nuclear-news

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

Microsoft just made a huge, far-from-certain bet on nuclear fusion

Microsoft just made a huge, far-from-certain bet on nuclear fusion, The Verge 10 May 23,

Microsoft just signed a jaw-dropping agreement to purchase electricity from a nuclear fusion generator. Nuclear fusion, often called the Holy Grail of energy, is a potentially limitless source of clean energy that scientists have been chasing for the better part of a century.

A company called Helion Energy thinks it can deliver that Holy Grail to Microsoft by 2028. It announced a power purchase agreement with Microsoft this morning that would see it plug in the world’s first commercial fusion generator to a power grid in Washington. The goal is to generate at least 50 megawatts of power — a small but significant amount and more than the 42MW that the US’s first two offshore wind farms have the capacity to generate today.

To say that’s a tall order would be the understatement of the year. “I would say it’s the most audacious thing I’ve ever heard,” says University of Chicago theoretical physicist Robert Rosner. “In these kinds of issues, I will never say never. But it would be astonishing if they succeed.”

Experts’ optimistic estimates for when the world might see its first nuclear fusion power plant have ranged from the end of the decade to several decades from now.

Helion’s success depends on achieving remarkable breakthroughs in an incredibly short span of time and then commercializing its technology to make it cost-competitive with other energy sources. Nevertheless, Helion is unfazed.

“This is a binding agreement that has financial penalties if we can’t build a fusion system,” Helion founder and CEO David Kirtley tells The Verge. “We’ve committed to be able to build a system and sell it commercially to [Microsoft].”……………………………………

The most advanced attempts at generating electricity through nuclear fusion involve shooting powerful laser beams at a tiny target or relying on magnetic fields to confine superheated matter called plasma with a machine called a tokamak.

Helion uses neither of those methods. The company is developing a 40-foot device called a plasma accelerator that heats fuel to 100 million degrees Celsius. It heats deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen) and helium-3 into a plasma and then uses pulsed magnetic fields to compress the plasma until fusion happens. (The company has a Youtube video that illustrates the process in much more detail.

Helion claims that the machine should eventually be able to recapture the electricity used to trigger the reaction, which can be used to recharge the device’s magnets.

Figuring out how to be energy efficient is crucial to make fusion power a reality. After all, you need extreme heat and pressure to force atoms to fuse together. ………………

Assuming Helion can pull this all off, it still has to ensure that it can do so in an affordable way. The cost of the electricity it generates for consumers would need to be comparable to or cheaper than today’s power plants, solar, and wind farms. The company isn’t sharing what price it agreed to in its power purchase agreement with Microsoft, but Kirtley says the company’s goal is to one day get costs down to a cent a kilowatt hour.

……………………as has been the case with dreams of nuclear fusion for decades — we’ll have to wait and see.  https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/10/23717332/microsoft-nuclear-fusion-power-plant-helion-purchase-agreement

May 11, 2023 Posted by | technology, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. transfers F-22s from Poland to Estonia to “defend NATO’s eastern flank” — Anti-bellum

NATOAllied Air CommandMay 9, 2023 US F-22s deploy to Estonia from Poland The U.S. Air Force F-22s supporting NATO Allied Air Command’s Air Shielding mission along the eastern flank have executed an Agile Combat Employment deployment to Amari Air Base, Estonia on May 8…. The US fighters joined their Royal Air Force colleagues who are […]

U.S. transfers F-22s from Poland to Estonia to “defend NATO’s eastern flank” — Anti-bellum

May 11, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

New Mexico State law and multiple federal court challenges may yet block the Holtec nuclear waste project.

State Laws Could Block CISF Projects

Multiple lawsuits in federal appeals courts and state laws opposing storage and disposal of irradiated nuclear fuel in both New Mexico and Texas could upend both nuclear waste CISF schemes.

Beyond Nuclear , LEA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO and WASHINGTON, D.C., May 9, 2023 —

Today, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced it approved licensing for Holtec International’s controversial consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) in southeastern New Mexico’s Lea County, not far from the Texas border.  The facility is designed to store high-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants across the U.S. But NRC approval notwithstanding, a recently enacted New Mexico State law and multiple federal court challenges may yet block the project

…………….. Holtec now seeks to branch out into consolidated storage and its associated high-level radioactive waste transportation. On the New Mexico CISF scheme it partnered with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance (ELEA), a quasi-governmental entity comprised of Eddy and Lea Counties (which border one another), as well as their county seats of Carlsbad and Hobbs, New Mexico.  ELEA owns the targeted nuclear waste CISF site’s land surface, and would take a large cut of the proceeds.

Giant Capacity May Signal Storing Foreign and Military Nuclear Waste

The Holtec-ELEA nuclear waste CISF would store up to 173,600 metric tons of highly radioactive irradiated fuel (often euphemistically called “spent” nuclear fuel or SNF, despite the fact it is highly radioactive and lethal), as well as Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) radioactive waste from commercial nuclear reactors. The facility would hold up to 10,000 canisters of nuclear waste, inserted into pits in a platform which sits on the surface.  Part of the canisters would stay above the natural land surface.

“If opened, the site could become home to the biggest concentration of radioactive waste in the world,” reported Diane D’Arrigo, Radioactive Waste Project Director at Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

The Holtec-ELEA CISF’s nuclear waste storage capacity would be in addition to another planned CISF some 40 miles to the east in Andrews County, Texas.  If built, it would be able to store 40,000 metric tons of irradiated fuel and GTCC in above-ground dry casks. The Texas facility, proposed by Interim Storage Partners, LLC (ISP), was granted construction and operation license approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on September 13, 2021.

