nuclear-news

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

Will Sizewell nuclear project go ahead? Campaigners question the timetable and the funding.

The Government has announced that the timetable for investing in the new
Sizewell C nuclear power station in Suffolk will be revealed before a
general election. However, the campaign group Stop Sizewell C, which is
opposed to the project, said there was still much that was unknown about
whether the project could go ahead, including how the £20bn would be
raised to pay for the station.

A Stop Sizewell C spokesperson said: “From
our extensive discussions with officials it is clear that a Sizewell C
Final Investment Decision (FID) is still some months away and the time
before the next election is running out, for Rishi Sunak hasn’t ruled out a
May poll.

 East Anglian Daily Times 12th Jan 2024

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24046041.campaigners-say-unknown-whether-sizewell-c-will-proceed/

January 15, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

No to nuclear power: stop the expansion

11 Jan 24,  https://cnduk.org/no-to-nuclear-power-stop-the-expansion/?fbclid=IwAR0fK6tLziBuDX544zzspuQZ71MDEi2yzP4ipEPOLDhy2m_cJEosi2Lxr6c

The UK government hopes to plough ahead with its biggest expansion of nuclear power for decades, despite major concerns over safety, cost, the legacy of nuclear waste, and its link to nuclear weapons.

A long-awaited plan was unveiled by ministers on Thursday and follows a commitment made at COP28 last November to triple nuclear power production by 2050. The roadmap includes plans by government and the nuclear industry to cut red tape in order to “accelerate new nuclear projects,” build another nuclear reactor in addition to Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C, and make investment decisions on new nuclear projects every five years from 2030 to 2044. £300 million has also been made available to launch a high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) programme – making Britain the only country in Europe after Russia to commercially produce such a fuel.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak lauded his nuclear plan as the “perfect antidote to the energy challenges facing Britain” adding “it’s green, cheaper in the long term and will ensure the UK’s energy security for the long-term.” But is it?

Britain’s two existing nuclear projects – Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C – have been beset with problems since the beginning. A 2015 forecast of Hinkley Point put the project at around £25 billion. These costs have since spiralled by 30 percent to £33 billion and the start date for the plant is likely to be in the early 2030s instead of 2027. Sizewell C is also struggling to attract private financing and the government has already spent over £1 billion on the project. Energy consumers too will pay more: a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) funding model proposed to help fund the project will add a levy to customer bills years before the plant ever starts to generate electricity.

Safety standards within Britain’s nuclear industry have also been under the spotlight recently. The Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation revealed a litany of safety concerns at the Sellafield nuclear waste site including: crumbling infrastructure at some of the site’s most dangerous areas; security breaches; and a toxic workplace culture including harassment of whistleblowers. The scandal has already led to senior management leaving.

Sellafield remains Europe’s most toxic nuclear site and efforts to build a new underwater nuclear waste dump in Cumbria or Lincolnshire have so far failed to achieve community support.

CND General Secretary Kate Hudson said:

“The nuclear lobby was an obvious presence at last November’s COP28 summit and the UK government is working overtime to sell to the public the myth that nuclear power is the answer to the climate crisis and Britain’s energy needs. The evidence points in the opposite direction as renewables are cheaper, faster to deliver, and cleaner. Meanwhile, Hinkley Point C is seriously delayed and overbudget and the government thinks it’s ok to bill consumers twice for Sizewell C: once through taxation and again through a levy on consumer bills. Even if these projects were brought in on time and on budget, it still doesn’t solve the issue of Britain’s shocking record when it comes to safety, as shown in the recent Sellafield Leaks, or with what to do with nuclear waste. We must also bear in mind the main reason this government is so in favour of nuclear power: it helps to normalise Britain’s nuclear weapons and ensures a steady stream of skilled personnel to maintain and manufacturer them. Anyone who tells you any different is living in Cloud Cuckoo Land.”

January 13, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Where your $trillions go, to risk all life

Peace and Planet News, by Anthony Donovan | Winter 2023 Edition

We’ve seen an amazing level of bipartisan support!” For what initiative do we hear this rare statement echoed about Congress today?

The 15th Annual Nuclear Deterrence Summit, held once again at the Hyatt Regency in Arlington, Va., Feb. 13–15. For three days the rooms are filled with a multitude of companies and government agencies from around the country connected to the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, and National Nuclear Security Administration that make up our nuclear weapons industry, and its terribly secretive renewed Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) race.

What is termed the “Enterprise” is in full-out sales and confidence-building mode. It is here the relationships for securing contracts through the next 5 to 35 years are solidified.

One aged reporter who once covered the industry in the 1980s confides his shock after a dizzying day of presentations: “How did you know these gatherings were going on? I just found out last week!  Can’t believe this, I mean, this is a new unbridled arms race!  These people in there are totally convinced this is the only way to go.” Looking at only two of us with our sign, he asks, “Why aren’t more people in the streets? Where is the movement pushing back?”………………………………………………………………….

Attendees were a bit puzzled that I wasn’t with a company connected to the summit, but I continued to share my purpose, seeing that we desperately need their dedication and skillset to begin turning toward the critical needs before us today: sustainability, good jobs supporting our environment, food, water, air, housing, healthcare, education, infrastructure … you know the issue. Some were relieved that I was all for science and space exploration, but first, for the precious earth!

…………………………………………………… Most exhibitors were too young to remember that the vast majority of citizens had voted with their feet to end this madness, and that there was no transparency or democratic process in the decision to use our treasure to fund it all.

Inevitably the confounding old Cold War rhetoric arose, painting China and Russia as vile enemies that we can not trust to honor any agreements.  ……………………..

Naturally, I’d let them know we had a most worthy instrument, The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, now international law, to help guide this needed transformation, despite its being dismissed by our mainstream media.  Only a few had heard of it, and of those, few knew particulars.

Laser beamed on their one aspect of the industry, several with competitors present vying for the same contract, many met in the dozens of closed-door side rooms for private company presentations/briefings.  There were open “networking breakfasts” lunches and evening cocktail parties and several daily general gatherings in the large Hyatt Ballroom focused on the latest in pit production, delivery platforms, command-and-control infrastructure and communications, warhead modernization, STRATCOM reports, reports from the heads of all our labs, Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, Sandia, etc.   Presentations on increasing efficiency in product and organization, best practices, and cited pathways to “success.”   After all, we are leading and “winning.”   Exactly what we think we are winning made no sense to anyone on the nuclear abolition team.

There were exhibitors displaying highly specialized metal nose cones and delivery vehicle parts.  Designers of fabrics that claim to protect from radioactivity, cybersecurity “experts,” nuclear waste management specialists, triad infrastructure architects, specialists in improving uranium refining, nuclear physicists and engineers specializing in all materials and their “enhanced delivery” of precision warhead targeting and interception by “safety” umbrellas, inter-agency communication specialists, and those through it all maintaining secure communications.   My presence seemed harmless enough to this security.  I think of all our very brave colleagues who’ve risked life to enter the kill zones of these most highly sealed-off omnicidal compounds to render witness of the crime against humanity.

Amazon, a “Gold Sponsor” of the summit, had an exhibit:  “We have established good relations with the CIA, but we need to get better integrated with the NNSA.  This is new to us.  That’s why we’re here.”

In this very clearly white male-oriented world, there was also a presentation on the essential hiring of more “diversity” for the future.  One enticing statement read they “offer specialized worth to employees by valuing their entire career life cycle–creating stable careers…”  Ah, such security………..

The revolving door is astoundingly evident here, and the boundaries of government, military, with private companies is quite indistinguishable.  Those with Navy, Air Force, and other triad experience are now running these private companies or working as their specialized “experts in technical and professional innovation. support and security.”   One “private” company proudly advertising that 70% of “our expertise” hold all the necessary security clearances within the government!

…………………………….. Former General Lloyd Austin, who retired to become Raytheon’s CEO, was easily confirmed by our Congress to become our current Secretary of Defense under President Biden.  In his hearings, General/CEO Austin guaranteed to our representatives that the Triad would get his full support to obtain all that it needed.  What seems illegal goes unchallenged.

Along with the DOE, National Security Administration, and Budget Office, the regular old nuclear weapon corps were very present: General Dynamics, Huntington Ingalls, Bechtel, Flour, Honeywell, Aerospace, SAIC, etc., and a number of universities……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Within 25 minutes we were surrounded by hotel security and managers asking us to leave the premises immediately.   They then claimed even the sidewalks outside the hotel were private and we could not remain there………………………………………………………..

Ask your representative to sign H. Res. 77, sponsored by Rep. James McGovern, supporting the goals of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons!   Ask your senator to call for the same in the Senate.  Thank all the nations ratifying the TPNW.   Ask your representative to observe the Ban Treaty’s Meeting of States this November in New York City at the United Nations.  They are welcome to learn, and think deeper.

Knowing the horror of war was pushing ahead and with it an increasing, completely unnecessary risk of nuclear annihilation, there was ever-present sense of unity with the citizens of the world who are pleading and advocating another way.  There were many thumbs up and waves from passing vehicles.  Thinking of those who have young children/grandchildren, including a good number I got to  speak with on this Summit floor, we felt there was nowhere else to be on this day celebrating the love in our hearts and in our lives, round the world, Valentine’s Day.  https://peaceandplanetnews.org/where-your-trillions-go/

January 10, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, opposition to nuclear, USA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Catholic activists arrested for anti-nuclear protest outside UN

BY LIAM MYERS, National Catholic Reporter 18 Dec 23

Agroup of Catholic activists blocked the entrance to the United States Mission to the United Nations in New York City on Nov. 30, drawing attention to its lack of participation in UN meetings discussing nuclear disarmament that week.

This nonviolent direct action took place during the Nov. 27-Dec. 1 meeting of the nations who are party to the UN’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the first legally binding international agreement to prohibit nuclear arms. 

Those gathered for the action included the Atlantic Life Community, Catholic Worker communities, NukeWatch, and War Resisters League.

The group met together at the Isaiah Wall — a monument near the UN headquarters inscribed with the famous quotation “They shall beat their swords into plowshares” — before processing toward the U.S. Mission to the UN. At the front of the group, they held aloft a sign that read “Everything to do with nuclear weapons now illegal,” referencing the 50-plus countries who have ratified the nuclear prohibition treaty.

The activists clearly called upon their Catholic faith throughout the action, as another sign featured a quote from Pope Francis: “The use of Nuclear Weapons as well as their mere possession is immoral.”

Upon arrival at the U.S. Mission, these groups created a human blockade of all three public entrances to the building. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Throughout the blockade, which lasted over two hours, there were a number of people standing alongside the sidewalk and supporting those doing the blockade. These people were leafleting, shouting “Sign the Treaty!,” “No More Nukes,” and singing songs. 

As the New York Police Department began to move in to make arrests, Bud Courtney, a member of the New York Catholic Worker, led everyone in song playing his guitar as they were being arrested, singing “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”  https://www.ncronline.org/news/catholic-activists-arrested-anti-nuclear-protest-outside-un

December 20, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Religion and ethics | Leave a comment

A resounding rejection of ‘nuclearism’

 by beyondnuclearinternationa

Non-nuclear states gathered in New York are decidedly anti-nuclear in outlook and approach

By Tom Unterrainer, chair, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

The non-nuclear majority met in New York between 27 November and 1 December for the Second Meeting of States Parties (2MSP) to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). This coming together was not simply ‘non-nuclear’ but decidedly anti-nuclear in outlook and approach.

The TPNW represents many things: a ‘work in progress’, a part of international law, a mechanism for the eventual abolition of nuclear weapons and similar. What it represents politically, at the time of coming into force and since, is a full-frontal rejection of ‘nuclearism’ and a challenge to the nuclear-armed world. 2MSP saw discussion and decision making on how to embed this aspect of the Treaty.

Between 15 and 27 October 1953, the British government carried out ‘Operation Totem’ over an area in Southern Australia. Totem I and Totem II were atmospheric nuclear tests and together with five additional ‘non-critical’ tests, Britain delivered death and catastrophe on the First Nations people inhabiting the area.

These people “felt the ground shaking and the black mist rolling”, as Karina Lester put it on the floor of 2MSP. “We know our lands are poisoned”, she went on, clearly stating that “we want governments to recognise what they have done.”

What the British government did in 1953 was to consign a people and their land to death, destruction and continuing – intergenerational – harm.

The British government has refused to recognise or make recompense for what it did over seventy years ago and recently affirmed that it would not do so now. This roadblock to justice must be challenged, as should the other roadblocks to peace and justice that are erected by nuclear-armed states.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament has been engaged on the question of Britain’s legacy of nuclear colonialism and recently agreed a resolution at our 2023 Policy Conference to enhance this work. The message coming loud and clear from 2MSP is that this aspect of our work is urgently necessary and incredibly important. Even in states like the UK which possess nuclear weapons and which take a hostile approach to the TPNW, the overall message and intent of the Treaty has universal applicability.

The theme of ‘universalisation’ was prominent at 2MSP, with a series a working papers, proposals and speeches made to address the concept. In an early ‘thematic debate’, a representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross outlined some of what this could mean. For example, highlighting and embedding the anti-nuclear consensus that any nuclear use would have an enormous humanitarian impact; being clear that nuclear possession is “not exceptional” and does not stand above and beyond international law…………………………………………………………………………………………….

What is clear is that the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament can and will play an important role in pressing forward with ‘universalising’ anti-nuclear ideas, including those embodied in the TPNW.

It is also clear – and this is one of the more positive aspects of such international meetings – that CND and our supporters are the representatives of majority non-nuclear and anti-nuclear thinking in the UK. Given Britain’s nuclear-armed status and nuclear alliances, our work – and the work of the TPNW community globally – is as important as ever. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2023/12/10/a-resounding-rejection-of-nuclearism/

December 11, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Halt the US-Philippines Nuclear Deal

Sign on to Letter to US Congress

Full statement and sign on: tinyurl.com/haltUSPHdeal

While thousands gathered in San Francisco to protest the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s presence at its meetings, United States Secretary of State Anthony Blinken signed a new Section 123 Nuclear Agreement with the Philippine Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla. This agreement would allow the United States to export nuclear technology and material to Manila. Negotiations for the agreement began upon Kamala Harris’ November 2022 trip to the Philippines, making it the fastest Section 123 agreement ever signed, according to Blinken.

President Marcos Jr. portends the so-called “peaceful nuclear cooperation,” to be an alternative energy solution for the Philippines. The agreement must now go before the US Congress for approval.

Here are five reasons why we must act now to oppose it: 

  1. In a country already prone to climate disaster, vulnerable communities in the Philippines will be further at risk. Located in the notoriously active seismic zone known as the “ring of fire,” the Filipino people are among those that climate change and natural disasters most endanger, seen in the yearly typhoons and major disasters such as Typhoon Haiyan in 2013, which some estimate affected around 16 million people. History meanwhile provides no doubt about the potential disasters that can come with nuclear energy; we are already witness to the devastation caused by the nuclear accidents in Chernobyl and Fukushima. US-based nuclear companies are pivoting their projects to the Philippines, making the country a guinea pig for their untested and risky technologies. 

2 Nuclear energy poses a threat to the health and safety of communities in the Philippines. Exposure to toxic nuclear waste is linked to increased rates of cancer, cardiovascular disease and other adverse health effects, particularly in sensitive populations including children. The Philippines is highly abundant in safer forms of renewable energy, and it is better to use precautionary principles than put already vulnerable communities at further risk. There is no confidence in the Philippine government to handle this type of radiation processing of energy, especially if they are privatized and the main objective is profit.


3 Fashioned in the style of the Marcos Sr. Dictatorship, this deal benefits only the US and Philippine elite. This is not the first attempt of the Philippine government to prioritize nuclear energy with the United States. Marcos Sr., following his declaration of Martial Law, worked with US companies to begin the building of the Bataan Nuclear Plant. The Bataan Plant, a point of protest for activists in the Philippines, quickly failed and was mothballed when the Marcos dictatorship, full of corruption and plundering of public funds for personal use, could not complete the construction. Now, Marcos Jr., known for his lavish spending on global travel, has sought to revive a nuclear project like his father’s to earn foreign investment. House of Representatives Member Mark Cojuangco, a billionaire and long-time supporter of the Marcos family, has been a proponent of nuclear projects. These families support said nuclear project because it benefits their widespread power over land and profit in the Philippines Creating a deal with the US and foreign corporations will serve their business interests, not those of the Filipino people. For the US and US based corporations, it gives the opportunity to control and profit further from the resources in the Philippines, a country which, since 2022, has allowed 100 percent foreign ownership over “clean” energy projects. 


4 The so-called “peaceful transfer” of nuclear materials thwarts the Filipino people’s right to peace, development and self-determination. Known as the deadliest country for land defenders, environmental activists, indigenous people, farmers and people in rural areas of the Philippines are currently facing brutal attacks under the Marcos’ counterinsurgency program – recently documented by UN Special Rapporteur Ian Fry. In its attempts to squash the CPP-NPA-NDF, the Marcos regime has continued the US-designed counterinsurgency policy of Duterte and many presidents before him that result in the militarization of indigenous and rural communities, indiscriminate aerial bombings, forced surrender of civilians and mass displacement of people from their homelands. At the roots of the armed conflict in the Philippines is the Filipino people’s struggle for land and sustainable, national development, free from foreign intervention and control. The transfer of nuclear materials paves the way for more displacement of indigenous people, land grabbing for the sake of foreign corporations and further militarization of the countryside. The potential monopoly of foreign ownership over energy in the Philippines further aggravates the people’s aspiration to control and determine the development of their own economy. The US agreement with the Marcos regime gives further approval of Marcos’s policies and rewards his family for their ongoing plunder and exploitation of the Filipino people. 

5 As tensions with China escalate, the storage of nuclear materials will set a precedent for the US to allow a nuclear arsenal to be stored in the Philippines. The required technology and infrastructure for facilities to hold nuclear materials will open up the door for conversations to allow for the potential storage of US nuclear weapons on Philippine soil. President Marcos has already allowed the ongoing Kamandag war game exercises between the US, Philippines, South Korea, and Japan, only serving to escalate tensions in the region and drag the Philippines into conflict between the US and China. By allowing the US to store nuclear materials in the Philippines, Marcos is setting the stage to welcome US nuclear weapons as an opportunity to advance his foreign affairs relationship with US President Biden. 

For these reasons, we, members of the Filipino community and allies in solidarity, demand that members of US Congress halt the Section 123 US-PH Nuclear Deal.

December 2, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Philippines, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear energy in Philippines? Group says there’s not even a Filipino expert on safety, radiation.

By: Cristina Eloisa Baclig – Content Researcher Writer / @inquirerdotnet, INQUIRER.net / 03:08 PM November 27, 2023

MANILA, Philippines—In a convergence of scientific and environmental dissent, progressive groups, scientists, and climate activists expressed strong opposition to the newly signed nuclear deal between the Philippines and the United States (US).

Last Nov. 17, Energy Secretary Raphael Lotilla and US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken signed the 123 agreement, or the “peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement,” on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Cooperation (Apec) Summit.

It took a year to negotiate the breakthrough agreement between the two countries. Blinken described it as “the fastest that the United States has ever negotiated this kind of agreement.”

The deal, which awaits approval by the US Congress, establishes a legally binding framework allowing the transfer of nuclear material and the export of nuclear fuel, reactors, and equipment from the US to the Philippines…………………………

A ‘reckless decision’

The group Advocates of Science and Technology for the People (AGHAM) said the government’s decision to “impulsively” enter into the agreement was a “reckless decision that lacks careful consideration.”

The group explained that despite its promised and expected benefits, there is still no detailed study on whether nuclear power is necessary and appropriate for the country.

“This omission leaves the Marcos administration without a solid foundation to justify their nuclear aspirations, as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) emphasizes the importance of such studies in assessing a country’s needs and potential for nuclear energy,” the group added.

AGHAM argued that nuclear energy will only worsen the energy crisis in the country, where, according to the group, other indigenous sources of energy remain largely untapped or with inefficient and incomplete distribution systems.

It also described the agreement as “dangerously premature,” considering that the science and technology sector in the country remains severely underfunded and understaffed.

“To illustrate, as of this moment, there is no Filipino expert in nuclear safety or in radiological environmental impact assessment in the country,” the group explained.

“This means that we will have to disproportionately rely on the US nuclear regulatory mechanism, which will lead to us being clueless guinea pigs for their new nuclear technologies; since we do not have our own way of technically assessing future implementations.”

Not a solution for clean energy security

President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., who witnessed the signing of the pact, said the deal would ensure a “more energy secure and green Philippines.”

“We see nuclear energy becoming a part of the Philippine energy mix by 2032, and we would be more than happy to pursue this path with the United States as one of our partners,” said Marcos Jr. in a speech.

“The signing of the Philippines-United States Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy, or the 123 Agreement, is the first major step in this regard, taking our cooperation on capacity building further and actually opening the doors for U.S. companies to invest and participate in nuclear power projects in the country,” he added.

However, according to the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ), the 123 Agreement poses a threat by acquiring risky nuclear technologies, misleadingly promoted as a remedy for clean energy security.

“[T]he agreement’s purported benefits are debunked. Nuclear energy, touted for clean energy, releases pollutants worsening the planet’s temperature. The resulting radioactive waste persists for years, often irresponsibly dumped or stored, lacking proper technology for disposal,” PMCJ said in a statement.

PMCJ said that it “vehemently opposes nuclear energy in the country, advocating for a shift towards sustainable solutions.”

Despite the supposed benefits, the International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines (ICHRP-US), along with progressive groups — Bayan USA, Malaya Movement USA, Kabataan Alliance — demanded that members of the US Congress halt the nuclear deal, citing five reasons:

  • In a country already prone to climate disaster, vulnerable communities in the Philippines will be further at risk.
  • Nuclear energy poses a threat to the health and safety of communities in the Philippines.
  • Fashioned in the style of the Marcos Sr. regime, this deal benefits only the US and Philippine elite.
  • The so-called “peaceful transfer” of nuclear materials thwarts the Filipino people’s right to peace, development, and self-determination.
  • As tensions with China escalate, the storage of nuclear materials will set a precedent for the US to allow a nuclear arsenal to be stored in the Philippines.

Renewable vs nuclear energy

Both PMCJ and AGHAM questioned Marcos Jr. and his administration’s plans to use more renewable energy while also pushing for the use of nuclear power……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

“As with his other policies, this will just be an edifice to be used as a talking point for the purposes of extending the Marcoses’ cling to power; with no real positive contribution, and even potentially dangerous, to the Filipino people,” the group continued.

Environmental group Greenpeace Philippines has previously called out Marcos Jr. for showing mixed signals on his stance on energy.

“He used renewable energy when he ran for president, and continues to talk about it like he means it, but it’s all a game of pretend. If you look at his actions, he’s actually out to promote nuclear energy and fossil gas–both of which will block major RE development,” said Greenpeace Philippines country director Lea Guerrero.

“Greenpeace believes this is climate hypocrisy at its most dangerous,” she added.



https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1866612/nuclear-energy-in-ph-group-says-theres-not-even-a-filipino-expert-on-safety-radiation#ixzz8KL4mjfe6
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

November 28, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Philippines | Leave a comment

South Texans are publicly fighting SpaceX after second Starship launch

Starship’s second launch brought more outcry from local organizations.

Chron, By Andrea Guzmán, Nov 22, 2023

SpaceX’s second launch attempt of its Starship rocket on Saturday has been commended for its improvement from the first launch, which ended with the rocket exploding after reaching 24 miles into the air. 

But for some South Texas residents, SpaceX’s operations are not a cause for celebration. 

In a press release after Saturday’s launch, South Texas organizations said that local residents again experienced their homes shaking and debris falling on the community. 

“Musk and his pet vanity project continue to pollute and destroy our beautiful beach, coastline, and wildlife. SpaceX, an unnecessary, private money grab that only serves the wealthy, refuses to follow safety regulations, environmental regulations, and the wishes of local communities and the original people of the land,” said Christopher Basaldú with South Texas Environmental Justice Network. 

Meanwhile, grassroots collaborative Another Gulf Is Possible, which has members from Brownsville, Texas, to Pensacola, Florida, has invited the public to a documentary screening in Brownsville about community objection to SpaceX on Dec. 1. The film will explore how Brownsville residents and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas have battled “the encroachment of SpaceX on pristine lands,” an event invitation says. The documentary will also look at how South Texans have fought against two proposed LNG projects. ……………………………………………………………………………………… Next Friday’s documentary screening will be held at Brownsville’s Rio Bravo Office Space from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.

more https://www.chron.com/culture/article/texas-starship-second-launch-18508949.php—

November 25, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, space travel | Leave a comment

Council urged to review plans that could lead to UK hosting US nuclear bombs

An attempt by the Ministry of Defence to build a dormitory that could lead
to the return of US nuclear weapons to British soil is being challenged by
the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) because it is being attempted
without planning permission.

The campaign group has asked West Suffolk
council to intervene and insist that the planned 144-bed facility at RAF
Lakenheath be subject to an environmental impact assessment or be halted.

Work on the dormitory is due to start next year and its purpose is to house
the extra US personnel who would be needed to safeguard any return of B-61
air-launched nuclear bombs to Lakenheath for the first time since 2007.

Kate Hudson, CND’s general secretary, accused the US air force of
ploughing ahead by “purportedly relying on planning rights that assume
that the development won’t have significant environmental effects”, and
so ignoring the risks that storing nuclear weapons in Suffolk would entail.

 Guardian 14th Nov 2023

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/14/council-urged-to-review-plans-that-could-lead-to-uk-hosting-us-nuclear-bombs

November 16, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Anti-Nuclear Activist Goes on Trial Amid the Fallout of Oppenheimer’s LegacyKansas City’s Ties To The Bomb

Flatland, Clarence Dennis, cdennis@flatlandkc.org 10 Nov 23

At time zero the first thing I noticed was that although facing away from ground zero, it felt like someone had slapped my face: it was of course the heat radiation from a most successful test.”Hugh Richards, Ph.D., “Through Los Alamos, 1945: Memoirs of a Nuclear Physicist”

Last month, Ann Suellentrop, 71, stood before a judge in the 16th Judicial Court of Missouri.

A retired maternal-child nurse and lifelong activist, Suellentrop was one of three people arrested for trespassing during a Memorial Day protest organized by PeaceWorks KC at the National Security Campus of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in south Kansas City earlier this year.

The only property line crosser who would plead not guilty, Suellentrop represented herself in court on Oct. 25. She argued that intentionally crossing the alleged boundary line by 10 feet or less, approximately three-fourths of a mile from the NNSA facility, was not trespass, but a peaceful, “limited protest” on a matter of principle and should not result in fines or jail time.

Facing a $500 fine, six months in jail, or both, the defendant argued her action was an expression of her First Amendment rights and stressed that advanced notice and planning of the annual protest was communicated to police and NNSA campus officials.

In front of more than a dozen supporters sporting bold black stickers that read “NO NUKES Y’ALL,” Suellentrop raised points to Judge Anne LaBella about her own character, the nature of her peaceful protest and the threats nuclear weapons and nuclear terrorism pose to human health and society.

Facing a slew of objections based on relevance and witness testimony from the NNSA campus security guard who was on duty during the protest and warned the protesters to step off the property, all signs pointed to a guilty verdict.

Moments after all arguments were heard and the city rested its case, the prosecutor asked the judge to amend the charge to include NNSA campus administrator Honeywell Federal Manufacturing and Technologies.

Judge LaBella said the request came too late and she would not amend the charge. She then promptly announced her ruling on Suellentrop’s case.

Not guilty.

Modern-Day Peaceniks

A member of PeaceWorks KC and the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Suellentrop has been arrested twice before in protests at the NNSA campus. The facility manufactures 80% of the non-nuclear components that go into the national nuclear stockpile……..

“Our ultimate goal is to convert the plant into a peaceful production of hopefully something that can fight the environmental crisis that’s going on. We need those brains, those skills and that money to convert it into something we really need,” Suellentrop said ahead of the trial.

Immediately following the verdict, Suellentrop and her peacenik partners picked up where her testimony left off. The group of mostly older adults gathered outside of the Jackson County Courthouse, taking turns passing a child’s toy microphone, celebrating the win and speaking about the threat nuclear weapons present to anyone who would listen.

“Because there is a group of old people, it doesn’t mean we are wrong. Historically, civil disobedience has played a big role in changing things,” said PeaceWorks KC board chair Chris Mann.

Mann, 73, participated in her first protest in college – a silent vigil during the war in Vietnam.

“Our group is becoming increasingly younger… a tradition of civil disobedience is only one of the measures,” Mann said, speaking to the makeup of PeaceWorks KC. “We think that younger people have a hard way to go now.”…………………………………….

The experience, plus an admiration for Australian physician, author and anti-nuclear advocate Helen Caldicot, fueled a lifetime of activism for Suellentrop, particularly in anti-nuclear efforts.

As for what keeps her civil disobedience going into her 70s, Suellentrop points to her faith.

“Like any person, I have fears and worries and self-doubts and what have you, but I just go to God and prayer,” Suellentrop said. “I get an overwhelming feeling of, ‘I got this.’ God is good and he’s opposing this – and this is an unspeakable evil.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/anti-nuclear-activist-goes-on-trial-amid-the-fallout-of-oppenheimers-legacy/

November 11, 2023 Posted by | legal, opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

20 years after campaign began, the fight to ban deadly depleted uranium weapons goes on

 Yesterday (6 November) marked the 20th anniversary of the founding of the
International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons, and, with depleted uranium
(DU) weapons recently deployed to the battlefields of Ukraine, the Nuclear
Free Local Authorities want to highlight the aims of the coalition as its
important work for a global ban continues into a third decade.

 NFLA 7th Nov 2023

20 years after campaign began, the fight to ban deadly depleted uranium weapons goes on

November 10, 2023 Posted by | depleted uranium, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Worldwide protests against Israel’s ethnic cleansing in Palestine

BY OLEG CETINIC AND FATIMA HUSSEIN, 10, November 5, 2023

WASHINGTON (AP) — From Washington to Milan to Paris, tens of thousands of pro-Palestinian demonstrators marched Saturday, calling for a halt to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.

The marches reflected growing disquiet about the mounting civilian casualty toll and suffering from the Israel-Hamas war. Protesters, particularly in countries with large Muslim populations, including the U.S., U.K. and France, expressed disillusionment with their governments for supporting Israel while its bombardments of hospitals and residential areas in the Gaza strip intensify.

The Palestinian death toll in the Israel-Hamas war has reached 9,448, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry in Gaza. In Israel, more than 1,400 people have been killed, most of them in the Oct. 7 Hamas attack that started the war.

In the U.S., thousands converged on the nation’s capital to protest the Biden administration’s support of Israel and its continued military campaign in Gaza. “Palestine will be free,” demonstrators donning black and white keffiyehs chanted as an enormous Palestinian flag was unfurled by a crowd that filled Pennsylvania Avenue — the street leading up to the White House.

Leveling direct criticism of President Joe Biden, Renad Dayem of Cleveland said she made the trip with her family so her children would know “the Palestinian people are resilient — and we want a leader who won’t be a puppet to the Israeli government.”

Dozens of small white body bags with the names of children killed by Israeli missiles lined the street and demonstrators held signs calling for an immediate cease-fire……………………. more https://apnews.com/article/israel-gaza-palestinians-protests-europe-193a9aaca97df2c5c6a515f756a40a34 #Israel #Palestine

November 6, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear Ban Treaty Members to Meet in November

Arms Control Association, November 2023, By Shizuka Kuramitsu

States-parties to the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) will hold their second meeting in New York on Nov. 27-Dec. 1. Amid the crisis facing the international arms control and disarmament regime, they are expected to review and continue implementing their plans for a total ban on nuclear weapons.

The TPNW, which entered into force on Jan. 22, 2021, bans states-parties from involvement in any nuclear weapons activities, including the use, threat of use, production, development, possession, and stationing of these weapons. Spearheaded by non-nuclear-armed states and civil society groups, the treaty originated from their frustration over the long stalemate among nuclear-weapon states to engage in serious nuclear disarmament as called for by the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).

At their first meeting, in June 2022, TPNW states-parties produced two documents aiming to advance the treaty, a 50-point action plan and a political statement. (See ACT, July/August 2022.)

They established three informal working groups to make progress during the intercessional period on important topics such as nuclear disarmament verification, victim assistance, environmental remediation, and universalization of the treaty. In addition, the action plan agreed to create a scientific advisory group, to implement gender provisions in the treaty, and to promote TPNW complementarity with existing treaties.

For the November meeting, each working group is preparing reports on their respective intersessional activities. The meeting is expected to issue a final document, according to the provisional agenda and government officials……………………………………………………… more https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2023-11/news/nuclear-ban-treaty-members-meet-november #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

November 3, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) steps up drive to keep U.S. military expansion out of Australia

By Bevan Ramsden | 26 October 2023 https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/ipan-steps-up-drive-to-keep-us-military-expansion-out-of-australia,18020

The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN) has produced a petition opposing the Force Posture Agreement (FPA) which is enabling U.S. militarisation of Australia in preparation for the U.S. to support/launch war from the Australian continent against China.

The e-petition to Parliament is an instrument for peace calling for the termination of the FPA.

It can be signed HERE.

The devastation of war, currently in Ukraine and in Palestine, confronts us on TV on a daily basis. All peace-loving people cry out for a ceasefire on both war fronts to enable, hopefully under United Nations auspices, conferences of all affected parties to find solutions that meet the security needs of all parties and free non-combatants from the horrors of war.

But concern about these wars should not blind us to the preparations for war occurring on our own continent under the auspices of the United States and with the enthusiastic complicity of successive Australian governments.

When defence matters are discussed, much is made of the U.S.-Australia alliance. But when the U.S. militarisation of Australia is considered, the alliance pales into insignificance compared to the U.S.-Australia FPA. It emerged as a concept from former President Barack Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” of the U.S. armed forces, in which he announced the stationing of U.S. marines in Darwin each year to train for war with our Defence Force.

The “Pivot” was a strategy designed to “contain” China and maintain U.S. hegemony in the Asia/Pacific area. President Obama’s concept was enthusiastically received by all politicians of both major parties.

Subsequently, the Gillard and Abbott Governments, in conjunction with their U.S. defence counterparts, produced a greatly expanded concept, the FPA, providing “an operational posture” for U.S. forces in Australia, a gateway for U.S. militarisation of Australia. It was signed by the Abbott Government and the United States Government in 2014.

The FPA:

  • facilitates the stationing in Darwin, for six months each year, of up to 2,500 U.S. Marines; they are trained and equipped for immediate deployment and while in Australia, train for war in exercises with the Australian Defence Force. They are not under the control of the Australian Government. They are under the control of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command;
  • facilitates unimpeded access to Australia’s airfields and airport facilities for U.S. fighter planes and bombers including the stationing of up to six B-52 bombers at RAAF Base Tindall. B-52 bombers were used to devastate Vietnam in that war and some are capable of carrying nuclear weapons;
  • facilitates unimpeded access to Australia’s seaports for U.S. naval vessels including their nuclear submarines at HMAS Stirling in WA;
  • facilitates the establishment of storage facilities for aircraft fuel, spare parts and munitions under U.S. military control. This includes huge fuel storage facilities at East Arm, Darwin and logistics facilities for storage of equipment, munitions and spare parts at Bandiana in Victoria;
  • opened the door for the embedding of U.S. military intelligence operatives within the Australian defence intelligence organisation now called the Combined Intelligence Centre — Australia; and
  • under the FPA, a U.S. command centre has been established in Darwin to control U.S. aircraft operations and another command centre in Darwin to control U.S. marine operations.

In short, the U.S. could launch and control military operations from Australia.

I have stressed the words “unimpeded access” because they are the words used in the Agreement.

Article IV of the FPA states:

…United States Forces and United States Contractors shall have unimpeded access to and use of Agreed Facilities and Areas for activities undertaken in connection with this Agreement.

Australia hereby grants to the United States operational control of Agreed Facilities and Areas…

Part 4 of Article VII states:

‘As mutually determined by the Parties, aircraft, vehicles, and vessels operated by or for United States Forces shall have access to aerial ports and seaports of Australia and other locations, for the delivery to, storage and maintenance in, and removal from the territory of Australia of United States Forces’ prepositioned materiel.’

Activities under Article IV include:

‘…training, transit, support, and related activities; refuelling of aircraft; bunkering of vessels; temporary maintenance of vehicles, vessels, and aircraft; temporary accommodation of personnel; communications; prepositioning of equipment, supplies, and materiel; deploying forces and material; and such other activities as the Parties may agree.’

Summing up, the FPA, with the enthusiastic support of the Australian Government, is facilitating increased U.S. militarisation of Australia to support U.S. military operations in the Indo-Pacific from which it could launch or support a war against China. This has been done with the agreement of both major political parties.

The FPA lasts 25 years from the date of signing but has a clause facilitating termination if either party gives one year’s notice.

IPAN is campaigning to have this FPA terminated. This would be a strong step in the direction of keeping Australia out of another U.S. war. And this time, one which would have a catastrophic impact on the Australian people.

If you wish to join this campaign, IPAN has a parliamentary e-petition which is open until 15 November 2023 for signature and it can be accessed by using your mobile phone and this QR code. [on original] #nuclear #antinuclear #NoNukes

October 28, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

  Welsh campaigners call for nuclear sponsorship ban at National Eisteddfod.


The National Eisteddfod has peace at its heart and Welsh anti-nuclear
campaigners have registered a formal complaint with its governing body
protesting the acceptance of sponsorship money from the companies
Westinghouse and Cwmni Egino at this year’s event despite the clear links
between nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

A letter endorsed by eight campaign groups and the Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities has been sent today (24 October), on the first day of the United Nations’ Disarmament
Week, to the Eisteddfod Council calling on it not to accept ‘any future
sponsorship from any company engaged in developing nuclear power and the
manufacture of weapons, especially armaments of mass destruction.’

 NFLA 24th Oct 2023 #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

A joint media release – Is there peace? Welsh campaigners call for nuclear sponsorship ban at National Eisteddfod

October 27, 2023 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »