opposition to nuclear « nuclear-news

Stop Hinkley campaigners highlight storage of nuclear waste in West Somerset

By John Thorne, Saturday 8th August 2026, https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/stop-hinkley-campaigners-highlight-storage-of-nuclear-waste-in-west-somerset-935418

ANTI-nuclear campaigners staged a protest near the cluster of Hinkley Point power stations on the West Somerset coast on Thursday (August 6) to coincide with ‘Hiroshima Day’.

It was the 81st anniversary of the dropping of the world’s first nuclear bomb on the Japanese city in 1945. Members of the Stop Hinkley group gathered beneath the Hinkley Point sea wall to also highlight how nuclear waste would be stored on the site for centuries.

Stop Hinkley has been focussed on holding Hinkley C owner EDF to account for the protection of the public, wildlife, and the environment since the early 1980s.

The building of Hinkley C was initially blocked by Margaret Thatcher in 1984 because it was considered financially unviable.

It was eventually given the go-ahead under Theresa May’s Government in 2016.

One campaigner, Katy Attwater, from Timberscombe, said: “I have been campaigning against the building of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station since 2008 when I joined this amazing local protest group.

“We felt Thursday was an appropriate day to be reminded, given the danger of nuclear energy and its deadly by-product, highly-reactive spent fuel, which requires isolation for thousands to hundreds of thousands of years – nobody actually knows how long.

“We wished to draw attention to the danger arising from the radioactive waste that will be stored on site at Hinkley Point for at least 100 years.

“This was not envisaged at the outset, but, due to Sellafield no longer accepting high level nuclear waste and the continuing failure to find a site for a geological disposal facility (GDF), aka ‘nuclear dump’, there is nowhere for it to go.”

Ms Attwater said Hinkley C would have a scheduled refuelling outage every 12 to 24 months when about one-third of the nuclear reactor’s core 241 fuel assemblies were taken out and replaced with fresh fuel.

She said: “These assemblies, fuel rods, are so highly radioactive that they have to be stored under water for 10 years before they can be moved.

“There is currently no solution in the planning stage for where this hot and deadly substance can be taken.

“With predicted sea level rises and extreme weather events, this process will become increasingly dangerous on the low-level eroding coastline of Hinkley Point.

“We would encourage people to contact their local MPs to ask why this is being allowed to proceed, especially in the context of the obvious acceleration of climate change on our beloved planet earth.”

The Hinkley Point site houses three nuclear power stations, A, B, and C.

Hinkley A, opened in 1965 and was shut down after 35 years in 2000, and is currently being decommissioned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority subsidiary Magnox Ltd.

It will store intermediate level waste on site until a GDF becomes available.

The B station opened in 1976 and ceased generation in 2022 and has had its fuel removed and taken to Sellafield.

Decommissioning is expected to be approved in October this year.

Hinkley C is under construction and expected to start generating power in 2029.

August 9, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Campaign steps up opposition to south Wales nuclear project

They noted that Last Energy had not yet installed any SMRs anywhere in the world, branding nuclear projects unsafe, unclean, expensive, and unnecessary.

26 Jul 2026, Nation.Cymru Staff, https://nation.cymru/news/campaign-steps-up-opposition-to-south-wales-nuclear-project/

Campaigners have stepped up efforts to oppose plans for a new nuclear power project in a south Wales valley as public consultations come to a close.

Friends of the Earth Cymru is backing a campaign against proposals by micro-reactor company Last Energy to build four small modular nuclear reactors at Cwm Llynfi, near Maesteg.

Last Energy is a commercial developer of micro-modular PWR-20 nuclear power plants headquartered in Washington D.C.

Last Energy UK Limited, the company’s British subsidiary, announced plans to develop the clean energy project in south Wales in October 2024.

Formally titled ‘Prosiect Egni Glan Llynfi’, it is to be built on the 14-acre site of the former Llyfni coal-fired power station which ceased operation in 1977.

“Working to power and decarbonise industry in South Wales”, the company’s proposal includes development of up to four 20-megawatt micro-modular nuclear power plants, “intended to provide electricity to local industrial customers and to be privately financed”.

Last Energy UK intended to provide £300m financing, and expects the project to power 250,000 homes and create around 100 jobs for the local community.

In February 2025, Last Energy UK formally entered the site licensing process for the project, as the first commercial nuclear power reactor to seek licensing since 1978.

Michael Jenner, CEO of Last Energy UK, said that the process was “another critical milestone necessary to unlock nuclear power at scale in the UK, which will help meet growing energy demand and alleviate grid restraints.”

At the time, the company had said it aimed to complete construction on the first micro reactor in Wales by 2027. However, in July 2025 after a Preliminary Design Review by the Office for Nuclear Regulation, it was reported that they do not expect to receive site licensing until December 2027, “if necessary submissions to the required standard” are delivered according to schedule.

Friends of the Earth Cymru, local campaigners and anti-nuclear groups had voiced early opposition to the proposals, arguing the development would have long-term consequences for the environment and surrounding communities

In a May 2025 FoE Cymru blog post, Jenny Lloyd, Local Action and Community Campaigns Officer, supported by anti-nuclear activist Brian Jones, said: “The struggle to protect Wales from the dangers of nuclear is one that has been fought by communities for decades.