Since the entire SNF inventory at U.S. commercial reactors is just over 90,000 metric tons, experts have questioned why the Texas and New Mexico facilities would need a combined capacity of 213,600 metric tons, and whether the projects may be aiming to store nuclear waste from abroad and/or from the military.

There is precedent for shipping irradiated fuel from other countries to the U.S. for storage at Idaho National Labs. And in 2018, a test shipment of a mock SNF cask was transported from Europe to Colorado. Lead ISP partner Orano (formerly Areva) of France services the largest nuclear power reactor fleet of any single company in the western world. It lacks facilities in France to permanently dispose of the country’s own waste. 

The consortium backing the ISP facility includes Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS), a national dump for so-called “low-level” radioactive waste, located immediately adjacent to (and upstream of) the New Mexico border.  WCS loudly proclaims its ties to the U.S. military, which needs to dispose of its own highly radioactive wastes.

Nuclear Waste Transport Dangers 

Opening a CISF in the U.S. would trigger many thousands of shipments of domestic irradiated fuel across many of the Lower 48 states, through a large percentage of U.S. congressional districts. SNF canisters and transport casks are subject to so-called “routine” radiation emissions, as well as leakage and other failures, which would pose threats to thousands of communities along the transportation routes.



“Transporting highly radioactive waste is inherently high-risk,” said Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Specialist with Beyond Nuclear. “Fully loaded irradiated nuclear fuel containers would be among the very heaviest loads on the roads, rails, and waterways. They would test the structural integrity of badly degraded rails, for example, risking derailments. Even if our nation’s infrastructure gets renovated someday, the shipping containers themselves will remain vulnerable to severe accidents and terrorist attacks.

They could release catastrophic amounts of hazardous radioactivity, possibly in densely populated urban areas.”

“Even so-called ‘incident-free’ shipments are like mobile X-ray machines that can’t be turned off, in terms of the hazardous emissions of gamma and neutron radiation, dosing innocent passersby, as well as transport workers,” Kamps added.

Kamps’ February 24 letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, cc’d to governors and state Attorneys General across the U.S., warned of the dangers of transporting high-level radioactive waste. “The recent train wreck at East Palestine, Ohio demonstrates the urgency of the problem and the potential for a serious radiological accident from nuclear waste transport,” he wrote. “Environmental toxicologists have expressed deep concern that detection and response to release of hazardous chemicals in East Palestine were ineffective and untransparent and failed to protect public health and safety. But if the train that derailed had been carrying SNF or other highly radioactive wastes, the consequences would have been much worse.”

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board has recommended spending a minimum of a decade to develop better irradiated nuclear fuel cask and canister designs before attempting to transport highly radioactive wastes. Yet Holtec and ISP expect their nuclear waste CISFs to open and start accepting shipments in just the next few years.

 State Laws Could Block CISF Projects

Multiple lawsuits in federal appeals courts and state laws opposing storage and disposal of irradiated nuclear fuel in both New Mexico and Texas could upend both nuclear waste CISF schemes.

Siting nuclear facilities is supposed to be consent-based, but both Texas and New Mexico have made it abundantly clear they do not consent.  In advance of the NRC licensing the ISP facility in September 2021, the Texas legislature overwhelmingly approved a bill banning storage or disposal of high-level radioactive waste including SNF in the state, and directing the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to deny state permits the ISP project needs. The measure passed the Texas Senate unanimously, and passed the Texas House 119-3. Texas Governor Greg Abbott then signed the bill into law.

“This kind of bipartisan vote is very rare”, said Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition based in Austin, TX. “The message should be loud and clear: Texas doesn’t want the nation’s deadliest nuclear waste and does not consent to being a dumping ground.” 

In the runup to the Legislature passing the law, opposition to the ISP project in Texas was widespread and vocal. Abbott and a bipartisan group of U.S. Congressional Representatives from Texas wrote strong letters to the NRC opposing the project. Andrews County, five other counties and three cities, representing a total of 5.4 million

Texans, passed resolutions opposing importing nuclear waste from other states to Texas. School districts, the Midland Chamber of Commerce and oil and gas companies joined environmental and faith-based groups in opposing the ISP project. The City of Fort Worth, Texas submitted a Friend of the Court brief supporting appeals against ISP in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Strenuous opposition to nuclear waste CISFs is also widespread in New Mexico. The state recently enacted Senate Bill 53 (SB53) barring storage and disposal of highly radioactive wastes in New Mexico without its explicit consent. New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed SB53 into law on March 17, 2023,  immediately after it had passed both houses of the State Legislature.  Grisham has strongly objected to both nuclear waste CISFs on either side of New Mexico’s southeastern border since before she became governor in 2019.



“I am thankful that the New Mexico Legislature voted to stop this dangerous nuclear waste from coming to our state, and for Governor Grisham for signing it into law,” said Rose Gardner of Eunice, New Mexico, co-founder of the environmental justice watchdog group Alliance for Environmental Strategies. Gardner’s hometown is very close to the ISP project site in Texas, as well as to the Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) national dump for hazardous and so-called “low-level” radioactive waste. Every single one of thousands of rail shipments of highly radioactive waste bound for the ISP CISF would pass through Eunice. 

These lawsuits argue that nuclear waste CISFs violate federal law. Consolidated interim storage facilities are predicated on the assumption that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will enable SNF transportation by taking title to commercial reactor waste as it leaves the reactor sites, thus relieving the licensees of their liability for it. But transferring responsibility for highly radioactive nuclear waste from private businesses to the federal government is specifically prohibited by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended (NWPA) — unless and until a geologic repository is open and operating.  By DOE’s own admission, an operating geologic repository remains at least 25 years away. 

The prohibition against DOE taking title to commercial reactor waste was included in the NWPA precisely to guard against “interim” storage sites becoming de facto permanent surface dumps for nuclear waste. But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s CISF licensing process was pushed ahead anyway in defiance of the law, on the theory the law will be changed by Congress and the President. 

Participants in the legal challenge to the Holtec CISF include the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) Beyond Nuclear, Sierra Club, and Don’t Waste Michigan, et al., a national grassroots coalition of watchdog groups, including the New Mexico-based anti-nuclear collective formerly called Nuclear Issues Study Group (recently renamed DNA, short for Demand Nuclear Abolition). Additional coalition members include: Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination (MI); Citizens’ Environmental Coalition (NY); Nuclear Energy Information Service (IL); and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace (CA). Federal appeals before the D.C. circuit court have also been filed by

Fasken Land and Minerals, Ltd., and Permian Basin Land and Royalty Owners, which advocate for ranching and mineral rights.

“The grand illusion that the nuclear power industry will figure out what to do with the lethal nuclear waste later, is now revealed,” said Michael J. Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan, one of the lead intervenors in the lawsuits. “There is nowhere to put the waste. No community consents to accept nuclear waste — not Texas, not New Mexico, not Michigan, or anywhere on this planet.  We have to stop making it. No more weapons of mass deception!”

May 11, 2023 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

US to Provide Ukraine $1.2 Billion in Long-Term Security Aid

Military.com 8 May 2023, Associated Press | By Lolita C. Baldor and Matthew Lee

WASHINGTON — The U.S. will provide $1.2 billion more in long-term military aid to Ukraine to further bolster its air defenses as Russia continues to pound Ukraine with drones, rockets and surface-to-air missiles, U.S. officials said Monday.

The aid package is expected to be announced on Tuesday and the money will be provided under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. Unlike the U.S. equipment, weapons and ammunition that are more frequently sent to Ukraine from Pentagon stocks — so they can be delivered quickly — this money is to be spent over the coming months or even years to ensure Ukraine’s future security needs.

The assistance initiative will fund HAWK air-defense systems, air-defense munitions and drones for air defense. It will also buy artillery, rockets, satellite imagery assistance, and funding for ongoing maintenance and spare parts for a variety of systems, according to the officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the aid package has not yet been formally announced.

The assistance initiative will fund HAWK air-defense systems, air-defense munitions and drones for air defense. It will also buy artillery, rockets, satellite imagery assistance, and funding for ongoing maintenance and spare parts for a variety of systems, according to the officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the aid package has not yet been formally announced……………………………………………. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/05/08/us-provide-ukraine-12-billion-long-term-security-aid.html

May 11, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Prevent, protect, consult – the NFLA (Nuclear Free Local Authorities)’ three priorities for UK radioactive waste policy

The UK Government has its priorities ‘all wrong’ in its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning, so says the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities in its response to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s consultation on its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning.

Instead of an emphasis on cutting costs and reducing the burdens on the nuclear industry as DESNZ would like, the NFLA believes that government and the nuclear industry should do everything necessary for the protection of human health and safeguarding our natural environment – whatever the cost.

To the NFLA, government policy and industry practice should focus upon three main tenets:

  • Preventing the creation of more radioactive waste, by not building any more nuclear power plants, by closing and decommissioning existing ones as quickly as possible, and by not revisiting mad-cap schemes that have failed before, like repurposing plutonium as reactor fuel, which creates yet more waste and risks nuclear weapons proliferation;
  • Protecting the public and the natural environment, by ‘concentrating and containing’ existing waste on or near the surface on the sites where it was created or is currently stored and having a policy of active ongoing management, with the facility of retrieval if waste is stored below ground. This is opposed to government policy which for high-level waste is focused upon transportation by rail to a Geological Disposal Facility into which the waste would be deposited and forgotten about and for lower-level wastes is one of ‘dilute and disperse’, which involves incineration releasing radiation into the atmosphere or dumping into municipal waste tips or discharging it into rivers or oceans.
  • Consulting the public, over the storage and treatment of radioactive waste, and its transportation if this should continue, and also educating the public on the radiological risks attached to these activities; all too often consultation is tokenistic, not inclusive and not open, with the nuclear industry still conducting much of its business behind closed doors.


The author of our response was Pete Roche, the NFLA Policy Advisor (Scotland). Pete has over fifty years of environmental and anti-nuclear campaigning experience, having first been involved in protests against the construction of the Torness Nuclear Power Station in the 1970s.

The NFLA’s full response can be read at the end of this media release [on original]; it amounts to a resounding ‘No’.

The DESNZ consultation is still open for public comments until 24 May 2023.

The consultation papers can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/managing-radioactive-substances-and-nuclear-decommissioning

For more information, please contact NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email on richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk or mobile 07583097793

The response by the NFLAs to the DESNZ consultation

May 11, 2023 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Links between Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power.

