Grazing sheep among solar panels could produce higher quality wool, study finds
Sophie Vorrath, Nov 1, 2024,
https://reneweconomy.com.au/grazing-sheep-among-solar-panels-could-produce-higher-quality-wool-study-finds/
The co-location of solar farming with sheep grazing does not have a negative affect on wool production and could even improve the quality of the wool produced, a new study has found.
The study is based on the results of a second round of wool testing at the Wellington solar farm, south east of Dubbo in New South Wales, which has shared its site with 1,700 merino sheep for the past three years.
Legend has it that the decision to graze sheep at the solar farm came about when an employee of Lightsource bp, the owner of the Wellington project, complained to a local, sixth-generation wool farmer about the hassle and cost of mowing the solar farm six times a year.
According to Tony Inder, who heads up the Allendale Merino Stud, the effect on his sheep has been a lot better than he thought it would be – he says the wool quality they are producing has “increased significantly.”
But Lightsource bp – which is now wholly owned by the oil and gas giant BP, after completing the acquisition of the remaining 50.03% interest – has used the opportunity to gather some formal data.
The study, conducted by EMM Consulting with support from Elders Rural Services, compares two groups of merino sheep – one group grazed in a regular paddock and the other at the Wellington solar farm.
The latest findings show grazing sheep among solar panels does no harm to wool production, even in the case of pre-existing high-quality standards. And it says that some parameters even indicate an improvement in wool quality, although conclusive benefits require further long-term measurement.
Lightsource bp says that while the study at the Wellington solar farm is ongoing, it is another indication that solar farms can exist side-by-side with sheep farming, for the benefit of both enterprises.
“These results are very encouraging and highlight the potential for solar farms to complement agricultural practices,” says Emilien Simonot, Lightsource bp’s head of agrivoltaics.
“By integrating sheep farming with solar energy production, we can achieve dual benefits of sustainable energy together with agricultural output.” . By co-locating grazing with renewable energy, land can remain in agricultural use, offering farmers additional revenue while contributing to cleaner energy for the planet.
“Finding ways for agriculture and clean energy to work together is crucial for a more sustainable future,” says Brendan Clarke, interim head o environmental planning Australia and NZ at Lightsource bp.
“The promising results from this study indicate that we are on the right path, and working closely with farmers to grow our knowledge in this area is paramount.”
As for the sheep, Inder says they “just do really well” when grazing among the Wellington solar farm panels.
“I like to say that panel sheep are happy sheep.”
Sophie is editor of One Step Off The Grid and deputy editor of its sister site, Renew Economy. She is the co-host of the Solar Insiders Podcast. Sophie has been writing about clean energy for more than a decade.
France wrestles with the idea that nuclear wastes might be useful, “retrievable” for future generations
“measures likely to cause serious and lasting harm to the environment”
CIGEO: REVERSIBILITY AND RECOVERABILITY In the request for creation authorization (DAC)
Saturday, November 2, 2024, by Bernard Laponche
During the first decades of nuclear electricity production in France, the management of radioactive waste produced by this industry, from uranium mines to reprocessing products of irradiated fuel, was not a major concern of the governments and industrialists concerned.
The acceleration of the nuclear program in the early 1970s, particularly the “Messmer Plan” of 1974, made it necessary to take things seriously.
Since the work of the Castaing Commission in the early 1980s, the choice has been oriented towards deep geological storage, with the condition of reversibility, that is to say the possibility for future generations to reverse such a choice and therefore to easily recover any waste that may have already been buried.
This condition of reversibility was subsequently maintained by government decisions and legislative acts leading to the creation of a research laboratory on the Bure site, then to the Cigéo project for deep storage of the most dangerous waste on a site close to that of the laboratory.
Following the declaration of public utility (DUP) of the Cigéo project, the application for authorisation to create (DAC), filed by the organisation responsible for the management of radioactive materials and waste, ANDRA, is currently being examined by the nuclear safety organisations, IRSN and ASN, and should result in an authorisation for commissioning by 2026-27, after a series of consultations.
In 2023, the Constitutional Council, asked by the Council of State to rule on a
priority question of constitutionality (QPC) brought by a group of organizations and private individuals, concluded that “… the legislator, when adopting measures likely to cause serious and lasting harm to the environment, must ensure that choices intended for the needs of the present do not compromise the ability of future generations and other peoples to meet their own needs, while preserving their freedom of choice in this regard”. This decision of historic importance highlights the question of the reversibility of the Cigéo project, which, in its analysis, the Constitutional Council considered to be acquired.
In order to judge this, this report analyses the way in which the reversibility of storage is treated in the various parts of the DAC file to which the reader can refer.
This analysis leads to the following conclusion:
Reversibility, the possibility of removing all packages from storage due to a political decision, would be ensured for the duration of operation, therefore before final closure, if the cells and galleries were not “sealed” and therefore accessible. This situation may therefore arise for generations up to the date of closure of the site, planned by ANDRA towards the end of the 22nd century.