“Activists persuaded every county council in Wales to declare themselves “Nuclear Free Zones” in the 80s, marched to Greenham common to protest against the siting of guided nuclear missiles at the RAF base, and rallied against the redevelopment of Wylfa nuclear power station…”

They noted that Last Energy had not yet installed any SMRs anywhere in the world, branding nuclear projects unsafe, unclean, expensive, and unnecessary.

They continued: “If this proposal is allowed to go ahead it threatens our health, our environment and our communities for generations to come.”

In June 2026, Last Energy UK notified Welsh ministers that, in line with the Infrastructure (Wales) Act 2024, it would make an application for a Significant Infrastructure Project.

It said: “The project comprises four PWR-20 modular reactor units with associated plant, substation, buildings, security and access infrastructure.”

They also provided two images to the Welsh Government’s planning portal, one with four reactors, and another with only one reactor and other operational buildings.

The company held four public consultations on the project in Bridgend, Porthcawl, and Maesteg throughout July.

FoE Cymru once again voiced their opposition with grassroots campaign group No Nuclear Llyfni, this time directing supporters to “show that we are against this damaging proposal” and sign a petition ‘No nuclear in Cwm Llynfi’.

Currently at almost 1,500 of 2,000 signatures, the petition via ActionNetwork reiterates that the project is unsafe, unclean, and expensive, adding that “To make a profit, the company aims to mostly sell the energy straight to businesses – we won’t benefit from this energy.”

They affirm that “Our community and our beautiful valley deserve better than this!”

The petition is available here.

July 29, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

How Fear of Nuclear Armageddon Leads Me to Protest

Simply put, the U.S. maintains a first-strike nuclear option to be deployed against even a non-nuclear enemy. Paradoxically, China does have a “no first use” policy for its nuclear arsenal. Hey, U.S. adversaries, don’t even look at us the wrong way!

How radically and overtly hypocritical that the U.S., the greatest military power in the world—holding such a nuclear posture—initiated a war with Iran on the basis that the country might one day develop nuclear weapons, even though there is no conclusive evidence that it intends to do so. But then, this is how big bullies operate.

For nearly two decades, I have been arrested, ignored, and dismissed for protesting nuclear weapons—but as the Doomsday Clock inches toward midnight, giving up is not an option.

Scott Fina, Current Affairs, July 2026

Our tiny protest gathering at Vandenberg had a “micro-Woodstock” feel to it. One of us was dressed like an angel, in a white gown with flashing, battery-powered lights on wings attached to her back. She held a peace sign that also had blinking lights. She started beating a drum she had brought, and broke into an Indigenous chant she had learned from a local Chumash (Native American) community, whose descendants continue to protest military installations on their ancestral homelands. She had driven hours to the military base from her home in central Los Angeles—the likely source of her captivating creativity.

So, there we were, observing the flight of the most dangerous weapon ever created and possessed by humanity: an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that had been launched from an underground silo on the base. The Minuteman III ICBM we were watching could carry multiple nuclear warheads. Fortunately, the missile was not armed, and its launch was a test, sending it 4,200 miles over the Pacific Ocean to the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands. The U.S. military has adopted a nickname for such missile flights: “Glory Trips.”

As protesting observers, we failed to see any glory in the exhibition of the ICBM test launch. But if watching an ICBM launch isn’t glorious enough for some folks, they can go to the U.S. Department of War (DOW) website and check out the “multimedia experience” of the military’s nuclear triad delivery system. The online presentation blatantly and unabashedly explains in detail how the U.S. military can readily make nuclear strikes against its adversaries using not only land-based, silo-launched missiles, but also submarine and fighter plane launchings of nuclear bombs.

The DOW’s flashy, action-filled nuclear triad website is full of bravado, and seemingly overloaded with testosterone. It looks like a violent video game. One can imagine Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, messing around with the website, tapping at the keyboard with one hand, while holding a beer in the other.

Interestingly, the introductory section of the DOW nuclear triad website includes a statement which reads, in part, “…the triad ensures a credible and flexible nuclear deterrent, providing the president of the United States with options to accomplish objectives if deterrence fails.”

Those are nuclear options currently available for Donald Trump, who alone has the authority to order a nuclear attack. Having such choices on which weapons to use has got to be alluring, if not tempting, for our president. Imagine what goes on in his brain at times when he thinks about the power he has over nuclear weapons and the fate of humanity. Think, “eeny, meeny, miny, moe…”

On top of all its muscle flexing, there is another feature in the U.S. nuclear weapons policy that exhibits a kind of bullying. I refer here to the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) published by the Biden Administration in 2022. The NPR remains operative under the Trump Administration.

Consider this statement in the NPR, which is readily available for the world to see:

We conducted a thorough review of a broad range of options for nuclear declaratory policy – including both No First Use and Sole Purpose policies – and concluded that those approaches would result in an unacceptable level of risk in light of the range of non-nuclear capabilities being developed and fielded by competitors that could inflict strategic-level damage to the United States and its Allies and partners.

Simply put, the U.S. maintains a first-strike nuclear option to be deployed against even a non-nuclear enemy. Paradoxically, China does have a “no first use” policy for its nuclear arsenal. Hey, U.S. adversaries, don’t even look at us the wrong way!

But wait! There’s more going on with the U.S. nuclear arsenal: modernization.

The replacement of over 400 ICBM Minuteman III missiles is currently in the works. These weapons have been in use (on alert but not fired off) for over 55 years, and have been kept viable thanks to “a series of life extension programs,” according to the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. In the early 2030s, even more deadly ICBM Sentinel missiles will take their place. According to the Air and Space Forces Magazine, these new ICBMs will cost over $140 billion.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Many protesters at Vandenberg have also gone to prison for their nonviolent, civil disobedience: crossing a green line that demarcated where protest was allowed. The case of one courageous protester, Dennis Apel, who was arrested 15 times at Vandenberg, landed at the U.S. Supreme Court……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Hundreds of Americans protest against nuclear weapons every year at various military bases, and also at private corporate facilities that are connected to the U.S. nuclear program (and make big bucks). Unfortunately, anti-nuclear protesters often go unheard in the U.S., regardless of the often deep, personal sacrifices they make. Also, those voices have been aging and declining in number over the years.

Since I first joined protesters at Vandenberg in 2008, our numbers have dwindled to less than a dozen who gather monthly at the main gate. Annually, on or around the dates of August 6 and August 9—the anniversaries of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively—the number of protesters grows to a few dozen at Vandenberg, with most coming from Los Angeles. The somewhat larger crowd draws a good number of well-armed, military security guards who line up in formation a hundred yards down the base entry road.

The soldiers wait for protesters to cross the green line, and every year, a few do. Over a loud speaker, the military officer in charge of the formation warns these brave folks to cross back over the line within two minutes or they will face arrest. The protesters ignore the command, are handcuffed, cited, and then driven off the base in a van by the soldiers.

This scene is both moving, and a little comical, depending on one’s perspective. You see, these days most of the protesters at Vandenberg are old and grey (including myself). We are also a motley group, and frumpy. It’s not too much of a stretch to imagine us as a collection of outsized Ewoks from a Star Wars film, standing up to Stormtroopers of the Galactic Empire. If someone played a John Williams score over a music box in the background, we’d have a real show.

Admittedly, probably most Americans would see the protesters at Vandenberg as preposterous, daring to confront the most powerful military on the planet with little hope of disarming our nation of nuclear weapons. Perhaps we are. But we are driven by a moral and humane purpose. . And if observers—even those who are patriotic—were more objective and opened their eyes widely, they might see what we protesters deeply sense: that the huge and deadly U.S. nuclear arsenal and forces contain our nation’s own demise.

The blindness of Americans to the reality of nuclear annihilation begins with a national hypocrisy, one that we hold as the first and only nation to ever use nuclear weapons in war, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people. It is a striking example of our hypocrisy that is blatantly clear to most of the world beyond our borders……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The most recent, significant multilateral treaty, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), was adopted at the United Nations in 2017, and entered into force in 2021. In sum, this treaty calls for nations around the world to either commit to never creating, possessing, testing, or transferring nuclear weapons if they have not yet done so, or to fully rid themselves of nuclear weapons—disarm—if they already have them.

To date, 95 nations have signed onto the TPNW. While that seems promising, it really isn’t, yet. The TPNW has been ignored by all the nuclear states, including the U.S. Still, it’s premature to write the treaty off at this point. But consider what looms over humanity’s head in the meantime.

The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), an international coalition of non-governmental organizations and winner of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize, warns that even limited nuclear conflicts will cause global devastation.

………………………. The second Trump Administration has said it is pursuing a “peace through strength” policy in national security and foreign affairs. The National Defense Strategy emphasizes the importance of modernizing the U.S. nuclear deterrent in response to increased nuclear threats.

“Peace through strength!” That doesn’t quite sound like a winning catchphrase that could inspire adversaries to surrender their nuclear weapons. More accurately, the image I get is Pete Hegseth crushing an empty beer can against the side of his head. Add on the “weapons modernization” program and you don’t really improve nuclear deterrence, but embolden the arms race already in place by nuclear adversaries.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..What JFK described in his peace address is a very different America, one that respects other nations and treasures humanity. It presents an America that tries to lead, rather than rule the nations around the world. Consider these comments:

“What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. … I am talking about …the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, … that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children–not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women–not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.

I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.”

Currently there is a movement in Congress echoing JFK’s thinking on peace……………………………………………………

JFK’s thinking on peace is radically different from Trump’s and Hegseth’s. In our day and age, Kennedy’s perspective would be widely held as preposterous—just like the case of protesters who make personal sacrifices in attempts to waken our nation to see its almost hypnotic violence and self-destruction threatened by nuclear weapons.

……………………………………………………………………………………………Recently, the DOW has posted television and social media ads about “peace through strength” that compliment its multimedia presentation on the nuclear triad. One asks: how do most Americans carry on daily life, seemingly unconscious of the deeply disconcerting possibility of nuclear Armageddon? Is it because our populace is errantly convinced that immense, superior weaponry will fully protect us from our adversaries? Have we drank a soon-fatal dose of the potion of military propaganda? https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/how-fear-of-nuclear-armageddon-leads-me-to-protest

July 21, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, PERSONAL STORIES, USA | Leave a comment

Australian resistance to the war machine -500 march towards Pine Gap this morning demanding closure of the facility

Monday 20 July 2026, Mparntwe Alice Springs, Arrernte Country

Hundreds from across the country have joined a rally on the road to Pine Gap this morning demanding the closure of the controversial military facility. The action closes out the Close Pine Gap Sacred Land Back Convergence 2026 organised by Mparntwe for Falastin and Anti Militarism Action Network, the biggest convergence of its kind since 1987.

The Hayes family – Traditional Owners of Kuyunba, the sacred land that Pine Gap occupies – lead the rally, with a list of four demands:

Return of Kuyunba
The closure of Pine Gap
Compensation for the years Kuyunba has been occupied
Compensation to the families in Gaza for the lives lost there

These actions have been echoed by rallies across the country.

The action follows two days of learning and discussion about militarism and colonialism. Experts from around the country addressed the violent reality and risks of Pine Gap.

“If ever there was a message to end the world, it would come through Pine Gap. We would be the handmaidens of that,” said Senator David Shoebridge on the weekend, adding, “US bases have never made us safe, but right now they are especially making us a target.”

Felicity, Wyonna and Jacquita Hayes, Arrernte Apmereke-artweye Traditional Custodians, said earlier to supporters:

“We want people to support us to close down Pine Gap. We want them to know it’s a sacred site. We don’t want to be feeling guilty all the time when bad things are happening overseas to little ones. We’re not the ones controlling that facility, but we feel guilty that it’s coming from our land.”

July 20, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Activists protest outside Pioneer Park nuclear event.

by Gareth Cavanagh

ACTIVISTS held a protest outside The Peddler in Whitehaven yesterday as nuclear sector figures shared their plans for ‘Pioneer Park’, an AI data centre powered by nuclear energy, with the public.

Land at Moorside, neighbouring Sellafield, has been central to new nuclear ambitions for a
number of years. There were once ambitions to develop a ‘clean energy hub’
on the land with a mix of energy-generation solutions, including a fleet of
small modular reactors (SMR).

Now named Pioneer Park, the proposal is to
develop an SMR site which will provide the energy for an ‘innovative’ AI
data centre. It is hoped the development will attract more than £12billion
in investment from business giants, provide a jobs boost and a space for
emerging industries to thrive.

But Radiation Free Lakeland, which protested
a consultation event about the proposals yesterday, argues that benefits of
the development would not outweigh the environmental impact, pointing out
the proximity of the land to the River Ehen as well as the village of
Beckermet.

Pioneer Park is set to be located on land at Moorside,
neighbouring Sellafield. The activist group said: “This area of green
fields and River Ehen Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) should be
a buffer zone between the sprawling Sellafield site and the surrounding
villages.”

They said that the nuclear industry is “using public money like
there is no tomorrow to try and make this buffer zone a further nuclear
sacrifice zone and AI data centre.”

A spokesperson for Pioneer Park’s
developers said that the site at Moorside “has been identified through
Government policy for nuclear power generation since 2011″. Their ambition
is “to build on west Cumbria’s internationally recognised strengths in
energy and engineering by bringing forward new nuclear development,
alongside complementary clean energy and technology projects, helping to
diversify the economy, support the ongoing decommissioning mission at
Sellafield, generate secure, low-carbon energy and create long-term
opportunities for local people.”

Carlisle News & Star 15th July 2026, https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/26276371.activists-protest-outside-pioneer-park-nuclear-event/

July 19, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

The Golden Rule and Crew are ready – Summer 2026 voyage

The VFP Golden Rule Committee plans to bring the Golden Rule to 12 ports-of-call this summer. However, weather on the Pacific coast has been wild this season. After arriving in Fort Bragg, we are waiting for a huge, strong storm to let up a bit before proceeding south.

An optimistic schedule is set out below – note that the order of stops and dates for San Diego, Ensenada, and Oceanside all depend on when the storm breaks. And the rest of the schedule may also shift and a stop or two canceled – stay tuned on our website and eNews, which will be posted as soon as we successfully leave Fort Bragg.

Please see vfpgoldenruleproject.org for the latest schedule.

Locate the Golden Rule with our Tracker.

See live videos from the boat on Facebook: GoldenRulePeaceBoat

Follow us on Instagram goldenrulepeaceboat

We look forward to presentations, peace picnics, concerts, film screenings, city council resolutions, press conferences, Peace Flotillas, “open boat” tours, and taking people sailing!

If you live in or near any of these coastal cities, we encourage you to help organize events and publicity. If you will be visiting the California coast this summer, please plan to join us.

July 6, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. Military Bases Around the World Are Facing Growing Protest From an Emboldened Antiwar Movement

Jeremy Kuzmarov, Jun 23, 2026

Previously published at CovertAction Magazine

In early April, an unidentified Irish man climbed onto the roof of a U.S. C-130 Hercules military transport vehicle parked at Shannon Airport in County Claire, Ireland, and sabotaged its wing and fuselage using a hatchet, causing $75 million in damage.

The heroic action was part of a wave of protests at Shannon Airport, which has functioned since the end of the Cold War as a transport hub for U.S. troops and refueling and transit spot for CIA and U.S. military planes, including ones that transported prisoners to Guantánamo Bay under the infamous rendition program.

Edward Hogan is a a regular participant in the protests at the Shannon Airport who was a featured speaker at a June 6 webinar hosted by Global Women for Peace—United Against NATO, which aimed to raise awareness about the widening protests against U.S. military bases in Europe and around the world.

A former member of the Irish defense force and UN peacekeeper, Hogan said that he has been arrested eight times in protests outside Shannon Airport, which are growing in scale because of popular anger at Ireland’s complicity in the Israeli genocide in Gaza and Iran War—along with previous illegal U.S. and NATO wars like in Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and Serbia in the 1990s.

Hogan emphasized that, by allowing the U.S. military to use Shannon Airport, it has violated a neutrality policy that was signed into law by the Irish government in 1939.

Since 2002, more than three million U.S. troops have passed through Shannon Airport, many through flights classified as “civilian,” though most troop carriers are operated by Omni Air International, which the Irish government acknowledges has been allowed to carry weapons on board.

Additionally, the Irish Foreign Minister has granted permission for U.S. Navy and Air Force planes to land at Shannon—in violation of Irish law.

Hogan was followed up in his remarks by Ilse Terheggen, a Dutch punk rock musician and activist, who spoke about growing protests she is involved in outside the Leeuwarden Air Base in Friesland near Leiden………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

At the end of the webinar, a woman from Sweden came on to highlight the Pentagon’s push for the expansion of military bases in the Nordic countries (Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway) from which the U.S. can launch direct attacks on Russia.

When the woman asked why Swedish anti-war activism was not featured in the webinar, others said they would have liked to but that, unfortunately, there was not much anti-war activism there except for some small actions.

The woman agreed that, unfortunately, this was true and lamented that the entire Swedish parliament had supported an agreement that would allow the U.S. to use Sweden’s 17 military bases to attack Russia.

Despite a conservative political climate reminiscent of the Cold War and insane war escalations being carried out in Washington and Tel Aviv, the June 6 Global Women for Peace—United Against NATO webinar made clear that there is a growing grass-roots opposition across Europe and parts of Southeast Asia, which is beginning to make some political headway.

Many speakers emphasized a widening coalition at anti-base and anti-war protests involving pro-Palestinian groups, climate change activists, trade union activists, feminists and pacifists, along with a growing number of young people who are experiencing a political awakening.

If they continue to expand, these networks may threaten the hold on power of ruling classes whose war-mongering and fealty to U.S. imperial designs have put them on the wrong side of history. https://jeremykuzmarov.substack.com/p/us-military-bases-around-the-world?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2091638&post_id=203170903&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=rq1nt&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

June 25, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Sizewell C: the Unanswered Questions

June 8, 2026 Alison Downes, https://stopsizewellc.org/sizewell-c-the-unanswered-questions/

8 June 2026: On the day the Public Accounts Committee begins scrutiny of Sizewell C, [1] and almost a year to the day that the government’s announcement of its £14.2bn investment paved the way for a Final Investment Decision, Stop Sizewell C is publishing a report “Sizewell C – The Unanswered Questions”. This highlights what is known, what it is impossible to know, and what the government continues to keep secret about Sizewell C. It is a story of secrecy, obfuscation and deception and contains a number of recommendations. [2]

Read here: Sizewell C, the Unanswered Questions, 8 June 2026

Stop Sizewell C said: “Over the last decade, efforts to uncover Sizewell C’s expected cost and schedule have been met by obfuscation, secrecy and outright deception. [3] While the National Audit Office published some details that the government wanted to keep secret, [4] we now demand much greater transparency; the Sizewell C Full Business Case and Strategy and Delivery Plan must be published – unredacted – immediately.

“With households on the hook for Sizewell C, we need assurances that the government has a prepared exit strategy for when the project – which according to the NAO is already based on “big assumptions” and “significant uncertainty” [5] – goes wrong. The government’s inability to back out of HS2 shows where this project might be heading, but with Sizewell C’s “novel” financing, it would be immoral to force households to continue paying for something that might never work properly, while investors laugh all the way to the bank.

“In the cost of living crisis, consumers must be protected now and into the future from the risks of building nuclear projects. As well as assurances of increased scrutiny and Ministerial accountability for Sizewell C, we call for a commitment that RAB will never be used again for future nuclear projects. Unless investors suddenly rediscover an appetite for risk – unlikely given the free ride provided by Sizewell C’s RAB – abandoning nuclear or switching to full state funding would seem to be the only alternatives.

“We look forward to the outcomes of the Public Accounts Committee’s enquiry into Sizewell C and hope the Committee calls out the government for failing to come clean about this deeply flawed project.”

Notes

1. The Public Accounts Committee is taking oral evidence on Sizewell C at 1pm today, 8 June with senior officials and Nigel Cann https://committees.parliament.uk/work/9713/sizewell-c/

2. See Appendix below. Some of our recommendations echo those by the National Audit Office in its report on Sizewell C.

3. Our report includes examples such as:

The government claimed not to “recognise” a cost of Sizewell C put at “close to £40bn” by the Financial Times in January 2025, when in July the project “baseline” was given as £38bn and HMG’s “central cost estimate” as £40.5bn.
Ministers are keeping the target completion date secret, saying only “mid to late 2030s”, but the NAO revealed the project baseline date as July 2039.
Sizewell C revised its May 2020 cost estimate of £20bn a few months later, including removing allowances for in risk contingencies, but told the Planning Inspectorate in January 2021 the estimated cost “remains the same”.
Officials gaslit Stop Sizewell C in a conversation about the project costing over £30bn.

4. Stop Sizewell C has repeatedly called for publication of the Sizewell C Full Business Case (FBC) but the government decided to only publish a summary. The NAO had sight of the FBC in preparing its report, but the FBC itself is still unpublished.

5. NAO’s press statement says: “This novel approach [RAB financing] has costs and relies on big assumptions” and “DESNZ’s modelling of [Sizewell C’s] benefits shows they will not outweigh the costs to consumers until after 2060. They are also subject to significant uncertainty.”

Appendix: Our recommendations.

I. GREATER TRANSPARENCY

We call for the immediate unredacted publication of Sizewell C’s Strategy and Delivery Plan that contains clear and accessible information about cost, schedule and project milestones to enable the public to understand project progress. Annual updates to Parliament should spell out the following:

Average and total costs for domestic and business users to date.
Total capital accessed by the project to date.
Updated construction cost compared to project baseline, LRT and HRT.
Transparency about the whole life cost of the project from inception, through construction, operation and decommissioning. The cost of risk shouldered by HMG should also be included.
If the Strategy and Delivery Plan cannot be published at this time the government should make a statement explaining why and commit to a publishing date.

We call for the immediate – unredacted – publication of Sizewell C’s Full Business Case, as accessed by the National Audit Office.
Terms agreed with EDF for use of its technology should be placed in the public domain.

II. EVIDENCE OF AN EXIT STRATEGY

While Stop Sizewell C is already convinced that Sizewell C cannot provide value for money or energy security, we believe the case for Sizewell C will weaken further over time as project milestones are missed, technological challenges emerge, and other sources of energy generation become cheaper. Given the financial burden on consumers, we seek assurances that the government would pursue an exit strategy rather than commit further funds to an expensive, unreliable energy source that would add to the UK’s stockpile of nuclear waste. The lack of an exit strategy must surely be a fundamental learning from HS2 – and Hinkley Point C.

DESNZ should publish a process and timetable for regular reviews of the FBC, including ongoing assessments of internal or external developments on the economic viability of the project. These updates should be made public.

These updates should transparently communicate the cost of continuing Sizewell C compared to the cost of abandoning the project, and what and when a government exit strategy would be pursued, to save consumer money being wasted.

III. PROVIDE CONSUMERS WITH ASSURANCES OF SCRUTINY AND PROTECTION

We echo the NAO’s call for close, ongoing scrutiny by Ministers and independent watchdogs of consumer risk. The government must provide clarity on how this scrutiny will be undertaken, and demonstrate that DESNZ is resourced with the right skills and expertise to ensure full oversight. The government should undertake an early review of Sizewell C’s governance and assign specific Ministerial accountability for the project.
The government should make a commitment not to use RAB for future nuclear power developments, especially GW nuclear projects. Full state funding would seem inevitable.
The policy decision to “recycle” the government’s profit from Sizewell C’s RAB during construction (and operation, assuming the government kept its share) to help reduce consumer contributions towards Sizewell C should be legislated, to reduce the likelihood that future governments would rescind this arrangement and force consumers to pay even more for Sizewell C. (See point 3.)

DESNZ should provide more detailed information to show how private sector expertise will be garnered from investors, and the basis of their belief that this will deliver savings for the benefit of consumers and that would justify use of the RAB.
With investor returns during construction considered “high” by the NAO, we call on Ofgem to use all its powers to limit the profits investors would receive during operation, and not be swayed by investor claims that returns should reflect their “higher risk” * – when in fact consumers are bearing significant risk.

*Comments made by Centrica in a video presentation, https://www.centrica.com/investors/centrica-as-an-investment/investing-for-value-at-sizewell-c/

June 12, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Pull the plug over nuclear reactors

Sir, – I refer to the letter from Dr Steven Welsh (April 11) headed “We have been failed on energy and jobs” in which he states that “Dounreay is crying out to be developed as a site for a small modular nuclear reactor”.

He argues that by ignoring our crying need for nuclear Scotland continues to miss out on investment, jobs and a long-term future for Scotland’s civil nuclear sector.

I presume he knows that Dounreay currently employs 1,300 people with 700 in the supply chain and that the clean up will continue into the 2070s at a cost of £8.7 billion.

Highlands Against Nuclear Power (HANP) will be crying out to prevent any
nuclear in Scotland as it is not carbon free nor safe, does nothing to
reach netzero, is the most expensive form of energy production and the UK
has no solution for dealing with highly radioactive nuclear waste.

Press & Journal 20th April 2026, https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-press-and-journal-aberdeen-and-aberdeenshire/20260420/282041923714019

April 25, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran

Black Hills Uranium Is More Dangerous. Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.

Trump is bombing Iran over uranium enrichment 6,000 miles away. He’s fast-tracking uranium extraction in the Black Hills on Lakota treaty land, above the aquifer that feeds Pine Ridge. Two fast tracks. Two manufactured crises. Both bypassing the consent of the governed. Tell Secretary Burgum the real uranium threat is here.

This administration has put two things on a fast track to destruction. One is a war in Iran. The other is a uranium mine in the Black Hills. Both manufactured crises. Both bypassing democratic oversight. Both moving at the speed of executive order, because if either one slowed down long enough for the people to weigh in, the answer would be no.

Congress never authorized the war in Iran. They’ve voted four times to stop it. Overruled. The Lakota people never consented to uranium extraction from treaty land. They’ve fought it for 20 years. Overruled.

On February 27, 2026, the U.S. Forest Service approved new drilling around Pe’ Sla — the ceremonial heart of He Sapa, the Black Hills — over formal tribal objections, with no environmental review, under a document falsely claiming there are “no known Native American or Alaska Native religious or cultural sites within the project area.” About land a half-mile from Pe’ Sla.

Now the Bureau of Land Management has opened a 30-day comment window on the Dewey-Burdock uranium project — 50 miles from Pine Ridge, in Lakota treaty territory. The 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty appears in the review exactly zero times. The document resolving cultural harm to Lakota sacred sites won’t be signed until six weeks after the comment period closes.

They will go to war over uranium in Iran. They will not protect our water from uranium 50 miles from Pine Ridge.

In the end, the only backstop on this runaway train is the consent of the governed. Use it.

Tell Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum:

1. Reverse the Pe’ Sla drilling permit — now

2. Remove Dewey-Burdock from the FAST-41 federal fast-track program

3. Suspend all extractive permits on treaty lands until full tribal consultation and a complete Environmental Impact Statement are done

The Black Hills are not for sale. Mni wiconi — water is life

Also submit a public comment directly to the BLM on the Dewey-Burdock Environmental Assessment — deadline May 14, 2026.

April 24, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Events, opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

CND opposes new contract to build nuclear reactors on Anglesey.

COMMENT Just by the way, in this new Trumpian era, our nuclear sites become a useful weapon for an enemy – an appealing target to be attacked

David Nicholson

Anti-nuclear campaigners have condemned plans to build small modular
reactors (SMRs) at Wylfa on Anglesey, dismissing claims that they will
bring energy independence as a “fantasy” today.

CND Cymru commented
after contracts to construct Britain’s first SMRs in north Wales were
signed. Anglesey was selected last year to become the site of the SMR
programme by the Labour government at Westminster.

CND Cymru national
secretary Dylan Lewis-Rowlands said: “Nuclear power does not deliver
energy independence. Wales doesn’t mine fissile material, lacks the
ability to enrich it and convert it into fuel, and has no storage capacity.
“We need to end the corporate nuclear fantasy and focus on the
deliverable solutions that can be done quicker, cheaper and placed in the
hands of communities — that is how we truly make Wales energy
independent.”

Morning Star 13th April 2026, https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/cnd-opposes-new-contract-build-nuclear-reactors-anglesey

April 17, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Making London councils allies in the campaign to oppose Britain’s nuclear expansion

7 Apr 26, https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/making-london-councils-allies-campaign-oppose-britains-nuclear-expansion

As weapons return to Suffolk and defence spending soars, London CND is pressing local candidates to oppose nuclear expansion and support the UN ban treaty. SALLY SPIERS explains.

LONDON Region CND has launched a campaign to make London nuclear weapon-free. There are compelling reasons for local council candidates to oppose the expansion of Britain’s nuclear weapons by promising to sign up to the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

US nuclear weapons have returned to Britain for the first time since their complete removal in 2008. These weapons have been sited at US air base Lakenheath in Suffolk, approximately 75 miles from London. The majority of voters are opposed to US nuclear weapons being stationed in the UK, according to a 2025 YouGov poll.

In addition, Keir Starmer has announced Britain is buying 12 nuclear-capable jets (F-35As) from the United States. These are equipped to carry and fire the same nuclear weapons that are based at Lakenheath.

These weapons will not in any way be an independent nuclear deterrent. The US president must authorise the use of these missiles. Buying them and having them on our territory meshes us even deeper into US foreign policy.

We have all witnessed President Donald Trump threatening Nato countries to get them to enter a crazy illegal war of his making. US foreign policy is aggressive, expansionist, threatening to its allies and it is highly unpopular with British people.

We cannot believe for one minute these jets and weapons will protect the security of the people of these islands.

Given the proximity to London, it seems more likely they actually constitute a threat to Londoners from either attack or accident. Councils have a duty to ensure their residents are safe. Opposing Britain’s nuclear expansion and supporting the TPNW is an obvious first step in fulfilling this duty.

And then there’s the cost. The nuclear capable jets that Britain is buying are estimated to cost £80 million each, almost £1 billion in total. When he first announced the increased spending on defence, John Healey argued the money would secure British high-skilled jobs.

Whether you are convinced by this argument or not, it is clear that this £1bn is going to secure high-skills jobs in Indianapolis where the jets will be built, not Britain.

We cannot believe for one minute these jets and weapons will protect the security of the people of these islands.

Whether you are convinced by this argument or not, it is clear that this £1bn is going to secure high-skills jobs in Indianapolis where the jets will be built, not Britain.

In mid-March, London Councils which speaks for all London authorities, described the financial situation of our councils as being “extremely challenging.” They “are grappling with a £1bn budget shortfall this year.”

How can prospective councillors not question the expenditure on nuclear-capable jets? There cannot be a single council in this country that has the resources to mend potholes effectively. Our councils need that money to provide basic services that keep the capital functioning.

Incredibly, neither decision — bringing US nukes back nor expanding our own nuclear capabilities — has been debated in Parliament. War is most definitely on people’s minds. Last year, voters identified defence as the fourth-most important concern for them.

The only way this concern seems to be discussed is in terms of increased spending on defence. But these important matters could be discussed in council chambers if councillors were willing to consider signing up to the TPNW or even making their mayors a mayor for peace.

This would send an important message to the government that is entirely in line with the view of the majority of the British public.

There is movement. It seems likely Green candidates will support the TPNW at council level. Labour candidates must be feeling the burn from the Greens and other parties. Supporting the TPNW will be a popular move with voters and Labour candidates would be foolish to ignore it.

London CND is asking voters to write to their council candidates to urge them to sign their support for the TPNW.

Councils and individual councillors can sign the cities pledge of the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, the authors of the TPNW.

Mayors can sign up to mayors for peace. Cities and mayors throughout the world, and particularly Europe, have already signed. What a coup it would be for peace if London and London Councils were to sign.

Further information on how to support the London CND campaign is available on the London CND website Make London Nuclear Free Campaign, “London’s TPNW Pledge” www.londoncnd.org.

Sally Spiers is vice-chair of London CND.

April 13, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Arrests at Lakenheath nuclear base blockade

News, Apr 6th, https://freedomnews.org.uk/2026/04/06/arrests-at-lakenheath-nuclear-base-blockade/

International Peace Camp protests British complicity in Iran and Gaza

Several protesters were arrested at RAF Lakenheath over the weekend, during the International Peace Camp held at the US-occupied nuclear base. The actions included a successful blockade of the main gates of the base, with protestors focusing on the ongoing Iran war, the Gaza genocide, and the presence of nuclear weapons at the site.

The camp, taking place from 1-6 April, built to a crescendo over the Easter weekend with the main gates successfully blockaded for three hours on Saturday. Two protestors were arrested for refusing to move, with one of them citing attacks on over 600 schools and 300 medical facilities in Iran as her motivation for direct action.

Easter Sunday saw a further seven arrests when a number of protestors focusing on the genocide in Gaza wore tabards offering support for Palestine Action. The camp has also featured dramatic interventions from the Red Rebel Brigade.

Lakenheath, located in Suffolk, has for decades been a home of the US Air Force in Europe, and last year once again became home to US nuclear weapons on UK soil, with B61 gravity bombs delivered last summer after a long period of preparation. The base has been actively involved in the Iran war, used by a wide range of US aircraft to transit to stations in the Middle East. An F-15E Strike Eagle shot down over Iran is believed to have been a Lakenheath aircraft.

The camp, organised by the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, has featured addresses from CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt, and former British Army Colonel Chris Romberg, who was arrested last year in Parliament Square for carrying a sign in support of Palestine Action.

The camp is scheduled to conclude with a ‘grand finale’ today, Easter Monday (6th April) .

April 9, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Protestors target RAF Lakenheath amid evidence of US nuclear weapons and role in illegal war on Iran

Peace camp against deployment of US nuclear weapons to Britain takes place at RAF Lakenheath, 1-6 April
Major demonstration and blockade of base main gate on Saturday, 4 April
CND ad van touring East Anglia calling to ‘Kick out Trump’s nukes’

The international peace camp at RAF Lakenheath returns from 1-6 April, with a major demonstration and blockade of the main gate taking place on Saturday, 4 April.

Organised by Lakenheath Alliance for Peace* of which CND is a member, the camp will draw attention to the overwhelming evidence that US B61-12 nuclear bombs under the control of Donald Trump have arrived at the base, as well as highlighting the base’s role in facilitating Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the ongoing illegal attacks on Iran.

As part of this campaign, CND has organised ad vans to travel around East Anglia, including, Norwich (today), Cambridge (Wednesday), and towns and villages near the base (Thursday), calling on communities to join the major protest at RAF Lakenheath on Saturday, 4 April, to demand that Keir Starmer kicks out Trump’s nukes from Britain!.

CND 31st March 2026, https://cnduk.org/protestors-target-raf-lakenheath-amid-evidence-of-us-nuclear-weapons-and-role-in-illegal-war-on-iran/

April 8, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Back to Pentagon on Good Friday

Friday, April 03, 2026, Bruce K. Gagnon, https://space4peace.blogspot.com/2026/04/back-to-pentagon-on-good-friday.html

Sixteen activists got up early this morning and took the subway to the Pentagon where we held a 90 minute vigil as military and civilian employees walked, drove, biked and rode buses by our Good Friday peace vigil.

Yesterday Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George, removing the Army’s top officer in the latest shake-up of military leadership amid the war in Iran. This was most likely done because Gen. George dared to question the US Iran war strategy on some level. George is the 24th general or admiral Hegseth has removed indicating that all is not well inside the ‘war department’.

I made a point this morning of asking any Army personnel who passed me by why their ‘boss had been fired’. One officer stopped and said to me, “I don’t why why he was fired. I only met him once and he was a good man”.

During our time on the street, now kept at a distance from the Pentagon in comparison to where we were arrested last Friday when 27 of us got deep into the bowels of the war-making institution, we got lots of ‘good mornings’, kind nods, and some words of encouragement as folks passed us by. Even a four-star general gave me a nice nod.

My sense is that there is much quiet unsettlement inside the Trump war machine these days. It felt good to be outside offering support to those on the inside who might have a good heart and good sense of which there must be many amongst the 30,000 who work at the Pentagon.

In related news Stars & Stripes military publication is reporting this morning that “A search and rescue effort was underway on Friday afternoon to locate two crew members of a U.S. fighter jet [F-15] that was shot down in Iran”.

NBC News: Two U.S. military helicopters participating in search and rescue operations were hit by Iranian fire but appear to have made it back to base. We also learned that a Pentagon A-10 Warthog plane “crashed” today in the Persian Gulf region — according to The New York Times. The plane was likely hit by Iranian air defenses, but US is concealing it to save face with saying it “crashed” — crashed how?

Trump has just requested $1.5 trillion from Congress for ‘defense’ in the 2027 fiscal year – the largest sum in the country’s recent history. Trump explains the sharp increase in spending by the ongoing war with Iran and the need to replenish depleted weapons stocks.

Trump and Hegseth are burning taxpayer dollars like they are nothing.

April 7, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries