AUKUS Pillar 1 should be scrapped, report says
ICAN Australia urges a rethink of US alliance agreements
By APDR•Nov 8, 2026, https://asiapacificdefencereporter.com/posts/aukus-pillar-1-should-be-scrapped-report-says
A comprehensive examination of the AUKUS submarine deal to date is recommending it be immediately scrapped and a Plan B cost-effective alternative implemented immediately to ensure a capable submarine service. A Royal Commission into how the disastrous defence pact was conceived and allowed to continue for as long as it has, is also required.
Report is available at aukuspublicinquiry.com.au.
The independent, crowdfunded Public Inquiry into AUKUS has found that the security partnership will not succeed in any of its stated aims and constitutes a gross waste of public monies – up to half a trillion dollars if nuclear waste management costs are included – that compromise our national security and sovereignty. The inquiry report included 17 recommendations, including that Australia urgently develop a comprehensive National Security Strategy, suspend plans for a US naval base near Perth, cease seconding RAN submariners on US submarines and that an urgent Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) audit of the AUKUS program be undertaken and the results made public.
Lead Commissioner Peter Garrett said that AUKUS represented an absurd cost for submarines of highly contested utility that may well never arrive. “After carefully considering all the material presented to us, we conclude that AUKUS is the worst, most costly and riskiest defence decision ever made. AUKUS compromises our national security, erodes our sovereignty and commits us to any future conflict in support of US war plans. AUKUS definitely does NOT keep us safe.”
A substantial number of Australians – including a former Prime Minister, five former Foreign Affairs and Defence Ministers, senior academics and recognised military experts, unions, community groups and citizens – presented to the Inquiry across 10 day-long hearings in 8 cities around Australia since it launched in June.
ICAN Australia urges a rethink of US alliance agreements
ICAN Australia urges a rethink of US alliance agreements and says Australia must sign the nuclear weapon ban treaty Hosting US nuclear-capable forces is increasing the risk to Australian communities, and that risk is set to grow, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) Australia said today.
The AUKUS Public Inquiry’s report, Surrendering Australia, released last week, warns that AUKUS opens the door to nuclear weapons hosted in Australia. It finds the Force Posture Agreement does not prevent the US deploying them here, and that Perth would be a likely nuclear target in a US-China conflict. The report, and recent events, point to what’s currently here and what’s coming:
- Now: US B-52s landed at RAAF Base Tindal, near Katherine, on 1 September. The base has been upgraded to host them, and at least half of the US B-52 fleet is nuclear-capable.
- From 2027: US and UK nuclear-powered submarines will rotate through HMAS Stirling, beside Rockingham.
- After 2032: US Congressman Michael McCaul says it is “logical to assume” rotating US submarines could be nuclear-armed.
- Next: The report names Port Kembla, Newcastle and Brisbane as possible east coast submarine bases.
The report urges the government to recalibrate the US alliance around Australian sovereignty, rescind ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ and honour Labor’s commitment to sign the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
Associate Professor Tilman Ruff, founding chair of ICAN and contributor to the inquiry said: “The US will neither confirm nor deny whether its aircraft and submarines carry nuclear weapons, and Australian governments say they ‘understand and respect’ that policy. This level of secrecy is unacceptable in a modern democracy. Communities like Katherine and Rockingham are carrying a nuclear risk they were never asked about. We don’t even know whether emergency and medical services have been told what they might face. Our agreements with the US leave the door open to nuclear weapons operations being launched from Australia, and each new deployment pushes it wider. We need to rethink those agreements, including AUKUS Pillar 1, and sign and ratify the nuclear weapon ban treaty. That would replace don’t ask, don’t tell with a clear legal line – no nuclear weapons hosted here.”
Ralph Nader: Democrats Will Squander Their Victory Unless Voters Fight Their Corporate Masters
November 7, 2026, SCHEERPOST, Joshua Scheer
Defeating Donald Trump at the ballot box will mean little if Democrats preserve the corporate rule that helped bring him to power. The ballots have been counted. The danger now is that Democrats will mistake a repudiation of Donald Trump for permission to keep serving the billionaires who own American politics. On The Chris Hedges Report, Ralph Nader warns that an electoral landslide can become another exercise in betrayal if voters allow the party’s corporate leadership to turn public anger into empty promises, toothless investigations and business as usual.
For Nader and Hedges, the battle now runs directly through the Democratic Party—and through leaders such as Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, whose allegiance to wealthy donors, military contractors and the Israel lobby they argue has repeatedly smothered demands for change. A party that celebrates defeating MAGA while leaving Americans trapped in medical debt, poverty wages and corporate exploitation is preserving the conditions for the next authoritarian to exploit.
Nader calls for replacing the party’s leadership and building organized pressure for universal health care, a living wage, prosecution of corporate criminals and Trump’s impeachment. Voters delivered the victory; now they must make those they elected fear the consequences of betraying it. Otherwise, he and Hedges warn, the celebration could become the prelude to a more dangerous backlash.
Nader lays out an agenda of universal health care, a living wage, corporate criminal accountability and impeachment, backed by relentless pressure from constituents. Without that mobilization, he and Hedges warn, Democrats risk repeating the broken promises and economic abandonment that fueled the authoritarian backlash in the first place………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://scheerpost.com/2026/11/07/ralph-nader-democrats-will-squander-their-victory-unless-voters-fight-their-corporate-masters/
The U.S. Has $50 Billion for Nuclear Waste and Nowhere to Put It
By Haley Zaremba – Nov 07, 2026, https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/The-US-Has-50-Billion-for-Nuclear-Waste-and-Nowhere-to-Put-It.html
- Finland has licensed Onkalo, 22 years after construction began, to take up to 6,500 tonnes of uranium in spent fuel buried 400 meters down.
- The U.S. holds about 97,000 metric tons of spent fuel at nearly 75 sites in more than 30 states, and Yucca Mountain, its only legally designated repository, has had no development money in over 15 years.
- The Nuclear Waste Fund holds more than $50 billion, and a gridlocked Congress has to sign off before a dollar moves.
Finland and the United States are exemplifying two opposing approaches to managing the mounting problem of spent nuclear fuel. Finland is about to open the world’s first permanent nuclear waste disposal facility. The United States is stuck in a cycle of endless political turnover and resultant gridlock about how to address the more than 90,000 metric tons of spent fuel sitting in temporary facilities around the country, posing a mounting public health hazard and tax dollar sink.
The Onkalo site (named after the Finnish for ‘cave’) will encapsulate radioactive spent nuclear fuel in copper canisters designed to safely store the hazardous materials, and then store them 400 meters (1,312 feet) under the ground within the bedrock, where they will be insulated with shock-absorbent clay. The canisters are designed to safely store the waste for 100,000 years, after which the radioactivity of the uranium within will be neutralized due to natural exponential decay. The repository will be able to store up to 6,500 tonnes (7,200 tons) of spent nuclear fuel. When it reaches maximum capacity, it will be backfilled, sealed and handed over to the Finnish government for maintenance and oversight.
Just last month, Finland’s Onkalo facility secured its official operating license from the Finnish government after construction began 22 years ago. This may seem like a remarkably long timeline, and it is indeed remarkable in several ways.
Onkalo is a remarkable feat of engineering. The political achievement is just as striking,” states an op-ed published in the Washington Post this week. “Finland kept its nuclear waste program on track for more than four decades, weathering changing governments and keeping its host municipality, Eurajoki, at the table.” By contrast, “In the United States, where nuclear waste policy lurches from one administration to the next, that consistency is almost unimaginable.”
Finland and the United States are exemplifying two opposing approaches to managing the mounting problem of spent nuclear fuel. Finland is about to open the world’s first permanent nuclear waste disposal facility. The United States is stuck in a cycle of endless political turnover and resultant gridlock about how to address the more than 90,000 metric tons of spent fuel sitting in temporary facilities around the country, posing a mounting public health hazard and tax dollar sink.
The Onkalo site (named after the Finnish for ‘cave’) will encapsulate radioactive spent nuclear fuel in copper canisters designed to safely store the hazardous materials, and then store them 400 meters (1,312 feet) under the ground within the bedrock, where they will be insulated with shock-absorbent clay. The canisters are designed to safely store the waste for 100,000 years, after which the radioactivity of the uranium within will be neutralized due to natural exponential decay. The repository will be able to store up to 6,500 tonnes (7,200 tons) of spent nuclear fuel. When it reaches maximum capacity, it will be backfilled, sealed and handed over to the Finnish government for maintenance and oversight.
Just last month, Finland’s Onkalo facility secured its official operating license from the Finnish government after construction began 22 years ago. This may seem like a remarkably long timeline, and it is indeed remarkable in several ways.
“Onkalo is a remarkable feat of engineering. The political achievement is just as striking,” states an op-ed published in the Washington Post this week. “Finland kept its nuclear waste program on track for more than four decades, weathering changing governments and keeping its host municipality, Eurajoki, at the table.” By contrast, “In the United States, where nuclear waste policy lurches from one administration to the next, that consistency is almost unimaginable.”
According to federal law, the United States has just one official nuclear fuel repository site – Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, which congress hasn’t provided funding for in over 15 years. But in reality, approximately 97,000 metric tons of hazardous spent nuclear fuel are sitting stranded at nearly 75 sites in more than 30 states, housed by communities that never consented to this arrangement. And while the United States federal government has made attempts to redress this sloppy and piecemeal approach, it has allowed deadline after deadline to lapse as political turnover continues to relegate nuclear waste storage to the back burner.
The United States’ political spin cycle is not just affecting its ability to commit to long-term nuclear waste disposal and management projects, it’s negatively impacting the nation’s overall energy policy, to the detriment of taxpayers. As noted by the Atlantic Council in a report on United States energy policy published last week, “political volatility has become an energy cost” as each successive regime change has scrapped or otherwise overhauled the energy progress of its predecessor over the last several federal election cycles.
“Technology-specific incentives amplify that cycle,” notes the Atlantic Council. “They can accelerate deployment, especially for growing industries, but they also tie project economics to the political durability of a particular credit, grant, mandate, or regulatory interpretation.” This means that an abrupt change in priorities every four years causes a major and expensive disruption to federal funding cycles, which makes projects like the long-term management of spent nuclear fuel nigh on impossible to achieve and sustain.
It’s not that the United States doesn’t have the money – the country’s Nuclear Waste Fund holds over $50 billion. “But spending the money requires approval from a Congress racked by partisanship,” concludes Vincent Ialenti, a former Energy Department program manager, in his Washington Post op-ed. “This is a precarious framework for commitments measured in decades.”
Public Inquiry into AUKUS recommends recalibrating Australia’s relationship with the US
November 5, 2026, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/public-inquiry-into-aukus-recommends-recalibrating-australias-relationship-with-the-us/
The four-month AUKUS public inquiry has recommended a recalibration of Australia’s relationships with the United States and China, including the cancellation of nuclear-powered submarines.
The launch of the commissioners’ final report, Surrendering Australia – The AUKUS Deception, coincided with US mid-term elections that significantly reshaped the American political landscape.
“Yesterday, the people of the US recalibrated their relationship with the US government, rejecting the policies of President Trump. Now is the perfect time for Australia to do the same,” said Leanne Minshull, co-CEO of The Australia Institute and one of five public inquiry commissioners.
Recent polling conducted on behalf of The Australia Institute found just 16% of Australian voters now consider the US to be a ‘close friend’ of Australia.
The AUKUS deal is sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas but it also has a clear way out, the first step being to give the US and UK one year’s notice of withdrawal.
“In a cost-of-living crisis, redirecting hundreds of billions of dollars allocated to AUKUS would not just boost our national security but our economic security as well.”
The full Commissioners’ Report can be found here
Virulent US Russophobia hindering Trump from ending Ukraine war that is destroying Ukraine
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 7 Nov 6
Now that he’s a Lame Duck with nothing to lose, President Trump should ignore the rampant Russophobia infesting US politics and end Russia’s war in Ukraine.
The war was provoked by Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden in February 2022. It was a despicable foreign policy initiative, totally avoidable, that has consigned Ukraine to failed state status. Nearly five years on Ukraine is near collapse to further Biden’s lust to complete the destruction of Russia as a viable rival to America for supremacy in Europe and beyond.
Now upwards of seven million Ukrainians are fled, wounded or dead. They’ve lost over a fifth of their best land never to be returned. Capitol Kyiv is becoming unlivable and may be a ghost town this winter with no power to heat homes or businesses.
After Biden squandered over $150 billion of our precious treasure to salvage his failed proxy war involving only Ukrainian blood, Trump signaled he’d end the war on day one of term two. But the Russophobes who control the levels of power in the national security state: the military, intelligence agencies, the weapons makers, war loving, anti-Russian academics, mainstream media, all ganged up to distract Trump from achieving his goal for 655 days now.
Besides ferocious opposition from the Russophobes, Trump is bogged down in his lost criminal war in Iran that blew up the US economy and was the biggest factor in his massive congressional defeat Tuesday.
But while he’s completely paralyzed, unable to admit defeat in Iran to turn around the economy, he can end the Ukraine war with one phone call. He must ring up Ukraine President Zelensky and tell him all US support in weapons, intelligence, logistics, domestic aid is over. But Trump must go further and remove deep state officials working against his efforts to end the war. He must fire anyone in the CIA and military refusing orders to stop supporting Ukraine attacks on Russian oil and other Russian infrastructure.
Without any further US support, Zelensky will be forced to end the war on Russia’s sensible, non-negotiable terms. No NATO for Ukraine. Ukraine to be forever neutral between East and West, not a proxy puppet of the US to isolate Russia from Europe. No return of Donbas and adjacent oblasts. Security guarantees for the remaining Ukraine rump state. That is the best Ukraine can achieve short of complete destruction, which is what will occur if the war is not ended swiftly.
Trump can do this unilaterally as Europe is essentially broke because they stupidly cut off cheap Russian energy when they joined Biden’s crazed proxy war. Without US aid they cannot support Ukraine alone. European leaders are totally ut of touch with their people who want nothing to do with continuing their senseless, failed war destroying Ukraine. European leaders’ approval ratings have tanked and they face removal from office by opponents promoting the people first.
Russian President Putin is not the new Stalin or new Hitler. Trump is not a Putin puppet or a traitor to Ukraianian democracy. Ukraine betrayed democracy when they conspired with the US in 2014 to overthrow their elected president to wage war on Donbas Ukrainians for simply practicing Russian culture. They betrayed democracy when they believed joining NATO to weaken, isolate Russia from Europe was in their national interest. In doing so they’ve largely destroyed their country with no end in sight.
In the US, the traitors to Ukraine democracy; indeed, Ukraine’s very existence, are the US Russophobes ferociously promoting endless proxy war with Russia in Ukraine with the potential to go nuclear. Trump must ignore them and seek to end this madness forthwith.
America’s Nuclear Revival Is Running Into a Fuel Supply Wall
By Haley Zaremba – Nov 06, 2026,
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Americas-Nuclear-Revival-Is-Running-Into-a-Fuel-Supply-Wall.html
- Foreign suppliers provided 93% of the uranium delivered to U.S. reactors, so progress on domestic enrichment still leaves the front of the fuel chain exposed.
- Only five plants worldwide convert uranium at scale. Per the National Interest, the West needs about 44,000 metric tons of feedstock a year and has roughly 34,000 tons of capacity.
- Urenco USA’s New Mexico plant covers about a third of U.S. enrichment demand and says its expansion is ahead of schedule and on budget, but Russia still holds nearly half of global enrichment capacity.
The United States boasts the largest nuclear power production capacity in the world, but decades of insufficient funding and policy support is now posing an existential threat to the ageing sector. In the past decade, the United States has added just one new nuclear power plant to its fleet, while many more plants are drawing close to being decommissioned, at a time when clean, round-the-clock energy production has never been more needed. The Trump administration has been bullish about restoring the country’s nuclear energy sector to its former glory, but growing the country’s nuclear energy capacity raises a new problem – where to source the nuclear fuel to power it.
Countries around the world are racing to build up nuclear power capacity as the artificial intelligence boom places unprecedented strain on global power supplies, the war in Iran sustains volatility in oil and gas markets, and decarbonization deadlines draw nearer. As a result, competition over scarce enriched uranium supplies has ramped up at a rapid pace. As a result, U.S. nuclear energy now “faces fuel supply chain vulnerabilities, with tight uranium supplies, geopolitical risks, and rising costs,” threatening both existing reactors and advanced reactor development, according to a January report from Stanford Energy.
The geopolitical risks inherent to current nuclear fuel supply chains represent a key and growing concern. The world’s nuclear energy fuel supply chains are extremely geopolitically fraught. At present, just five plants in the entire world operate large-scale uranium conversion, and nearly half of global enrichment capacity is controlled by Russia. And if Russia decides to cut the United States off, or vice versa, the alternative could be even worse.
“The West needs more converted uranium than it can process, and cutting off Russian supply could leave its reactors dependent on a single Chinese facility,” an article from the National Interest warned earlier this week.
The United States boasts the largest nuclear power production capacity in the world, but decades of insufficient funding and policy support is now posing an existential threat to the ageing sector. In the past decade, the United States has added just one new nuclear power plant to its fleet, while many more plants are drawing close to being decommissioned, at a time when clean, round-the-clock energy production has never been more needed. The Trump administration has been bullish about restoring the country’s nuclear energy sector to its former glory, but growing the country’s nuclear energy capacity raises a new problem – where to source the nuclear fuel to power it.
Countries around the world are racing to build up nuclear power capacity as the artificial intelligence boom places unprecedented strain on global power supplies, the war in Iran sustains volatility in oil and gas markets, and decarbonization deadlines draw nearer. As a result, competition over scarce enriched uranium supplies has ramped up at a rapid pace. As a result, U.S. nuclear energy now “faces fuel supply chain vulnerabilities, with tight uranium supplies, geopolitical risks, and rising costs,” threatening both existing reactors and advanced reactor development, according to a January report from Stanford Energy.
The geopolitical risks inherent to current nuclear fuel supply chains represent a key and growing concern. The world’s nuclear energy fuel supply chains are extremely geopolitically fraught. At present, just five plants in the entire world operate large-scale uranium conversion, and nearly half of global enrichment capacity is controlled by Russia. And if Russia decides to cut the United States off, or vice versa, the alternative could be even worse.
“The West needs more converted uranium than it can process, and cutting off Russian supply could leave its reactors dependent on a single Chinese facility,” an article from the National Interest warned earlier this week.
In recent years, leadership in the United States has made considerable inroads toward building up domestic uranium production and conversion capabilities, as it has benefited from being one of the rare forms of energy supported by both the Trump and Biden administrations. Just last month, the National Enrichment Facility, located in Eunice, New Mexico, announced that its planned expansion is ahead of schedule and on budget. Currently, the singular plant converts enough uranium to cover about one-third of U.S. enriched uranium demand, with plans to raise enrichment output by more than 50 percent to reach 7 million separative work units (SWUs) as reactor demand grows.
The country is indeed getting closer to establishing nuclear fuel independence – but it still has a long way to go. And in today’s geopolitical climate, no one knows just how much time we have before a supply chain snag could cause the next global energy crisis. At present, a whopping 93 percent of the United States’ raw uranium for nuclear fuel is coming from foreign markets. If those supply chains dry up, it won’t matter how much uranium the country is capable of enriching.
And the issue is not limited to the United States alone, but to Western nuclear power markets in general. “To keep the lights on in the West every year, the nuclear reactor fleet requires approximately 44,000 metric tons of uranium feedstock. Western supply lines [including the United States, Canada, and France] are estimated to have processing capability of just 34,000 metric tons when fully operational,” the National Interest details. “Traditionally, reactors have relied on Russian or Chinese fuel producers to make up the shortfall, but as global trade corridors constrict and relationships become contentious, over-reliance on Russian or Chinese nuclear fuel could represent a serious national security risk.”
US offers $20 million reward for intelligence on Iran’s nuclear programme
The State Department promises cash and relocation for insider details on Tehran’s atomic network, as Trump asserts the adversary is desperate to end the conflict.
Middle East Online, Saturday 07/11/2026
WASHINGTON — The United States is offering a bounty of up to $20 million, alongside potential resettlement abroad, for actionable intelligence regarding Iran’s nuclear programme, the US military announced on Friday. The move comes as President Donald Trump reiterated that Tehran is eager to conclude an agreement to halt the eight-month-old regional conflict.
The bounty is being administered through Rewards for Justice, a long-standing State Department programme established in 1984 to offer financial compensation for information that safeguards American lives and national security interests.
In a statement published on X, US Central Command (CENTCOM) confirmed the scope of the appeal, noting that the initiative seeks verified details concerning Iran’s nuclear programme, including its enrichment facilities, specialized hardware, and affiliated personnel within the scientific and research community………………………………………..
The diplomatic bounty arrives amidst sharp contradictions in Washington’s rhetoric. Trump has repeatedly maintained that previous strikes effectively destroyed Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure………………………………….
Regional mediation remains intensive as diplomats race to stave off any fresh escalation. On Tuesday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed that his administration continues to pursue a resolution through dialogue.
Even so, lingering military friction remains visible. Earlier in the week, Trump indicated that American forces still needed to neutralise a limited number of remaining objectives, pointing specifically to the contested site at “Pickaxe Mountain” in central Iran—a suspected subterranean facility whose nuclear function Tehran has consistently denied. https://middle-east-online.com/en/us-offers-20-million-reward-intelligence-irans-nuclear-programme
Chris Hedges: Defeating Trump Is Only the Beginning
| ScheerPost Joshua Scheer, November 7, 2026 |
In this live Q&A, Chris Hedges examines the midterm results and warns that a Democratic victory alone will not extinguish the forces driving American fascism. He discusses the fight against corporate control within the Democratic Party, the influence of the Israel lobby and why organized pressure from workers and social movements remains essential to meaningful change.
The Democrats’ midterm victory has opened a window for change, but Chris Hedges warns that the conditions that propelled Donald Trump to power remain intact. In this live Q&A, he argues that corporate domination, economic abandonment and a political establishment unwilling to confront either will continue to nourish American fascism—even after an electoral defeat for MAGA.
Hedges examines the coming struggle between the Democratic Party’s leadership and those demanding universal health care, workers’ rights, an end to arms shipments to Israel and a break with billionaire influence. Taking questions on impeachment, Christian nationalism, the Israel lobby and political organizing, he warns that another Democratic failure to deliver material improvements could produce an even more dangerous authoritarian backlash. The decisive question, he argues, is whether unions and social movements can build enough power to turn an electoral opening into lasting change.
America’s AI backlash will change the world
Global sell-off continues after scores of anti-data centre candidates win election
The city of Harwood in North Dakota does not have much to put it on the
map. With a population of 794, the town is best known for a heroic
operation in 1997 when locals built a five-mile wall to keep out floods, as
well as its wonderfully relaxed local motto: “It’s all good.”
Harwood’s easygoing nature became more apparent this week when it became
the only place in America to vote in favour of data centres. Around 325
voters, three quarters of turnout, voted against a proposal to slow large
industrial developments including data centres. The measure, if passed, may
have affected plans for a $3bn (£2.2bn) development by the tech company
Applied Digital near the town.
The vote was conspicuous by being unique.
There were 47 local referendums on data centres this week; 46 voted to make
it harder to build the giant facilities that are crucial to artificial
intelligence. Combined with a blue wave that elected many anti-data centre
Democratic candidates, the results sent a straightforward message. Despite
the promise of jobs and investment, Americans do not want data centres
where they live – if they want them at all.
Telegraph 6th Nov 2026, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/11/06/americas-ai-backlash-will-change-the-world/
1 This Month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (103)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- 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)
-
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