This condition must therefore be imposed as soon as the creation of Cigéo is authorized.
On the other hand, once the galleries, cells and all accesses to the storage are sealed at the end of the storage operation and at final closure, there is no longer any possible reversibility for future generations beyond this date.
Why ‘British’ nuclear weapons are really very American
But the idea that this weapon system is “independent” involves just as much magical thinking and is more myth than fact. Unfortunately, such myths are not harmless but deadly dangerous for every one of us and for the future of our planet.
Lakenheath is RAF in name only as it is primarily populated by US personnel and equipment. US sources have revealed that permission has been given once again for Lakenheath to host US nuclear bombs without prior consultation with the population.
By Lynn Jamieson, Scottish CND, The National 3rd Nov 2024
THE approach of a US election is a good time to consider the reality of the so-called British nuclear weapon system – its integration with and dependence on the United States of America.
Since the first test and use of nuclear bombs in 1945, the heads of the UK Government have brushed aside efforts at international agreement to ban nuclear weapons.
After the Second World War, British prime ministers wanted Britain to have nuclear bombs to keep up with America. Now the British nuclear program can only exist because of “sharing” with America.
The UK Government ignores new efforts at banning nuclear weapons. This is despite knowing that any nuclear war will end comfortable liveable life across most of this planet and that the majority of non-nuclear countries in the world disagree with their viewpoint and support the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
Deviating from this blinkered commitment to nuclear weapons would rupture the “special relationship” with the USA.
The so-called British nuclear weapon system includes four nuclear-powered submarines each ready to simultaneously launch at least 40 nuclear bombs in clusters, fanning out from eight independently targeted missiles. That is eight regions to be totally obliterated by five bombs each.
This is the system described by this government and governments before it as “Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent”. This name combines the idea that the UK Government alone controls the nuclear weapon system – hence “independent” – and that it will stop any aggressor ever attacking – hence “deterrent”. Both the independent and the deterrent ideas are deeply flawed.
Many things are written about the failures and problems of deterrence, including the possible catastrophic mistakes in games of bluff and counter-bluff, the tendency towards constant escalation in nuclear arms, the target it puts on our back, the absurd costs, and the very real risks created by nurturing mass death machines in your own back yard.
But the idea that this weapon system is “independent” involves just as much magical thinking and is more myth than fact. Unfortunately, such myths are not harmless but deadly dangerous for every one of us and for the future of our planet.
The United States is involved at every level of the so-called British nuclear weapon system, from design and procurement to operation and targeting.
The flow of knowledge, technology, materials and military personnel between the US and the UK is made possible by a number of treaties, most importantly the Mutual Defence Agreement treaty. It was first signed in 1958 and has been extended and expanded multiple times since.
Nuclear bombs assembled in Britain are based on a US design and have components shipped from the USA. The USA also builds, supplies, and maintains the missiles used to “deliver” the bombs to their targets……………………………………………..
Neither the US base nor the subsequent development of the Faslane Royal Navy into a nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered submarine base involved consultation or agreement with Scottish people, a situation that many have resisted ever since………………………………………………………………………………………………
Lakenheath is RAF in name only as it is primarily populated by US personnel and equipment. US sources have revealed that permission has been given once again for Lakenheath to host US nuclear bombs without prior consultation with the population…………………………………………………….. https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24696487.british-nuclear-weapons-really-american/
NGOs call for more secure interim storage facilities for Germany’s nuclear waste
29 Oct 2024, Jack McGovan, Germany, https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/ngos-call-more-secure-interim-storage-facilities-germanys-nuclear-waste
Clean Energy Wire / Tagesspiegel Background
Many nuclear waste storage facilities in Germany are not up to safety standards with issues like rusting drums and interim sites being used without permits, found a report by anti-nuclear organisation Ausgestrahlt and the NGO Munich Environmental Institute. The organisations are calling on the German government to take the dangers of improper nuclear waste storage seriously and demand a comprehensive and safe nuclear policy.
“We don’t have a single interim storage facility that is sufficiently safe,” said nuclear waste expert Helge Bauer from Ausgestrahlt to Tagesspiegel Background.
29 Oct 2024, 13:22
|
Germany
NGOs call for more secure interim storage facilities for Germany’s nuclear waste
Clean Energy Wire / Tagesspiegel Background
Many nuclear waste storage facilities in Germany are not up to safety standards with issues like rusting drums and interim sites being used without permits, found a report by anti-nuclear organisation Ausgestrahlt and the NGO Munich Environmental Institute. The organisations are calling on the German government to take the dangers of improper nuclear waste storage seriously and demand a comprehensive and safe nuclear policy.
“We don’t have a single interim storage facility that is sufficiently safe,” said nuclear waste expert Helge Bauer from Ausgestrahlt to Tagesspiegel Background.
One issue the activists highlight is the transportation of nuclear waste, which they say is being moved back and forth because nobody wants to be responsible for storing it. The report found that this also makes Germany vulnerable to sabotage. In August, there were drone flights of unknown origin over Brunsbüttel where there is currently an interim storage facility for highly radioactive waste, reports Tagesspiegel Background.
The report looked at 216 nuclear facilities across 71 sites in the country, including 84 that were currently in operation and 56 that were decommissioned or already being dismantled. Other organisations have also shown support for the report, including BUND and Robin Wood.
The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), which advises EU institutions like the Commission and the Parliament, adopted a firm stance after a plenary session in October that civil society groups should receive funding to be able to monitor the management of radioactive waste.
The discussion regarding what to do with nuclear waste has been a big topic in Germany recently as a report in August found that the hunt for a final repository could go on until the 2070s. Germany completed its nuclear phase-out last year and will now have to store around 1,900 large containers, or around 28,100 cubic metres, of high-level radioactive waste by 2080.
Climate Researchers Warn: Warmer Climate Could Lead To “Cold Waves Across Northern Europe”!
By P Gosselin on 2. November 2024, https://notrickszone.com/2024/11/02/climate-researchers-warn-warmer-climate-could-lead-to-cold-waves-across-northern-europe/
In a recent open letter, researchers warned that a warmer Arctic could lead to cold waves across Northern Europe – due to “complex feedback mechanisms”.
According to Forschung & Wissen here, an international group of renowned scientists recently published an open letter (PDF) stating that the melting of ice in the Arctic could disrupt ocean currents in the Atlantic, and thus have “devastating and irreversible impacts especially for Nordic countries, but also for other parts of the world.”
According to their publication in the journal Nature Communications, October 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53401-3, melting of sea ice during the last interglacial significantly impacted the density and salinity of seawater, and thus led to significant changes in ocean currents and heat distribution in the oceans.
The researchers looked at sediment cores collected in the North Sea and reconstructed surface temperatures and salinity and found that these processes have led to a significant drop in temperature in northern Europe.
According to Mohamed Ezat: “Our discovery that the increased melting of Arctic sea ice in the Earth’s past probably led to significant cooling in northern Europe is alarming.”
He adds: “The impacts particularly on Nordic Countries would likely be catastrophic, including major cooling in the region while surrounding regions warm. This would be an enlargement and deepening of the ‘cold blob’ that already has developed over the subpolar Atlantic Ocean and likely lead to unprecedented extreme weather.”
Safety analysis is not yet approved for Sweden’s nuclear waste dump plan, despite the hype.
| Brennain Lloyd, 3 Nov 24 |
Sweden’s Land and Environmental Court has granted SKB an environmental permit to build and operate the DGR for nuclear fuel waste …. almost.
This is the last step in the licensing process, and while a political approval had already been issued, this permit from the Lands and Environment Court was still outstanding, and so we were still on sound ground saying that there was no “approved and operating deep geological repository anywhere in the world” (Finland has constructed the underground workings, but still is in the early or mid-stages of the review of their operating license).
Now SKB has “granted” the permit, but there are still two more steps: the Uppsala County administrative board has to approve a “control program”, which sounds from this article like it might be the rough equivalent of the CNSC “License to Prepare a Site” (but it might not be! that’s my speculation based on this description).
The larger point is that “Before SKB can start on the actual mining of the repository tunnels, an approved safety analysis report is required from the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority.”
So, in summary, it seems that the permit has been granted, but the safety analysis report has not been approved, so there is still – as of this moment – still no “approved and operating deep geological repository anywhere in the world”.
Given that the detail of the approval of the safety analysis report might not get media coverage (even nuclear industry media coverage) we’d probably be on sounder ground to now simply say that “there is no operating DGR anywhere in the world, and therefore no operating experience the nuclear industry can point to”.
Saugeen Ojibway Nation stands firm on nuclear waste decision despite South Bruce vote
By Adam Bell, November 2, 2024 , https://cknxnewstoday.ca/news/2024/11/01/saugeen-ojibway-nation-stands-firm-on-nuclear-waste-decision-despite-south-bruce-vote—
The Saugeen Ojibway Nation (SON) Joint Chiefs and Councils have issued a statement responding to the Municipality of South Bruce’s narrow referendum approval to host a Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for nuclear waste.
While South Bruce residents voted in favour, SON’s leadership underscored that the referendum outcome does not affect SON’s separate decision-making process regarding the DGR’s placement within its territory near Teeswater.
SON’s statement emphasized the Nation’s independent authority in determining if the proposed DGR would be allowed within its lands. Chiefs Greg Nadjiwon of the Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation and Conrad Ritchie of the Chippewas of Saugeen First Nation clarified that any decision regarding hosting the facility would be based solely on SON’s evaluations and community input.
“We continue to thoroughly examine the potential impacts and benefits of this project through our own process, as the rights holders and authority within our Territory,” the Chiefs stated, reaffirming that SON’s community members will make the final decision.
SON leadership says key principles guiding their approach include its members’ exclusive authority to determine if the Nation consents to hosting a DGR, a community-driven decision-making process, and a commitment to engagement with members before seeking their input on whether to proceed.
The chiefs extended gratitude to the SON community for its commitment to protecting the lands and resources, with SON’s future decisions guided by member perspectives and environmental stewardship. They underscored a cautious approach that places SON interests, cultural responsibilities, and long-term impacts at the forefront.
While South Bruce Mayor Mark Goetz celebrated the high turnout and democratic process, he noted that SON and the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation still hold critical voices in the DGR site selection. Both First Nations must grant consent for the project to move forward.
In 2020, SON members voted to reject a DGR by a vote of 1,058 against and just 170 in favour.
Why were the floods in Spain so bad? A visual guide
Guardian 1st Nov 2024
At least 205 people have died in Spain after torrential rains triggered the
country’s deadliest floods in decades, unleashing a deluge of muddy water
that turned village streets into rivers, destroyed homes and swept away
bridges, railways tracks and cars. An unknown number of people remain
missing, while thousands of others are without electricity or phone
service. The majority of those killed were in the coastal region of
Valencia, where the state-run agency said that nearly a year’s worth of
rain had fallen in just eight hours. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/31/why-were-the-floods-in-spain-so-bad-a-visual-guide
After two months, Nuclear Free Local Authorities receive vague response on Advanced’ Gas-Cooled Reactors (AGRs)
After a two month wait, the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities has just received a cryptic reply from Labour’s Nuclear Minister in response to our concerns about the future of Britain’s aging ‘Advanced’ Gas-Cooled Reactor (AGR) plants.
Four AGR plants – Hartlepool, Heysham-1, Heysham-2, and Torness – remain operational, each equipped with two gas cooled reactors. They first began generating in either 1983 or 1988, with an estimated operational life of 30 years. The plants are currently expected to cease operations by 2028, but in the Labour Party energy manifesto ‘Mission Climate’, the party pledged to ‘extend the lifetime of the existing plants until 2030’.
The AGR fleet has been operating for many years longer than intended. The NFLAs are concerned that the graphite moderators within each reactor are degenerating, compromising safety. We have previously raised our concerns with senior officials in the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). It is our view that it is this independent regulator which has the expertise and the legal responsibility to determine whether to further extend the operating dates that should do so, and that it is ‘frankly not the business of Ministers’.
Consequently in his letter to Nuclear Minister Lord Hunt, NFLA Chair Councillor Lawrence O’Neill posed the central question:
‘Can the Minister therefore please reassure me that Labour Ministers will not seek to apply pressure on EDF to make an application to operate these plants beyond 2028, unless they genuinely wish to do so, and more importantly will not apply pressure on the independent regulator ONR to automatically sign off on any application without rigorous scrutiny?’
In his reply, Lord Hunt says cryptically that:
‘Decisions regarding the future operation of the Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor fleet or any nuclear power station in Great Britain would be for the operator, EDF Energy, (and) the ONR. The ONR would not allow a reactor to operate, return to service or extend its operating life if it judged that it was not safe to do so’.
We are hoping that the Minister means that it will fall to the operator EDF Energy to determine if it wishes to apply to the ONR for permission to extend the operating life of any, or all, of the AGR plants, but that it will be the responsibility of the ONR to decide if it can grant that permission based upon the safety case submitted.
This is a situation that the NFLAs shall continue to watch.
The Wylfa nuclear power station site needs “better storage facilities for waste”
New Civil Engineer 1st Nov 2024
The Wylfa nuclear power station site needs “better storage facilities for
waste” according to independent experts who visited. The Committee on
Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) shared a diary entry-style update
about a recent visit it made to Ynys Mon (Anglesey) for meetings and to see
the nuclear power plant.
The nuclear power plant on the island has two
reactors but Reactor 2 was shut down in 2012 and Reactor 1 was switched off
on 30 December 2015, ending 44 years of operation at the site .https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/wylfa-nuclear-site-needs-better-storage-facilities-for-waste-01-11-2024/
New nukes not a plus for unions
Nuclear power is nothing if not hugely capital, not labour, intensive.
Trades unions should oppose nuclear power as there would be far more jobs in renewables and related industries, argue activists
UK union leaders Mike Clancy of Prospect and Gary Smith of GMB recently appealed to British prime minister Sir Keir Starmer to commit to finalising financial arrangements for the Sizewell C nuclear project in order to ‘help the UK meet its net-zero targets, deliver sustainable energy, and strengthen the economy’.
In response, the activist group Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) has written to the unions’ general secretaries setting out why they need to think again regarding their support for Sizewell C.
What follows is the text of their letter, edited for context and clarity, which also debunks the myths that new nuclear power plants will provide long-term sustainable jobs for union workers. (Note: UK spellings in the original have been retained.)
We write in response to your recent appeals to Sir Keir Starmer to commit to finalising financial arrangements for the Sizewell C nuclear project in order to ‘help the UK meet its net-zero targets, deliver sustainable energy, and strengthen the economy.’
In the first instance, we refer you to two important documents. The first, written by Professors Andrew Blowers, OBE, a social scientist of impeccable pedigree and lecturer at the Open University, and Steve Thomas, Emeritus Professor of Energy Policy at the University of Greenwich, is entitled: It is time to expose the Great British Nuclear Fantasy once and for all.
The second document we are sending you — an open letter to the Labour Party on energy policy — submitted in June 2024 before the election, was written by members of this organisation, which has been fighting Sizewell C for more than a decade.
The truth is that the government nuclear energy policy which is most brazenly and shamelessly represented by Sizewell C is unattainable and a recipe for financial and environmental calamity. Keir Starmer, an apparent subscriber to the ‘duty of candour’, will, at some stage, be required to agree. It is noticeable that in all public statements since the election of the Labour administration, ‘nuclear’ is a word which has been studiously avoided. We don’t believe that’s coincidental.
The final investment decision (FID) for Sizewell C has been delayed because it is a manifestly bad investment option for UK plc and the private investors who have demonstrated their agreement with that view by shunning appeals to invest. Why should the public purse come to the rescue for a venture that was supposed to be ’subsidy-free’, which is already predicted to be at least three times the original cost and years overdue in completion?
There will be no seamless transition of workers and supply chains from Hinkley because the sites and conditions are entirely different in timing and need. Whatever way the Sizewell C employment issue is regarded, each of the 900 long-term jobs created will have cost several tens of millions of pounds to create. That is a very bad investment in itself.
Nuclear power is nothing if not hugely capital, not labour, intensive. It costs billions, the plants are always late and over budget, and it doesn’t do what it says on the tin in terms of climate change and security (it relies upon uranium from abroad and Sizewell C is a French design with a French developer – nothing home-grown about it). ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Sizewell C will not, in any way, be the salvation of East Suffolk nor UK plc. We are quite simply being swamped by a development which is a Boris Johnson vanity project, one that is unnecessary to the national energy requirements and that will fail to do all the things you and your trades union colleagues have been told to believe it can do.
Trades union support for nuclear power is in itself disappointing when an energy policy based on a similar investment programme to that identified for nuclear could be invested in renewables and storage technology, energy conservation projects, microtechnology, decentralisation, and retrofitting thermal insulation. This can be coupled to the creation of many more job opportunities for today’s young people in industries that do not have the stigma of being linked to the nuclear weapons industry and the mass destruction that implies.
If we need anything right now in the UK, we need Starmer’s duty of candour to be levelled at the nuclear industry and for the trades union movement, of which we are mainly supportive, to help us show the way to a nuclear-free world.
Learn more at Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) and Stop Sizewell C. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/11/03/new-nukes-not-a-plus-for-unions/—
Banning United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) is a new way to kill children, aid groups warn
Electronic Intafada, Maureen Clare Murphy 30 October 2024
Palestinian human rights groups say that new Israeli legislation banning a UN agency from providing services to Palestinians under occupation “aligns with a broader pattern of Israel’s genocidal intent.”
On Monday, Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed into law – with near unanimity – two bills that would effectively ban UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, from operating in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
One of the laws bars state authorities from having any contact with UNRWA, which provides health, education and other basic services to millions of Palestinian refugees in the occupied Palestinian territories as well as Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.
“The legislation also terminates the 1967 agreement between Israel and UNRWA with immediate effect,” according to three prominent Palestinian human rights groups: Al-Haq, Al Mezan and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights.
The second law bans the agency from operating in so-called Israeli territory and “will go into effect three months after the passing of the laws – approximately by the end of January 2025,” the rights groups said.
If enacted, the new laws will shutter UNRWA’s headquarters in eastern Jerusalem, which Israel has unlawfully occupied since 1967 and annexed in violation of international law. UNRWA’s Jerusalem headquarters are the administrative hub for its operations across the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
According to media reports, Israel plans to build settlements on the site of UNRWA’s headquarters, which state authorities ordered vacated in May.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has the authority to block the legislation. But he is unlikely to do so, despite international pressure, especially after his foreign minister declared António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, persona non grata.
Israel’s unbridled hostility toward the United Nations will only escalate with every attempt towards accountability through the world body’s organs.
On Wednesday, the UN Security Council issued a statement declaring its support for UNRWA and warning “against any attempts to dismantle or diminish UNRWA’s operations and mandate.”
“Criminalization of humanitarian aid”
Three prominent Palestinian human rights groups – Al-Haq, Al Mezan and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights – said that the passage of the laws is part of a “calculated, decades-long campaign to dismantle UNRWA and undermine the inalienable right of return” of Palestinian refugees.
“Now more than ever, amid Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, UNRWA’s role is not only essential but irreplaceable,” the groups added.
The new legislation “amounts to the criminalization of humanitarian aid and will worsen an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis,” Agnès Callamard, the head of Amnesty International, said on Tuesday………………………………………………
UNRWA is the agency with the largest humanitarian footprint in the West Bank and Gaza and one of the largest employers in the occupied Palestinian territories.
“Dismantling UNRWA will have a catastrophic impact on the international response to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza,” Philippe Lazzarini, the head of UNRWA, told the president of the General Assembly in a letter on Tuesday. “It will also sabotage any chance of recovery.”
In the absence of any other entity to provide government-like services, the effective ban on UNRWA will leave more than 660,000 children in Gaza without an education. “An entire generation of children will be sacrificed,” Lazzarini said.
The Palestinian rights groups observe that 2.4 million Palestinian refugees in the West Bank and Gaza “will be deprived of essential services – particularly education and healthcare – that only UNRWA has the mandate and capacity to deliver.”
UNRWA staff killed and tortured
Addressing Israel’s allegations, Lazzarini said that UNRWA provided Israel with a list of its staff on an annual basis for 15 years. Personnel that Israel never raised concerns over are now included in its lists of alleged fighters, he said.
Repeated requests to the Israeli government appealing for evidence regarding its allegations against UNRWA staff have gone without a reply, he added.
“UNRWA is therefore in the invidious position of being unable to address allegations for which it has no evidence, while these allegations continue to be used to undermine the agency,” Lazzarini said.
He added that at least 237 UNRWA staff have been killed in Gaza and more than 200 of its facilities have been damaged or destroyed in attacks that have killed more than 560 people “seeking UN protection.” Meanwhile, “dozens of UNRWA staff have been detained and report being tortured,” Lazzarini said.
Israel has abused UNRWA employees detained in Gaza in order to extract forced confessions incriminating the agency.
Israel’s attacks on UNRWA “are an integral part” of the crumbling of “the rules-based international order … in a repetition of the horrors that led to the establishment of the United Nations,” Lazzarini added………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
At the time that Israel’s Knesset voted to ban UNRWA, some 100,000 Palestinians were under siege in the northern Gaza areas of Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya and Jabaliya refugee camp without food, water or medical supplies.
“The entire population of north Gaza is at risk of dying,” Joyce Msuya, the acting UN relief chief, stated two days before the vote. https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/maureen-clare-murphy/banning-unrwa-new-way-kill-children-aid-groups-warn
Israel kills the journalists. Western media kills the truth of genocide in Gaza
Western publics are being subjected to a campaign of psychological warfare, where genocide is classed as ‘self-defence’ and opposition to it ‘terrorism’
Jonathon Cook, Middle East Eye – 25 October 2024
Israel knew that, if it could stop foreign correspondents from reporting directly from Gaza, those journalists would end up covering events in ways far more to its liking.
They would hedge every report of a new Israeli atrocity – if they covered them at all – with a “Hamas claims” or “Gaza family members allege”. Everything would be presented in terms of conflicting narratives rather than witnessed facts. Audiences would feel uncertain, hesitant, detached.
Israel could shroud its slaughter in a fog of confusion and disputation. The natural revulsion evoked by a genocide would be tempered and attenuated.
For a year, the networks’ most experienced war reporters have stayed put in their hotels in Israel, watching Gaza from afar. Their human-interest stories, always at the heart of war reporting, have focused on the far more limited suffering of Israelis than the vast catastrophe unfolding for Palestinians.
That is why western audiences have been forced to relive a single day of horror for Israel, on October 7, 2023, as intensely as they have a year of greater horrors in Gaza – in what the World Court has judged to be a “plausible” genocide by Israel.
That is why the media have immersed their audiences in the agonies of the families of some 250 Israelis – civilians taken hostage and soldiers taken captive – as much as they have the agonies of 2.3 million Palestinians bombed and starved to death week after week, month after month.
That is why audiences have been subjected to gaslighting narratives that frame Gaza’s destruction as a “humanitarian crisis” rather than the canvas on which Israel is erasing all the known rules of war.
While foreign correspondents sit obediently in their hotel rooms, Palestinian journalists have been picked off one by one – in the greatest massacre of journalists in history.
Israel is now repeating that process in Lebanon. On Thursday night, it struck a residence in south Lebanon where three journalists were staying. All were killed.
In an indication of hiw deliberate and cynical Israel’s actions are, it put its military’s crosshairs on six Al Jazeera reporters this week, smearing them as “terrorists” working for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. They are reportedly the last surviving Palestinian journalists in northern Gaza, which Israel has sealed off while it carries out the so-called “General’s Plan”.
Israel wants no one reporting its final push to ethnically cleanse northern Gaza by starving out the 400,000 Palestinians still there and executing anyone who remains as a “terrorist”.
These six join a long list of professionals defamed by Israel in the interests of advancing its genocide – from doctors and aid workers to UN peacekeepers.
Sympathy for Israel
Perhaps the nadir of Israel’s domestication of foreign journalists was reached this week in a report by CNN. Back in February whistleblowing staff there revealed that the network’s executives have been actively obscuring Israeli atrocities to portray Israel in a more sympathetic light.
In a story whose framing should have been unthinkable – but sadly was all too predictable – CNN reported on the psychological trauma some Israeli soldiers are suffering from time spent in Gaza, in some cases leading to suicide.
Committing a genocide can be bad for your mental health, it seems. Or as CNN explained, its interviews “provide a window into the psychological burden that the war is casting on Israeli society”.
n its lengthy piece, titled “He got out of Gaza, but Gaza did not get out of him”, the atrocities the soldiers admit committing are little more than the backdrop as CNN finds yet another angle on Israeli suffering. Israeli soldiers are the real victims – even as they perpetrate a genocide on the Palestinian people.
One bulldozer driver, Guy Zaken, told CNN he could not sleep and had become vegetarian because of the “very, very difficult things” he had seen and had to do in Gaza.
What things? Zaken had earlier told a hearing of the Israeli parliament that his unit’s job was to drive over many hundreds of Palestinians, some of them alive.
CNN reported: “Zaken says he can no longer eat meat, as it reminds him of the gruesome scenes he witnessed from his bulldozer in Gaza.”………………………………………………………………………………………………….
The media do not want their reporters to become chief witnesses for the prosecution in the future trials of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant, at the International Criminal Court. The ICC’s prosecutor, Karim Khan, is seeking arrest warrants for them both.
After all, any such testimony from journalists would not stop at Israel’s door. They would implicate western capitals too, and put establishment media organisations on a collision course with their own governments.
The western media does not see its job as holding power to account when the West is the one committing the crimes.
Censoring Palestinians
Journalist whistleblowers have gradually been coming forward to explain how establishment news organisations – including the BBC and the supposedly liberal Guardian – are sidelining Palestinian voices and minimising the genocide.
…………………………………………………………………………………………… Even officials from one of the biggest rights group in the world, the New York-based Human Rights Watch, became persona non grata at the BBC for their criticisms of Israel, even though the corporation had previously relied on their reports in covering Ukraine and other global conflicts.
Israeli guests, by contrast, “were given free rein to say whatever they wanted with very little pushback”, including lies about Hamas burning or beheading babies and committing mass rape.
An email cited by Al Jazeera from more than 20 BBC journalists sent last
……………………………………………………………………………………... Crushing dissent
Israel is the one dictating the coverage of its genocide. First by murdering the Palestinian journalists reporting it on the ground, and then by making sure house-trained foreign correspondents stay well clear of the slaughter, out of harm’s way in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
And as ever, Israel has been able to rely on the complicity of its western patrons in crushing dissent at home. …………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://www.jonathan-cook.net/2024-10-25/israel-kill-journalists-genocide-gaza/
Will Susan Holt’s new government continue New Brunswick’s nuclear fantasies?
despite the governments’ support, after more than six years of trying, the companies have been unable to entice private investors.
Keeping the Point Lepreau and SMR fantasies alive will require considerable effort from the new government. Susan Holt’s handling of the nuclear file will be an early test—both of her leadership and her commitment to wishful thinking.
BY SUSAN O’DONNELL | October 31, 2024, The Hill Times https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024/10/31/will-susan-holts-new-government-continue-new-brunswicks-nuclear-fantasies/439671/
Successive New Brunswick governments have been bewitched by two nuclear fantasies: first, that its beleaguered public utility NB Power can connect two experimental reactors to the electricity grid, and second, that the small province can successfully run a nuclear power reactor.
Both fantasies will confront Susan Holt early in her new Liberal government’s tenure. Will she break the spell and end the province’s nuclear delusions? Nuclear energy was not raised during the recent election campaign, but a 2023 CBC interview with Holt offers clues.
The biggest fantasy is connecting two experimental “small modular nuclear reactors” (SMRs) to New Brunswick’s electricity grid. In 2018, Holt was a business adviser to then-premier Brian Gallant when his Liberal government invited two nuclear start-up companies from the U.K. and the U.S. to set up shop in the province and promote their SMR designs, although it’s unknown if she was involved in that decision.
The Gallant government had chosen two “advanced” reactor designs—molten salt and sodium-cooled— that have never operated successfully in a commercial setting. The government gave each company a $5-million incentive and support to apply for federal funding to develop their designs. A recent expert report from the U.S. Academies of Sciences predicted that such designs would have difficulty reaching commercial viability by 2050.
During the subsequent reign of PC premier Blaine Higgs, the province gave $25-million more to the start-ups and the federal government added grants totalling $57.5-million. Both governments also invested in building an SMR business supply chain in New Brunswick and encouraged some First Nations to support the projects.
The Higgs government further supported its plan to have the experimental designs built and connected to the grid by 2035 by passing legislation forcing NB Power to buy electricity, at any price, from SMRs if they are ever built and actually work.
However, despite the governments’ support, after more than six years of trying, the companies have been unable to entice private investors. Each company claims to need $500-million to develop its reactor design to the point of applying for a licence to build one. Where this money will come from is an open question.
This summer, the CEO of one SMR company, ARC Clean Technology, left suddenly and some staff at the Saint John office received layoff notices. The second company, Moltex, was notably absent from an Atlantic energy symposium in Fredericton this September. Until Moltex secures matching funds for its three-year-old $50.5-million federal grant, further federal funding is unlikely.
In her CBC interview last year, Holt said SMRs must be part of the energy transition, but: “I don’t think it needs the province to subsidize the businesses … buying power produced by an SMR is different than putting money into a company building SMR technology.”
The second fantasy—the Point Lepreau nuclear reactor on the Bay of Fundy—has been offline for repairs since April. Cost overruns for its original build and refurbishment represent two-thirds of NB Power’s $5.4-billion debt and crippling (94 per cent) debt-to-equity ratio. The reactor’s poor performance is the main reason the utility loses money almost every year.
Around the globe, it is hard to find an electrical grid as small as NB Power’s with a nuclear reactor. The province’s oversize nuclear ambitions were identified early. In 1972, a federal Department of Finance official warned against subsidizing a power reactor for a utility with “barely enough cash flow to finance its present debt,” calling New Brunswick’s nuclear plans “the equivalent of a Volkswagen family acquiring a Cadillac as a second car.”
New Brunswick lacks even the internal capacity to operate its reactor. When the plant re-opened in 2012 after refurbishment, NB Power first contracted a management team from Ontario Power Generation (OPG) and later hired a manager living in Maine who billed the utility for travel expenses in addition to his salary which reached $1.3-million despite no improvement in the reactor’s performance. In 2023, NB Power ditched the American, and contracted OPG management again.
In her 2023 CBC interview, Holt’s statement that the province’s energy strategy needs to include “wind energy, solar energy, SMR energy, hydro energy, nuclear energy” suggests that her government will continue to support the Point Lepreau plant. However, new developments may give her pause to reconsider.
A recent expert report linked the poor performance of NB Power’s nuclear reactor to the utility’s failure since refurbishment to spend enough on maintenance. If this trend continues, “It is likely that performance could drop even further in the late 2030s into the 2040s.”
The plant’s shutdown for maintenance and upgrades on April 6 this year was originally planned for three months, but the work uncovered serious problems with the main generator. In July, NB Power suggested the plant would re-open in early September and then in August, pushed that date to mid-November.
Energy watchdogs expect the Lepreau plant to remain off-line longer than November due to the serious nature of the generator malfunction. NB Power will be looking to the new government to reassure the public that the utility has its nuclear operations under control. New Brunswickers are facing a 19.4 per cent increase in electricity rates, due in large part to the poor performance of its nuclear reactor, although Holt has already promised to eliminate the 10 per cent PST on NB Power bills to ease the pain.
Holt plans to re-convene the New Brunswick Legislature before the end of November. At that point the Point Lepreau reactor will likely still be mothballed, and the two SMR start-ups will be on life support.
Keeping the Point Lepreau and SMR fantasies alive will require considerable effort from the new government. Holt’s handling of the nuclear file will be an early test—both of her leadership and her commitment to wishful thinking.
Dr. Susan O’Donnell is adjunct research professor and primary investigator of the CEDAR project in the Environment and Society program at St. Thomas University in Fredericton.
Half of world’s biggest cities to face severe climate risks by 2050, LSEG finds.
Edie 31st Oct 2024
Dozens of populous cities including Dubai, which hosted last year’s
international climate summit, will face high physical risks from the
climate crisis by 2050, the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) has warned.
LSEG’s new Net-Zero Atlas projects that half of the world’s largest 49
cities will be at high risk of one or more climate hazards by 2050—up
from just one in five today.
Hazards covered in the analysis include
floods, cyclones, heatwaves and water stress. Cities in the Middle East and
Southeast Asia are particularly vulnerable to multiple hazards, the Atlas
explains. Jakarta is expected to experience at least quadruple the number
of extreme heat days in 2050 as it did last year. And cities including
Singapore, Surabaya, Dubai, Riyadh, and Jeddah face similar heatwave risks,
which would be compounded by water stress.
This does not mean that cities
in other geographies are immune to physical climate risks. LSEG predicts
that, by 2050, London will experience a 133% increase in heatwave days and
a 22% rise in water stress, and Manchester will face a 93% increase in
heatwaves and a 45% rise in water stress.
https://www.edie.net/half-of-worlds-biggest-cities-to-face-severe-climate-risks-by-2050-lseg-finds/
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (81)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 