Stop Sizewell C’s Response to Regulated Asset Base Licence Consultation

Stop Sizewell C’s Response to Regulated Asset Base Licence Consultation,
Modifications to Sizewell C Limited’s electricity generation licence.
It is entirely credible that the scenario of Hinkley Point C – where predicted
overnight costs have almost doubled, and completion time has slipped by 5
or 6 years since construction began – may be replicated at Sizewell C, with
the obvious conclusion that consumers would pay more, and for longer.
DESNZ should therefore revise the figures in the RAB impact assessment taking
this new information and inflation into account, and publish it to show how
bills would be impacted. We wish to highlight the conclusions of the
Science Information and Technology Committee which said of Sizewell C in
July 2023: “A headline lower cost than Hinkley Point C is not justified
if the value of the risk is too great”
Stop Sizewell C 29th Jan 2024
Touring South Korea to support opposition to US space warfare plans
Organizing notes, Bruce Gagnon, 19 Feb 24
https://space4peace.blogspot.com/2024/02/touring-south-korea-to-support.html
I’ve just landed in South Korea (ROK) where I will be on a speaking tour around the country for the next 10 days.
I was invited to come and talk about Washington’s push to entrap South Korea into the Pentagon’s space technology strategy aimed at North Korea, China and Russia.
Already at the US Osan AFB in South Korea the Space Force has set up operations with the ROK client state.
The US has pushed the right-wing Seoul government to massively expand their spending on military space tech. With the current US national debt now at $35 trillion, Washington can’t afford to pay for its expensive and ambitious plans to ‘control and dominate’ space. Thus the #1 job of the Pentagon and State Department is to get the allies to help pay for the space warfare infrastructure.
Currently the ROK government is building space R & D centers, satellite production facilities, new airfields likely to test hypersonic missiles and expanding ‘missile defense’ deployment sites.
One key goal the US has is to use ROK satellite production and launch facilities to hoist mini-satellites into Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) to help fill up the already crowded orbits before China and Russia can get there. Eyes and ears in LEO give a nation a decisive advantage in full scale war making.
Late last year the US hosted a big space industry conference in the capital city of Seoul in order to cement this expanding space warfare relationship. Dangling the promise of ‘lots of high-tech jobs’ the US has drawn the ROK into the trap.
The problem for the ROK (like all of Washington’s allies participating in this space warfare operation) is that they will have little to no input into how and when this Star Wars program will be used. Even though ROK will help pay for it (and host many of the bases) the Pentagon will remain in charge of the ‘tip of the spear’. Once becoming a colony of the US war machine, a nation loses their right to be full partners.
One sad thing about all of this is how Jeju Island (just off the southern tip of the Korean peninsula) is becoming further militarized via this new space tech operation.
Late last year the US hosted a big space industry conference in the capital city of Seoul in order to cement this expanding space warfare relationship. Dangling the promise of ‘lots of high-tech jobs’ the US has drawn the ROK into the trap.
The problem for the ROK (like all of Washington’s allies participating in this space warfare operation) is that they will have little to no input into how and when this Star Wars program will be used. Even though ROK will help pay for it (and host many of the bases) the Pentagon will remain in charge of the ‘tip of the spear’. Once becoming a colony of the US war machine, a nation loses their right to be full partners.
One sad thing about all of this is how Jeju Island (just off the southern tip of the Korean peninsula) is becoming further militarized via this new space tech operation.
Campaigners deeply concerned at Dr Thérèse Coffey’s support for Bradwell new nuclear power
A CAMPAIGNER group opposing new nuclear power in Bradwell-on-Sea said they
are “deeply concerned” following comments made by an MP. According to
the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG), former deputy prime
minister Dr Thérèse Coffey showed support for Bradwell as a “logical”
landfall site for a substation and converter linking East Anglian offshore
wind farms to the on-land national grid. BANNG have now refuted these
comments. A spokesman said: “National Grid has made it clear that
Bradwell is in the wrong place for the connection, would require upgraded
transmission infrastructure and faces environmental constraints from the
many designated areas on the Essex coastlands.
Maldon Standard 6th Feb 2024
Strong opposition on plans to store nuclear waste in East Yorkshire
A consultation event took place in Patrington yesterday
Andy Marsh, 2nd Feb 2024
There appears to be very strong opposition to plans to store nuclear waste in East Yorkshire
A series of public pop-in centres will give people in the area more information about the proposals for Holderness.
We were at the first consultation event in Patrington yesterday.
Another is being held in Withernsea later.
There are some who were convinced by the plans but many weren’t.
I would oppose it 100 per cent
Beverley and Holderness MP Graham Stuart has called for a referendum.
Here are some of the views of people we spoke to:
“They don’t know exactly where the site is going to be.”
“Somebody has to have it – to be honest I’ll be dead before all the this takes place anyway.
“I would oppose it – 100 per cent – on behalf of my children, my grandchildren and my future great grandchildren.”
We feel like guinea pigs
“This is bad for this community.”
“The whole of Holderness – everybody involved in it – it can only lead to bad things.”
“I think it’ll be a positive thing for the area if it happens here.”
“There are terms such as may and could – that’s not absolute certainty.”
“It feels like we’re just guinea pigs.”……………………………………………… https://planetradio.co.uk/greatest-hits/east-yorkshire-north-lincolnshire/news/strong-opposition-on-plans-to-store-nuclear-waste-east-yorkshire/
Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG) firmly contradicts Therese Coffey, MP on Bradwell as a nuclear site.

Therese Coffey MP suggests Bradwell is a large brownfield site. In fact,
the site is occupied by the long closed Bradwell A power station now in the
process of decommissioning before being returned to greenfield land use.
Perhaps her most preposterous assertion is that ‘Bradwell has hosted
nuclear power and hopes to do so again in the future’. In fact, the
communities and Councils around the Blackwater estuary in Essex are
overwhelmingly against new nuclear development at Bradwell.
Many years ago, BANNG gathered 10,000 signatures face-to-face for a petition against new
nuclear development at Bradwell which was taken to Whitehall. Since then,
the Chinese developer, CGN, has withdrawn its proposals for a massive new
nuclear power station in the face of implacable hostility from the local
community.
‘Therese Coffey would do well to check her facts and look to
her own backyard and devote her campaigning against the destruction of the
Suffolk coast by the giant Sizewell C nuclear power station project, with
its long-term stores of radioactive wastes, rather than seek to impose
unwanted infrastructure on the precious marshlands of Essex.’
BANNG 31st Jan 2023
It’s not a done deal and you are not alone’: anti-GDF campaigners pledge solidarity with South Holderness over nuclear waste dump plan,
Last week’s surprise news that South Holderness is being considered as another
potential site for a Geological Disposal Facility, or in layperson’s
language a nuclear waste dump, will have been a great shock to many local
people. But residents can take heart because this is the fifth such
announcement by Nuclear Waste Services and residents in West Cumbria and
East Lincolnshire faced with similar news in previous years have mobilised
successful campaigns to fight similar plans in their areas.
NFLA 30th Jan 2024
1
MP calls for vote on Holderness nuclear site which local petition brands ‘hazardous waste dumping ground’
Graham Stuart has called for a public vote on whether a nuclear waste site
should be built in Holderness amid opposition from some living in the area.
‘Beverley and Holderness ‘ MP said Nuclear Waste Services, the Government
Agency which unveiled the waste site proposals last week, should be forced
to make their case directly to the public. Joanne Turner, whose Change.org
petition calls for the site to be rejected, said the beautiful south
Holderness area should not be turned into a dumping ground for hazardous
waste.
Hull Daily Mail 31st Jan 2024
2
UK government pours good money after bad, into failing Hinkley Point C nuclear boondoggle
The Stop Hinkley Campaign has reacted to the news that the cost of Hinkley
Point C has ballooned to £46bn and that the first reactor may not now be
open until 2031. Stop Hinkley Spokesperson Roy Pumfrey said: “The
Government will have known for days if not weeks that this announcement was
coming – we certainly heard rumours. You would have thought it would have
provoked them into at least re-examining their nuclear roadmap.
Instead, on Monday they decided to waste another £1.3bn of taxpayers’ money on a
carbon copy of Hinkley Point C on the Suffolk Coast. Any sensible
Government would be urgently looking at the overwhelming case to provide
our power from 100% renewables.” “And it’s not just HPC’s costs
that are ballooning, the whole project is swirling around making a horrid
noise like a punctured balloon. And trying to cram 15,000 workers toe to
toe on the site to play catch up will mean H&S rules go out the window.”
Stop Hinkley 24th Jan 2024
http://stophinkley.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Press-Release-240124.pdf
CAMPAIGNERS opposing the development of nuclear power in Bradwell-on-Sea say they believe ‘new nuclear’ in the area “remains dead in the water”.

Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG) has been fighting its cause for 15 years.
On January 11, the Government released its Civil Nuclear: Roadmap to 2050.
BANNG claims it means the original eight government-listed coastal sites, including Bradwell, are no longer the only sites earmarked for nuclear deployment.
They say new nuclear power stations will only be sited in “suitable locations” identified by developers based on a set of criteria.
BANNG chairman Professor Andy Blowers said: “This new approach to siting effectively rules Bradwell out of any further consideration.
“As we have strenuously demonstrated over the last 15 years, Bradwell is a most unsuitable site and the Blackwater communities are overwhelmingly opposed to nuclear development in such a fragile location, increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.”
He added: “BANNG welcomes the effective delisting of the Bradwell site. Delisting is something we have insisted on since the list was first compiled more than a decade ago.
“We are at a loss to understand what ‘certain advantages’ can conceivably be attributed to the site.
“Rather as the myriad evidence accumulated and published over the years shows, Bradwell is a wholly unsuitable and unsatisfactory site for the development of nuclear power at whatever scale and capacity.”
A BANNG spokesman said: “A major problem is the vulnerability of the site to flooding, and to storm surges and coastal processes that are intensifying as the impacts of climate change begin to take hold on this fragile coastline
They added: “There are other significant reasons why Bradwell should be off the Nuclear Road Map.
“The Blackwater area has precious environments in land, sea and sky which are protected, conserved and significant.
“The intrusion of a mega power station or a cluster of smaller reactors would prove intrusive, polluting and detrimental to habitats and to human wellbeing.
“Further, there would be dangerous highly radioactive wastes stored on the site for future generations to cope with, along with all the other problems of climate change.
“Above all, the communities around the Blackwater have over the years overwhelmingly declared against new nuclear development at the Bradwell site.
“New nuclear is not welcome here.”
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/
No to nuclear power: stop the expansion

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.”
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/
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
A resounding rejection of ‘nuclearism’

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/
-
Archives
- May 2026 (72)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
