Stop Sizewell C carries out bold projection on Sizewell B dome a week before the Spending Review, highlighting alternatives for Sizewell C’s £40 billion cost.
Stop Sizewell C tonight projected a series of messages to the Prime Minister onto Sizewell B’s dome, stating that the £40 billion Sizewell C project is a Nuclear Waste of Money. [1] The messages urge him to make alternative choices for spending taxpayers’ money on ways to generate cheaper electricity and to reduce household bills.
In one week, on 11 June, the Chancellor is expected to set out taxpayers’ commitment to Sizewell C at the conclusion of the Spending Review. Sizewell C has already swallowed £6.4 billion of taxpayers’ money [2] and the entire project is bogging down the government balance sheet. The two-year equity raise process remains ongoing with an uncertain outcome, meaning the much-delayed Final Investment Decision is unlikely before next month at the earliest. The Financial Times says this could take place at an Anglo French Summit between 8-10 July. [3]
Alison Downes of Stop Sizewell C said: “Every pound sunk into risky, expensive Sizewell C is a pound lost to alternative energy sources and critical social funding that the voting public cares deeply about. It’s not too late to redirect money to offshore wind, or warm homes – creating thousands of jobs – or to restoring the most unpopular and unjust cuts. Sizewell C, given the terrible track record of Hinkley Point C, would be £40 billion badly spent.”
Stop Sizewell C 4th June 2025,
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IugTc5hAy7N9SlPrdvbfevH5USEfIsjJKw-jIDoo74c/edit?tab=t.0
It’s over! Anti-nuke dump campaigners in East Lincolnshire celebrate victory
The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities are delighted to share in
the celebrations of East Lincolnshire residents and their elected members
as Nuclear Waste Services announces that it shall now take the ‘immediate
steps needed to close the Community Partnership and the communities of
Withern and Theddlethorpe, and Mablethorpe will leave the GDF (Geological
Disposal Facility) siting process’.
The announcement came hot on the
heels of the decision this morning by the Lincolnshire County Council
Executive to withdraw its support from the GDF process.
NFLA 3rd June 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/its-over-anti-nuke-dump-campaigners-in-east-lincolnshire-celebrate-victory/
Scots aren’t having our voices heard – nuclear is one such case study
English Labour are pushing for more nuclear because they’re funded by the industry. The industry expects a return.
Leah Gunn Barrett, The National 1st June 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/politics/25205426.scots-arent-voices-heard—nuclear-one-case-study/
ON May 1, a public meeting was held in Dunbar. It was attended by 28 people, mostly retired workers from the nearby Torness nuclear power plant.
It was organised by Britain Remade, a lobby group headed by former Tory spad Sam Richards. He described Britain Remade as a “cross-party campaigning group” that believes in economic growth and building infrastructure.
Britain Remade’s campaign, “New Scottish Nuclear Power”, aims to reverse Scotland’s ban on new nuclear power.
Also present were councillor Norman Hampshire, the leader of East Lothian Council (ELC) and chair of the planning committee, and Labour MSP for South Scotland Martin Whitfield.
Sellafield is the site of Europe’s worst nuclear accident – the 1957 Windscale fire, that led to the atmospheric dispersion of radioactive materials throughout England, Wales and northern Europe. Sellafield has been a nuclear waste dump since 1959 and has been called Europe’s most toxic nuclear site, a “bottomless pit of hell, money and despair”. It’s a reason Scotland has been dubbed the “cancer capital of the world”.
That’s a hell of a track record.
Richards blamed high electricity bills on the UK’s failure to build more nuclear plants, claiming nuclear was the reason France had lower bills. Wrong. Nuclear power has never been economic. It requires government subsidies and there’s no solution for radioactive waste disposal. French energy bills are lower because France didn’t privatise its energy and thus retained the ability to cap costs. The French government owns 100% of Électricité de France (EDF), which runs the Torness plant and the UK’s four other operating nuclear plants.
EDF should be showing far more concern about the safety of its UK plants. The Torness reactor has 46 cracks in its core which the ONR (Office for Nuclear Regulation) said could lead to a reactor meltdown and the release of radiation into the environment. EDF has extended the life of the plant to 2030.
Britain Remade’s goal is to get the ban on nuclear lifted and to use the Torness site for new nuclear plants.
Whitfield trotted out two pro-nuclear talking points, both of which are easily refuted:
1. Nuclear power doesn’t increase CO2.
Not so. There are carbon emissions from mining, transporting and processing uranium, from constructing power plants and from transporting radioactive waste to places like Sellafield. By contrast, renewable energy doesn’t increase CO2, there’s no mining required or toxic waste to dispose of, and Scotland is bursting with renewables.
2. Nuclear power creates skilled jobs for life.
The renewables industry also creates skilled jobs for life without shortening it – in engineering, project management, data analysis and renewable energy technologies – and doesn’t endanger the health of workers or the local community.
Councillor Hampshire, who worked at Torness, said that although he “had to support renewables”, nuclear is needed for baseload power, which is the minimum power level on the grid.
Wrong again. Baseload power can be provided by any mix of generators, including variable wind and solar, if constant backup sources like tidal are provided. Furthermore, nuclear can’t be easily switched off, so when it’s present on the grid, much cheaper renewables are limited, which raises costs to the consumer.
Nonetheless, councillor Hampshire said he was lobbying hard for more nuclear power. He wants two Rolls-Royce SMRs (Small Modular Reactors) at the Torness site, claiming they’re cheaper and quicker to build and said that many SNP MSPs support him.
I wrote about SMRs in February, showing they are more expensive than and just as dangerous as large nuclear reactors; will generate more radioactive waste and will turn communities into de facto long-term nuclear waste disposal sites.
Only two SMRs are operating in the world – in Russia and China. Both are performing at less than 30% capacity and have been plagued by cost and time overruns. According to the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, these problems “make it even less likely that SMRs will become commercialised.”
Despite these facts, councillor Hampshire vows to include SMRs in the next ELC Local Development Plan. We were told that a lot of work is going on behind the scenes to ensure Torness remains an active nuclear site – with the UK having to import energy, otherwise.
During the Q&A, Whitfield was asked what it would take to change Scotland’s position. He replied “a change of government” and questioned whether Scotland has the authority to ban nuclear power since energy policy is reserved to the UK. It does because the Scotland Act 1998 devolves planning to Scotland.
Nevertheless, Whitfield said this could and would be tested through the courts, although he later clarified there were no definite plans to mount a legal challenge to Scotland’s authority to ban new nuclear power.
English Labour are pushing for more nuclear because they’re funded by the industry. The industry expects a return.
Nuclear power is another issue crying out for direct democracy, where the Scottish people – not special interests who are in bed with the politicians – have the power to decide via a referendum whether they want it or not. There are many other issues, local and national, over which the Scottish people have no control – pylons in the Highlands, corporate tax haven “freeports”, the closures of Ardrossan Harbour and Grangemouth, the Loch Lomond Flamingo Land development, to name just a few.
If we’re to stop special interests always crushing the interests of the people, we must demand our international human rights. That’s why Respect Scottish Sovereignty (RSS) is urging as many as possible to sign PE2135, to enact the Direct Democracy/Self-Determination Covenant (ICCPR) into Scots law.
Protest against Chalk River nuclear waste disposal project
It’s a choice between defending life and water or protecting the nuclear industry.
Pierre Chapdelaine de Montvalon, Radio-Canada, Espaces Autochtones, May 26, 2025-https://ici.radio-canada.ca/espaces-autochtones/2167618/chalk-river-kebaowek-dechet-nucleaire
Opposition to the proposed Chalk River nuclear waste disposal site continues unabated. A coalition of Aboriginal leaders and elected officials met Monday morning in Montreal to denounce the proposed Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) on the Ontario side of the Ottawa River.
For nearly 10 years, the community of Kebaowek, in Témiscamingue, has been fiercely opposed to the construction of such a site, and is leading a court battle against the organization responsible for the project, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL).
At a press conference, First Nation Chief Lance Haymond reiterated his community’s fears about the risks of water contamination and the effects on biodiversity of such a project, which he said would not respect First Nations’ rights.
Several speakers added their voices to call on the governments of Quebec and Canada to reject the project.
For the new Chief of the Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador, Francis Verreault-Paul, such a project is a threat to our waters, our rights, our cultures and our traditional ways of life.
“Where is the free, prior and informed consent of First Nations, which is at the heart of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?” he asked at a press conference.
It’s a choice between defending life and water or protecting the nuclear industry.
The Quebec government challenged
Manon Massé, Aboriginal Affairs spokesperson for the Québec solidaire party, took advantage of the press conference to directly challenge Quebec Premier François Legault, Environment Minister Benoit Charette and Ian Lafrenière, Minister responsible for relations with First Nations and Inuit.
“What do you mean, these people should not react against such a project? It’s immoral and inhuman to allow Quebecers to be put at risk like this.”
At the time of publication, the office of the Minister of the Environment had not responded to our questions.
“It makes no sense for such a project to be so close to such an important water resource,” added Rébecca Pétrin, Director of Eau secours. “Why aren’t our governments opposed to this?”
A Long Term Project
The proposed near-surface waste management facility is a project launched in 2016 by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, a private-sector consortium [of multinational corporations] responsible for managing federal nuclear sites.
The corporation’s proposed site would house low-level radioactive waste from the Chalk River Laboratories site, Canada’s largest nuclear science research complex, and other Canadian sites.
This waste includes contaminated soil and discarded items such as mops, protective clothing and rags that have been slightly contaminated.
LNC claims in its documentation that the project poses no contamination risk to the river.
“The NSDF is designed to protect the Ottawa River, not harm it. Drinking water downstream is not at risk,” states the LNC reference document.
The organization also assures us that radioactivity at the site will return to naturally occurring levels in a hundred years, and that the site will be monitored for hundreds of years.
Preventing long-term contamination
The president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, Gordon Edwards, insisted at the press conference that such waste should not be stored near any watercourse, and feared long-term contamination.
[14 of the 31 radioactive waste materials to be stored in the NSDF have half-lives of more than 100,000 years, and 22 of them have half-lives of more than 5,000 years.]
The octogenarian activist cited the example of a disused salt mine in Germany, which had been used as a dump for low-level nuclear waste.
After 20 years, radioactive pollutants began to seep into the environment and contaminate the ground water, despite all the precautions taken.
“Instead of pretending that this is not a problem, or that it’s a problem that has been solved, we need to consider that we have an intergenerational responsibility. We shouldn’t be thinking of simply abandoning this waste permanently. I don’t think we have sufficient scientific knowledge to do that,” he explains in an interview.
In early 2024, the Chalk River site was found to be discharging toxic wastewater.
A project challenged in court
In 2024, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) announced that it was giving the green light to construction of the NSDF.
This decision was successfully challenged in court by the Kebaowek Algonquin community.The Federal Court first ruled in favor of the Kebaowek on the government’s failure to obtain free, prior and informed consent in the case, which runs counter to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), adopted and codified by Ottawa in 2021.
“We never gave our consent to the project, and we were never consulted,” said Chief Lance Haymond.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories has appealed the court’s decision, but has also initiated a consultation process with the First Nation.
“It’s difficult to talk to CNL representatives about the parameters of a consultation process, when on the other hand, their lawyers are fighting us in court,” lamented Lance Haymond in an interview.
“The government can’t talk about reconciliation while appealing court decisions.”
– Lance Haymond, Chief of Kebaowek First Nation
In writing, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) states that it is committed to working with Kebaowek First Nation and CNL to implement the court’s directive in a transparent and judicious manner. “We are working with the Kebaowek First Nation and the CNL to develop a collaborative consultation process consistent with the court’s directive.”
The Federal Court also recognized that the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories had not sufficiently examined other options for the location of the nuclear waste dump. [This is required by law because of several species at risk that have been identified by Kebaowek.] CNL has also appealed the decision.
A third lawsuit by citizens’ groups and scientists opposed to the project was dismissed by the Federal Court.
Nine other Anishnabeg Algonquin communities support Kebaowek’s fight against the development of the NSDF, as do dozens of Quebec municipalities.
Pikwakanagan, an Anishnabe community on the other side of the Ottawa River in Ontario, supports the project.
Coalition urges Carney to drop nuclear from energy plan
by Abdul Matin Sarfraz, National Observer, May 23, 2025
A coalition of First Nations, physicians and environmental organizations is ramping up pressure on Prime Minister Mark Carney to drop nuclear energy from his “energy superpower” strategy, warning it comes with high costs, long delays and long-term risks.
In an open letter, dozens of organizations urge the federal government to halt funding for nuclear development and instead prioritize renewables, energy efficiency and storage. The letter warns that new nuclear projects are likely to increase electricity costs while delaying meaningful climate action.
“We are concerned that you may be unduly influenced by the nuclear and fossil industry lobbies,” reads the letter.
During the federal election campaign, Carney pledged to make Canada “the world’s leading energy superpower,” focusing on clean and conventional energy. His platform promised faster project approvals and a national clean electricity grid, among other energy promises. The coalition sent their letter in an effort to ensure Carney does not invest more significantly in nuclear energy, as he prepares to set his government’s agenda and ministers’ mandates.
While Carney’s plan doesn’t mention nuclear energy, he praised it during the first leaders’ debate and referenced two companies in the sector he previously worked with at Brookfield Asset Management…………………………………………..
In an open letter, dozens of organizations urge the federal government to halt funding for nuclear development and instead prioritize renewables, energy efficiency and storage.
The federal government — through the Canada Infrastructure Bank — has committed $970 million in low-cost financing to Ontario’s Darlington New Nuclear Project, which aims to build Canada’s first grid-scale small modular reactor.
The federal government also invested millions in Moltex Clean Energy, a New Brunswick-based company developing a technology called Waste to Stable Salt, which aims to recycle nuclear waste into new energy.
Jean-Pierre Finet, spokesperson for le Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie, one of the organizations that signed the open letter, said he worries about the long-term future of any nuclear plants built today without a plan for their waste.
“We object to our federal taxpayer dollars being spent on developing more nuclear reactors that could be abandoned in place, ultimately transforming communities into radioactively contaminated sites and nuclear waste dumps that will require more federal dollars to clean up,” Finet said.
Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and a longtime nuclear critic, says the federal government is backing the slowest and most expensive energy option on the table.
“In a climate emergency, you have to invest in things that are faster and cheaper,” Edwards said. “Canada hasn’t built new reactors in decades. There’s no practical experience left, and what’s being proposed now is largely speculative.”
“We’re very concerned about a misappropriation of public money and investment in what we see as a losing strategy,” Edwards said, stressing that the coalition is not asking private companies to stop building plants — but rather asking the federal government to stop subsidizing them.
International concerns echo at home
Much of the current controversy focuses on Ontario’s Darlington New Nuclear Project, as growing skepticism around the cost of small modular reactors mirrors global concerns.
In the US, two nuclear reactors in South Carolina were abandoned after $12.5 billion (CAD) had already been spent, triggering the bankruptcy of Westinghouse Nuclear — now owned by Canadian firms Brookfield and Cameco. Meanwhile, two completed Vogtle reactors in Georgia came in at $48 billion, more than double the original $19-billion estimate, making them among the most expensive infrastructure projects in US history.
In the UK and Europe, new nuclear power project efforts are facing delays, budget overruns, or outright cancellations.
………………………………ome energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. “Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,” said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. “These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.”
Winfield calls small modular reactors “a distraction and likely a dead end,” warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production.
Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer.
“There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,” Winfield added in an email. ome energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. “Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,” said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. “These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.”
Winfield calls small modular reactors “a distraction and likely a dead end,” warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production.
Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer.
“There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,” Winfield added in an email.ome energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. “Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,” said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. “These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.”
Winfield calls small modular reactors “a distraction and likely a dead end,” warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production.
Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer.
“There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,” Winfield added in an email.ome energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. “Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,” said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. “These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.”
Winfield calls small modular reactors “a distraction and likely a dead end,” warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production.
Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer.
“There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,” Winfield added in an email.ome energy experts say the small modular reactor path is out of sync with climate timelines and economic realities. “Nuclear is a very high-cost and high-risk option,” said Mark Winfield, professor at York University and co-chair of its Sustainable Energy Initiative. “These subsidies divert resources from much less costly and lower-risk options for decarbonizing energy systems. The focus on nuclear can delay more substantive climate action.”
Winfield calls small modular reactors “a distraction and likely a dead end,” warning that the technology carries catastrophic accident, safety, security and weapons proliferation risks not found in any other form of energy production.
Winfield said Canada lacks a significant comparative advantage in energy production beyond its legacy hydro assets, and remains a relatively high-cost fossil fuel producer.
“There is no reason to believe that we would be better at other energy production technologies (nuclear, renewables) than anyone else,” Winfield added in an email. https://www.nationalobserver.com/2025/05/23/news/civil-society-first-nations-groups-carney-nuclear-energy-plan?nih=cCuxV9ZjIGLlEj3vVOQpRJBIfmNu0W4xzKEBn8bDrx8&utm_source=National+Observer&utm_campaign=d2c908330f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_05_23_02_10&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cacd0f141f-d2c908330f-277064766
Hearts and Minds: Report highlights East Lincolnshire still not a ‘willing community’.
A report recently published by campaigners opposed to a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) in Lincolnshire demonstrates that theirs is still ‘not a willing community’ when it comes to the nuclear waste dump.
‘The Nuclear War for Lincolnshire’ published by Guardians of the East Coast (GOTEC) may conjure up an image of a decimated, burnt out waste land in the aftermath of an attack by nuclear weapons, but fortunately the publication is instead a detailed narrative of the relentless struggle to win public ‘hearts and minds’ support for a GDF first began by Nuclear Waste Services (NWS) in the middle of 2020, and continually valiantly resisted by GOTEC and its allies, amongst them local elected members and the Nuclear Free Local Authorities.
Following the announcement of a new inland ‘Area of Focus’ between Gayton le Marsh and the Carltons at the end of January, NWS ran a series of public events across the Theddlethorpe GDF Search Area. At each of these events, activists from Guardians of the East Coast offered attendees the opportunity to vote outside in a special private ‘ballot box’, built for the purpose by local Councillor Travis Hesketh.
535 members of the public attended these events. 93% took up the opportunity to vote. The result was decisive. 93% of those who voted wanted a public vote on the proposal now and 93% wanted the GDF to end now. The result was consistent across all the events.
A separate parish poll was also held in Gayton le Marsh in February 2025. 88% of parishioners voted and 93% expressed a desire to see an immediate vote.
These are just the latest expressions of the pronounced opposition to the GDF amongst residents…………………………………………………………………………………………………
NFLA 8th May 2025
Updates on Palisades: Zombie reactor & “SMR” new builds
These so-called “Small Modular Reactors” are not small. At 300 Megawatts-electric each, their construction and operation would nearly double the zombie reactor’s 800 MW-e on the tiny site. They would each be 4.5 times larger than the 67 MW-e Fermi 1 reactor in southeastern Michigan, which on October 5, 1966 had a partial core meltdown, and “We Almost Lost Detroit,”
April 30, 2025, https://beyondnuclear.org/updates-on-palisades-zombie-reactor-smr-new-builds/
Holtec and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) zealous and reckless push for restart of the 60-year old zombie reactor, as well as “Small Modular Reactor” new builds, at the Palisades nuclear power plant in Covert, Michigan, has continued non-stop recently. So too has Beyond Nuclear’s resistance to the unprecedented, unneeded, very dangerous, and insanely costly schemes, alongside our environmental allies in the area.
On April 29, 2025, the five Commissioners of the NRC held an Affirmation Session, and unanimously approved Palisades’ license transfer from previous owner Entergy, to new owner Holtec. Beyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, and Michigan Safe Energy Future (MSEF) had petitioned to intervene against it, and requested a hearing. The coalition has opposed Holtec’s takeover at Palisades from the get-go in 2020-2021. But NRC staff, the NRC Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board (ASLB), and the NRC Commissioners, have blown us off at every twist and turn. And still we persist, with no intention to slow down or give up!
Quite to the contrary, we continue our watchdogging, speaking environmental truth to nuclear power (or greed-driven corruption, anyway), sometimes on an intense daily basis.
Also on April 29, several environmental watchdogs attended an NRC-Holtec technical meeting, the latest of countless such meetings related to the nuclear nightmare of the restart scheme, which began three years ago this month. Representatives from Beyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, and Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago spoke out strongly against safety shortcuts regarding the potential for loss of power to operate vital safety and cooling systems at Palisades, due to the risk of an “open phase” flaw in the electrical systems. This problem dates back decades and has yet to be resolved.
The day before, on April 28, representatives from Beyond Nuclear and Don’t Waste Michigan spoke out at yet another NRC-Holtec technical meeting, regarding environmental review of the company’s scheme to add two SMR-300s, frighteningly close to the Van Buren State Park campground.
Kraig Schultz of MSEF-Shoreline Chapter in Grand Haven, MI made an audio recording of the April 28 meeting. Listen to it here.
These so-called “Small Modular Reactors” are not small. At 300 Megawatts-electric each, their construction and operation would nearly double the zombie reactor’s 800 MW-e on the tiny site. They would each be 4.5 times larger than the 67 MW-e Fermi 1 reactor in southeastern Michigan, which on October 5, 1966 had a partial core meltdown, and “We Almost Lost Detroit,” in the words of John G. Fuller’s iconic 1975 book title, and Gil Scott-Heron’s 1977 song title. They would also be 4.5 times larger than the 67 MW-e Big Rock Point reactor in northwest Michigan, which despite supposedly not having had a disaster, nonetheless shockingly released more than three million Curies of hazardous radioactivity into the environment.
The juxtaposition of the restarted zombie reactor, and the “SMR” new builds, would represent both extremes on the risk spectrum: breakdown phase risks, and break-in phase risks. Chornobyl Unit 4 in Ukraine in 1986, Three Mile Island Unit 2 in Pennsylvania in 1979, and Fermi Unit 1 in Michigan in 1966 are examples of break-in phase reactor disasters and catastrophes.
In addition to the decades-long electrical risks at Palisades mentioned above, there are multiple pathways to reactor core meltdown related to vital safety systems already pushed to the brink of breakdown. Palisades’ original owner, Consumers Energy (previously Consumers Power), listed them in a presentation to the Michigan Public Service Commission in spring 2006: “Reactor vessel head replacement; Steam generator replacement; Reactor vessel embrittlement concerns; …Containment coatings and sump strainers.”
None of these vital safety repairs or replacements have ever been performed, not by Consumers Energy in 2006, Palisades’ next owner Entergy from 2007 to 2022, nor by Holtec since 2022. Why not? Because the complicit NRC has not required it.
The Japanese Parliament concluded in 2012 that the root cause of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear catastrophe, which began on March 11, 2011, was collusion, between the company (Tokyo Electric), the safety regulatory agency, and government officials. Such collusion exists in spades at Palisades. And thus people and other living things live in deepening peril, downwind, downstream, up the food chain, and down the generations.
Regarding the needed “Steam generator replacement,” Holtec has no intention of doing so, despite giving the $510 million job some lip service in a secretive, smoking gun 2022 document Beyond Nuclear obtained from the State of Michigan via a Freedom of Information Act request.
Holtec’s rookie error (it has never operated a reactor) of neglecting steam generator maintenance from 2022 to 2024 has led to accelerated corrosion and degradation of exceedingly thin steam generator tubes in shockingly high numbers. It did not implement a chemically-preservative wet lay up, as repeatedly and publicly recommended by our coalition’s expert witness, Arnie Gundersen. The company has applied to NRC for a License Amendment Request (LAR) that represents mere BAND-AID fixes on the steam generator tubes. Our environmental coalition — Beyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future, Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago, and Three Mile Island Alert of Pennsylvania — has every intention of petitioning to intervene, and requesting a hearing, in opposition to the LAR, by the fast-approaching deadline in June.
Speaking of LARs, our coalition has challenged four others. The NRC staff opposed our challenges, as did Holtec. The ASLB ruled against all of our contentions, in rapid fire fashion. We have appealed those rulings to the NRC Commissioners. If and when the Commissioners reject our contentions as well, we will appeal to the federal courts.
We still have a number of live new and amended contentions regarding NRC’s Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. The ASLB has ordered another round of oral argument pre-hearings, scheduled for May 15, regarding them. As on Feb. 12, 2025, at our first round of oral argument pre-hearings on the four LARs mentioned above, our coalition’s legal counsel, Terry Lodge of Toledo, Ohio, and Wally Taylor of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, will represent us before the ASLB yet again on May 15.
Yet another of numerous NRC public meetings regarding Palisades’ restart status was held in Benton Harbor, MI on April 23, 2025. Watchdogs attended and spoke out.
And, following the money, as reported by producer Chrystal Blair at Public News Service on April 25 (the eve of the annual commemoration of the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear catastrophe), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has awarded Holtec the third installment of loan guarantees, this time for $47 million.
The second installment, awarded on March 17, was for $57 million.
The first installment, in early 2025, was for $38 million.
DOE announced on September 30, 2024 the final approval for $1.52 billion in loan guarantees for Holtec toward the zombie reactor restart. Holtec need not pay the money back. If Holtec defaults on repaying the loans, U.S. taxpayers will be left holding the bag.
See Beyond Nuclear radioactive waste specialist Kevin Kamps’ breakdown of bailouts at Palisades.
Blair quoted Kamps:
“A recent analysis by Dave Lochbaum, who is retired from the Nuclear Safety Program at Union of Concerned Scientists, placed Palisades at something like 84th out of 105 reactors in the country,” Kamps pointed out. “His analysis was they’re more like in the bottom rung of the industry, actually.”
[Palisades is ranked 81st out of 106 reactors, actually.]
Here is that Lochbaum analysis, as well as his chronicle of events (including mishaps) at Palisades, some quite serious, over six decades.
Lochbaum also authored a backgrounder in 2010, about Palisades’ problem-plagued Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) seal leaks, the worst in industry. CRDM seal leaks are yet another potential pathway to reactor core meltdown.
Blair also reported:
Punkin Shananaquet, a member of Michigan’s Indigenous community, emphasized for many Native people, the issue is not just about public safety, it is about honoring the sacredness of the land and water and educating the next generation about protecting the earth.
“We just can’t be pushed through the corporate world because they have no spirit,” Shananaquet contended. “We have spirit. We are the ones with the feelings for this place.”
Shananaquet, and her family, graced and honored the World Tree Peace Center in Kalamazoo, Michigan at its grand opening, on Indigenous Peoples Day (October 12, formerly Columbus Day), 1996. Kamps co-founded the World Tree, and co-directed it till 1999, when he began a new job, at Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), in Washington, DC, as nuclear waste specialist there for eight years, before joining Beyond Nuclear. The World Tree focused on watch-dogging Palisades, as well as the Donald C. Cook nuclear power plant 30 miles south of Palisades, and various undertakings for the Chornobyl Children’s Project.
And regarding the very significant safety problem of “Containment coatings and sump strainers” mentioned above, NRC and Holtec held a related meeting last week. Don’t Waste MI attended and spoke out. In an emergency, containment coatings could dissolve into a viscous sludge with the consistency of Elmer’s Glue, clogging sump strainers. This could block coolant flow needed to prevent a reactor core meltdown. This pathway to meltdown at Palisades has been known about for a quarter-century, yet nothing meaningful has been done to address it — just NRC allowing Palisades’ three owners during those 25 years to kick the can down the road.
Last but not least, on April 12, 2025, the St. Joe-Benton Harbor Herald-Palladium reported that Holtec had transferred highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel, from the indoor wet storage pool at Palisades, into outdoor dry cask storage.
Although such transfers ultimately represent an increase in safety — pools are vulnerable to mega-catastrophic fires, that could release unthinkable amounts of hazardous radioactivity into the environment — such transfers must be done very carefully, including with emergency preparedness measures in place. (It should be kept in mind, however, that the widespread quality assurance violations associated with Holtec’s dry cask storage containers’ fabrication call into question their structural integrity, even in on-site storage; see a summary of whistleblower allegations about this, here.)
Such emergency preparedness was not in place when Holtec undertook these irradiated nuclear fuel transfers. Palisades’ previous owner, Entergy, requested a waiver and exemption from emergency preparedness, as it permanently shutdown the reactor several years ago, and entered it into the decommissioning status phase.
Although Holtec has requested that NRC approve re-establishing emergency preparedness and planning, in order to restart the reactor and operate Palisades again, such NRC approval is not yet finalized.
The danger comes from moving such heavy loads as loaded highly radioactive waste containers over the vulnerable pool. The inadvertent drop of such a heavy load could damage the pool, and drain away vital cooling water.
Palisades had a near miss under its original owner, Consumers Energy, in October 2005, with just such a heavy load drop scenario.
See the April, 2006 NIRS backgrounder on this incident, prepared by Kevin Kamps, here.
See the related March, 2006 environmental coalition press release, here.
See the March, 2006 front page, above the fold Detroit Free Press coverage of the serious near-miss, here.
Holtec’s scheming, and NRC’s complicity, have continued apace for three years. So too has our resistance. It will only intensify in the days, weeks, and months ahead. Holtec has stood by its schedule to restart the Palisades zombie reactor by October 2025, and to fire up its proposed “SMR”-300s by 2030. We will resist these schemes at every opportunity, to the best of our ability.
To learn more about the past three years of this nuclear nightmare, and our resistance to it, see our chronicle of web posts (arranged backwards, newest posts at the top).
NUKE WASTE DUMP: Ojibwe Country once again targeted
May 1, 2025, Beyond Nuclear
JUST SAY NO TO NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPING IN NORTHWESTERN ONTARIO!
Beyond Nuclear’s radioactive waste specialist, Kevin Kamps, presented “Water Is Life, Nuclear Waste Is Toxic” at the annual meeting of Environment North, in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, on the north shore of Lake Superior, April 23, 2025.
Environment North is the lead local grassroots organization resisting the Canadian federal Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO, dominated by the nuclear industry, such as Ontario Power Generation) designation of the Ignace-Wabigoon Lake Ojibway First Nation area as the national radioactive waste dump.
A number of Ojibway First Nation Bands have also passed resolutions opposing the scheme, which would require long-distance, high-risk transportation of highly radioactive waste, from some two-dozen reactors to the east in Canada, on the Great Lakes, Saint Lawrence, and Atlantic.
See local coverage on April 22, 2025, quoting Kamps, by the Chronicle-Journal newspaper, here.
Watch a video recording of Kamps’ April 23, 2025 presentation, here. (Note that you can turn on the subtitles under Settings, to complement the audio.)
See Kevin’s slideshow presentation, here.
Listen to the audio recording, here, of Kamps being interviewed by host Scot Kyle, on the podcast “Wiley Koyote” on April 24, 2025. It was broadcast live on CILU Radio, 102.7 FM, as part of the Paradigm Shift Cafe, from the campus of Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ontario. Environment North’s Graham Saunders was also interviewed.
See Environment North’s press release about Kevin’s presentation, here.
See Environment North’s flier for Kevin’s presentation, here…………………………………………………………………………… https://beyondnuclear.org/nuke-waste-dump-ojibwe-country-once-again-targeted/
LANL Plans to Begin Venting Large Quantities of Radioactive Tritium On or After June 2nd
May 1st, 2025, https://nuclearactive.org/
During the early days of the pandemic, on March 10, 2020, LANL mailed a notice to people on the facility mailing list about the proposed venting of radioactive tritium into the air from four metal containers stored at Area G. LANL’s request provided information about its plan to seek temporary authorization to vent from the New Mexico Environment Department, specifically from the Hazardous Waste Bureau. UTF-820200310 Resubmit Temp Authorization FTWC Venting LA-UR-20-22103
Use of the facility mailing list is a notification process for people who want to know about the LANL plans. The public may sign up on the Hazardous Bureau’s website in order to receive a mailed written notice. https://www.env.nm.gov/hazardous-waste/lanl-permit/ , scroll down to LANL Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Mailing List and follow the instructions.
OR
Please notify Siona Briley by email at siona.briley@env.nm.gov , or by postal mail at Siona Briley, New Mexico Environment Department-Hazardous Waste Bureau, 2905 Rodeo Park East, Bldg. 1, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Please include your name, email (preferred communication method to save resources) or postal mailing address, and organization, if any.
Five years later, on April 9th, 2025, the public received email notification from LANL’s Electronic Public Reading Room that the proposed venting would be done on or after June 2, 2025.
Importantly, the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act provide regulatory distinctions between a mailing to those on facility mailing list and those who receive an email through the Electronic Public Reading Room.
CCNS is on both notice lists. We received both the March 10th, 2020 Facility Mailing List notice and the April 9th, 2025 Electronic Public Reading Room notice.
The Environment Department is reviewing the request to determine whether to grant or deny it. Once the decision is made, people on the Facility Mailing List will receive notice through the mail. Parties will then have thirty days to appeal the decision to the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board. https://www.env.nm.gov/opf/environmental-improvement-board/
CCNS and the Communities for Clean Water < https://www.ccwnewmexico.org/general-2 > urge the Environment Department to require LANL to host hybrid public meetings now in frontline communities before making a decision for the following reasons:
it has been five years since the first notice;
many aspects of the proposal have changed, including the significant reduction in the amount of tritium from 100,000 curies five years ago to 30,000 curies today;
LANL has not publicly provided the technical reasons for the change;
LANL provided a list of 53 alternatives to the Environmental Protection Agency. Despite multiple requests from Tewa Women United, neither federal agency has provided the alternatives list; and
five years is typically a regulatory time period for review of proposed or on-going activities.
It is time for action!
Please communicate with your family and friends and encourage them to sign the Action Network on-line petition directed to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the Environment Department Secretary James Kenney requesting denial of LANL’s request.
Online Petition: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/petition-to-deny-lanls-request-to-release-radioactive-tritium-into-the-air
Nuclear Watch New Mexico Fact Sheet: https://nukewatch.org/why-nmed-should-deny-lanls-request-for-tritium-releases
Campaigners tell Government to drop Bradwell nuclear site
27th April, By Sophie England, AI Champion for the South East, https://www.maldonandburnhamstandard.co.uk/news/25110689.campaigners-tell-government-drop-bradwell-nuclear-site/
A campaign group has told the Government to “drop the Bradwell site” for the development of nuclear energy.
The Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG) has urged the Government to end all interest in the Bradwell site for future nuclear power station development.
In their response to the Government’s National Policy Statement for Nuclear Energy, BANNG stated: “In the specific case of Bradwell, the site should be removed from further consideration on the grounds that it is unsuitable and unacceptable.”
The Bradwell site was considered “potentially suitable” for nuclear power by Chinese company CGN from 2015.
However, a pre-application for development in 2020 was met with strong opposition from the Blackwater communities and councils.
This led to CGN pausing its investigations and leaving the site.
It has now been confirmed by the Government and industry that they no longer expect planning applications to be submitted.
BANNG claims this confirms the end of the CGN Bradwell project.
Despite this, the site is still considered to have potential for energy transmission and nuclear infrastructure.
However, BANNG argues that the site does not have widespread public support, with “overwhelming opposition from local councils, stakeholders, community groups led by BANNG over many years”.
BANNG also points out the site’s vulnerability due to its exposed and low-lying coastal location.
They argue that this makes it susceptible to “accidental or malevolent interference and to the increasing impacts of climate change, sea level rise, inundation and storm surges capable of ultimately overwhelming the power station and its long-term highly active waste stores.”
BANNG also criticises the idea of using the site for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), stating that these are “not small and do not yet exist”.
In their consultation response, BANNG urges the Government “to provide a more balanced, less hysterical, account of the virtues and failings of nuclear energy”.
Nuclear Free Local Authorities express support for Democracy Day at USAF Lakenheath
The NFLAs have sent a message of solidarity and support to the organisers
of the Peace Camp at RAF / USAF Lakenheath for Democracy Day being hosted
today. The Lakenheath Alliance for Peace has kept up a 24/7 vigil at the
gates of the airbase since 14th April. LAP consists of 59 organisations,
including the NFLAs, who are opposed to the siting of US nuclear weapons at
the base and campaign in favour of nuclear disarmament. Although notionally
an RAF station, Lakenheath is really the largest US airbase in the UK
hosting the 48th ‘Liberty’ Fighter Wing of around 6,000 personnel and
F-15C/D Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle, and F-35A Lightning II fighter bomber
aircraft. From 1954 until 2008, the station held nuclear weapons in its
inventory. Now there are plans to reintroduce them.
NFLA 22nd April 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/nflas-express-support-for-democracy-day-at-usaf-lakenheath/
Protester for life
Activist Angie Zelter has been arrested more than a hundred times. She’s not stopping now, writes LINDA PENTZ GUNTER
ANGIE ZELTER doesn’t know if there are already US nuclear weapons at the RAF Lakenheath base in Suffolk. In fact we may never know, says the 73-year-old grandmother and veteran of countless protests, who began her activism at the Greenham Common women’s occupation in 1981 that saw US cruise missiles removed from the base there 10 years later.
RAF Lakenheath is a misnomer. It is actually a US Air Force base where, it is suspected,
preparations are underway for a return of US nuclear weapons to the base,
if they are not there already. This week and next, hundreds of peace and
disarmament activists will be travelling there to attend a peace camp that
includes rallies, a conference and culminates in a blockade on April 26.
The camp is hosted by the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, a network of
groups and individuals from Britain and around the world. Protesters are
expected to include activists from other countries where US military bases
are located.
Morning Star 16th April 2025
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/protester-life
Peace camp protestors hand in letter to US airbase commanders at Lakenheath
14th April 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/peace-camp-protestors-hand-in-letter-to-us-airbase-commanders-at-lakenheath/
On this the first day of a two-week Peace Camp hosted by the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, a delegation from LAP will hand in a letter to commanders of the US airbase at Lakenheath.
The Peace Camp will comprise various themed days, including Democracy Day on 22 April, for which the NFLA Secretary has produced a bespoke briefing paper for peace activists wishing to engage with Councillors on the issue of nuclear disarmament. As a partner in LAP, the UK/Ireland NFLAs have endorsed the letter.
The letter reads:
14th April 2025
Peace camp protestors hand in letter to US airbase commanders at Lakenheath
On this the first day of a two-week Peace Camp hosted by the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, a delegation from LAP will hand in a letter to commanders of the US airbase at Lakenheath.
The Peace Camp will comprise various themed days, including Democracy Day on 22 April, for which the NFLA Secretary has produced a bespoke briefing paper for peace activists wishing to engage with Councillors on the issue of nuclear disarmament. As a partner in LAP, the UK/Ireland NFLAs have endorsed the letter.
The letter reads:
Dear Base Commanders and all personnel of ‘RAF’/USAF Lakenheath,
Lakenheath Alliance for Peace (now consisting of around 60 Alliance Organisations) are writing to you once more. This is our 5th letter[1] to you and we politely ask that you please reply to us.
As you will know from our previous communications and protests over the last year, we are concerned at the blatant disregard of international humanitarian law by the preparation to use US guided nuclear bombs. Just one could kill hundreds of thousands of people and cause lasting devastation to our environment. We are also horrified and ashamed that you have been training Israeli pilots who are engaged in a genocide in Gaza and have also, along with USAF Mildenhall, been aiding and abetting that genocide.
We are engaged in a 2-week nonviolent presence at your base in order to show that your war mongering is not being done in our name.
Many people living close to US military bases in Europe, Japan and South Korea (to mention just a few) are extremely concerned that you operate outside the rule of law and in the interests of controlling scarce resources for yourselves, not for purely self-defensive reasons and certainly not in the interests of the general public in our countries.
The informed public understand that the existential threats facing us are escalating climate change, biodiversity loss and nuclear annihilation. Your activities at Lakenheath are exacerbating all these threats and putting us all in danger. They are a breach of our peace and are in breach of national and international laws.
Yours in peace,
Lakenheath Alliance for Peace, info@lakenheathallianceforpeace.org.uk
CND Cymru condemns billions for nuclear industry
Morning Star 15th April 2025
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/cnd-cymru-condemns-billions-nuclear-industry
CAMPAIGNERS have condemned the billions being poured into nuclear energy while the Westminster government “preaches austerity” for everybody else.
CND Cymru attacked Sir Keir Starmer today, claiming he was poised to announce more public subsidy for the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset, not due to open until 2031.
A CND Cymru spokesperson said: “The willingness of the government to fund the nuclear industry to the tune of billions while preaching austerity to everyone else is absolutely farcical.
The anti-nuclear campaigners said Hinkley Point is likely to cost over £40 billion, £14bn over the initial estimate, with CND pointing out the project was managed by French company EDF.
“We must not accept the subsidy of a failing industry in order to preserve our nuclear attack capabilities while working people are facing impossible choices,” the CND spokesperson said.
“A different, greener, fairer, future is possible which doesn’t leave future generations with nuclear waste.”
Nuclear waste returns to Germany amid protests.
Matt Ford with dpa, NDR, 04/01/2025April 1, 2025, Edited by: Sean Sinico
https://www.dw.com/en/nuclear-waste-returns-to-germany-amid-protests/a-72108958
Seven containers filled with nuclear waste were transferred from ship to train in northern Germany for transport to Bavaria. But Germany still has no permanent storage solution for its radioactive material.
A ship carrying castor seven containers filled with highly radioactive nuclear waste docked in the northern German port of Nordenham, Lower Saxony, on Tuesday morning, amid protests and a heightened police presence.
The nuclear waste is being transported from Sellafield in northwest England to a temporary storage unit in Niederaichbach in the southern German state of Bavaria. The waste left the northwestern English port of Barrow-in-Furness last Wednesday and is being transferred from ship to train in Nordenham before continuing southwards. The nuclear waste was what remained after the reprocessing of fuel elements from decommissioned German nuclear power plants.
The first of the containers, which are four meters (13 feet) long and weigh over 100 tons, was lifted off the special “Pacific Grebe” transport ship by a large crane on Tuesday morning and underwent inspection to measure radiation levels and ensure they matched those taken in Sellafield.
The port in Nordenham remains sealed off and guarded by heavily armed police, who have thus far reported no incidents, despite a number of protests by anti-atomic energy groups.
Nuclear waste: Why are people protesting?
“Every castor container carries enormous risk,” said Helge Bauer from the protest group Ausgestrahlt, which means “radiated.” “Nuclear waste should, therefore, only be transported once — to a permanent storage site.”
Further protests are planned along the presumed route of the train carrying the waste over the coming days, including in the cities of Bremen and Göttingen.
“Every castor transport is one too many because it only postpones the problem and does not solve it,” Kerstin Rudek, a spokesperson for the group Castor-Stoppen, said in a statement, adding that nuclear waste should not be moved until a safe, final storage location is determined.
Where is the waste from if Germany phased out nuclear energy?
Germany began phasing out the use of nuclear power in 2003, a process which was accelerated following the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011. Germany’s final remaining nuclear power plants were shut down in 2023.
But Germany is still obligated to take back nuclear waste produced by used elements from its plants which, up until 2005, were regularly transported to reprocessing plants in Sellafield and La Hague, France. The transport of processed German nuclear waste back to the country has often been subject to protests.
According to the Society for Nuclear Service (GNS), over 100 castor containers were transported from La Hague to Gorleben, Lower Saxony, between 1995 and 2011. The final four were transported to Philippsburg, Baden-Württemberg, in 2024. Six containers were reportedly transported from Sellafield to Biblis, Hesse, in 2020, with seven more still to come.
Where does Germany store nuclear waste?
Germany’s Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (BGE) is still in the process of identifying a suitable location for the permanent underground storage of 27,000 cubic meters of nuclear waste produced over the course of 60 years of German nuclear energy production.
Nuclear waste, which can remain radioactive and, therefore, highly dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years, is currently stored in 16 temporary locations above ground, but it can’t stay there forever.
“We are using an empiric process to identify a location which offers the best possible security,” the BGE’s Lisa Seidel told public broadcaster NDR in November 2024.
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (293)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 
