Germany reaffirms its opposition to nuclear power being designated as ”sustainable”
Germany will work towards an exclusion of nuclear power from the EU taxonomy for sustainable investments, the country’s environment minister Svenja Schulze has affirmed. “We don’t want nuclear energy, we don’t think it’s sustainable and we don’t want the EU to support it,“ the acting minister from the Social Democrats (SPD) told newspapers of the Funke Mediengruppe in an article carried by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.
Schulze added that the German government is not alone on this position, countering an initiative of several other EU member states under the leadership of France to give nuclear power a greater role in the EU’s plans for decarbonisation and the greening of the financial system.
Building nuclear plants would be much too expensive and time-consuming for effective climate action, with plants commissioned now only being ready for operation by 2045 due to lengthy searches for a location, licensing hurdles and expectable protests against it, she argued. Conservative (CSU) Bavarian state premier Markus Söder backed Schulze’s rejection to make the
technology a tool for climate action, arguing that Germany’s nuclear phase-out “is based on broad societal acceptance.”
Clean Energy Wire 8th Nov 2021
Europe’s dilemma over whether or not to include nuclear power in its sustainabble finance taxonomy
Greenwashing or viable solution? Europe has a big decision to make on nuclear power, CNBC, NOV 9 2021Silvia Amaro @SILVIA_AMARO
It is a long-standing dilemma that the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, must resolve in the coming weeks.
Ultimately, its decision will have repercussions on its efforts to be a global leader in the area of climate change.
LONDON — The European Union must decide whether nuclear is a clean source of energy, but the decision is tough with countries divided about the right labelling.
Some EU members, notably France, which have big investments in nuclear and are wary of using gas from Russia see the energy resource as a viable option. Other nations, including Germany, believe it is time to move away from it and are worried about nuclear waste.
It is a long-standing dilemma that the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, must resolve in the coming weeks. The commission is due to publish its sustainable finance taxonomy — rules that will help clarify to investors what the bloc sees as green investments — as an attempt to boost financing in these areas.
Ultimately, its decision will have repercussions on its efforts to be a global leader in the area of climate change……………….
Opponents to inclusion of nuclear power into the EU green taxonomy, led by Germany, argue that the technology is not suitable to achieve sustainability targets, including establishing a transition to a circular economy,” Henning Gloystein, director for energy, climate and resources at consultancy group Eurasia, told CNBC via email.
“The core problem for critics is that there is no solution for long-term storage of nuclear waste. All current solutions are temporary,” he added.
The inclusion of nuclear in the EU’s green taxonomy has also been criticized by activists.
The World Wide Fund for Nature has said that classifying nuclear as somewhat sustainable “would allow the greenwashing of billions of euros of financing for these activities, despite the high emissions from fossil gas and the radioactive waste produced by nuclear power.”
Green image at risk
More broadly, whatever the commission decides will also send a signal to other nations.
The European Commission praises itself for having the most concrete plan on how to cut greenhouse gas emissions — a plan that is still yet to be approved by lawmakers.
The institution has also lobbied other parts of the world, including China, to put forward concrete steps on how they intend to achieve carbon neutrality……….. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/09/cop26-europe-has-a-big-decision-to-make-on-nuclear-power.html
China and Saudi Arabia blocking progress towards a deal at COP26
China and Saudi Arabia are blocking progress towards a deal at Cop26 by
refusing to accept that they must be fully transparent about their
greenhouse gas emissions. Senior negotiators at the climate change
conference in Glasgow said that both countries had objected to proposed
reporting requirements aimed at resolving concerns that some nations
conceal the extent of their emissions.
The dispute is delaying progress on
other ingredients of a deal, including rules on establishing a global
market for carbon offsetting. China is understood to object because its
climate target is based on a reduction in emissions per unit of GDP,
meaning that full transparency would reveal data it wants to keep secret
about its economic growth.
Saudi Arabia’s emissions are strongly
influenced by its biggest company, the oil giant Saudi Aramco, and it is
thought to be concerned about revealing information about its performance.
China and Saudi Arabia are also objecting to proposed wording in the final
text that emphasises the need to limit warming to 1.5C, meaning the coal
and oil on which they depend would have to be phased out more quickly.
Times 9th Nov 2021
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chinese-and-saudis-thwart-moves-towards-climate-deal-5pr86frjv
Carbon capture and storage – not all that it’s cracked up to be.
Carbon capture has been heralded by some as an important technological solution to the climate crisis. The Ferret, 8 Nov 21
As COP26 continues in Glasgow, the potential impact of carbon capture and storage in reducing emissions is in the spotlight.
Ferret Fact Service looked at how it works, and whether carbon capture is actually a viable solution…………
According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, there are currently 26 large-scale carbon capture projects in use globally, with 34 more in different stages of development.
What are the drawbacks of carbon capture?
Some environmental campaigners have raised questions about the technology.
One issue is the slow progress in getting carbon capture facilities ready. While it has been trumpeted as one of the major tech solutions for the climate crisis, the amount of CO2 currently captured by CCS is small.
Currently operating CCS facilities have the capacity to capture about 40 million tonnes of CO2 each year. The latest global figure for fossil fuel CO2 emissions (2020) was 34 billion tonnes.
Many countries’ climate change plans rely heavily on carbon capture, but some analysts have questioned whether this is a realistic and effective use of environmental budgets that could be spent on renewable energy sources, for example.
The cost of carbon capture development and getting CCS facilities to commercial levels has been criticised.
Another issue is that most of the carbon capture projects won’t be in operation until the next decade. Scientists say significant carbon reductions are required this decade if the world is to reduce global temperature increase.
Currently, much of the carbon captured is being used in enhanced oil recovery (EOR). This is where oil companies use CO2 to obtain oil from previously unreachable reservoirs. Critics argue that this actually exacerbates overall climate change, as it allows more oil to be accessed which is then burned, adding to emissions, despite reducing carbon released during extraction.
There are also fears that carbon capture will be used as a way for countries with heavy fossil fuel production to continue to extract and sell them, which would hamper global attempts to reduce emissions.
Fears have been raised of the potential danger of CO2 leaking from the underground areas it is stored, either gradually or suddenly……… https://theferret.scot/ffs-explains-carbon-capture-storage/
Greta Thunberg and youth activists filing legal petition to UN, urging for a declaration of “system-wide climate emergency”
Greta Thunberg and youth climate activists from around the world are
filing a legal petition to the UN secretary-general urging him to declare a
“system-wide climate emergency”. As Cop26 enters its final days,
climate campaigners were due to file a legal document on Wednesday calling
on António Guterres to use emergency powers to match the level of response
adopted for the coronavirus pandemic by pronouncing the climate crisis a
global level 3 emergency – the UN’s highest category.
Guardian 10th Nov 2021
“Cover decision” – a draft outcome of COP26 climate talks – planet still headed for 2.4C of warming above pre-industrial levels
Prime Minister Boris Johnson is returning to the COP26 climate summit in
Glasgow – urging nations to “pull out all the stops” to limit warming. The
first draft of an agreement setting out how countries will cut emissions to
avoid temperature rises of above 1.5C is due to be published later.
The agreement – known as a “cover decision” – is the negotiated outcome of the
COP26 talks. Mr Johnson said negotiators would be working to “turn promises
into action”. Despite the promises made at the summit so far, the planet is
still heading for 2.4C of warming above pre-industrial levels, according to
a report by Climate Action Tracker. A global average temperature rise of
just 2C could mean a billion people are affected by fatal heat and
humidity, the Met Office has warned.
BBC 10th Nov 2021
Investor backlash predicted, if European Union were to include Nuclear and Gas as ”Green” in its EU Taxonomy
Net-Zero Alliance Plans to Reject Gas, Nuclear as Green Assets, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-08/net-zero-alliance-plans-to-reject-gas-nuclear-as-green-assetsBy John Ainger and Alastair Marsh9 November 2021
- UN-convened asset owners weigh in on taxonomy debate
- The group favors separate legislation for energy transition
The European Union will likely face investor backlash if it includes natural gas and nuclear energy in its green rulebook, known as the EU taxonomy.
The United Nations-convened Net-Zero Asset Owner Alliance, which is part of the wider finance industry’s $130 trillion climate agreement announced last week, wrote in a document that hasn’t been finalized that it would oppose such a decision. Instead, fossil fuels should go into an extension or separate piece of legislation for transition technologies, the group said.
“The Alliance supports a taxonomy that is credible, usable, as well as science- and evidence-based,” according to the document seen by Bloomberg News. The inclusion of gas “would be inconsistent with the high ambition level of the EU taxonomy framework overall.” For nuclear, “it will be of utmost importance to apply strict criteria when assessing” the principle of do-no-significant-harm, “with respect to the other environmental objectives to identify a potential taxonomy alignment,” it said.
The development marks a blow to those EU members who’d hoped the bloc would take a softer stance on gas and nuclear. It also sets the tone for other investors keen to put their net-zero pledges to work, less than a week after international financial institutions representing 40% of total global assets pledged to work toward carbon neutrality by the middle of the century.
The European Commission is under pressure from member states such as France, which want to include nuclear and gas as key planks of their green transition strategies. The debate has intensified in recent months as energy prices soar amid a lack of supply. A decision on the so-called complementary delegated act is expected in the coming weeks.
Environmental groups have criticized the potential inclusion of gas, arguing it would undermine the EU’s ambition of setting the “gold standard” for green investing. It also would result in the bloc failing to meet its goal of cutting emissions by 55% by 2030 from 1990 levels and becoming carbon neutral by mid-century, they said. For nuclear, meanwhile, there are concerns over the environmental impacts of radioactive waste.
The Net-Zero alliance, whose members include Allianz SE and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, urged the EU Commission, member states and their expert bodies to make sure any decision arrived at is “science and evidence-based,” according to the document.
:
France and other pro nuclear countries push for nuclear to be included as ”sustainable” in EU taxonomy.
Mairead McGuinness urged to reclassify nuclear power as possible ‘green’ solution for EU https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/mairead-mcguinness-urged-to-reclassify-nuclear-power-as-possible-green-solution-for-eu-41028296.html
Irish Commissioner under pressure amid global warming and energy crisis, John Downing .
November 08 2021 Ireland’s EU Commissioner Mairead McGuinness is under pressure to reclassify nuclear power as “green energy”, giving it a central role in the battle against global warming and easing Europe’s energy crisis.
Commissioner McGuinness hopes to decide in the coming weeks on a controversial move which could also give natural gas a transition role in scaling down carbon emissions burning the planet.
Decision time comes amid a major EU energy crisis, with spiralling prices in every member state, and an increasing demand for real action on the pledged 55pc reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 with zero carbon by 2050.
If Ms McGuinness gets the move through the policy-guiding Commission, the issue will then pass to member governments and the European Parliament where battle-lines are already drawn.
On one side, pro-nuclear countries like France will promote the change as a “pragmatic solution” – but others will speak of “greenwashing” and creating more problems to solve immediate issues.
Ms McGuinness told the Irish Independent that member states must ultimately decide their own energy mix whatever the outcome.
There is an important debate ongoing about the role of nuclear energy and natural gas in the transformation of the EU energy sector and their potential inclusion in the EU taxonomy – a classification system for sustainable investments,” Ms McGuinness said yesterday.
“To be part of the EU sustainable investment taxonomy, an energy source must make a significant contribution to the fight against climate change. Nuclear energy is low carbon,” she added.
But she also warned that other aspects of nuclear power were still being studied, looking at “the requirement to do no significant harm” to the environment.
“Right now our work is focusing on scientific reports on this aspect of nuclear power,” Ms McGuinness said.
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen gave a strong hint on the direction of travel when speaking to reporters after a leaders’ summit in Brussels on October 22.
“The energy mix of the future needs more renewable and clean energy. Alongside this, we also need a stable source, nuclear energy, and during the transition, also natural gas.
“That is why – as called for by many leaders – the Commission is going to come forward with a taxonomy proposal in the near future,” said Ms von der Leyen.
A pivotal issue in all of this will be the attitude taken by the new German government which is expected to be in place by December 6, the feast of St Nicholas and an important national day.
Back in June 2011, the now outgoing German chancellor, Angela Merkel, committed to ending all nuclear power in the state by December 2022.
She will be replaced by Social Democrat leader Olaf Scholz, heading a three-party coalition of the Green Party and the Liberal FBD.
The Green Party is, by definition, committed to ending nuclear power generation in Germany but the current energy crisis, aggravated by undue dependence on Russian natural gas, complicates this matter as coalition negotiations continue.
France gets 70pc of its electricity from nuclear power stations.
Ireland is committed to creating a ‘Celtic Interconnector’, taking power from France via an undersea powerline due for completion by 2026.
France and other pro nuclear countries push for nuclear to be included as ”sustainable” in EU taxonomy.
Unfair restrictions on observers at COP26 climate talks
The legitimacy of the Cop26 climate summit has been called into question
by civil society participants who say restrictions on access to
negotiations are unprecedented and unjust.
As the Glasgow summit enters its
second week, observers representing hundreds of environmental, academic,
climate justice, indigenous and women’s rights organisations warn that
excluding them from negotiating areas and speaking to negotiators could
have dire consequences for millions of people.
Observers act as informal watchdogs of the summit – the eyes and ears of the public during
negotiations to ensure proceedings are transparent and reflect the concerns
of communities and groups most likely to be affected by decisions. But
their ability to observe, interact and intervene in negotiations on carbon
markets, loss and damage and climate financing has been obstructed during
the first week, the Guardian has been told.
Guardian 8th Nov 2021
The biggest delegation of all at COP26 is that of fossil fuel lobbyists
There are more delegates at COP26 associated with the fossil fuel industry
than from any single country, analysis shared with the BBC shows.
Campaigners led by Global Witness assessed the participant list published
by the UN at the start of this meeting. They found that 503 people with
links to fossil fuel interests had been accredited for the climate summit.
These delegates are said to lobby for oil and gas industries, and
campaigners say they should be banned. “The fossil fuel industry has spent
decades denying and delaying real action on the climate crisis, which is
why this is such a huge problem,” says Murray Worthy from Global Witness.
“Their influence is one of the biggest reasons why 25 years of UN climate
talks have not led to real cuts in global emissions.”
BBC 8th Nov 2021
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59199484
Drill or Drop 8th Nov 2021
At People’s Summit for Climate Justice, campaigners accuse COP26 of failing the climate
| COP26: Campaigners accuse UN talks of failing climate as they hold counter summit for most marginalised. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was found guilty of “violating its charter” because it had “forged an intimate partnership with the corporations”. At the start of the People’s Summit for Climate Justice, the UNFCCC was also found guilty of failing to: address global social and economic injustices. recognise, promote and protect the rights of nature; The Sudanese diplomat, Lumumba Di Aping, said: “The UNFCCC has allowed itself to be converted at best into a catering company for the G7, at worst into a carbon noose for the global south.” Global Justice Now, one of the summit’s organisers, said: “There’s one technology that the UNFCCC has an unwavering faith in – it is the market. It promotes the ponzi scheme of capitalism. The UNFCCC no longer represents us, we need to represent ourselves.” Drill or Drop 7th Nov 2021 https://drillordrop.com/2021/11/07/cop26-campaigners-accuse-un-talks-of-failing-climate-as-they-hold-counter-summit-for-most-marginalised/ |
The People’s Summit forClimate Justice plans ambitious pressure on governments for real action
| A counter climate summit kicks off in Glasgow on Sunday amid mounting criticism from activists about greenwashed solutions and stalled action from corporations and rich nations inside Cop26. The People’s Summit for Climate Justice will bring together movements and communities from across the world to amplify voices, ideas and solutions it believes are largely absent from Cop – including the global green new deal, polluters’ liability, indigenous ecological knowledge and the gulf between net zero and real zero emissions. Organisers hope that sharing expertise onequitable and transformative non-market solutions to the climate emergencywill help create a powerful grassroots collective to force governments to be more ambitious and less beholden to big business. Guardian 7th Nov 2021 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/07/counter-climate-summit-kicks-off-as-activists-lament-cop26-inaction |
COP26 – Why Nuclear is NOT a Solution.
Don’t Nuke the Climate press conference in Glasgow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjSMd1pmsqQ
Sasha Gabizon, Executive Director – Women Engage for a Common Future hosts this COP26 panel on why nuclear energy is NOT a climate solution.
The panel members:
— Makoma Lekalakala, Earthlife Africa https://earthlife.org.za/ SEGMENT: https://youtu.be/LjSMd1pmsqQ?t=281
— Ayumi Fukakusa, Friends of the Earth Japan https://www.foejapan.org/en/ SEGMENT: https://youtu.be/LjSMd1pmsqQ?t=868
— Angelika Claussen, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) https://www.ippnw.org SEGMENT: https://youtu.be/LjSMd1pmsqQ?t=1168
— Günter Hermeyer, Don’t Nuke the Climate https://dont-nuke-the-climate.org/ SEGMENT: https://youtu.be/LjSMd1pmsqQ?t=111
— Gavan McFadzean, Australian Conservation Foundation https://www.acf.org.au/ SEGMENT: https://youtu.be/LjSMd1pmsqQ?t=1538
——————————————————
Don’t Nuke the Climate statement now signed by 461 organisations around the world (including 50+ in Australia):
https://dont-nuke-the-climate.org/cop-26-statement
Progress report on Glasgow climate talks
The Guardian view on climate progress: now for the detail, Editorial https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/nov/05/the-guardian-view-on-climate-progress-now-for-the-detail
Pledges made during Cop26’s first week were encouraging. But without adequate finance and monitoring they don’t mean much
f week one of the climate conference in Glasgow set out a strong outline, the task for next week is to fill in as many details as possible. The long-term ambition of the global environmental policy now being negotiated would have been hard to imagine just a few years ago. While it is not yet clear exactly where the various pledges will get us to in terms of limiting temperature rises, the new agreement on methane spearheaded by President Joe Biden and a commitment by India to get half of its energy from renewable sources by 2030 are highly significant.
Also encouraging is the more integrated approach to the many environmental challenges humanity faces. Previously, conservation and biodiversity were to some extent viewed as separate issues from the changing atmospheric chemistry that drives global heating. Now, with a promise to reverse deforestation and provide funding directly to indigenous people to help them protect their lands, there is greater recognition of the vital part that nature plays in regulating the climate.
The pledges made so far are far from sufficient, and must be viewed as part of a continuing process. The decisions by China’s Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin to stay away inevitably undermine confidence in the overall project. Their refusal, along with India, to join the methane agreement is worrying. The possibility of a return to office by Donald Trump, or the election of a Republican in a similar mould, must be regarded as a serious threat. But there is a sense of momentum in Glasgow, and many climate scientists are relieved that the goal (a net zero planet) is increasingly accepted, even as arguments about how to get there continue to rage.
Investment in new technologies such as “clean” aviation fuel should be encouraged, as subsidies for fossil fuels are cut off. The pace of development in the wind and solar industries has been astonishing. There are some grounds for optimism about the role that the private sector can play in the transition ahead. But nonexistent technology, and the hopes invested in it, played an oversized role in the UK government’s recently launched net zero strategy. One of the challenges of the coming days is to ensure that the plans put forward by governments, known as nationally determined contributions, are not built on wishful thinking. Years of delays mean that the timetable is incredibly tight. Leaders cannot afford to be passive.
Once commitments have been made, mechanisms must be developed to measure and report on progress. This is an enormous task that will not be completed at the first attempt. With regard to the $100bn (£70bn) of climate finance that is supposed to be provided annually by rich countries to poorer ones, for example, more transparency is needed. Poor countries cannot be expected to choose green energy over fossil fuels unless they are supported. Calls from India and African countries for massively increased sums (Narendra Modi has suggested $1tn annually) make the establishment of a trusted carbon accounting system all the more urgent.
After a dip during the pandemic, global emissions have jumped alarmingly. Unless they start to fall dramatically over the next two years, Cop26 will have been a failure. Overshadowing all the technical details is the overwhelming injustice of a situation in which the countries that have contributed least to global heating are already suffering most from its effects. This is a moral point, but also a practical and political one. Eliminating carbon emissions is a collective endeavour in which our civilisation must succeed if it is to continue to thrive. Questions of environmental justice, engaging the past as well as the future, must be confronted head-on in the days ahead.
Nuclear power, fossil fuel companies represented at COP26 climate talks
Revealed: 1,000 fossil fuel and big business reps at COP26, The Ferret, Rob Edwards November 6, 2021,
As many as 141 people registered for COP26 from the nuclear power industry across the globe, including the UK’s Nuclear Industry Association and the World Nuclear Association.
More than 20 were part of the Young Generation Network of nuclear professionals.
Nearly 1,000 representatives from the fossil fuel industry, big business and nuclear power companies have registered to attend the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, according to an analysis by The Ferret.
They include executives from Shell, BP, Equinor, Chevron, Total, Gazprom and other major oil and gas companies, as well as multinational corporations such as McDonald’s, Bayer, Walmart, HSBC, PepsiCo, Nestlé and Microsoft.
There are also delegations from the coal industry, tobacco companies and pesticide manufacturers. Eleven people from two climate sceptic think-tanks have registered for the summit.
Campaigners are outraged that the oil and nuclear industries were being allowed to influence COP26, and called for polluters to be kept away from the summit. They warned of the “corporate capture of climate policies”….. They include executives from Shell, BP, Equinor, Chevron, Total, Gazprom and other major
oil and gas companies, as well as multinational corporations such as McDonald’s, Bayer, Walmart, HSBC, PepsiCo, Nestlé and Microsoft. There are also delegations from the coal industry, tobacco companies and pesticide manufacturers. Eleven people from two climate sceptic think-tanks have registered for the summit. [details of these participants is given]…………………..
As many as 141 people registered for COP26 from the nuclear power industry across the globe, including the UK’s Nuclear Industry Association and the World Nuclear Association. More than 20 were part of the Young Generation Network of nuclear professionals.
The nuclear industry promotes itself as a low-carbon solution to the climate crisis. But some environmentalists argue that it’s too expensive, unreliable and dangerous, compared to renewable energy……..
This list is described as “provisional”, with a final version due to be issued after COP26 has closed. It does not include so-called “overflow” delegates which under UN rules can been added by countries without their names appearing on the official list of participants.
Friends of the Earth Scotland called for polluters to be kept out of COP26. “Many different groups in society need to talk and work together to tackle the climate crisis,” said the environmental group’s director, Dr Richard Dixon.
“But the last people you want at the COP are the big oil firms who continue to profit from fuelling climate change and the nuclear, carbon capture and carbon market enthusiasts who are peddling solutions that are no solution at all.”
The campaign group, Glasgow Calls Out Polluters, decried “political failure” at COP26. “These big polluters’ climate plans are a death sentence for many, but they are nevertheless appeased by the authorities at the COP,” said the group’s Scott Tully from Glasgow.
“The presence and access of these big polluters is in stark contrast with the exclusion of civil society, which draws into disrepute the legitimacy of these talks.”
The anti-poverty charity, Oxfam Scotland, said it was “worrying” that those who have fuelled the climate crisis were given so much access. “Civil society groups, in particular from poorer countries in the south, have found it so hard to attend or even to observe the talks,” said the group’s head, Jamie Livingstone.
“Unless COP26 prioritises the voices of those facing the consequences of climate inaction, it will be impossible for the talks to deliver climate justice.”
Dr Will Dinan, an expert on lobbying from the University of Stirling, accused fossil fuel companies of lobbying to delay action to cut climate pollution. “Climate campaigners have long been concerned about corporate influence on UN environmental decision-making in general, and the corporate capture of climate policies in particular,” he said………….. https://theferret.scot/1000-fossil-fuel-big-business-cop26/
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 (187)
- 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 