nuclear-news

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

Gabbard has more intelligence than entire Intelligence Service she’s slated to head.

Gabbard had the audacity to speak truth against America’s unhinged proxy war against Russia in 2022 that has failed spectacularly while destroying Ukraine as a viable country. She was spot on in declaring US weaponizing its Ukraine proxies against Russia jeopardizes global security. “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if the Biden Administration and NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns over NATO membership for Ukraine on Russia’s border.”

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 8 Dec 24

The US national security state, more appropriately referred to as the US war party, is aghast Trump picked Tulsi Gabbard to be Director of National Intelligence.

John Bolton, correctly nicknamed ‘Bonkers’ over his love of endless, failed US military interventions charged, “Gabbard, like Trump’s failed Attorney General pick Matt Gaetz, is like a hand grenade ready to explode. Republicans who throw themselves on those grenades for Donald Trump are risking their own personal reputations and places in history. Bolton appears oblivious his reputation and place in history rests in the warmonger wing of the American Story.

My Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth warned “I think she’s compromised. The U.S. intelligence community has identified her as having troubling relationships with America’s foes.” Ironically, it’s Duckworth, who exploited her service in America’s criminal Iraq war to gain political power supporting more senseless US wars, who is compromised.

Even progressive hero Elizabeth Warren foolishly bellowed “Do you really want her to have all of the secrets of the United States and our defense intelligence agencies when she has so clearly been in Putin’s pocket.” Warren clearly is in the pocket of US weapons merchants, super hawk congresspersons and their media enablers.

What infuriates these unbridled proponents of US unipolar dominance about Gabbard, a former congressperson, Iraq war vet and current Lt. Col. in the US Army reserve?

Gabbard had the audacity to speak truth against America’s unhinged proxy war against Russia in 2022 that has failed spectacularly while destroying Ukraine as a viable country. She was spot on in declaring US weaponizing its Ukraine proxies against Russia jeopardizes global security. “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if the Biden Administration and NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns over NATO membership for Ukraine on Russia’s border.”

Gabbard compounds this inconvenient truth by speaking with rulers of America’s imaginary enemies like Syrian President Bashar Assad. America’s refusal to speak with its long list of enemies is a reckless policy that can easily stumble America into further warfare, even nuclear.

Bravo to Gabbard for pushing back against senseless US foreign misadventures that threaten American security, indeed, all peoplekind.

American intelligence has been exploited by our clueless leaders since the end of WWII to destabilize, overthrow dozens of countries worldwide. It seeks new enemies to expand its power and influence promoting US unipolar dominance. Gabbard threatens that terrible sinecure.

The Senate should confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence to make sensible intelligence Job One in the intelligence community.

December 9, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | 1 Comment

What happened to integrity and honor in the age of Technocracy?

Charles Hugh Smith, oftwominds.com, Fri, 06 Dec 2024,  https://www.sott.net/article/496524-What-happened-to-integrity-and-honor-in-the-age-of-Technocracy

The hope here is that facing the reality of moral collapse frees us of the delusion that fiddling with technocratic financial abstractions and policy tweaks can reverse moral collapse.

Ours is a technocratic culture with a short attention span, and so problems and solutions are understood to be 1) technocratic and 2) instant. The problem is something that can be distilled down to a spreadsheet, formula, algorithm or legalistic policy, and the solution is some modification of spreadsheet, formula, algorithm or legalistic policy: all our problems will go away if we just end the Fed, switch to cryptocurrency, tweak some laws, get rid of the bankers, eliminate an agency, and so on.

These solutions will offer immediate relief. The problems will start melting away the minute we modify the spreadsheet, algorithm, financial settings or legal code.

But what if the problem is the collapse of integrity and honor, a moral rot that has consumed the foundations of our social order? If this is the root problem, then technocratic-financial solutions are the equivalent of excising a wart from the big toe and declaring that as a result of this procedure, the brain cancer has been cured.

What if the problem is that everything we’re cheering as Progress is actually the opposite–it’s Anti-Progress? What if all the technocratic “advances” that are constantly being hyped as wondrous are actually harming our physical and mental health?

So a product labeled as a “veggie snack” that’s nothing more than fat-soaked, sugary potato starch is lauded because it’s immensely profitable, a virtue gained by deceiving parents into thinking a “veggie snack” is a healthy snack.

That this is a culture in moral collapse is obvious, but we dare not admit it. That integrity and honor have decayed to the point of parody is equally obvious, but that too doesn’t register in a culture attuned to novelty, profit, gadgets, legalese, techno-fantasies and technocratic “solutions” to problems that aren’t even visible to technocrats.

Integrity and honor have, along with everything else, been commoditized into something we sell as a “product” or “enhancement.” Virtue-signaling has replaced actual integrity, and as the host of my latest podcast observed, the job of corporate CEOs is not to make quality products; their job is to elevate the corporation’s stock price by whatever means are available–including hollowing out quality, reliability and durability.

Seeking a Culture of Honor and Integrity with Emerson Fersch and Amy LeNoble (59 min)

In this state of moral collapse, we look to centralized authorities to solve all our problems. But the collapse of integrity and honor does not have a legal, financial or technocratic solution. We have to reverse that collapse ourselves rather than rely on centralized diktats from on high to fix what’s broken.

Before we get to the hope, let’s first review reality. Here is loneliness–soaring. – [excellent graphics here, on original]

And we all know how positive online interactions are for our collective mental health:

Every one of these graphics depicts a social order in collapse, yet this truth is greeted with silence or delusional misdirections and self-referential parodies being passed off as “solutions.”

Let’s say we want a lifestyle stripped of denial, moral rot, techno-fantasies and technocratic delusions, a lifestyle of responsibility, accountability, integrity and honor. Oops, sorry, that lifestyle is out of stock and we don’t anticipate any reordering.

The hope here is that facing the reality of moral collapse frees us of the delusion that fiddling with technocratic financial abstractions and policy tweaks can reverse moral collapse and Anti-Progress. We are then free to see the problem is spiritual and cultural, realms that we change in our own lives, not by waiting around for central authorities–the state, Big Tech, etc.–to fix for us.

We need a new way of living, not more gadgets and financial “innovations.” A restoration of basic integrity and honor cannot be achieved by technocratic “solutions”–policies, crypto, apps, algos, AI–for the belief that these are solutions has blinded us to the decay and collapse of the foundations of the social order.

Yes, it’s understandable that we all want a solution to the collapse of integrity and honor to be done for us by some new app or a new law, but that’s like thinking the wart on the big toe is the source of the brain cancer. Real social change comes from the ground up, not the top down. I explore these themes in my new book The Mythology of Progress, Anti-Progress and a Mythology for the 21st Century.
(free sample chapter)

New podcast:Seeking a Culture of Honor and Integrity with Emerson Fersch and Amy LeNoble (59 min)

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Religion and ethics, technology | Leave a comment

Biden’s Nuclear Going Out of Business Sale

The only way Ukraine wins is for the West to stop the war and negotiate an agreement with Russia which restores Ukraine’s sovereignty, neutrality and way of life. Otherwise, the war grinds on, the casualties on both sides mount, Armageddon looms and the world gets to indulge in thinking the unthinkable, annihilation.

This is real. This is not a drill. The world is teetering on a precipice of nuclear war.

Dennis Kucinich, 7 Dec 24,  https://freepress.org/article/biden%E2%80%99s-nuclear-going-out-business-sale

Has the world forgotten the real danger of nuclear war?

Do we live in a fantasy world where we think we can escalate tensions and put entire portions of the world under threat by using Ukraine as a sacrificial pawn (in what is classically sold as providing humanitarian and ally support) in a decades-long psychopathic foreign policy play to destroy Russia?

According to the laws of war, NATO, the U.S., the U.K., and France have determined to become “direct participants” in Europe’s deadly conflict as their home-grown offensive missiles are being launched from inside Ukraine to attack Russia.

Translated, a state of war exists between the West and Russia.

Putin is not absolved for his invasion of Ukraine. But how are western nations, led by the U.S., protecting Ukraine’s or their own national interests by quickening the dialectic of conflict, bringing nuclear weapons into the calculus?

Russian President Putin and his government have experienced long-standing western policies of encirclement and NATO encroachment through Ukraine, something the U.S. government swore would not happen. It did happen, reawakening Russia’s deepest fears of invasion.

Most Americans are unaware that in 2014, the U.S. forced out the elected President of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych, which resulted in Kiev ordering attacks on ethnic Russian enclaves of Donetsk and Luhansk, baiting Russia into the beginning of a three year war, with the lure of NATO membership fluttering above Ukraine.

As the war barrels to a climactic, perhaps irredeemably fatal stage, the Ukrainian people have lost at least 600,000 of their fellow countrymen and women. Even so, at this late hour, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken demands that Ukraine lower its age of compulsory military service from 25 years of age to 18, to send even more young Ukrainians into the slaughter. Russian casualties will soar past 400,000 dead, with latest reports of 1,000 casualties a day.

One million Europeans have been killed for a war which was not inevitable, should never have been fought and, once it started, could have been brought to a fast conclusion. According to Naftali Bennett, former Prime Minister of Israel, peace talks were sabotaged by the US, just a month into the conflict.

The constitutions of the U.S., the U.K. and France, which forbid executives to unilaterally wage war, are being circumvented. Leaders have gone rogue and are consciously choosing nuclear brinkmanship over diplomacy.

In the past month, escalation is being stoked by the West. The launch of ATACMS and other advanced missiles necessarily involves U.S. personnel and intelligence data. This new phase of the war compelled the Kremlin to lower its threshold for a nuclear strike in an attempt to stop the use of even higher grade weapons against it from the West.

What happened? … The 2024 Presidential Election happened.

The escalation is intended to sabotage President Trump’s stated desire to bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine war and for the architects of the war to try to escape the blame for miscalculations, bumbling and cynical protraction of a bloody conflict. It is clear the West does not want peace.

Remember, the sacrifice of Ukraine and everything that has led up to this point is due to the West’s long time policy to advance the strategic defeat of Russia.

The Cold War never ended. It has given way to a boiling Hot War whose aim is to antagonize, provoke, diminish and conquer Russia. Key elements are the attempted dismantling of Russia’s energy infrastructure, and the massive transfer of arms to our proxy, Ukraine, through US appropriations which are approaching $200 billiion dollars, an amount equal to over $5,000 dollars for every Ukrainian man, woman and child.

In order to set the stage for this war, Western interests resorted to conjuring Putin as a demon, an arch-enemy of freedom, as was done with Hussein in Iraq, Khaddafy in Libya, and Assad in Syria. Once the enemy machine goes to work, military assets are mobilized to advance the overthrow of the noxious government, and the cash registers of defense contractors ring with the energy of a pinball arcade.

The Democratic Party unleashed an entire kennel of the dogs of war upon Russia, often at the urging of warden Hillary Clinton, mastermind of the Russiagate hoax. The nadir of the Dems descent into the indecent was ballyhooing the support of its 2024 presidential ticket by Dick Cheney, the sterling warmonger whose endorsement is to mass homicide what the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval is to stylish domesticity.

Think of the political consequences to the credibility of the entire Western foreign policy establishment if President Trump succeeds in bringing the war to a close. President Biden’s foreign policy, led by Secretary Blinken, will be forever tainted, as will the Democratic Party’s steadfast support for guns over butter.

The overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government in 2014, Russia’s subsequent invasion; the Prime Minister’s Gambit, Boris Johnson’s April 2022 scuttling of a peace agreement; the severe damage to the European economy through the destruction of Nordstream pipeline, by GUESS WHO, [readers hereby invited to guess]; NATO’S teeter-totter, penny-pinching one moment, saber-rattling burlesque the next, and harrowing brinkmanship — misdirecting public attention during the inevitable collapse of Ukraine. All this chest thumping and war pimping will be called into question, presuming there is time.

Another knock-on effect of the war and the failure of sanctions: Russia and China have been pushed together into a deep long-term military and economic partnership. Could the Biden Administration have been unaware of the military, economic and political fallout from a BRICS+-type alliance?

Rational military observers predict the transfer of the newest missiles will not change the outcome of the war, and some Trump advisers believe the next president’s bargaining position vis a vis Moscow will be strengthened as Ukraine’s offensive capacity is temporarily enhanced.

However, a sharp escalation in the next six weeks could result in a devastating response from an increasingly anxious Russia. Biden isn’t trying to help Trump or the process of peace, he’s handing him, and the world, a poisoned chalice.

The only way Ukraine wins is for the West to stop the war and negotiate an agreement with Russia which restores Ukraine’s sovereignty, neutrality and way of life. Otherwise, the war grinds on, the casualties on both sides mount, Armageddon looms and the world gets to indulge in thinking the unthinkable, annihilation.

Rear Admiral Thomas Buchanan of the US Strategic Command, isn’t calling for nuclear war, but he did say at a Project Atom 24 meeting recently, “If we have to have a(n) [nuclear] exchange then we want to do it in terms that are most acceptable to the United States,” where, presumably, even after nuclear war, we still lead the world, or its ashes – in strategic weapons.

President-Elect Trump, has assessed the extreme danger of the moment, saying: “We have never been closer to World War III than we are today under Joe Biden. A global conflict between nuclear-armed powers would mean death and destruction on a scale unmatched in human history.”

Vladimir Putin has clearly stated that Russia would “mirror” or match all escalations. Russia responded to an ATACM missile launch with a new hypersonic intermediate range ballistic missile, the Oreshnik, that reputedly reaches speeds of MACH 11 and delivers some 36 payloads. It devastated a Ukrainian missile factory.

It was an unmistakable message: Those six major payloads with six submunitions within them could be nuclear ones next time.

The next firing of ATACMs could bring a Russian response endangering or killing the American personnel responsible for firing these munitions. Even a skilled negotiator will find it difficult to diffuse the conflict once American blood has been shed. Why in the world would our government cause our troops, let alone our nation, to be so vulnerable?

Eight trillion dollars of our $36 trillion deficit is due to wars of choice since 9/11. The continued failure of American diplomacy, preferring war to statecraft, has been a persistent hubris. Pray that it not be fatal for our nation and the world.

Everyone who loves our country must speak out, now, to help avert a catastrophe.

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Younger people at greater risk of heat-related deaths this century – study

New research estimates a 32% increase in deaths of people under 35 if greenhouse gases not radically cut.

Oliver Milman, Guardian, 7 Dec 24

Extreme heat fueled by the climate crisis is often viewed as primarily a problem for vulnerable segments of the population, such as elderly people. But it is people aged under 35 that are set to suffer the brunt of heat-related deaths as temperatures climb, new research has suggested.

While older people are susceptible to heatwaves, they currently make up the bulk of cold-related deaths. As the world heats up, it will be younger people that will suffer disproportionately as the mortality burden shifts, with the new study estimating a 32% increase in deaths of people under 35 years old this century from heat if greenhouse gases emissions aren’t radically cut.

“Most discussion of vulnerability to heat focuses on the elderly, but we found a surprising source of inequality in that most heat mortality is in younger people,” said Andrew Wilson, a Columbia University researcher who led the study, published in Science Advances, with a group of nine other scientists. “We didn’t think we’d find this.”

The study is based on data drawn from deaths in Mexico, a country of extensive mortality records and high “wet bulb” temperatures, which is a measurement that factors in humidity to ascertain the heat stress level upon people.

The researchers found that in the two decades until 2019, 75% of deaths from heat occurred among people younger than 35 while, conversely, almost all cold-related deaths were of those older than 50.

As most temperature-related deaths in Mexico, like in most countries, currently occur due to cold weather, the growing problem of extreme heat is likely to tip the balance towards more younger people dying, the research suggests. This pattern may well be replicated in other countries such as the US and in Europe, Wilson said, due to fundamental similarities in how different age groups react to temperature.

“We are seeing that cold-related deaths will fall, primarily of older individuals, while heat deaths of younger individuals will increase,” he added. “Climate change is here and how we adapt to it will be a very important determinant of human health in the future. We shouldn’t move resources away from older people but we certainly need to think more about the risk faced by younger people.”

There is no single answer as to why there is heightened risk for younger people but researchers said there are likely a number of factors, such as physiological differences – for example, babies are unable to sweat to release heat and are dependent upon caregivers – as well as occupational risks, such as a working age population that toils outdoors while engaged in agricultural labor and construction.

In the US, the Biden administration has spent the past three years formulating the first federal rules to protect workers from extreme heat, although these regulations are likely to be wound back by the incoming president, Donald Trump.

……………………Khatana said that younger people are exposed to heat through work, school and recreational activities and “therefore may experience a disproportionate impact from climate change”.

“This highlights the importance of thinking of targeted measures, such as work breaks for people working in hot environments, or rescheduling sporting events to avoid extreme heat,” he said. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/06/young-adults-heat-related-deaths-climate-crisis

December 9, 2024 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

UK Seeks More Investors as Sizewell Funding Talks Drag On

The UK government is speaking with investors beyond the core group of existing bidders for a stake in the country’s Sizewell C nuclear plant as talks to finalize the project’s funding continue.

Financial Post, Bloomberg News, William Mathis, Priscila Azevedo Rocha and Aaron Kirchfeld, Dec 05, 2024 

he UK government is speaking with investors beyond the core group of existing bidders for a stake in the country’s Sizewell C nuclear plant as talks to finalize the project’s funding continue.  

The government has recently approached infrastructure and other private investors to provide equity to Britain’s next large-scale nuclear power plant, according to people familiar with the matter. The talks come at a critical time for the UK as it seeks to attract financing to overhaul the country’s power grid this decade.

The country recently delayed funding for the project until at least spring 2025, pushing back a previous target to take a final investment decision by the end of the year. Finding investors willing to participate in new nuclear plants is crucial to plans to cut emissions and reach 2050 net zero goals.

The government has been seeking investors for the Sizewell C project for more than a year and canvassed a wide variety of potential backers before honing in on a smaller group of interested parties, the people said. It’s not clear whether any of the investors being contacted now would be able to join the current fundraising process, or if they would buy into a subsequent round as the government further sells down its stake. ……………………………………

A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero said the autumn budget confirmed the current equity and debt raising process will move to its final stages shortly and will conclude in the spring. A final investment decision on whether to proceed with the project will be taken in the multiyear spending review, they added. 

The Sizewell project — owned by the government and minority stakeholder Electricite de France SA — could eventually cost an estimated £20 billion ($25.3 billion) and take roughly a decade to build. 

The government has previously engaged in discussions with investors including Centrica Plc, Emirates Nuclear Energy Corp., Amber Infrastructure Group Ltd. and Schroders Greencoat LLP and the conversations are ongoing, the people said, asking not to be named because the talks are private. Barclays Plc is advising the UK government. 

Spokespeople for Barclays and Centrica declined to comment, while representatives for ENEC, Amber Infrastructure and Schroders didn’t immediately respond to queries. 

Centrica Chief Executive Officer Chris O’Shea has said on various occasions that the company’s engagement in any UK infrastructure projects, including Sizewell, would hinge on the “right conditions.”

At the moment, the only nuclear power station under construction in the UK is Hinkley Point C, which has been repeatedly delayed and is expected to cost as much as £47.9 billion in current terms. EDF is also holding talks with investors over funding for Hinkley as the French utility grapples with the ballooning cost of the project.
https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/uk-looks-for-more-investors-as-sizewell-c-funding-talks-drag-on

December 9, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

The Moltex Reactor and used CANDU Fuel

Frank Greening, 9 Dec 24

From a MOLTEX Technical Report, issued May 2022:

THE FUEL

The reactor core comprises an array of fuel tubes in a graphite matrix, which fills most of the tank. Each tube sits in a separate channel, within which a molten salt primary coolant circulates.

FUEL SALT

The SSR-U is a fluoride or chloride salt reactor with separate fuel and coolant salts. The fuel is in the form of molten low-enriched uranium fluoride or chloride salt (6% enrichment).

What I find most interesting about this information on the Moltex SMR is that the fuel is enriched uranium, even though we have been led to believe that the Moltex reactor can run on used CANDU fuel, which is certainly not enriched, but depleted in U-235.

For example, consider this announcement by Moltex dated October 3, 2024:

“The SSR-W was specifically engineered to efficiently reuse and consume recycled nuclear waste,” said Moltex CEO Rory O’Sullivan. “This breakthrough research, the result of years of collaboration, clearly demonstrates that ability.” According to this research, the SSR-W can recycle used fuel indefinitely, producing a minimum of 6,000 MW of clean energy from Canada’s existing CANDU reactor fuel without the need for new fuel imports.

Unfortunately, Molex is not very forthcoming about how much fuel their reactor will use. I am going to conservatively assume that 20 tonnes of enriched uranium will be needed for the first year of reactor operation. Based on information I have found in a number of reports on the cost of enriching uranium to 6% U-235, I estimate this will cost about $1 million per tonne. By comparison, the production cost of CANDU fuel is about $250,000 per tonne.

But there are other hidden costs to the production of enriched uranium, one of the most significant being the cost of disposing of the depleted uranium generated by the U-235 enrichment process. Thus, the production of 1 kg of U-235 enriched to 6% generates 12 kg of depleted uranium tailings waste. The uranium enrichment process begins with the conversion of uranium oxide to uranium hexafluoride, UF6, which is gaseous above 64 ⁰C. UF6 is very toxic and chemically reactive so it is necessary to convert the depleted UF6 back to a solid uranium form for safe disposal – adding substantially to the cost of producing enriched fuel for the Moltex reactor.

But there’s still more bad news for the Moltex SMR! Thus, I quote from an article in the May 2023 issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists by J. Kang et al. entitled: “Canadian reactors that “recycle” plutonium would create more problems than they solve”, where we read:

Moltex’s fresh fuel will consist of potassium chloride, uranium chloride, and plutonium chloride, with some unspecified actinides and lanthanides. Using the expected distribution of plutonium and uranium, and using the ratio of the atomic masses of chlorine and plutonium, one can conclude that the reactor would need about 392 kg of plutonium as fuel every year. In a 2021 presentation, Moltex also mentioned that the average fuel assembly resides for 6.3 years in the reactor. This means that the initial loading for the reactor to start operating would require roughly 2.4 tons of plutonium.

To obtain the 2.4 tons of plutonium required in the startup fuel for a single 300 megawatt-electric (MWe) Moltex reactor, around 577 tons of CANDU spent fuel would have to be processed. In addition, a further 94 tons of CANDU spent fuel must go through Moltex’s waste-to-stable-salts chemical process to produce the necessary fuel for each year of operations. 

December 9, 2024 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

Britain’s Energy Secretary Follows Tech Giants In Pursuit Of New Nuclear Power Stations

the government is “determined to drive forward” with nuclear power through both public and private investment, despite this being a period of “immense challenge for the public finances.”

Miliband was speaking in London on Thursday at the Nuclear Industry Association’s Nuclear 2024 conference, where he told the audience that their industry has an essential role to play in the U.K.’s pursuit of achieving a [ ?] clean power system by 2030.

Robert Olsen,  Forbes 7th Dec 2024

British Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has been watching U.S. tech companies striking deals with operators and developers of nuclear power plants, and now he’s eager to pursue similar projects in the U.K.

“My message is clear: if you want to build a nuclear project in Britain, my door is open,” Miliband said. “My department is listening. We want all your ideas for projects that can work and provide value for money.”

Miliband was speaking in London on Thursday at the Nuclear Industry Association’s Nuclear 2024 conference, where he told the audience that their industry has an essential role to play in the U.K.’s pursuit of achieving a [ ?] clean power system by 2030.

He said the government is “determined to drive forward” with nuclear power through both public and private investment, despite this being a period of “immense challenge for the public finances.”

Great British Nuclear (GBN), the government body tasked with spearheading the development of small modular reactors (SMRs), has started contract negotiations with four companies shortlisted for the U.K.’s small modular reactor program, and final decisions will be made next year.

Britain’s Rolls-Royce is competing with U.S.-based rivals GE Hitachi, Holtec and Westinghouse Electric for contracts to develop SMRs in the U.K. The competition was launched last year, as part of the government’s plan to replenish the country’s dwindling nuclear industry………………………………..https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertolsen-1/2024/12/07/britains-energy-secretary-follows-tech-giants-in-pursuit-of-new-nuclear-power-stations/

December 9, 2024 Posted by | politics international, technology, UK | Leave a comment

Trump’s Pro-Israel Dream Team: Patel Nomination Caps Hawkish Cabinet

 December 8, 2024, By Kit Klarenberg / MintPressNews

On November 30, Donald Trump nominated Kash Patel to serve as FBI director. A staunch MAGA activist and loyalist with significant standing in Trump’s orbit, Patel aligns closely with the president-elect on both domestic and foreign policy matters. Indeed, he appears to struggle to pinpoint areas of disagreement with Trump’s agenda.

Patel has consistently advocated for a hardline approach to China and is an unabashed supporter of Israeli interests, often prioritizing them over U.S. considerations. On October 7, marking the first anniversary of the Hamas attack, Patel delivered a fiery interview on Fox News. During the segment, he vowed that the incoming Trump administration would intensify its crackdown on anti-Israeli elements.

We should be side by side [with Israel]…When we are back in power with President Trump…we will shut off the machinery that feeds money into Iran…We need America to wake up and prioritize Israel, and that is not what Kamala Harris is about, we need to bring home Americans and end this war, bring home Israelis, and stand by our number one ally in Israel, and people need to wake up on November 5.”

A relative political outsider who has never occupied high office, the media has been awash with profiles of Patel and fevered speculation about what his management of the Bureau could mean in practice ever since. In the process, he has been subject to a level of mainstream scrutiny and criticism that was entirely lacking over recent weeks, as Trump filled his cabinet with a rogue’s gallery of dedicated hawks, hardcore pro-Israeli elements, and characters both unknown and notorious with potential extremist ties and views.

For some, the composition of Trump’s cabinet is a crushing disappointment. On November 9, Trump caused shockwaves when he announced neither Nikki Haley nor Mike Pompeo would be invited to join his administration in any capacity. The news, coupled with comments he made in a late October appearance on Joe Rogan’s popular podcast, perked optimism in some quarters that the President-elect’s longstanding anti-war posturing could produce real-world results in Ukraine, if not elsewhere.

In his discussion with Rogan, Trump professed that “the biggest mistake” of his first term was he “picked a few people that I shouldn’t have picked” – “neocons or bad people or disloyal people,” among them John Bolton. Haley was the U.S. ambassador to the UN under Trump and perhaps the most ardent, outspoken Zionist ever to fill the role. She, Bolton and Pompeo – who personally orchestrated Iranian General Qasem Soleimani’s assassination, among other hostile deeds – were widely regarded as the administration’s leading hawks.

Yet, any slight hope that the pair’s absence from Trump’s new White House might herald an influx of some doves and, in turn, a more peaceful shift from the U.S. government was comprehensively dashed when the President’s transition team nominations began rolling in. Now the cabinet is fully stocked, countless millions around the world have urgent and grave concerns about what the future could hold for them, their families, countries, regions, and more.

In particular, Trump’s prospective government can already claim the mantle of the most fervently pro-Israel in U.S. history. This is despite replacing an administration that has done more than any before to accelerate, encourage, and facilitate Israel’s war on Gaza. The prospect that Tel Aviv’s deadly assaults on Gaza and Lebanon will escalate somehow further is now not only very real but seemingly inevitable. However, as we shall see, there are minor rays of hope among the mass doom and gloom.

‘Promised Land’

New Secretary of State Marco Rubio hardly needs any introduction as one of the most pro-war members of the modern U.S. political class. Since his career kicked off in 2000, he has been consistently among the loudest voices on how America’s officially designated enemy states should be dealt with, be that China, Iran, Venezuela, or otherwise. Threats of sanctions, coups, and military intervention are almost a daily staple of his political oratory.

A close friend of Benjamin Netanyahu, in 2019, Rubio cosponsored a Senate resolution condemning UN Security Council resolutions designating Jewish settlement expansion in occupied Palestine as a violation of international law. He has referred to Israel’s mass murder in Gaza since October 7, 2023, as legitimate self-defense, claimed Hamas is “100% to blame” for any civilian casualties inflicted by the horrific onslaught, and ominously declared Palestinian resistance must be “eradicated,” as Tel Aviv cannot coexist “with these savages.”……………………………………………………………………………………….

The pro-Israel credentials of Senator Marco Rubio and Representative Michael Waltz are unquestionable. Yet their fervor for supporting Israel’s controversial policies pales in comparison to some of President-elect Donald Trump’s other nominees. Take Mike Huckabee, the ultraconservative former Arkansas governor and twice-failed presidential candidate, now tapped to serve as U.S. ambassador to Israel. Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist pastor, wasted no time declaring his intentions. He vowed to publicly refer to Israel in biblical terms, calling it the “Promised Land,” and proclaimed that Jews hold a “rightful deed” to Palestinian territory………………………

Hegseth, a contender for Defense Secretary, has made his allegiances to Israel unmistakably clear. He has described Israel’s settler population as “God’s chosen people.” He has openly advocated for transforming Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque into a Jewish-only recreation of the historic Temple Mount, framing such an act as a “miracle.” At a 2018 National Council of Young Israel gala in New York City, Hegseth left no room for ambiguity:

 Zionism and Americanism are the front lines of Western civilization and freedom in our world today.”………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.mintpressnews.com/trumps-pro-israel-dream-team-patel-nomination-caps-hawkish-cabinet/288783/

December 9, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

We used to laugh at North Korean nuclear submarine boasts. Not any more

In January 2021, North Korean strongman Kim Jong Un stood before thousands of
members of the Worker’s Party of Korea in Pyongyang and announced that
North Korean industry was in the late stages of developing a
nuclear-powered submarine – the first such sub for the North Korean navy.
At the time, it may have been wise to be sceptical: nuclear submarines are
among the costliest and most complex weapon systems in the world. North
Korean industry isn’t exactly known for its wealth and sophistication.
Nearly four years later, there’s much less reason to doubt Kim’s claim.
Because now North Korea has Russia’s help. And for all its woes, Russian
industry still builds a lot of world-class nuke boats.

 Telegraph 6th Dec 2024, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/06/putin-russia-nuclear-submarine-north-korea-axis-evil/

December 9, 2024 Posted by | North Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hinkley update: mixed reaction as first reactor drops into place

Mr Vince said: “I’m really pleased to be a patron of the Stop Hinkley campaign which is working to stop the government wasting billions of taxpayers’ money on a technology which is hugely expensive and slow to develop.”

By Simon Hacker , Punchline Gloucester 6th Dec 2024

It may be delayed to the extent that existing nuclear reactors are now planning to remain operational for an extra three years, but Hinkley Point C has come a step closer to activation with an overnight operation to drop a crucial 500-tonne reactor for the process into place.

When switched on, Somerset’s Hinkley Point C, near Bridgwater, is estimated to be capable of providing 7% of the UK’s power needs – calculated to keep six million homes supplied.

The 13m-long reactor is the first of two to be put in place by French project owner EDF and each will contain the nuclear chain reaction that will generate power from a planned operational date of 2030. the 12-hour operation to manoeuvre the unit into place was the first such job in 30 years in the UK.

But the road to this landmark has been far from smooth. With the installation some five years later than was originally planned, Covid, supply chain issues and political negotiations have ensured an uphill slog on the technology’s re-introduction, while – in keeping with the original advent of nuclear power – costs have spiralled: back in 2017, the taxpayer was told that the cost of this project would be £18bn. It now stands at £46bn.

Gloucestershire businessman and energy entrepreneur Dale Vince, who owns Ecotricity and campaigns for Britain’s energy production to be brought back into the hands of British business, has argued against nuclear installations on the Severn Estuary since 1983 and became a patron of the Stop Hinkley campaign this summer.

Speaking about the decision, Mr Vince said: “I’m really pleased to be a patron of the Stop Hinkley campaign which is working to stop the government wasting billions of taxpayers’ money on a technology which is hugely expensive and slow to develop.”

Alongside Mr Vince, the Somerset campaign is urging the government to adopt a 100% renewable energy strategy which it argues is “perfectly feasible” and which, compared to the UK Government’s current strategy, would save more than £100bn on the route plan to reach net zero by 2050.

Roy Pumfrey, Stop Hinkley spokesperson, said nuclear power is “rapidly losing ground to the astonishing growth in renewables” and the campaign has wanred that there is “no scientific solutuon to safeguarding nuclear waste” and contends that while no electricity production is zero carbon, nuclear is calculated to produce between 8 and 11 times more carbon emissions than renewable sources.

EDF has also waded into controversy here in Gloucestershire this week after the Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust claimed the supplier’s mitigation scheme for fish killed in the planned nuclear site was “shambolic” and threatens to create the perfect conditions for an ecological disaster in the Severn Estuary.

Hinkley Point C is  financed by the state-owned French energy giant EDF Energy and China General Nuclear Power Group, which is also state-owned. https://www.punchline-gloucester.com/articles/aanews/hinkley-update-mixed-reaction-as-first-reactor-drops-into-place

December 9, 2024 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Iran’s uranium enrichment ‘worrisome’ – nuclear watchdog

 The head of the UN nuclear watchdog has told the BBC Iran’s decision to
begin producing significantly more highly enriched uranium was “very
worrisome”. Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), said Iran was increasing its stockpile of uranium
enriched to 60%, just below the level of purity needed for a nuclear
weapon.

This will be seen by many in the region as Tehran’s response to its
military and diplomatic setbacks in Syria, Lebanon and Gaza in recent
months. Mr Grossi said it was “no secret” some politicians in Iran were
calling for the development of a nuclear weapon – but after holding talks
in Tehran in recent weeks, he said that “doesn’t seem to be the path of
choice” by the current leadership.

 BBC 6th Dec 2024,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20ee6qylwgo

December 9, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Explosives speed Sizewell A turbine hall decommissioning

WNN, Friday, 6 December 2024

More than 1200 holes were drilled and 700 kilogrammes of explosive used for the demolition of large concrete plinths in the turbine hall of Sizewell A nuclear power plant in the UK.

Nuclear Restoration Services said it was the largest use of explosives on a nuclear site for conventional demolition purposes in decades.

After the holes were drilled into the plinths, the charges were set and covered for the detonation, which was all planned and carried out with Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) oversight.

A series of test blasts had to take place and special detonator timings designed to meet nuclear site regulations for air overpressure and ground vibration, with Offive for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) having placed a hold point on the work until they were sure any risks from the novel operation had been minimised.

The ONR said that following the blasts, the huge turbine supporting concrete bases can be removed using heavy machinery within two weeks, rather than “deploying older and slower methods of drilling the structure apart which would have taken several months”.

Sizewell A’s twin reactors shut down in 2006 after 40 years of operation. Planning consent was given to demolish the turbine hall and electrical annexe in August and more than 35 miles of cabling and 8000 scaffolding boards, clips and pipes have been taken out………………………….. https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/explosives-used-in-sizewell-a-turbine-hall-decommissioning

December 9, 2024 Posted by | decommission reactor, UK | Leave a comment

Gender and radiation: New report shows girls most at-risk group

December 4, 2024,
 https://beyondnuclear.org/gender-and-radiation-new-report-shows-girls-most-at-risk-group/

A new United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) report by Amanda M. Nichols — Postdoctoral Researcher, University of California, Santa Barbara and Mary Olson — Founder, Gender and Radiation Impact Project entitled Gender and Ionizing Radiation: Towards a New Research Agenda Addressing Disproportionate Harm examines recent research correlating harm from exposure to ionizing radiation and biological sex. The following is the executive summary:

“The detonation of a nuclear weapon in a populated area would cause devastating harm: it can kill thousands of people instantly, whether through the explosion itself, or through the intense heat and high levels of radiation. The mid- and long-term consequences from radiation exposure are less well understood, in part because they manifest differently for male and female survivors.

Robust evidence of differentiated health impacts emerged in 2006, when the US National Academy of Sciences published Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII which reported 60 years of data from the Life Span Study of atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Nearly 20 years after the publication of that report, this report speaks to the extent to which new evidence has been published regarding the correlation between harm from exposure to ionizing radiation and biological sex.

This report concludes the following:

The post-2006 radiation research reviewed in this report provides clear evidence that radiation causes more cancer, heart disease, and stroke in women compared to men.

Several studies present evidence that supports the hypothesis that a higher percentage of reproductive tissue in the female body could be one contributing factor to the greater rate of harm from radiation exposure in females compared to males.

In addition to biological sex, some studies suggest that age at time of exposure may be an important factor in assessing radiation outcomes.

Girls (ages 0–5 years) are the most at risk post-birth lifecycle stage for developing cancer and non-cancer related health consequences over the course of the lifetime from exposure to ionizing radiation.

These findings are important for discussions about nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, given that sex-specific and gendered impacts of nuclear weapons are a prominent topic during the meetings of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

More research is needed, however, that takes seriously the ways that age and intergenerational impacts inform discussions about radiological harm. This report concludes with an outline of a future research agenda and suggests research questions applicable across a number of disciplines and lines of inquiry.

December 8, 2024 Posted by | women, Women | Leave a comment

Green Group Sounds Alarm Over Meta’s Nuclear Power Plans

“In the blind sprint to win on AI, Meta and the other tech giants have lost their way,” said a leader at Environment America.

Jessica Corbett, 5 Dec 24, https://www.commondreams.org/news/meta-nuclear-power?xrs=RebelMouse_fb&ts=1733449433&fbclid=IwY2xjawHAsKZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHdKFUyPBOBTG7NW2ZlQDOh0gqS_OC0L73I44ICQNjlWw12xPlcO9omTXJQ_aem_Od_q57mbvDma_to2jfZafA

Environmental advocates this week responded with concern to Meta looking for nuclear power developers to help the tech giant add 1-4 gigawatts of generation capacity in the United States starting in the early 2030s.

Meta—the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, and more—released a request for proposals to identify developers, citing its artificial intelligence (AI) innovation and sustainability objectives. It is “seeking developers with strong community engagement, development, …permitting, and execution expertise that have development opportunities for new nuclear energy resources—either small modular reactors (SMR) or larger nuclear reactors.”

The company isn’t alone. As TechCrunchreported: “Microsoft is hoping to restart a reactor at Three Mile Island by 2028. Google is betting that SMR technology can help it deliver on its AI and sustainability goals, signing a deal with startup Kairos Power for 500 megawatts of electricity. Amazon has thrown its weight behind SMR startup X-Energy, investing in the company and inking two development agreements for around 300 megawatts of generating capacity.”

In response to Meta’s announcement, Johanna Neumann, Environment America Research & Policy Center’s senior director of the Campaign for 100% Renewable Energy, said: “The long history of overhyped nuclear promises reveals that nuclear energy is expensive and slow to build all while still being inherently dangerous. America already has 90,000 metric tons of nuclear waste that we don’t have a storage solution for.”

Do we really want to create more radioactive waste to power the often dubious and questionable uses of AI?” Neumann asked. “In the blind sprint to win on AI, Meta and the other tech giants have lost their way. Big Tech should recommit to solutions that not only work but pose less risk to our environment and health.”

“Data centers should be as energy and water efficient as possible and powered solely with new renewable energy,” she added. “Without those guardrails, the tech industry’s insatiable thirst for energy risks derailing America’s efforts to get off polluting forms of power, including nuclear.”

In a May study, the Electric Power Research Institute found that “data centers could consume up to 9% of U.S. electricity generation by 2030—more than double the amount currently used.” The group noted that “AI queries require approximately 10 times the electricity of traditional internet searches and the generation of original music, photos, and videos requires much more.”

Meta is aiming to get the process started quickly: The intake form is due by January 3 and initial proposals are due February 7. It comes after a rare bee species thwarted Meta’s plans to build a data center powered by an existing nuclear plant.

Following the nuclear announcement, Meta and renewable energy firm Invenergy on Thursday announced a deal for 760 megawatts of solar power capacity. Operations for that four-state project are expected to begin no later than 2027.

December 8, 2024 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

‘The process is broken’: Major oil producing countries kill UN plastics treaty over cap on production

Bulletin, By Joseph Winters | December 5, 2024

What was supposed to be the final round of United Nations negotiations for a global plastics treaty ended without an agreement on Sunday, as delegates failed to reconcile opposing views on whether to impose a cap on plastic production.

Another negotiating session — dubbed INC-5.2 after this week’s INC-5 — will be held in 2025, but it’s unclear how countries will make further progress without a change in the treaty’s consensus-based decision-making process. As it stands, any delegation can essentially veto a proposal they don’t like, even if they’re opposed by most of the rest of the world.

“If it wasn’t for Saudi and Russia we would have reached an agreement here,” one European negotiator told the Financial Times. Those two countries, along with other oil producers like Iran and Kuwait, want the plastics treaty to leave production untouched and focus only on downstream measures: boosting the plastics recycling rate, for example, and cleaning up existing plastic pollution.

Kuwait’s delegation said on Sunday that “we are not here to end plastic itself … but plastic pollution.” That’s the position the plastic industry is taking, as well: Chris Jahn, council secretary for a petrochemical industry consortium called the International Council of Chemical Associations, said it’s “crucial” for the treaty to focus on plastic pollution alone. “With 2.7 billion people globally lacking access to waste collection systems, solutions must prioritize addressing this gap,” he said in a statement.

Dozens of countries — supported by scientists and environmental groups — say that approach is futile while the plastics industry plans to dramatically increase plastic production. “You can talk about waste management all you want, but this is not the silver bullet,” one of the European Union’s delegates said last week. “Mopping the floor when the tap is open is useless.”

Christina Dixon, oceans campaign leader for the nonprofit Environmental Investigation Agency, attended INC-5 and told Grist the conference made it clear that “consensus isn’t working.” She said countries seem to be recognizing this too, in light of INC-5’s shortcomings and the low probability of finding unanimity on the treaty’s most critical issues.

Last week, one French minister accused a coalition of oil-exporting countries of “continuing obstruction.” Fiji’s negotiator said a “very minority group” was “blocking the process,” and at a press conference over the weekend told delegations holding back the treaty to “please get out.”

Technically, the treaty could move forward without Saudi Arabia, Russia, and their allies, either continuing under the U.N. framework or — a more radical scenario — in a new forum led by a breakaway alliance of countries. ……………………………………………… ……………………………….. more https://thebulletin.org/2024/12/the-process-is-broken-major-oil-producing-countries-kill-un-plastics-treaty-over-cap-on-production/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ThursdayNewsletter12052024&utm_content=ClimateChange_UNPlasticsTreaty_12052024

December 8, 2024 Posted by | environment | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »