low, low, intermediate and high levels of radioactivity.
Very-low-level and low-level waste make up most radioactive waste — about 95%. Very-low-level waste consists of the soil, concrete and rubble generated when a nuclear plant is decommissioned. Low-level waste is made up of used protective equipment and other lightly contaminated materials from the plant. Both types can be disposed of in near-surface secure facilities and need to be isolated for several hundred years.
Intermediate-level waste consists mainly of metal parts of the reactor that are contaminated with radiation. These metallic isotopes are so concentrated and long-lived that the material remains radioactive for thousands of years and cannot be disposed of near the surface — it needs to be isolated underground.
The biggest issue is the high-level waste. This is the spent nuclear fuel and its containers, as well as the waste from the reprocessing of spent fuel that some countries do to extend their fuel supplies. By volume, it represents just 3% of the waste generated by a power plant, but it is responsible for 95% of the radioactivity. And it remains radioactive for hundreds of thousands or even millions of years — longer than any human civilization has yet lasted. Because of the waste’s longevity, it must be safely isolated deep underground where it cannot contaminate the ecosystem or harm future generations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Another important adjustment for the United States would be to change who is responsible for dealing with the waste. Instead of the Department of Energy, with its revolving door of politically appointed leaders, Macfarlane thinks that it should be an independent organization: either a government agency similar to New York’s port authority or an industry-led group such as Canada’s NWMO.
“You need more of a corporate structure with leadership that’s going to be there a long time, because this is a slow process,” Macfarlane says. “It takes decades to do properly.”
This was one of the main recommendations in 2012 of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which Macfarlane took part in. But so far there has been no movement on the issue.
The United States, Macfarlane says, should not be afraid to admit defeat on Yucca Mountain and start again with a more consent-based process. “I think the US has failed and they just have to acknowledge that — and decide they’re going to try again,” she says.
The long timelines involved in dealing with nuclear waste make it tempting to continually kick the can down the road and trust that future generations will eventually find a solution. But Macfarlane is adamant that it is the responsibility of people today to at least get the ball rolling.
“It’s imperative that we do something sooner rather than later,” she says. “I can tell you one thing with 100% certainty: if we do nothing, this material will get into the environment and will harm humans in the future.”
‘Environmental violence’: inside the fight to save indigenous land from becoming a nuclear dumping ground
Andrew Lawrence, Tue 25 Aug 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/aug/25/to-use-a-mountain-documentary-interview
Nuclear energy was supposed to be our salvation, humanity’s chance to retool technology first conceived as a weapon of mass destruction into an engine of limitless prosperity. But even as the industry touted nuclear fission as an economic game-changer (never mind the astronomical startup costs), a safety paragon (never mind the spills at Chornobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima) and harmless fodder for an American comedy institution (never mind that glowing rod on Homer’s back or the three-eyed fish), there was no getting around the matter of what to do with all the toxic waste (never mind nuclear’s claimed green credentials).
The stagnant state of that dirty business brought Casey Carter, the director of the new avant-garde documentary called To Use a Mountain, back to his interview with a Washington state farmer who was part of a class-action lawsuit against the government over the release of radioactive material from the Hanford nuclear reservation – site of the world’s first full-scale plutonium production reactor. The farmer’s words still echo, despite ultimately being cut to fit the film’s 90-minute runtime. “He joked that nuclear power is the only faith-based energy because everyone always asks, ‘Do you believe in it?’” Carter says. “He was like, ‘You don’t have to believe in solar. It’s just a pretty good idea.’”
To Use a Mountain could exist as a coda to Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer, showing how the Manhattan Project physicist’s fears about nuclear technology’s vast potential for devastation proved more justified than even he could have imagined. In particular, the film trains its lens on the passage of the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act – which, among other things, placed six rural communities across the US in a derby of sorts to become the permanent site for more than 90,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste.
The plan was for the waste to remain isolated for 10,000 years, and that humans would still be around to celebrate the Reagan-era edict as a triumph. But the affected communities are more inclined to believe there may be no one left to parcel out due credit once the waste leaches into groundwater, pollutes the air and contaminates the food chain. Ultimately, Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, about a two-hour drive from Las Vegas, was selected as the nuclear burial site, but after decades of scheming and development, legal challenges and obstruction from activists and prominent politicians such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid, the Yucca Mountain project was halted – leaving the US with no permanent repository for its nuclear waste. (In the meantime, the federal government pays utility companies tens of billions of dollars to hold on to their spent fuel until a place for it opens up.)
Carter’s documentary unspools like an art installation, steeped in mood and texture, as it urges viewers to reckon with the anxious state of play. Gone are the voice-of-God narrator, the talking-head experts and even basic chyrons; the subjects who appear on camera aren’t named until the film’s end credits. Instead, To Use a Mountain papier-maches reams of Department of Energy (DoE) surveys, analyses and internal memos on to contemporary footage of decaying storage sites and interviews with community members who speak to the personal and environmental damage those false starts have wrought. A sound bath that samples from salmon-rich rivers and one-room church worship only serves to further underscore the stakes.
It’s a prevailing sense of doom established in shaky handheld shots that search the sky for danger, then paid off in archival footage of Oppenheimer’s bomb going off beneath desolate US landscapes before giving way to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “I didn’t want to have a traditional journalistic conversation,” says Casey, stressing the importance of humanizing the communities and concerns that the energy department documents treat with clinical distance. “These people were written about, mapped and diagrammed in excruciating detail. The Department of Energy was looking at them through this purely utilitarian lens, just kinda scanning the American landscape and trying to figure out which place was disposable enough.”
Not surprisingly, the Department of Energy disposal list quickly homed in on sparsely populated rural communities that mining and farming industries had left behind. In some cases, those communities were largely made up of marginalized Black and brown people whose claims to the land date back generations. Advocates against the Yucca Mountain site argue that its designation as a DoE nuclear disposal ground disregards a US government treaty obligation to the Western Shoshone tribe. (“The treaty is the supreme law of the land under Article 6, Section 2 of the US Constitution,” Zabarte said in a follow-up email to the Guardian. “The Constitution is not a suggestion. It is law.”) The area’s history of seismic activity is another reason to be wary of Yucca’s structural integrity over the ensuing millennia.
With impressionistic flourish, the film traces the arc of the resistance. Among others, it follows Ian Zabarte – a Shoshone principal who has lost family members to radiation-related diseases connected to the government’s nuclear testing on tribal lands. As he goes from testifying on Capitol Hill as a young man to hiking the desolate area decades later, Zabarte never wavers in his belief that Yucca belongs to the Shoshone, arguing effectively that eminent domain is just racism by another name. “It’s heavy, it’s tragic and unfortunately it’s an all-too-familiar state of affairs,” Carter says. “The amazing thing was having these conversations and really gaining a deeper understanding of the duration, persistence and willpower within these communities.”
In one scene drawn from archival footage from Hanford, which was fully decommissioned in the 1980s and has since been described as “the most contaminated place in the western hemisphere”, the film lowers viewers into a disused storage tank that has been leaking contaminants into the groundwater system and threatening the Columbia River – a lifeline to Portland, Oregon; Boise, Idaho; and scores of communities in between.
“In traveling to these places, you realize each one of them has dealt with issues of environmental violence or racism even prior to being nominated as a potential nuclear waste storage facility,” Carter says. “It’s gut-wrenching to think about people encountering this level of treatment from their government. It really shows how much of this anger exists in many parts of rural America, not just Maga rural America. This film is just a tour of example after example.”
Carter’s stylistic confidence suggests he’s been at this auteur thing for a while. But the truth is, To Use a Mountain is his first attempt at an ambitious, feature-length people’s history. A double major in physics and photography, Carter went to grad school for architecture in hopes of “unifying my left and right brain”, he says. That thirst for scientifically driven aesthetics, combined with formative years spent in the shadow of Oak Ridge national laboratory in east Tennessee, which also figured prominently in the Manhattan Project, compelled Carter to devote six years to retracing the US government’s slog-footed effort to bury its nuclear shame. In hindsight, there’s no missing those signatures in the CAD images Carter uses to depict Yucca Mountain and other disposal-site candidates.
Doubtless, some audiences may be tempted to return the concerns raised in To Use a Mountain to the back burner – to file it under “not my problem” because the energy department hasn’t sized up their community or their local power plant hasn’t been designated a Superfund site yet. Never mind that just last month, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah were named as finalists for “nuclear lifecycle innovation campuses” – federal sites that would handle spent fuel and waste management. The DoE plans to pick three host states by the end of this year. Oppenheimer’s existential dread is roaring back to the fore.
If anything, Carter’s film is a reminder of how our unsolved nuclear problem connects to all the other existential threats that keep us doomscrolling through the night and calling on a higher power – God? The government? – to restore our faith that humanity can outlive the toxic waste it leaves behind. “When I started this film in the summer of 2018, Covid hadn’t happened,” Carter says. “War in Ukraine, Gaza and Iran hadn’t happened. Artificial intelligence hadn’t been invented yet. The big tech companies are advocating for microreactors to power datacenters. Even by taking this methodological approach to making the film, it’s still opened up to this kaleidoscope of impacts that touches on military history, the environmental impacts and human psychology and fear. There’s just a sprawling network of consequences associated with this material.”
To Use a Mountain is out in the US now with UK and Australia release dates to follow
125 countries legally bound to arrest Netanyahu as ICC warrant looms over Israeli PM: Report

Wednesday, 26 August 2026, https://www.presstv.co.uk/Detail/2026/08/26/775092/125-countries-bound-to-arrest-Netanyahu-as-ICC-warrant-shadows-Israeli-PM–Hebrew-media
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a sweeping international travel restriction, with 125 countries legally bound by their membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC) to arrest him if he enters their territory, according to a report.
Netanyahu “cannot visit today in 125 countries,” including major Western states that are among Israel’s closest allies and trading partners, the Hebrew edition of the Times of Israel, Zman Yisrael, reported on Monday.
The Israeli outlet said that the countries include France, Britain, Germany and Canada.
The restriction stems from an arrest warrant issued by the ICC in November 2024 against Netanyahu over war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza which has killed at least 73,000 Palestinians, and wounded more than 17,000 others since it was waged in October 2023.
The Hague-based court holds Netanyahu responsible for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare, as well as the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts.
The practical impact has already been visible in Netanyahu’s foreign travel, with his aircraft taking alternative routes to avoid the airspace of ICC member states.
Netanyahu has avoided events in countries where the warrant could be enforced, including the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, because Switzerland is an ICC member state, the report noted.
Since the warrant took effect, Netanyahu has visited only one ICC member state where the warrant applies, Hungary in April 2025.
The report said that the restriction is not merely a diplomatic inconvenience, writing that “if Netanyahu cannot visit most countries in the world, including most Western powers, it is impossible to see this as ‘a superior international standing’ — but rather international isolation.”
Netanyahu can technically travel to around 70 countries that are not members of the ICC, but the majority have no diplomatic relations with Israel or have strained ties with the regime.
Meanwhile, Washington has stepped up its pressure campaign against the ICC since the court issued the warrant, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying the administration of US President Donald Trump was working to “dismantle” the tribunal.
The US has imposed sanctions on ICC officials involved in the Israel investigation and pressed the court’s member states to withdraw from the institution.
The West Bank’s Ultra-Apartheid (and the Collusive International Silence)
These statements no longer reflect a “lunatic fringe,” as often portrayed by the media in the West. They reflect the brutal repression of Palestinians that’s now the new normal.
31 August 2026 AIMN Editorial, By Dr Dan Steinbock
Gaza showed the genocidal face of Israel’s expulsive strategy. In the West Bank, the same objective is realized with incremental escalation. The ultimate goal is the same – the final expulsion of the Palestinians.
Today, the West Bank is a nightmare of vicious settlement expansion, land seizure, economic strangulation, settler violence and forced displacement.
With the collusion of the Israeli military and police, the Israeli-occupied territories are effectively ruled by the Messianic far-right settlers who see their mob-like racist pogroms of Palestinians as a divine step to Final Redemption.
The ongoing year has accelerated the process from settlement expansion toward territorial consolidation and displacement. The scale is stark.
Displacement becomes systematic
By August 10, the UN reported 76 Palestinians killed in the West Bank, including 18 children; about 3,800 Palestinians had been displaced during 2026 through settler violence, demolitions and evictions, nearly half children.
More than 1,430 settler incidents had been recorded, affecting roughly 260 Palestinian communities.
The crucial point is not simply Jewish settler violence but its geographical and economic function. Settler attacks increasingly target homes, agricultural land, livestock, water and electricity infrastructure.
In a recent podcast, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, a far-right extremist who believes in Jewish racial supremacy, urged Israelis to kill “30 to 40” Palestinians in Gaza every night. He also supports aggressive, lethal actions against Palestinians in the West Bank, applying a similarly hardline approach through legislative, judicial, and security policies.
These statements no longer reflect a “lunatic fringe,” as often portrayed by the media in the West. They reflect the brutal repression of Palestinians that’s now the new normal. OCHA reports that displacement caused by demolitions, settler violence and access restrictions has averaged 17 Palestinians a day in 2026; twice the average of the preceding three years.
Since 2023, 127 communities have experienced full or partial displacement; 47 have been completely emptied.
The economic damage compounds the demographic pressure. UNCTAD estimates that West Bank GDP contracted 17% in 2024, while cumulative unrealized Palestinian GDP from occupation-related restrictions between 2000–24 reached $170.8 billion – about 17 times 2024 West Bank GDP.
The settlement economy in Area C and East Jerusalem, by contrast, generated an estimated $53 billion in 2024.
Great conjuncture
Right before Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, I warned about an impending war, as the status quo was approaching a boiling point in Gaza. After all, it was the 50-year anniversary of the Yom Kippur War.
In The Fall of Israel (2024), I used the term great conjuncture to refer to structural forces that account for a series of cumulative disasters in the Middle East, starting with the waves of Palestinian expulsions since the 1940s.
Second, it refers to the aggressive expansion of the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. The rise of the Messianic far-right has fostered settler militarization accelerating anti-Arab pogroms in the West Bank, which is being annexed into Israel.
Third, the great conjuncture is fueled by a half century of failed American diplomacy in the Middle East. The Fall of Israel showed how the US-Israeli ties moved from hedging and choosing sides to partnership and eventually a symbiosis. These are not ties that bind, but ties that blind. They account for 50 years of military destabilization in the region and U.S. complicity to genocidal atrocities, even ecocide – both in Gaza and Lebanon.
Finally, instead of fostering peace in the region, America’s massive military aid to Israel has amplified Israel’s parallel securitization degrading its economy, politics and military. Washington has provided at least $22 billion in direct military aid to Israel, alongside up to $12 billion spent on related U.S. military operations in the region, since October 7, 2023. From Gaza and beyond, Israeli authorities and security forces have deliberately targeted Palestinians and Palestinian children.
These four structural forces feed on each other forming a vicious cycle, thereby intensifying and broadening regional escalation. When I extended the argument into a book, these views were still seen largely as marginal. Today, things have dramatically changed. Even the bipartisan consensus over the U.S.-Israel ties has collapsed.
But this erosion came only after Gaza has been obliterated and ethnic cleansing escalates in the West Bank with the tacit blessing of the international community.
Ethnic cleansing from Gaza to the West Bank
In the Israeli occupied territories, ethnic expulsion has not been an accidental by-product but a recurring political mechanism. From Labor’s post-1967 Allon Plan through the Likud era and the Messianic far right, its logic has been cumulative as it has sought to
- acquire territory;
- fragment Palestinian space;
- make Palestinian economic and social life increasingly unviable;
- if massacres don’t suffice, use genocidal atrocities;
- expand Jewish civilian presence;
- and eventually convert temporary occupation into permanent sovereignty.
The objective is not simply “security,” nor even the exploitation of Palestinian labor, but the Judaization of territory and prevention of a sovereign Palestine.
The Palestinian expulsions are intimately linked to both ideology and political economy. Land, subsidized settlements, real estate and state resources create constituencies that benefit materially from Palestinian dispossession.
Gaza became the extreme version: bombardment, destruction of housing and infrastructure, displacement and proposals for population “transfer” created conditions in which Palestinians were physically removed and territory becomes available for redevelopment or settlement.
In the West Bank, the mechanism used to be more incremental: settlement outposts, land seizures, demolition orders, restrictions on building and movement, settler violence and pressure on herding communities.
In the absence of international penalties, sanctions and blockades, settlers have been dramatically emboldened. They avoid one spectacular expulsion but seek to make the remaining Palestinian communities progressively untenable.
Their goal is the “Judaization” of Palestine – death by a thousands cuts………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. https://theaimn.net/the-west-banks-ultra-apartheid-and-the-collusive-international-silence/
AI robots and drones to assist in Fukushima nuclear plant cleanup

Three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant contain 880 tons of debris. (Photo by Akitoshi Sugiura)
Japan government, TEPCO to launch consortium as decommissioning progresses
MASATOSHI IDA, August 30, 2026
AI robots and drones to assist in Fukushima nuclear plant cleanup. Japan
government, TEPCO to launch consortium as decommissioning progresses……..(Subscribers only)
Nikkei Asian Review 30th Aug 2026, https://asia.nikkei.com/business/technology/artificial-intelligence/ai-robots-and-drones-to-assist-in-fukushima-nuclear-plant-cleanup
Britain ‘must brace for more Iranian cyber attacks’

Former US security chief expects UK infrastructure to be targeted again, following unprecedented breach of power plant
Rozina Sabur, National Security Editor, Telegraph, 29 August 2026
nfrastructure could face further attacks from Iran, a former US cyber chief has warned.
The Telegraph revealed last week that hackers affiliated with Tehran shut down a British power plant for four days in an unprecedented cyber attack.
And Britain, the US and other Western allies should “expect attacks like this to continue” as Tehran ramps up its cyber warfare, according to Jen Easterly, the former director of the US cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency (CISA).
In an interview with The Telegraph, Ms Easterly said companies that failed to heed alerts from the Five Eyes intelligence network in particular would be seen as “low-hanging fruit”. Five Eyes is an alliance between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US……………………
With Tehran under growing diplomatic and economic pressure amid its confrontation with the US and Israel, the regime has dramatically stepped up its cyber attacks on the West.
Intelligence officials describe Iran as a capable adversary in the online domain, with its cyber apparatus working in concert with its wartime aims.
In the incident revealed by The Telegraph last week, hackers affiliated with the Iranian regime succeeded in closing down an energy facility in the UK…………
The shutdown is understood to have occurred at the same time as a series of attacks on US water infrastructure last month, which affected multiple states……………………………………. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/29/britain-must-brace-for-more-iranian-cyber-attacks/
Three years on, Fukushima’s fishers still deal with impact of treated water release

Japan Times, By Phoebe Amoroso, Aug 24, 2026
March 11 is a date of indescribable weight in Japan — one that conjures images of the devastating earthquake and resulting tsunami that killed nearly 20,000, displaced hundreds of thousands and caused catastrophic damage to the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
But Aug. 24 has also become a date of significance for the Tohoku region and the rest of East Asia. On this day three years ago, power plant officials began releasing treated water into the Pacific Ocean — a move that, while necessary, is continuing to have an economic impact on the region’s seafood.
“There’s no single perfect method that will ensure understanding among the public (when it comes to the safety of Fukushima’s seafood),” says Tadaaki Sawada.
Sawada is deputy manager of the guidance section for the Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Associations (FS Gyoren). Even three years on, he laments the difficulty of eliminating the stigma attached to the northeastern coastal prefecture of Fukushima and its produce.
On the day Sawada spoke with The Japan Times, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. (Tepco) completed its 21st discharge of treated water currently held in storage tanks at the No. 1 nuclear plant. Three years into this process expected to take three decades in total, fears of reputational damage have not explicitly emerged within the domestic market, but other consequences have been profound: geopolitical tensions and an exposure of the vulnerabilities that underlie Japan’s fishing industry as a whole.
Difficult choices
Though the primary disasters of March 2011 are in the past, the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant is far from decommissioned.
Nuclear debris remains inside the damaged reactors and still produces heat, so water has to be circulated through the damaged reactors to keep them cool and eventually discarded. A method known as Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) can remove up to 62 radioactive compounds from this water to very low concentrations, but it can’t remove tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. After ALPS and dilution with seawater, the concentration of tritium in the water reaches 1/40 of the maximum threshold mandated by government regulations.
With on-site water tanks nearing capacity, Tepco — backed by the Japanese government and the International Atomic Energy Agency — announced in 2021 that it would conduct periodic, controlled ocean discharges while monitoring the resulting tritium levels.
The decision provoked strong reactions, not least within Fukushima’s fishing industry. The government had promised fishermen that it wouldn’t release the water without the understanding of local communities, and the move was perceived by many as reneging on that commitment, provoking strong fears over further reputational damage.
But three years on, a strong consumer backlash within Japan has not materialized.
Takeshi Hamada, a professor of fisheries science at Sapporo’s Hokkai-Gakuen University, has studied the economic impact on Japan’s fishing industry. He argues that one key difference between domestic reaction in 2011 compared to the years that followed is related to media coverage.
“Following the Great East Japan Earthquake, most media outlets — including major ones — viewed government information with skepticism,” Hamada says via email. “However, during the ocean release of ALPS-treated water, there was relatively little coverage questioning its safety.”
Instead, criticism mostly emanated from somewhere far away from Japan’s northeastern coast: China.
On the day the first batch of ALPS-treated water was released, Beijing banned the import of all Japanese aquatic products (the ban was partially lifted in June 2025 before being reinstated that November after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments on Japan’s role in a hypothetical Chinese naval blockade of Taiwan).
The impact of the import ban on Japan’s fishing industry has been hard to quantify, but experts believe it has been significant. Compared to the year prior, Hamada calculates that Japanese seafood exports fell by about ¥75.8 billion (about $476 million) between September 2023 and August 2024. Analysis of the next 12 months found that exports had improved in some areas, but total seafood exports were still below the prerelease level.
For Fukushima, the exact costs cannot be isolated. Although it exported almost no seafood to China, export-bound Japanese seafood was redirected into the domestic market, weighing on prices. Based on shirasu (whitebait) prices, which were driven down by bumper catches elsewhere, Hamada estimates that average prices decreased by 8.2%.
The lack of clarity has a direct knock-on effect on compensation promised from Tepco as a condition of the water release. Fishers must demonstrate lower catch volume, catch value and sales value compared to pre-2011 to receive funds for the shortfall. Seafood processors, wholesalers and other retailers can also claim compensation by demonstrating reduced sales due to consumers or buyers avoiding their seafood products.
However, many of the costs remain hidden. In a November 2025 symposium held by the Tokyo Fisheries Promotion Foundation, Soichiro Kato, a lawyer representing affected businesses, said fishers were better placed to seek compensation because fishery federations could negotiate collectively, while many seafood processors without the same collective organizations in place had to deal with Tepco individually. He also criticized Tepco’s criteria as being too rigid and not capturing losses from reverse flow effects.
Fishing for solutions……………………………………………………………………..
Coastal landings are still subject to official radiation monitoring by Fukushima Prefecture, while FS Gyoren also conducts voluntary screening at fish markets to reassure buyers. After more than 100,000 inspections, the federation relaxed its system in April this year to cover fewer species and reduce screening from each landing or sales day to at least once a week. It hopes that this will speed up distribution and make the overall system more efficient, paving the way for expanded sales.
But each step back toward normalcy for Fukushima’s fisheries is a double-edged sword.
“When it comes to how wholesalers and distributors have reacted (to relaxed regulations), naturally, to be honest, no one directly criticizes us,” Sawada says. “But I think some people do have concerns internally. That may naturally result in transactions disappearing or decreasing. It does not appear openly, and it is difficult for us on the fisher and producer side to see.”…………………………………………………………………………….
Although Tepco has made progress toward reducing newly generated water, the discharges are set to continue for decades to come. However, FS Gyoren’s call for more support for Fukushima’s fishing industry is unchanged.
“We want to continue fishing in Fukushima Prefecture as a livelihood, not only in our generation but into our children’s and grandchildren’s generations,” says Sawada. “We want the government and Tepco to provide firm support for that.”
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2026/08/24/japan/fukushima-seafood-treated-water-three-years-impact/
This is how we can regulate data centres in Scotland
There’s an increasingly loud uprising happening in Scotland around AI data
centres. Possibly the biggest I’ve seen since the 2016 uproar over shale
gas fracking. Data centre companies are actively lobbying the Scottish
Government as we speak and are basically asking for John Swinney to open
the gates to them to flood Scotland with as many data centres as he’s
willing to make us all swallow.
It’s easy to see what the companies get out
of it. Scotland has plenty of space, a good amount of water and while
electricity prices are high they can often negotiate preferential rates
that we could only dream of. What does Scotland get out of it? Higher
energy prices, higher demand on increasingly scarce water, about
three-and-a-half jobs, and the Scottish Government gets to claim that the
“inwards investment” line goes up? Perhaps I can see why Swinney would
take that deal.
The National 27th Aug 2026,
https://www.thenational.scot/news/26498669.can-regulate-data-centres-scotland/
-
Archives
- September 2026 (12)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS