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) 30 Apr 23

Note from GordonEdwards

* There is one exception. Plutonium-238 is normally present as a very small percentage of reactor-produced plutonium. However, if plutonium-238 is highly concentrated, it generates so much heat that it will melt the conventional explosice charges needed to trigger a nuclear explosion and for that reason cannot be used to make an effective nuclear weapon. However that situation never arises when dealing only with the plutonium produced by a nuclear reactor fueled with uranium. In other words, all plutonium produced in the used uranium fuel from a nuclear reactor is “good” for use as a nuclear weapons explosive material.

This resolution was passed at the 23rd World Congress, in Mombasa, Kenya 

by the IPPNW International Council – April 30th, 2023

IPPNW affirms that the links between nuclear power and nuclear weapons are such that in order to fully abolish nuclear weapons, we also must stop the parallel process of nuclear power.   

This resolution is an updated version of a similar resolution “Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Energy – The Links” adopted at the 13th World Congress of IPPNW in Melbourne, Australia, Dec 1998.

IPPNW urges that there be:

  1. No more uranium mining.  Leave it in the ground.
  2. No more plutonium extraction from existing nuclear materials.
  3. No new nuclear power plants.
  4. Expeditious transition from nuclear power to renewable energy sources. 
  5. Blending down of existing stores of highly enriched uranium thus rendering these stores less likely to be diverted for nuclear weapons proliferation.  How to handle plutonium to make it safe is still being discussed.

Reasons for Above:  

  1. The acquisition of nuclear-weapons-useable materials is the first step to making nuclear weapons
  2. The technical processes to create nuclear power or nuclear-weapons-usable materials are essentially the same.   Many nuclear plants have produced both.  For example Chernobyl was a “dual purpose” plant.
  3. The 1953 “Atoms for Peace” speech was widely seen as a cover for the military to maintain access to nuclear-weapons material after the closure of the Manhattan Project.
  4. Nuclear power makes the proliferation of nuclear weapons more likely and verification of nuclear weapons more difficult. For example India made and exploded its first nuclear weapons test from a reactor given to India from Canada.   This example of proliferation happened despite promises to the contrary.  
  5. The problem of what to do with high level nuclear wastes remains an unsolved dilemma threatening the environment and human health. This issue is similar for wastes originating from commercial nuclear fuel cycles or wastes from military grade material. Health hazards and multi generational health effects are the same from either stream.   
  6. The ‘weaponization’ of a nuclear power plant can happen in areas of conflict with great risks of purposeful or accidental dispersal of radioactive material.  (e.g. Zaporizhzhia plant in Ukraine).

May 11, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US Politicians Suggest Bombing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) in Event of Cross-Strait Conflict

more https://www.gnewswire.org/en/2023/05/06/us-politicians-suggest-bombing-tsmc-in-event-of-cross-strait-conflict-24537

US politicians have once again sparked debate by suggesting bombing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) in the event of cross-strait conflict. During a recent Milken Institute forum discussion on China-US strategic competition, Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton stated, “China needs to know that if you invade Taiwan, we’ll blow up TSMC”. While participating in the same panel discussion, US House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul revealed that President Tsai Ing-wen had asked him about the status of her country’s weaponry during his visit to Taiwan in April.

This is not the first time that US politicians have suggested bombing TSMC. In 2019, former Vice President Joe Biden had mentioned that the US would have to come up with new ways to counter China’s cyber attacks and intellectual property theft, including striking at Chinese companies like TSMC. Republican Senator Tom Cotton also touched on the topic earlier in May this year when he stated that America’s military response should include targeting Chinese critical infrastructure such as TSMC and Huawei.

Moulton later clarified his stance, saying that it is not the best strategy but only an example. Nevertheless, his comment could bring Taiwan’s technology industry, particularly TSMC, into focus in the escalating tensions between the US and China over the issue of Taiwan. TSMC, a crucial supplier to US firms such as Apple and Qualcomm, has seen its stock fall repeatedly this week following his comment.

Experts have pointed out that bombing TSMC would not only anger China but also cause significant harm to Taiwan’s economy. TSMC accounts for nearly half of the world’s chip production and is a critical part of Taiwan’s technology industry. The threats against it have highlighted how Taiwan, which relies heavily on the US for support, can be caught in the middle of tensions between the superpowers.

May 11, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The US silence on Israeli nuclear weapons and the right-wing Israeli government

While the US government tiptoes around the issue, Israel brags about its nuclear force.

Who would have imagined that, just as we have been worrying about Pakistani weapons falling into the hands of Islamic fanatics, we would come to the point where we have to fear Israel’s nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Israeli fanatics, who, as Ehud Barak explained, are “determined to attack Islam.” Our government cannot deal with these issues if it ignores the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons.

By Victor Gilinsky | May 4, 2023, Victor Gilinsky is a physicist and was a commissioner of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission during the Ford, Carter, and Reagan administrations   https://thebulletin.org/2023/05/the-us-silence-on-israeli-nuclear-weapons-and-the-right-wing-israeli-government/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=MondayNewsletter05042023&utm_content=NuclearRisk_IsraeliNukes_05042023

The Israeli protests against its new right-wing government have now touched on Israel’s nuclear weapons. To underline what is at stake, former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak cast aside Israeli ambiguity over whether it possesses nuclear weapons to warn his compatriots that Western diplomats are worried that a Jewish messianic dictatorship could gain control over Israel’s nuclear weapons.

One thing we can be sure of is that the United States was not officially represented among those Western diplomats. American diplomats—in fact all US government employees—are forced to pretend they know nothing about Israeli nuclear weapons. Since everyone knows it’s not true, the pretense hobbles America’s policy on restraining the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Barak’s acknowledgment of Israel’s weapons, backhanded as it was, should free the United States from this outdated omerta.

The popular explanation of the US gag on Israeli nuclear weapons is that it is required by a September 1969 deal between Richard Nixon and Israel’s then-prime minister Golda Meir in which America would accept a nuclear-armed Israel and both would keep Israel’s nuclear weapons secret. US policy toward Israeli nuclear weapons was indeed eased after their meeting, but judging by Nixon’s memoirs, it was because he didn’t care much whether Israeli had them. His main interest was to gain Israeli support in the Cold War.

They spoke alone, kept no notes, and told no one what they talked about. A memorandum days later to the president from Henry Kissinger, then his national security advisor, shows even he knew little about the conversation. As to maintaining secrecy, they didn’t need a formal agreement. Nixon and Meir both understood a declared Israeli nuclear arsenal would have led to pressure on Moscow to provide their Arab allies with nuclear weapons.

The US bureaucracy and academics later created a myth about a nuclear deal, turning a convenient accommodation into a perpetual obligation, and subsequent presidents fell in line. But an international deal of which there is no record is no deal at all.

Nevertheless, US presidents since Bill Clinton are said to have signed a secret letter that they will not interfere with Israel’s nuclear weapons, and Israel acted as if it was entitled to such a commitment from every incoming US president. It got the commitment. When President Obama took office in 2009, the first question at his first televised press conference, from veteran reporter Helen Thomas, was: “Do you know of any country in the Middle East that has nuclear weapons?” The president’s slippery reply was: “I don’t want to speculate.” Helen Thomas got fired soon after, and while this was for her anti-Israeli remarks on a different occasion, no reporter has asked the question since. In February 2017 Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer managed to infuriate even the newly arrived Trump White House staff, sympathetic to Israel, with his heavy-handed demands the new president sign “the letter.” Still, it worked.

A change won’t come easily. A realistic US government assessment of Israel’s nuclear weapons will have to overcome not only Israeli intervention for its own reasons, but also State Department and White House resistance, in part because of the embarrassment of such an admission after years of denial, but also because such an admission could lead to complications under US law.

There is persuasive evidence that Israel detonated at least one test nuclear explosion on September 22, 1979, about a thousand miles south of South Africa. The signal, detected by a US Vela satellite, with corroborating evidence, was widely interpreted by the US intelligence community and most analysts as coming from an Israeli nuclear test explosion.

While the Carter White House publicly argued otherwise, months after the event Carter wrote in his diary: “We have a growing belief among our scientists that the Israelis did indeed conduct a nuclear test explosion in the ocean near the southern end of Africa.” Such an explosion was a violation of the 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty, to which Israel was a party.

Confirmation of such a test would also trigger the 1977 Glenn Amendment to the Arms Export Control Act, which imposes tough economic and military sanctions on any state, other than the five nuclear powers authorized under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, that detonates a bomb post-1977. The president can waive the penalty, but not without political embarrassment.

While the US government tiptoes around the issue, Israel brags about its nuclear force. At the 2016 ceremony for the arrival of the fifth German-built submarine which Israel outfits with long range nuclear-tipped missiles, Netanyahu said: “Our submarine fleet is used first and foremost to deter our enemies who strive to extinguish us. They must know that Israel is capable of hitting back hard against anyone who seeks to hurt us …” No mention of “nuclear,” but the message was unmistakable.

Who would have imagined that, just as we have been worrying about Pakistani weapons falling into the hands of Islamic fanatics, we would come to the point where we have to fear Israel’s nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Israeli fanatics, who, as Ehud Barak explained, are “determined to attack Islam.” Our government cannot deal with these issues if it ignores the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons.

In his book on Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, Wolf Blitzer wrote there is “a widely held attitude among Israeli officials that Israel can get away with the most outrageous things. There is a notion among many Israelis that their American counterparts are not too bright, that they can be ‘handled’.” We should not any longer put up with that. The Cold War reasons for America to stay mum about Israeli nuclear weapons evaporated decades ago. What the Israeli government says about its nuclear weapons is its business—but what our government says about it is American business.

May 10, 2023 Posted by | Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties | 1 Comment

The crazy plan to explode a nuclear bomb on the Moon

BBC the next giant leap, 3 May 23

In the 1950s, with the USSR seemingly sprinting ahead in the space race, US scientists hatched a bizarre plan – nuking the surface of the Moon to frighten the Soviets.

…………………………….. At first reading, the title of the research paper – A Study of Lunar Research Flights, Vol 1 – sounds blandly bureaucratic and peaceful. The kind of paper easy to ignore. And that was probably the point.

Glance at the cover, however, and things look a little different.

Emblazoned in the centre is a shield depicting an atom, a nuclear bomb, and a mushroom cloud – the emblem of the Air Force Special Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, which played a key role in the development and testing of nuclear weapons.

Down at the bottom is the author’s name: L Reiffel, or Leonard Reiffel, one of America’s leading nuclear physicists. He worked with Enrico Fermi, the creator of the world’s first nuclear reactor who is known as the “architect of the nuclear bomb“.

Project A119, as it was known, was a top-secret proposal to detonate a hydrogen bomb on the Moon. Hydrogen bombs were vastly more destructive than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945, and the latest in nuclear weapon design at the time. Asked to “fast track” the project by senior officers in the Air Force, Reiffel produced many reports between May 1958 and January 1959 on the feasibility of the plan……………………

While it might have helped to answer some rudimentary scientific questions about the Moon, Project A119’s primary purpose was as a show of force. The bomb would explode on the appropriately named Terminator Line  – the border between the light and dark side of the Moon – to create a bright flash of light that anyone, but particularly anyone in the Kremlin, could see with the naked eye. The absence of an atmosphere meant there wouldn’t be a mushroom cloud.

There is only one convincing explanation for proposing such a horrendous plan – and the motivation for it lies somewhere between insecurity and desperation.

In the 1950s, it didn’t look like America was winning the Cold War. Political and popular opinion in the United States held that the Soviet Union was ahead in the growth of its nuclear arsenal, particularly in the development, and number, of nuclear bombers (“the bomber gap”) and nuclear missiles (“the missile gap”). 

In 1952, the US had exploded the first hydrogen bomb. Three years later the Soviets shocked Washington by exploding their own. In 1957 they went one better, stealing a lead in the space race with the launch of Sputnik 1, the first artificial satellite in orbit around the world.

t didn’t help American nerves that Sputnik was launched on top of a Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile – albeit a modified one – nor that the US’s own attempt to launch an “artificial moon” ended in a huge, fiery explosion. The inferno that consumed their Vanguard rocket was captured on film and shown around the world. A British newsreel at the time was brutal: “THE VANGUARD FAILS…a big setback indeed…in the realm of prestige and propaganda…”

All the while, US schoolchildren were being shown the famous “Duck and Cover” information film, in which Bert the animated turtle helps teach children what to do in the event of a nuclear attack.

Later that same year, US newspapers citing a senior intelligence source reported that “Soviets to H-Bomb Moon On Revolution Anniversary Nov 7” (The Daily Times, New Philadelphia, Ohio) and then followed it up with reports that the Soviets might already be planning to launch a nuclear-armed rocket at our nearest neighbour.

Like with other Cold War rumours, its origins are hard to fathom…………………………………………………..

“Project A119 reminds me of the segment in The Simpsons when Lisa sees Nelson’s ‘Nuke the Whales’ poster on his wall,” says Bleddyn Bowen, an expert in international relations in outer space. “And he says, ‘Well you’ve got to nuke something.’

…………………………………. Most of the details of Project A119 are still shrouded in mystery. Many of the were apparently destroyed….  https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230505-the-crazy-plan-to-explode-a-nuclear-bomb-on-the-moon

May 10, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Vogtle-3 nuclear reactor flunked cybersecurity inspections, still at 0% power

The Vogtle-3 nuclear reactor in Georgia hasn’t even reached full power yet
(still at 0% as of yesterday morning) and it has already flunked a
cybersecurity inspection, with three violations, including issues with
procedure adherence and training.

Ed Lyman 6th May 2023

NRC 3rd May 2023

more https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2312/ML23122A319.pdf

May 10, 2023 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear Energy and the Non-Proliferation Treaty: A Retrospective Examination

Mycle Schneider & M. V. Ramana

Received 08 Nov 2022, Accepted 17 Apr 2023, Published online: 04 May 2023

ABSTRACT

This commentary looks at how nuclear power has evolved in the last five decades since the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entered into force in 1970. Using data on numbers of reactors constructed around the world, we show that the early expectations of a rapid growth of nuclear power plants around the world has not materialized. We also outline the trends in safeguards at nuclear facilities, namely the measures undertaken to prevent the diversion of fissile materials for use in nuclear weapons, and highlight the potential risks due to the rapid growth in the amount of material that could potentially be diverted.

more https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2023.2205572—

May 10, 2023 Posted by | history | Leave a comment

The success of the Zelensky regime coming unstuck?

Zelensky regime’s fate is sealed Indian Punchline  BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

The West’s cryptic or mocking remarks doubting the Kremlin statement on the failed Ukrainian attempt to assassinate President Vladimir Putin do not detract from the fact that Moscow has no reason on earth to fabricate such a grave allegation that has prompted the scaling down of its Victory Day celebrations on May 9, which is a triumphal moment in all of Russian history, especially now when it is fighting off the recrudescence of Nazi ideology on Europe’s political landscape single-handedly all over again. 

The alacrity with which the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken debunked the Kremlin allegation, perhaps, gives the game away. It is in the neocon DNA to duck in such defining moments. That said, predictably, Blinken also distanced the Biden administration  from the Kremlin attack. 

Earlier, the chairman of Joints Chiefs of Staff General Marks Milley also did a similar thing in an interview with the Foreign Affairs magazine disowning in advance any responsibility for the upcoming Ukrainian “counteroffensive”. This is the Biden Administration’s new refrain — hear no evil, speak no evil. No more talk, either, of backing Kiev all the way “no matter what it takes” — as Biden used to say ad nauseam. 

The heart of the matter is that Kiev’s much touted “counteroffensive” is struggling amidst widespread western prognosis that it is destined to be a damp squib. Actually, the salience of the Foreign Affairs podcast this week with Gen. Milley was also his diffidence about the outcome. Milley refused to be categorical that Kiev would even launch its “counteroffensive”! 

There is a huge dilemma today as the entire western narrative of a Russian defeat stands exposed as a pack of lies, and alongside, the myth of Kiev’s military prowess to take on the far superior military might of a superpower has evaporated. The Ukrainian military is being ground to the dust systematically. In reality, Ukraine has become an open wound that is fast turning gangrene, and little time is left to cauterise the wound. 

However, Kiev regime is ridden with factionalism. There are powerful cliques who are averse to peace talks with Russia short of capitulation by Moscow and instead want an escalation so that the Western powers remain committed. And even after Boris Johnson’s exit, they have supporters in the West. 

The militant clique ensconced in the power structure in Kiev could well have been the perpetrators of this dangerous act of provocation directed against the Kremlin with an ulterior agenda to trigger a Russian retaliation. 

From Blinken’s vacuous remark, it seems the neocons in the Biden Administration led by Victoria Nuland are in no mood to rein in the mavericks in Kiev, either. As for Europe, it has lost its voice too. 

This will probably show up in history books as a historic failure of European leadership and at its core lies the paradox that it is not France but the German government that has aligned itself closer with the US in the Ukraine war and risking an intra-European “epoch of confrontation.”

Even otherwise, these are fateful times, with the political middle ground already shrinking in France and Italy and is much weakened in Germany itself in the wake of the pandemic, the war, and inflation. Importantly, this is only partly an economic story, as the decline of the centre and the de-industrialisation in Europe are closely related and the social fabric that supported the centre has come unstuck. 

……………………………………….. The considered Kremlin reaction is available from the remarks by the Russian Ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov: 

“How would Americans react if a drone hit the White House, the Capitol or the Pentagon? The answer is obvious for any politician as well as for an average citizen: the punishment will be harsh and inevitable.” ………………………………………… more https://www.indianpunchline.com/zelensky-regimes-fate-is-sealed/

May 10, 2023 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | 2 Comments

Five years after Trump’s exit, no return to the Iran nuclear deal

Trump’s slew of sanctions and a changing political climate have contributed to JCPOA remaining in limbo.

By Maziar Motamedi

Aljjazeera On 8 May 20238 May 2023

Tehran, Iran – Five years ago today, President Donald Trump held up a signed executive order for the cameras at the White House, announcing a unilateral withdrawal from a nuclear deal the United States had signed in 2015 with Iran and world powers.

Despite years of efforts, and after many ups and downs, the landmark accord known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), has not been restored, contributing to rising tensions across the region.

The Trump administration’s many designations of Iranian entities and institutions, specifically aimed at making it difficult for his successor Joe Biden to undo his damage, worked in tandem with a changing political climate to prevent a restored JCPOA.

The then-US president had argued that the deal was not doing enough to permanently keep Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and Trump rejoiced as he undid one of the most important foreign policy achievements of his predecessor Barack Obama.

His administration set out a dozen conditions to renegotiate a deal more favourable to Washington with Tehran, which would effectively amount to a total political capitulation by Iran…………………………

Iranian leaders, however, have not surrendered their doctrine of defying the US, and attacks by pro-Iran groups on US interests across the region have only multiplied in recent years, according to Washington.

The US assassination of Iran’s top general Qassem Soleimani in Iraq in early 2020 took tensions to new heights, with Tehran and Washington teetering on the edge of war…………………………………………………………..

JCPOA in the region

Since its inception, Israel has been the JCPOA’s biggest foe, incessantly lobbying Washington to declare the deal dead.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump after his reneging on the deal, and Tel Aviv has repeatedly pushed against efforts by other signatories – namely China, Russia, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – to restore the accord through now-stalled talks that began in 2021.

Israel has also warned it will attack Iran to stop it from acquiring a bomb, and Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, last week said the US president is willing to recognise “Israel’s freedom of action” if necessary.

The comment drew ire in Tehran, prompting security chief Ali Shamkhani to deem it a US admission of responsibility for Israeli attacks on Iranian facilities and nuclear scientists.

Elsewhere in the Middle East, many Arab states, led by Saudi Arabia, also cheered for Trump as they expressed concern over Tehran’s nuclear programme – which it maintains is strictly peaceful – and its support for proxies across the region.

But as Tehran also ramped up the pressure, and the US gradually saw its role in the region diminished, Arab leaders recognised a need for change.

The 2019 attack on Saudi oil facilities by the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, and the subsequent non-response from Washington, appeared to be a turning point for Arab nations.

After two years of direct talks, Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed in March to restore diplomatic relations in a deal mediated by China, and embassies are expected to be reopened this week.

More challenges ahead

At least for now, JCPOA stakeholders appear to be content with maintaining the status quo while managing tensions.

The passing of two Western-introduced resolutions last year at the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that censured Iran – and Tehran’s response – and a deadlock in talks since September have not prompted any side to declare the JCPOA dead in the absence of a better alternative for the accord.

The deal’s fate, however, promises to produce more confrontations between Tehran and the West in the coming months.

The Western parties have already reportedly warned Iran that if it further increases its enrichment of uranium to levels that could be potentially used to produce a bomb, it will prompt them to activate the deal’s so-called “snapback” mechanism that will automatically reinstate the United Nations sanctions on Iran.

Iran and the IAEA reached an agreement in Tehran in March to increase cooperation, which could potentially prevent another resolution at the upcoming board meeting of the nuclear watchdog in June.

Another major deadline arrives in October when the JCPOA is set to lift a number of restrictions on Iran’s research, development and production of long-range missiles and drones.

With Israel also pushing for snapback and the West accusing Tehran of selling armed drones to Russia for the war in Ukraine, stakeholders will have their work cut out for them in managing tensions during the coming months. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/8/five-years-after-trumps-exit-no-return-to-the-iran-nuclear-deal

May 10, 2023 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Power alert: Be wary of lifting moratorium on new Illinois nuclear plants

Advocates of ending the moratorium have said they want to make it possible to build small power nuclear power plants in the state.

Chicago Sun-TimesBy  CST Editorial Board May 9, 2023

Illinois should move carefully before repealing its three-decade-old moratorium on new nuclear power plants.

On Tuesday, the House Senate Energy and Public Utilities Committee will discuss an amended version of a bill passed by the state Senate to lift the moratorium and allow “advanced nuclear reactors.” Advocates of ending the moratorium have said they want to make it possible to build small power nuclear power plants in the state, which would take advantage of new federal spending, although the technology to make that possible is years in the future. And it’s not clear how the “advanced nuclear reactors” in the bill would differ from small modular ones.

Meanwhile, Illinois still faces the problem that led to the moratorium in the first place: There is no long-term storage facility to store nuclear waste, which can go on emitting hazardous radiation for tens of thousands of years.

As envisioned, small modular nuclear power plants would have about a third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear reactors. Their modular design would allow them to be factory assembled, saving money and allowing them to be constructed on sites too small for traditional reactors. U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry has said small modular reactors can be a tool to fight against climate change.

But some environmentalists and stakeholders are wary. “What’s really at play here is the attempt to resurrect the moribund and uneconomic nuclear industry,” said David Kraft, director of the Nuclear Energy Information Service, a nuclear watchdog. “But most fundamentally and important, we need an overhaul of the transmission grid, because you could have a million reactors or you could have a million wind turbines, but if you can’t connect power to the customer, they are worthless.” 

…………………. small nuclear plants are a dubious answer. Will the nuclear waste they generate lead to vulnerable storage sites or risky transportation of spent fuel? Global energy prices are higher now, but if they go back down, will smaller reactors be in line for the subsidies larger ones got? Why focus on them when they won’t be built in time to meet the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2030 deadline to halve carbon emissions?

Illinois needs to focus on achieving its goal of transitioning to renewable energy. The state must ensure the idea of new nuclear plants does not divert it from that mission. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/5/8/23715796/small-modular-power-nucear-energy-reactors-moratorium-illinois-legislature-editorial

May 10, 2023 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

What to Know About Fukushima’s Exclusion Zone and Nuclear Mutations

The Fukushima exclusion zone is the result of a nuclear disaster in 2011. Keep reading to learn more about nuclear mutations and the earthquake that started it all.

BY RAYNA SKIVER. MAY 8 2023,  https://www.greenmatters.com/clean-energy/fukushima-exclusion-zone

Back in 2011, a coastal city in Japan was hit by a powerful earthquake and tsunami. When this disaster struck Fukushima, reactors at a nuclear power plant overheated melted, causing radioactive materials to be released into the environment.

Soon after the catastrophe, the Fukushima exclusion zone was created.

After the disaster, the area surrounding the power plant was closed off due to the dangers of radiation— this site is called an exclusion zone. Today, a few places are still closed even after all of these years.

Some people might think that Fukushima is completely unsafe to visit, but that’s actually not the case. In fact, it’s possible to tour the area and learn more about the disaster. Real Fukushima is one of the many organizations that are working to change the public’s perception — they want people to see the city as hopeful, not dark.

The Fukushima disaster resulted in nuclear mutations.

Another result of the 2011 catastrophe was nuclear mutations. According to NBC News, researchers found mutations in butterflies near the Daiichi power plant. This observation was a sign of potential changes to the local ecosystem.

Nearby forests were also affected by the nuclear disaster. Studies showed that leaves had high concentrations of radiation and that there were “​​growth mutations of fir trees,” according to Greenpeace. The organization voiced concern about the potential consequences that the disaster might have on plants and animals.

The Fukushima nuclear disaster had terrible consequences for the surrounding communities and the environment. According to BBC, the earthquake and the tsunami that followed killed over 18,000 people, with many still missing. Over 150,000 had to evacuate the area as well, due to radiation leaks.

After the event, many countries began correcting design flaws — such as having the generators in the basement — and conducting stress tests in order to minimize future risks. On the other hand, Japan decided to phase out nuclear energy altogether.

The country’s citizens were uncomfortable with their dependence on atomic energy after the disaster, understandably so. Most nuclear power plants in Japan have been idle since 2011. Before the incident, nuclear energy accounted for about a third of the country’s power, but in 2020, the number significantly decreased to less than 5 percent, according to The Guardian.

But now, the country is reconsidering its reliance on nuclear power. Japan is looking for a secure energy supply — the war in Ukraine and rising energy costs have made the feat difficult. Not only might this be an unpopular move with the country’s citizens, but it’s also a loss for the environment.

Nuclear energy produces radioactive waste. This waste can end up harming both humans and the environment, according to the Energy Information Association. Nuclear power plants are also water hungry — they require a lot of water for cooling, Greenpeace explained.

With all of the risks involved, it might be best to turn away from nuclear energy and toward renewable energy.

May 10, 2023 Posted by | environment, Japan | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »