Safety problems may mean the end for AREVA’s EPR nuclear reactor
the International Energy Agency’s World Economic Outlook 2014 report:
- that nuclear growth will be “concentrated in markets where electricity is supplied at regulated prices, utilities have state backing or governments act to facilitate private investment”;
- and that “nuclear power faces major challenges in competitive markets where there are significant market and regulatory risks.”.
Finland cancels Olkiluoto 4 nuclear reactor – is the EPR finished?, The Ecologist, Dr Jim Green & Oliver Tickell 15 May 15 A negative learning curve on steroids
“……What to make of the EPR saga? First, Areva is backing the wrong horse – the outcome of current political debates will result in a declining role for nuclear power in France, coupled to the growth of renewables.
A new report by ADEME, a French government agency under the Ministries of Ecology and Research, concludes that a 100% renewable electricity supply scenario is feasible in France. The report estimates that the electricity production cost would be €119 per megawatt-hour in 2050 in the all-renewables scenario, compared with a near-identical figure of €117 / MWh with a mix of 50% nuclear, 40% renewables, and 10% fossil fuels.
Areva has also backed the wrong-sized wrong horse: a giant reactor with a giant price-tag. That said, the backers of ‘small modular reactors‘ are having no more success than Areva.
Areva has backed the wrong-sized wrong horse at the wrong time – the Global Financial Crisis and its aftermath, stagnant energy demand, the liberalization of energy markets, the political fallout from the Fukushima disaster and other factors have dampened demand for new reactors and made it more difficult to secure finance (or government subsidies) for huge projects.
The EPR saga undermines the rhetoric of standardised, simplified reactors designs ushering in a new era of nuclear growth. It also shows that developing modified versions of conventional reactors (in this case pressurised water reactors) can be complicated and protracted and can end in failure.
How much more difficult will it be to develop radically new types of reactors? The French government’s Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety has recently produced an important critique of Generation IV nuclear power concepts.
It states that there “is still much R&D to be done to develop the Generation IV nuclear reactors” and it is sceptical about the safety claims made for Generation IV concepts.
The EPR saga shows that even countries with extensive nuclear expertise and experience can mess things up. The EPR might have demonstrated the potential for mass production to drive down costs – but in reality it is demonstrating the opposite.
Even before the EPR fiasco, the large-scale, standardised French nuclear power program was subject to a negative economic learning curve – costs were increasing over time. The EPR represents a negative learning curve on steroids.
That point is emphasised by construction cost estimates of £16-24.5 billion (US$24.3-37.2b; €21.7-33.2b) for two planned EPRs (with combined capacity of 3.2 gigawatts) at Hinkley Point in the UK. In the mid- to late-2000s, the estimated construction cost for an EPR was £2 billion; current estimates are 4-6 times higher.
Private companies have pulled out of EPR projects in several countries (Italy, the US, the UK, etc.). Thus the EPR fiasco reinforces points made in the International Energy Agency’s World Economic Outlook 2014 report:
- that nuclear growth will be “concentrated in markets where electricity is supplied at regulated prices, utilities have state backing or governments act to facilitate private investment”;
- and that “nuclear power faces major challenges in competitive markets where there are significant market and regulatory risks.”…..http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2859924/finland_cancels_olkiluoto_4_nuclear_reactor_is_the_epr_finished.html
Green bonds – a powerful way to develope green energy?
Green bonds, a fast-growing money game with the clout to develop clean energy, await an umpire, EE News, Benjamin Hulac, E&E reporter ClimateWire: Thursday, May 14, 2015
When he chaired the Federal Communications Commission from 1993 to 1997, Reed Hundt studied the swift expansion of the nation’s telecommunications system that made the United States among the most advanced nations in the field and sparked investment overseas.
Between 1996 and 2013, broadband companies invested more than $1.3 trillion in telecom infrastructure domestically, according to the broadband industry’s trade group.
About 32 percent of the world’s population — 84 percent and 21 percent of residents in developed and developing nations, respectively — now has mobile broadband connections, according to the United Nations.
Hundt believes the same experience could be repeated in developing clean energy to cope with global climate change.
Borrowed money paid for the communications boom, Hundt explained, speaking yesterday at an energy efficiency conference in Washington, D.C. He added that world leaders should apply the same method to fund the renewable energy market.
“Everything in communications has been purchased with debt,” he said, holding up an iPhone and describing how rapidly mobile phones have spread internationally.
The portion of the business world devoted to renewable energy resembles the telecom industry in the 1980s, said Hundt, now the CEO of the Coalition for Green Capital, a nonprofit working to drive renewable investment by creating so-called green banks.
“I think that we’re in the really early days,” he said during a panel talk on green bonds, adding that a “total, radical, disrupting overhaul” of the energy sector must be accomplished with a massive lending market and robust debt securitization…………..http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060018552
Nuclear corporation Exelon tries to stifle the competition from renewables
Exelon’s Pepco Takeover Fuels Fear That Nuclear Will Trump Solar, Blomberg, by Mark Chediak & Jim Polson 14 May 15 Fear that Exelon Corp. could slow the growth of solar power in Maryland to protect its high-cost nuclear reactors is fueling a push to block its planned acquisition of Pepco Holdings Inc.
The debate pits the state’s top lawyer, who has urged regulators to reject the sale, against the nation’s biggest nuclear power plant owner. The Maryland Public Service Commission is scheduled to rule on the $6.8 billion merger Friday.
If approved, Exelon will supply more than 80 percent of the state’s utility customers, giving it extraordinary market clout to favor its aging nuclear fleet over renewables, Attorney General Brian E. Frosh has argued. Exelon, based in Chicago, has countered with a promise to develop 15 megawatts of solar power in the state, and to create a $19.8 million fund to encourage investment in rooftop solar and energy efficiency.
In Illinois, where three Exelon reactors are at risk of closing, the company has blamed the growing use of wind power for crimping revenue, and it supports a requirement that utilities buy some power from “low-carbon” plants that include nuclear reactors.
‘Transformative Opportunities’
“The evidence shows that Exelon intends to control the pace of development of distributed energy resources,” Frosh said in a filing with the commission. Solar and wind, “while threatening to Exelon’s central station merchant power plants, offer unprecedented and transformative opportunities for Maryland consumers.”…….http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-15/exelon-s-pepco-takeover-fuels-fear-that-nuclear-will-trump-solar
Trans Pacific Partnership Versus The Environment
Here’s why. Continue reading
Things look crook for the uranium market – no respite in sight
Uranium prices have taken a turn for the worse due to a combination of factors that pulled the floor from underneath the commodity.
Back in November 2014, prices spiked from $28 per pound to $44 per pound. This was largely due to the sanctions imposed on Russia after the annexation of Crimea, thus portending a supply shortage.
But the price is currently close to $35 per pound. And technical indicators are pointing south once again……..
France was so confident in its atomic energy capabilities that, about 10 years ago, the French nuclear establishment made a bet on a new generation of reactors using European pressurize reactor (EPR) technology. These reactors were touted as the safest and most powerful ever made.
But, France isn’t living up to its promises. New plants that would ostensibly showcase the most cutting edge of nuclear energy prowess are years behind schedule and billions of euros over budget. Some are as much as three times more expensive than the original cost projections! At this point, many are questioning if they’ll ever be completed.
Plus, The New York Times reported on April 7 that one reactor, the Autorite de Surete Nucleaire, had discovered imperfections in the steel used by Areva (AREVA.PA) to make the caps of the main reactor vessel.
The caps contain the extreme heat, pressure, and radiation produced by nuclear fission. These same parts were used for a plant under construction in Taishan, China, which is being built in partnership with France……http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2015/05/15/uranium-commodity-concerns/
Costs rise with more delays at Georgia Nuclear Plant
Regulators: More Delays Possible for Georgia Nuclear Plant ATLANTA —abc news, May 13, 2015, By RAY HENRY Associated Press Regulators say there’s a “high probability” a nuclear plant under construction in Georgia will be delayed even longer than the three years already announced by its owners, according to an analysis obtained by The Associated Press.
Southern Co. subsidiary Georgia Power and its co-owners are building two more nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle in eastern Georgia. A project using the same reactor design, Westinghouse Electric Co.’s AP1000, is underway at the Summer nuclear station in South Carolina, which has seen similar delays……..
Time is money in the nuclear power industry. The longer building a power plant takes, the more utility companies must pay in construction and borrowing costs. Ultimately, electric customers will pay for the plant’s costs unless regulators intervene. A single day of delay will cost Georgia Power roughly $2 million, according to estimates from regulators…….http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/regulators-delays-georgia-nuclear-plant-31020059#.VVPN4Dd00rg.twitter
USA’s nuclear salesmen happy with Barack Obama’s trade deal with China
Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with China, quiet submarines and the South China Sea, SMH, May 11, 2015 Steven Mufson “……….The deal would allow Beijing to buy more US-designed reactors and pursue a facility or the technology to reprocess plutonium from spent fuel. China would also be able to buy reactor coolant technology that experts say could be adapted to make its submarines quieter and more difficult to detect.
The formal notice initially did not draw any headlines. Its unheralded release on April 21 reflected the administration’s anxiety that it might alarm members of Congress and non-proliferation experts who fear China’s growing naval power – and the possibility of nuclear technology falling into the hands of third parties with nefarious intentions.
Now, however, Congress is turning its attention to the agreement. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to hear from five Obama officials in a closed-door meeting on Monday to weigh the commercial, political and security implications of extending the accord. The private session will permit discussion of a classified addendum from the Director of National Intelligence analysing China’s nuclear export control system and what Mr Obama’s notification called its “interactions with other countries of proliferation concern”.
The White House’s willingness to push ahead with the nuclear accord with Beijing illustrates the evolving relationship between the world’s two largest powers, which, while eyeing each other with mutual suspicion and competitiveness, also view each other as vital economic and strategic global partners. The Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group, argues that the new agreement will clear the way for US companies to sell dozens of nuclear reactors to China, the biggest nuclear power market in the world………..http://www.smh.com.au/world/barack-obamas-nuclear-deal-with-china-quiet-submarines-and-the-south-china-sea-20150511-ggyl25.html
Weapons proliferation and other risks in USA’s marketing of nuclear technology to China
US nuclear deal with China raises proliferation concerns, Guardian Steven Mufson 12 May 15
Critics of Obama agreement are worried about Beijing’s growing naval power “……..The deal would allow Beijing to buy more US-designed reactors and pursue a facility or the technology to reprocess plutonium from spent fuel. China would also be able to buy reactor coolant technology that experts say could be adapted to make its submarines quieter and harder to detect.
The formal notice’s unheralded release on 21 April reflected the administration’s anxiety that it might alarm members of Congress and nonproliferation experts who fear China’s growing naval power – and the possibility of nuclear technology falling into the hands of third parties with nefarious intentions.
Now, however, Congress is turning its attention to the agreement. The Senate foreign relations committee was set to hear from five Obama officials in a closed-door meeting on Monday to weigh the commercial, political and security implications of extending the accord. The private session permitted discussion of a classified addendum from the director of national intelligence analysing China’s nuclear export control system and what Obama’s notification called its “interactions with other countries of proliferation concern”.
The White House’s willingness to push ahead with the nuclear accord with Beijing illustrates the evolving relationship between the world’s two largest powers, which, while eyeing each other with mutual suspicion and competitiveness, also view each other as vital economic and strategic global partners. The Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group, argues that the agreement will clear the way for US companies to sell dozens of nuclear reactors to China, the biggest nuclear power market in the world……..
The US has bilateral 123 agreements with 22 countries, plus Taiwan, for the peaceful use of nuclear power. Some countries that do not have such agreements, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Malaysia, have expressed interest in clearing obstacles to building nuclear reactors…………..
In December 2006, Westinghouse Electric — majority-owned by Toshiba — signed an agreement to sell its AP1000 reactors to China. Four are under construction, six more are planned, and the company hopes to sell 30 others, according to an April report from the Congressional Research Service.
When it comes to nuclear weapons proliferation, China is in a different category from other 123 agreement nations. It first tested a nuclear weapon in 1964 and now has an arsenal of about 250 nuclear warheads. So US concerns have focused more on whether China has transferred technology to other countries.
“Concerns persist about Chinese willingness as well as ability to detect and prevent illicit transfers,” the CRS report said. “Missile proliferation from Chinese entities is a continuing concern.” The US wants China to refrain from selling missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons, a payload of 499kg, as far as 305km. A State Department compliance report in 2014 said that Chinese entities continued to supply missile programmes in “countries of concern”.
China has a pilot plant engaged in reprocessing in Jiu Quan, a remote desert town in Gansu province. Satellite photos show that it is next to a former military reprocessing plant, according to Frank von Hippel, a Princeton University physics professor who specialises in nuclear arms control. There is not even any fencing between the sites, he says. “That’s been one of the hang-ups of the (reprocessing) deal” that China has been trying to negotiate with France for several years, von Hippel said.
Sokolski said the agreement proposed by Obama lacks a requirement for explicit, case-by-case US permission for a reprocessing project using American technology or material from US reactors. It gives consent in advance. And he fears that over the 30-year life of the new 123 agreement, China might want to compete with Russian and US arsenals and make more bombs, for which plutonium is the optimal material…………http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/12/us-china-nuclear-deal-proliferation-concerns
Canadian review board knocks back Areva’s planned uranium mine as uneconomic
Review board recommends against Areva Canada uranium mine http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN0NW22H20150511 May 11, 201 By Rod Nickel WINNIPEG, Manitoba – A review board in the northern Canadian territory of Nunavut has recommended that Areva’s AREVA.PA planned uranium mine should not proceed, due to uncertainty about timing of the company’s plans to build the mine.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission released the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s report on
Monday.The review board makes recommendations to Canadian federal ministers who are responsible for the decision.
Uranium prices have been weak since 2011’s Fukushima disaster in Japan, which caused that country to take its reactors off-line. The slump has led uranium producers to put some plans for new mines on hold.
The Nunavut review board considered the project’s social, economic and environmental impacts, but concluded that it could not adequately do this with no clear development schedule. The board said its recommendation, if adopted by Ottawa, does not mean that Areva could not apply again for approval.
Areva spokeswoman Veronique Loewen said the company was disappointed and is reviewing the report.The project involves two separate open-pit mine sites and a milling operation.
Malawi warned by World Bank to not re-open Paladin Australia’s uranium mine
Malawi warned against reopening uranium mine http://www.ventures-africa.com/archives/62631 May 12, 2015 VENTURES AFRICA – The World Bank has warned Malawi against reopening its only uranium mine, saying the project should be put on hold until global prices improve.
Australia mining company, Paladin Energy, is developing Malawi’s only uranium mine, the Kayelekera uranium mine, in Karonga, northern Malawi. The project was initial suspended in 2014 because of the then unfavourable price climate, but there are indications that the company plans to resume operations in the coming months. “Whether or not the mine at Kayelekera eventually resumes operations will depend primarily on future prospects for global uranium prices, for which the immediate outlook is uncertain,” the World Bank told Malawi in its latest report.Uranium from mining is used almost entirely as fuel for nuclear power plants.
In 2013, Malawi was ranked as the third largest producer of uranium in Africa and tenth in the world. It is behind Namibia and Niger in Africa.
Last year, uranium global prices crashed to $36, from $51 per pound. This posed a major setback to Paladin Energy Africa, having invested heavily on the premise that prices will climb to $70. The Kayelekera uranium deposit was discovered by UK’s CEGB firm and a feasibility study was subsequently undertaken in the 1980s. Paladin acquired the deposit in 1997, accepted a Bankable Feasibility Study early in 2007, and, following environmental approval, undertook a $220 million development. The mine was opened in April 2009.
Paladin Energy (Africa) Ltd holds Paladin’s 85 percent interest following the Development Agreement with the Government of Malawi in control of the remaining 15 percent. Kayelekera production commenced in mid-2009, and in 2012 production reached 1103 tU, followed by 1134 tU in 2013.
AREVA’s nuclear options narrow in attempt to save thecompany
Indebted French nuclear company Areva sacks workers, negotiates with Paris, Financial Review, 10 May 15 French nuclear group’s options narrow; Talks with EDF and state over costs of shake-up by Michael Stothard
French nuclear group Areva is to cut 6,000 jobs over three years – 14 per cent of its global workforce – as options for a government-backed rescue package begin to narrow.
Areva, which reported a €4.8bn loss last year, said it was also lowering wages for surviving staff in an attempt to deliver the bulk of a €1bn cost reduction target.
However, the state-controlled group, which has seen its equity capital fall to nearly zero after four years of losses, is continuing to negotiate a more radical restructuring plan with EDF and the French government.
People close to the discussions said that these talks now focus on just two remaining options, and a final decision will be made in the coming months.
This deal, which could be valued at as much as €3bn, would result in the break-up of Areva, a company once regarded as one of the crown jewels of France’s nuclear industry. But, at the same time, it would limit the amount of cash the state has to contribute to Areva in a capital raising, which is expected to accompany such a deal.
Under a second, simpler, option – which people close to the talks say is preferred by the managements of Areva and EDF – only the smaller engineering business of Areva would be sold to EDF.
This would keep Areva relatively intact. But with EDF paying only between €300m and €1bn, it would necessitate a much bigger capital contribution from the cash-strapped French government to Areva.
To help mitigate the cost to the state of any capital raising, Areva will consider approaching its existing Chinese partners, according to people familiar with the plans………http://www.afr.com/news/world/indebted-french-nuclear-company-areva-sacks-workers-negotiates-with-paris-20150510-ggy6b0
Areva’s nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in La Hague in crisis- shunned by clients
Crisis for Areva’s La Hague plant as clients shun nuclear, News Daily May 6, 2015 EMMANUEL JARRY FOR REUTERS BEAUMONT-HAGUE, France – Areva’s nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in La Hague needs to cut costs as its international customers disappear following the Fukushima disaster, and its sole remaining big customer, fellow state-owned French utility EDF, pressures it to cut prices.
Located at the westernmost tip of Normandy, La Hague reprocesses spent nuclear fuel for reuse in nuclear reactors and is a key part in Areva’s production chain, which spans uranium mining to fuel recycling.
Its valuation and outlook are crucial for the troubled French nuclear group, which is racing to find an equity parter after four years of losses have virtually wiped out its capital……….
One of the world’s biggest nuclear waste storage facilities, La Hague’s four pools hold the equivalent of about 50 reactor cores under four meters of water.
Protected by 1.5 meter thick anti-radiation concrete walls, employees in space suits cut up spent nuclear fuel rods, extract uranium and about one percent of plutonium, and melt the remaining waste into glass for eventual deep storage.
Areva says reprocessing reduces natural uranium needs by 25 percent but opponents say that separating plutonium from spent nuclear fuel increases the risk of nuclear proliferation.
The United States does not reprocess its nuclear fuel, but Britain has a large reprocessing plant in Sellafield. A planned recycling plant in Rokkasho, Japan – modeled on La Hague – has been plagued by problems and is years behind schedule.
Since the 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Areva’s reprocessing unit has lost nearly all of its international customers.
The company’s “back-end” sales – which include reprocessing, logistics and decommissioning – have fallen to 1.53 billion euros in 2014, 18 percent of Areva’s turnover, from 2 billion euros, 30 percent of nuclear revenue, in 2004.
EDF SQUEEZE
In the past decades, more than 32,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel has been reprocessed at La Hague, of which nearly 70 percent for EDF, 17 percent for German utilities, nine percent for Japanese utilities and the rest for Swiss, Belgian, Dutch and Italian clients.
This year, La Hague expects to treat 1,205 tonnes of spent fuel, of which just 25 tonnes will come from abroad. That leaves Areva with EDF virtually as its sole customer, and although both firms are state-owned – Areva 87 percent, EDF 85 percent – EDF has played hardball in contract negotiations.
La Hague extracts plutonium from used nuclear fuel, which it then sends to Areva’s Melox plant in southeast France, which produces MOX fuel – a mixture of plutonium and spent uranium – for 22 (soon 24) of EDF’s 58 reactors.
The arrival of new management at both companies since the start of the year has ended years of hostility between France’s two nuclear champions, but a 6.5 billion euro contract to treat and recycle 1,100 tonnes per year of EDF’s spent fuel for the 2013-2020 period has still not been signed…………http://newsdaily.com/2015/05/crisis-for-arevas-la-hague-plant-as-clients-shun-nuclear/
AREVA’s woes heralding a slippery global slope for the nuclear industry?
French Nuclear Dynamo Stalls, NYT, By DAVID JOLLY and STANLEY REEDMAY 7, 2015 PARIS — For decades, France has been a been a living laboratory for atomic energy, getting nearly three-quarters of its electricity from nuclear power — a higher proportion by far than in any other country.
But in the last few years, the French dynamo has started to stall. New plants that were meant to showcase the industry’s most advanced technology are years behind schedule and billions of euros over budget. Worse, recently discovered problems at one site have raised new doubts about when, or even if, they will be completed……..
Alarmed by the French industry’s problems, the Socialist government of President François Hollande is expected soon to announce an industry overhaul. As the majority owner of the country’s two main nuclear companies — the reactor maker Areva and the big utility operator Électricité de France — the government will aim not only to put the companies on a firmer financial footing but to reorganize them in hopes of restoring the French industry’s role-model luster.
On Thursday, Areva took the first of those steps by announcing big cost-cutting plans. The move is likely to trim as many as 6,000 jobs from the company’s global work force of 45,000 — as many of 4,000 of those coming in France……….
With the French companies struggling, some nuclear experts see a slippery geopolitical slope. Continue reading
6,000 employees of failing nuclear giant AREVA are to lose their jobs
French nuclear group Areva to cut up to 6,000 jobs worldwide, Yahoo 7 News May 8, 2015,
Paris (AFP) – French nuclear group Areva, which incurred massive losses last year, announced Thursday it would cut up to 6,000 jobs worldwide as it seeks to slash its costs by a billion euros by 2017. he number of job cuts will be between 5,000 and 6,000 worldwide, said the group’s human resources director Francois Nogue.Between 3,000 and 4,000 of the job losses will be in France.
Areva had earlier said it planned to reduce its labour costs by around 15 percent in France and 18 percent internationally.
The group’s labour costs currently come to between 3.5 billion and 4.0 billion euros — an unsustainable level given that revenues are only about twice that, said Nogue………….https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/27700325/french-nuclear-group-areva-to-cut-up-to-6-000-jobs-worldwide/
Big nuclear company not interested in new nuclear power
Vattenfall: We are not interested in new nuclear power http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6156063 lördag 2 maj kl 15Vattenfall’s new President and CEO, Magnus Hall, a former lobbyist for the nuclear power industry, says it is no longer possible to build new nuclear power stations in Sweden, unless the state pays.
The business community in Sweden is no longer interested in building new nuclear power. At least not if it has to pay, thinks Magnus Hall. The ongoing nuclear projects in Finland and the UK have cracked all his calculations and the Vattenfall chief does not believe there is not sufficient profitability in new reactors without state support.
Magnus Hall, who was formerly chairman of Industrial Power, a lobby organization that wanted to build new nuclear power for electricity-intensive industries, has thus changed his position today.
“Yes, I have enough, actually, because I think it has become so clear that it is the state that dictates the terms for nuclear power. Therefore, the state also take responsibility for it, and it is also linked to the infrastructure of a country, says Hall to Swedish Radio News.
Last week, the Swedish state-owned energy company announced it will cut 1,000 jobs and close two of its reactors earlier than expected due to a fall in profits. Lower energy prices and lower production levels have affected Vattenfall’s results.
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (92)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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
nuclear-news 