UK’s largest planned data centre ‘could use 50 times more water’ than developer claims.
The developer of the UK’s largest proposed data
centre is likely significantly understating the scale of its planned water
footprint, teams of investigative journalists have claimed.
US-based data
centre developer QTS recently secured permission from the local council for
its campus in Cambois, Northumberland. It plans to build 10 data halls
across a 133-acre site, at a cost of $13.5bn. The site had previously been
home to Britishvolt, which had intended to develop a battery gigafactory
for the electric car sector before it folded. QTS’s proposals also
include cooling systems and dozens of diesel-powered generators to act as
an emergency backup, the BBC reports. These should only be used
“occasionally” on a “temporary basis”.
Edie 22nd Dec 2025, https://www.edie.net/uks-largest-planned-data-centre-could-use-50-times-more-water-than-developer-claims/
Biodiversity Net Gain: can developers be trusted?
Developers seem rather too fickle concerning their obligations to protect the environment, and the situation may be about to get worse
Rachel Fulcher, 21 December 2025
During the consultations for Sizewell C, it became clear
from the documents put forward by EDF, owner of this pine forest, that the
company considered the plantation to be of low biodiversity value.
They failed to take into account the fact that the rides between the trees
supported several species so rare that they are protected by law. Looking
into it in further detail I came across Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), which
specifies that developers must provide a minimum of 10% net gain for nature
in addition to compensating for any damage caused.
Using the Statutory
Biodiversity Metric devised by the Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs (Defra), the biodiversity value of the land prior to
development is calculated in units according to size, type of habitat, its
current condition, ecological distinctiveness and location. The proposed
replacement and enhancement habitats are then also calculated and must show
the necessary improvement.
Ideally these should be in the same area, but if
this is not possible then they can be elsewhere. As a last resort, builders
can simply buy habitat units from conservation organisations or even obtain
biodiversity credits from the government. In the first instance, however,
they must avoid harm – but do they?
A conversation with a Suffolk
ecologist revealed his profound disapproval of use of this metric,
considering the method to be ‘damaging’. He feels that it gives
builders a licence to destroy the environment, including protected sites
and species, so long as they offer something more elsewhere. However, some
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have accepted BNG on the basis that
something for nature is better than nothing.
East Anglia Bylines 21st Dec 2025, https://eastangliabylines.co.uk/environment/biodiversity-net-gain-can-developers-be-trusted/
Wildlife groups hit back at nuclear review claims over Hinkley Point C
By Burnham-On-Sea.com, December 14, 2025, https://www.burnham-on-sea.com/news/wildlife-groups-hit-back-at-nuclear-review-claims-over-hinkley-point-c/
Environmental organisations have criticised the government’s Nuclear Review, known as the Fingleton Report, for suggesting that environmental protections are blocking development at Hinkley Point C.
The Severn Estuary Interests Group, a collaboration of organisations working to protect the estuary, says EDF’s reported £700m spend on fish protection measures is not due to regulations but to poor planning and design decisions. The group points out that the government chose to build the power station on one of the UK’s most protected ecological sites.
The Severn Estuary is both a Special Area of Conservation and a Special Protection Area, supporting migratory fish, internationally important bird species and diverse invertebrate communities.
Campaigners say the impact of the plant will be immense, with cooling systems drawing in the equivalent of an Olympic-sized swimming pool every 12 seconds and discharging heated water back into the estuary. They argue that data used in the Fingleton Report is inaccurate, relying on figures from the now-decommissioned Hinkley Point B rather than the new design.
EDF’s costs have already risen from £18bn in 2017 to a projected £46bn, with completion now expected in 2031. The company has blamed inflation, Brexit, Covid and engineering challenges for the delays.
Simon Hunter, CEO of Bristol Avon Rivers Trust, said: “When developers fail to consult meaningfully, ignore local expertise, and attempt to sidestep environmental safeguards, costs rise and nature pays the price. Many countries would never have permitted a development of this scale in such a sensitive location in the first place.”
“The situation at HPC is not an indictment of environmental protection, but of poor planning, weak accountability, and a persistent willingness to blame nature for the consequences of human decisions.”
Georgia Dent, CEO of Somerset Wildlife Trust, said: “The government seems to have adopted a simple, reductive narrative that nature regulations are blocking development, and this is simply wrong. To reduce destruction of protected and vulnerable marine habitat to the concept of a ‘fish disco’ is deliberately misleading and part of a propaganda drive from government.”
“Nature in the UK is currently in steep decline and the government has legally binding targets for nature’s recovery, and is failing massively in this at the moment. To reduce the hard-won protections that are allowing small, vulnerable populations of species to cling on for dear life is absolutely the wrong direction to take.”
“A failing natural world is a problem not just for environmental organisations but for our health, our wellbeing, our food, our businesses and our economy. There is no choice to be made; in order for us to have developments and economic growth we must protect and restore our natural world.”
“As we have said all along in relation to HPC, how developers interpret and deliver these environmental regulations is something that can improve, especially if they have genuine, meaningful and – most importantly – early collaboration with local experts.”
As the UK looks to invest in nuclear, here’s what it could mean for Britain’s environment
In this week’s newsletter: The government’s bid to speed up nuclear construction could usher in sweeping deregulation, with experts warning of profound consequences for nature.
Helena Horton, Guardian, 12 Dec 25
When UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced last week that he was “implementing the Fingleton review”, you can forgive the pulse of most Britons for failing to quicken.
But behind the uninspiring statement lies potentially the biggest deregulation for decades, posing peril for endangered species, if wildlife experts are to be believed, and a likely huge row with the EU.
Earlier this year, John Fingleton, a lively, intelligent Irish economist, was commissioned by the government to lead a “taskforce” with a mission to come up with a way to build nuclear power faster and cheaper. It’s accepted by experts that we need more nuclear if we are to meet net zero, and that Britain is the most expensive place in the world to build it. In the end, Fingleton turned in a review with 47 recommendations aimed at speeding up the process. So far, so snoozeworthy.
However, his recommendations, if adopted, could well lead to the biggest divergence from retained EU habitat and environment law since Brexit. Changes could be made to the habitats directive, which Britain helped write when we were in the EU, and which protect rare species and the places they live. The government could also make it more costly for individuals and charities to take judicial reviews against infrastructure projects……………
Legal advice is that removing these rules for nuclear power will inevitably lead for other infrastructure projects to be subject to the same, weaker regulatory system. Expert planning lawyer Alexa Culver said: “It’s a clever move to sneak broadbrush environmental deregulation, as the government can point to ‘net zero’ as being the ultimate driver. In reality, though, if you don’t protect ecosystems while reducing emissions, you’ve lost the battle. We’re gone anyway.”
It’s not surprising Starmer is clinging to anything which might increase economic growth…….. OBR has predicted an anticipated average GDP growth of 1.5% over the next five years. This is despite the controversial Planning and Infrastructure Bill which Starmer introduced in order to “get Britain building” and experts say it will weaken environmental protections.
Nature also continues to decline. The recently released biodiversity indicators show species numbers continue to decrease in the UK, which is extremely concerning when you consider just how much wildlife has dropped off since the 1970s. Some species, including one-fifth of mammals, are facing extinction, and recent figures show wild bird numbers are in freefall.
Of the review, Georgia Dent, CEO of Somerset Wildlife Trust said: “The government seems to have adopted a simple, reductive narrative that nature regulations are blocking development, and this is simply wrong. Nature in the UK is now in steep decline and the government has legally binding targets for nature’s recovery, and is failing massively in this at the moment. To reduce the hard-won protections that are allowing small, vulnerable populations of species to cling on for dear life is absolutely the wrong direction to take.”
…………………………. the UK is negotiating an energy deal with the EU. There are competition and non-regression clauses in the newest free trade agreement, which prevent either side from weakening environmental law. Government sources tell me their legal advice has been that implementing the Fingleton review could put the free trade agreement at risk……………
………..When MPs, environmental experts and the EU look past the boring title and read the detail, Starmer may have a fight on his hands. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/series/down-to-earth
Activists fight plans for nuclear power station over threat to rare bird.
Ed Miliband’s plans to build the Sizewell C nuclear power station are facing a High Court legal threat over claims it will destroy a rare bird habitat.
Activists are seeking a judicial review to force the Government to revisit plans for the project, which they say is being built on land occupied by endangered marsh harriers. In a hearing on Tuesday, the Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) campaign group raised concerns over Sizewell C’s plans to build 10-metre-high flood defences on Suffolk marshland.
They argue that this will threaten the marsh harrier, a rare
bird that was almost driven to extinction before enjoying a recovery in recent years, particularly alongside the Suffolk coastline.
The group claims that details of the flood defences were Activists fight plans omitted from the original planning proposals in 2022. This now forms the basis of the group’s
argument, as it claims that work on Sizewell C should be paused while a further environmental assessment is carried out.
Chris Wilson, of TASC, said: “TASC’s legal challenge focuses on two additional sea defences that Sizewell C has committed to installing – but despite EDF, who is building Sizewell, being aware of the potential need for them since 2015,
they were not included in their planning application for the project.
Rowan Smith, the solicitor at Leigh Day representing TASC, said: “The failure to assess these impacts was alarming. “Our client is concerned about the revelation that provisions have been made for further flood defences at Sizewell C, which could harm the environment, yet the impact of this has never been assessed.”
Telegraph 9th Dec 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/12/09/activists-nuclear-power-station-threat-rare-bird/
UK’s Planning & Infrastructure Bill 2 – worse, and by stealth.
I was wondering why there was no PIB2 in the Budget. Now I understand why. It’s far worse (from an environmental perspective) than I could have imagined.
In his speech yesterday, (1/12/25) Starmer said, “in addition to accepting the Fingleton recommendations… I am asking the Business Secretary to apply these lessons across the entire industrial strategy.”
There are some VERY far-reaching proposals within the Fingleton recommendations. These include,
but are not limited to: modifying the Habitat Regulations, – allowing developers to comply with the Habitats Regulations requirements by paying a substantial fixed contribution to Natural England; – reversing Finch; – reversing the LURA’s enhanced protection for National Landscapes; – increasing Aarhus cost caps. Those are just SOME!
Community Planning Alliance 2nd Dec 2025, https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7401614251934654464/
New mini nuclear reactors are jeopardised by wildlife fears
COMMENT. Doncha love that headline?
I mean – those poor little non-existent unaffordable, dirty, dangerous, useless mini nuclear reactors – being persecuted by nasty Arctic, Sandwich and vulgar common terns!
Pledge to build three small modular reactors on island of Anglesey is threatened by warnings of potential impact on nesting terns in local nature reserve.
Sir Keir Starmer’s attempt to kickstart Britain’s mini nuclear reactor programme is being threatened by a protected colony of rare birds. The prime minister has pledged to build the UK’s first three small modular reactors (SMRs) at the Wylfa nuclear site on the island of Anglesey in north Wales, but the proposed location sits beside the Cemlyn nature reserve, where about 2,000 pairs of Arctic, Sandwich and common terns nest
each summer.
Wildlife groups have warned that the birds could abandon the
site if construction goes ahead, and this threatens to delay or reshape the first big project in the government’s nuclear programme, according to the Telegraph, which first reported the story, Mark Avery, a scientist and former conservationist at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), said:
“Terns are vulnerable because of the types of places where
they live, which tend to be places that would be disturbed if they’re not protected. So they do need our help. And the UK is important for these species. If anybody’s going to look after them, we ought to.”
Times 1st Dec 2025, https://www.thetimes.com/business/energy/article/new-mini-nuclear-reactors-are-jeopardised-by-wildlife-fears-gjmf28bgz
UK is running out of water – but data centres refuse to say how much they use.
One Government insider said ‘accurate water figures have historically been very hard to get from facilities of any size’.
Tech firms are failing to tell the Government how much water they use in
their data centres, as concerns grow that the UK does not have enough water to meet its needs.
Experts are calling on the Government to introduce
tighter regulations on data centres amid warnings that new power and
water-intensive supercomputers could be built in areas vulnerable to
drought. Campaigners have raised concerns that the Government is “too
close” to tech lobbyists and is failing to fully consider the impact a
data centre boom could have on the UK’s natural resources.
iNews 1st Dec 2025, https://inews.co.uk/news/uk-running-out-water-data-centres-refuse-say-4062230
Attacking nature protections with fudged figures is not the solution to slow growth: rivers charity responds to Hinkley Point C report
A statement from Mark Lloyd, Chief Executive of The Rivers Trust, https://envirotecmagazine.com/2025/11/26/attacking-nature-protections-with-fudged-figures-is-not-the-solution-to-slow-growth-rivers-charity-responds-to-hinkley-point-c-report/
Yesterday [(25 November)], several prominent newspapers published articles quoting a government-commissioned report into the spiralling costs of EDF’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. These articles focused on the report’s claims that a planned fish deterrent system for the power station’s water intakes cost £700m and would “save the lives of 0.083 salmon, 0.028 sea trout, six river lamprey, 18 Allis shad and 528 twaite shad per year”.
These figures, being used to deride the vital importance of the fish deterrent, cannot be taken seriously.
The fish deterrent system at Hinkley is in fact priced at £50m, not £700m. The tiny numbers of fish the report claims it would save are based on EDF’s own modelling, and are preposterously small given that 3.5bn litres of water a day will be sucked into the power station. This is more than the flow of all the rivers flowing into the Severn Estuary.
Such a vast amount of water will undoubtedly contain huge quantities of fish and other marine creatures, many of which are on the verge of extinction. The water intake at Hinkley will come from the most densely populated part of the estuary, killing not just fish but lots of other wildlife, and the knock-on effects on breeding would be catastrophically felt for generations. The abundance of species in the Severn Estuary and their vulnerability is why the area has the highest levels of protection in environmental law.
EDF included the fish deterrent system in the plans it submitted to get this project approved. Instead of disingenuously blaming spiralling construction costs on perfectly reasonable measures to reduce damage to the environment, EDF should honour its commitment. Within a total budget of £45bn to build a nuclear power station at Hinkley, £50m is little more than a rounding error.
This report seems to be another. Within a total budget of £45bn, £50m is little more than a rounding error, and this story is another ridiculous attempt to frame nature as the one and only blocker to growth and prosperity, a narrative that the government seems intent on pushing as we build up to today’s Budget.
The truth is that growth and prosperity are utterly dependent on the health of our natural world. Whilst we recognise the urgent need for new energy infrastructure, the processes being proposed to remove or bypass environmental protections should concern us all. Development and nature can thrive together, but only if the safeguards designed to protect our wildlife, and communities remain in place.
UK’s new nuclear body urges scrapping nature protections for new projects
24th November 2025, https://www.cpre.org.uk/news/nuclear-body-urges-scrapping-nature-protections-for-new-projects/
In the spring of 2025, the government set up a Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce to make it easier to build new nuclear projects. Their final report has just been published and its recommendations threaten some of the hard-won measures we have to protect our countryside and nature.
The taskforce was made up of figures working for the nuclear industry. They’re proposing two measures in particular that we’re worried about.
First, it proposes that new nuclear as a whole would get an opt-out of both the Habitats Directive and the mitigation hierarchy. This is a mechanism whereby developers first need to seek to avoid harm and then try to minimise the harm. Only when they cannot do this, they should compensate for the harm by improving the natural environment elsewhere.
The report calls for nuclear developments to pay into the new Nature Restoration Fund being set up by the Planning and Infrastructure Bill and ‘move directly to off-site nature conservation’ as the default. This sweeps away the first part of the hierarchy, which asks developers to avoid or minimise local harms on landscapes and nature in favour of offsetting the harm somewhere else. This is counter to CPRE’s view which is that protecting and regenerating landscapes at the source must come first.
Secondly, it calls for the scrapping of the duty on public bodies to further the statutory purposes of National Parks and National Landscapes, which came in in 2023. The report says the duty ‘has caused confusion, and will likely delay, and add cost, to nuclear development.’
Two CPRE groups – Kent and Friends of the Lake District – have already challenged decisions using the new protected landscapes duty, but in both cases planning permission was still granted.
Scrapping this duty would undermine the progress made in safeguarding our protected landscapes like the South Downs or the Shropshire Hills and return us to the weak duty that existed previously.
The Chancellor has said she welcomes the report and will set out the government’s response on Wednesday, and we’ll be strongly urging ministers not to dilute nature and landscape protections.
Officials make alarming discovery outside of shutdown nuclear facility: ‘Significant’
“A legacy of industrial practices.”
by Veronica Booth, November 26, 2025
A dangerous fragment of radioactive debris was found outside of a
decommissioned nuclear facility in Scotland. The BBC reported that a
radioactive fragment categorized as “significant” was discovered around the Dounreay nuclear facility on April 7.
Radioactive particles can be
classified as minor, relevant, or significant. This is the first
“significant” particle found near Thurso since March 2022. The Dounreay
facility was an experimental nuclear site until particles of irradiated
nuclear fuel contaminated the drainage system. Now, the shores and seabed around Dounreay are heavily contaminated. According to the BBC, the decontamination of the site is expected to be complete by 2333.
The significant fragment serves as a poignant reminder of the importance of responsible radioactive waste management. According to the BBC, these
radioactive particles and fragments around Dounreay are not a threat to
people. Highly contaminated areas are not used by the public. Nearby public beaches have not contained any significant or large particles that would cause concern for people. In this instance, the U.K. government’s Nuclear Restoration Services and other entities are taking proper action to
decontaminate the site.
TCD 26th Nov 2025, https://www.thecooldown.com/green-business/dounreay-nuclear-facility-scotland-radioactive-waste/
Does ‘fish disco’ show we’re dancing to the wrong tune on regulations?
“confected outrage about a fish disco”.
Hinkley Point C’s fish protections have been criticised as a
waste of money but environmental charities said the outrage was
manufactured.
For the twaite shad of the Bristol Channel, it has been a
strange few months. Ordinarily, few people bother with shad. Smallish,
silverish, a little like a less charismatic herring, generally they are
left alone. Not this year. Starting in May they have been tracked. They
have been chipped. They have been played some really odd sounds. And now, as they somewhat bemusedly navigate what has become known as the Hinkley Point C fish disco, they have been presented to the prime minister as an exemplar of all that is wrong with our nuclear regulations.
The Fingleton report on nuclear regulation is long and considered. Its 162 pages take in capital financing, nuclear risks and decommissioning obligations. But it was just a few paragraphs about fish that ended up catching the headlines.
“Hinkley Point C will have more fish protection measures than any other
power station in the world,” wrote John Fingleton, commissioned by the
government to find ways to make nuclear cheaper. “It has spent £700
million on their design and implementation,” he said. The outcome on
protected fish? “These measures would save 0.083 salmon per year, along
with 0.028 sea trout, 6 river lamprey, 18 allis shad, and 528 twaite
shad.”
“The government’s propaganda machine is working overtime to
perpetuate the false narrative that nature blocks development,” Joan
Edwards, from the Wildlife Trusts, said. It is, she said, “confected
outrage about a fish disco”. Every second it is running, Hinkley Point C,
which is still under construction, will suck in 134 cubic metres of
seawater. From three kilometres out, in the murky estuary, the water will
rush along pipes towards the reactor. There, the cold waters of the Bristol
Channel will meet the superheated waters of a steam turbine………………………………………………………………………………………….
Times 25th Nov 2025, https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/does-fish-disco-show-were-dancing-to-the-wrong-tune-on-regulations-99v2tsnvs
Millions of fish killed this winter at Bruce Power nuclear plant
By Scott Miller, March 21, 2025,
https://www.ctvnews.ca/london/article/millions-of-fish-killed-this-winter-at-bruce-power-nuclear-plant/
Millions of fish have been killed after getting trapped in Bruce Power’s water intake system.
The Saugeen Ojibway Nation (SON) estimates between 3.5 and 4.5 million ‘gizzard shad’ were trapped and died after being attracted to the warm water from the nuclear plant’s discharge channels.
In a statement, the Saugeen Ojibway Nation’s Environment Office said, “this event raises concerns about the artificial environment for aquatic life at the Bruce site.”
Bruce Power acknowledges that a ‘large number’ of fish have died after getting trapped in their intake system since mid-January. It was so concerning the company shut down one of their nuclear reactors for a week and half last month. Bruce Power said the fish have been removed and Unit 2 is back in service.
The company said they’re still trying to determine exactly what led to the fish die-off but say they’re not alone.
“Gizzard Shad have been reported along the shoreline as far north as the Sauble River and as far south as Goderich indicating this could be a population level event. Large numbers of Gizzard Shad have been observed in Lake Huron including around Bruce Power; this is likely due to their high rate of reproduction and warmer lake water temperatures in the last couple of years,” said a Bruce Power news release.
Gizzard Shad are naturally sensitive to cold water temperatures and can experience mass die-off in the wild.
Both Bruce Power and the Saugeen Ojibway Nation say they are working with federal authorities to try and get to the root of the fishkill – and prevent it from happening again.
Both Bruce Power and SON also report a number of dead birds just north of the nuclear plant in Baie-du-Dor. The company said the birds have been sent away for testing, “to check for conditions including botulism or avian flu.”
Bruce Power said the Ministry of Environment Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Ministry of Natural Resources are aware and are part of the investigation into what led to the dead fish and waterfowl.
New Mexico Environment Department Requires Los Alamos National Laboratory to Stop All Injection Operations into Regional Drinking Water Aquifer.
Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, 26 Nov 25
In a protective move, on Friday, November 18th, the New Mexico Environment Department required the Department of Energy (DOE) to cease all injection operations of treated waters back into the sole source regional drinking water aquifer shared by Pueblo de San Ildefonso, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and others. 2025-11-18-WPD-GWQB-NMED-Withdrawal-of-Temporary-Authorization-for-DP-1835-Final and EMID-704003_EMLA-26-BF028-2-1_Resp_DP-1835_Temp_Auth_WD_112125
In October, hexavalent chromium contamination was found beneath Pueblo de San Ildefonso while LANL was drilling a new well on the Pueblo, called San Ildefonso Regional Monitoring Well 3, or SIMR-3, in Mortandad Canyon. The Pueblo and LANL share borders in the area of Mortandad Canyon.
In Friday’s letter, the Environment Department wrote to LANL that “[S]ince 2021, DOE has neither complied with [the Environment Department’s] regulatory directives nor made substantial progress towards ensuring the protection of the regional aquifer. The latest sampling results from SIMR-3 prove that DOE’s refusal to take appropriate steps to ensure that contamiantion does not migrate further in the regional aquifer or offsite has created the harm to the environment that [the Environment Department] sought to prevent.”
China has built first undersea data center — a breakthrough in ecocidal technology posing as “sustainable”.
18 Nov 25
China is framing the project as “sustainable,” but the project could accelerate deoxygenation and warming of the oceans already imperiled by the climate crisis. According to a July 16, 2025 report in Scientific American, “researchers say submerged data centers could harm aquatic biodiversity during a marine heat wave—a period of unusually high ocean temperatures. In those cases, the outlet water from the vessel would be even warmer and hold less of the oxygen that aquatic creatures need to survive.”
South Korea has announced plans to also pursue underwater data centers. Other countries, such as Japan and Singapore, are considering data centers that float on the ocean’s surface instead. Around the world, technocrats are going to senseless lengths to keep building data centers to churn endless volumes of data. And to what end? To replace more jobs? To generate more AI slop? To launch hypersonic missiles? To provide more AI “friends” that tell users to jump off the cliff? I have yet to see an upside to AI, while its downsides are on parade. Wouldn’t it be better for humanity and all living things if we just chucked the idea of AI all together?
1 This Month
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (34)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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 