nuclear-news

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

U.S. Bets on Small Nuclear Reactors – But major obstacles loom.

U.S. Bets on Small Nuclear Reactors to Help Fix a Huge Climate Problem.
The dream of reviving nuclear power in the U.S. rests on a new generation
of smaller reactors meant to be easier to build.

But major obstacles loom.
Nearly a dozen companies are developing reactors that are a fraction of the
size of those at Vogtle, betting that they will be quicker and cheaper to
build. As the United States looks to transition away from fossil fuels.

But the push to expand nuclear power, which today supplies 18 percent of
electricity, faces enormous hurdles. In a major setback last week, the
first serious effort to build small reactors in the United States was
abruptly cancelled amid soaring costs. While other projects are still
moving forward, the industry has consistently struggled to build plants on
time and on budget. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which oversees the
safety of the nation’s nuclear fleet, is less experienced with novel
reactor technologies.

And the problem remains of how to dispose of
radioactive waste. “These nuclear megaprojects had just gotten way too
complex,” said Jay Wileman, president of GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, which
is designing a slimmed-down version of its boiling-water reactor that is
only 300 megawatts — one-quarter the size of the 1,117-megawatt units at
Vogtle. Ontario Power Generation plans to deploy four of them in Canada,
hoping to bring down costs as it builds the same design again and again.
The Tennessee Valley Authority is considering at least one.

Other companies
are exploring radically new reactor designs that, in theory, can’t melt
down and don’t require big containment domes or other expensive
equipment. Some might be manufactured in factories and assembled on-site,
potentially lowering costs.

The approval process can be slow. To date, the
N.R.C. has certified only one small reactor design, developed by NuScale
Power. NuScale’s light-water technology is similar to existing plants,
but the company argued that smaller reactors required different safety
rules, such as smaller evacuation zones in case of accidents.

Securing approval took a decade and cost $500 million.

Last week, NuScale announced
it was cancelling plans to deploy six 77-megawatt reactors in Idaho by
2030, which would have been the nation’s first small nuclear plant. The
problem was that it couldn’t sign up enough customers. Soaring costs
didn’t help: In January, NuScale said the price of building the reactors
had jumped from $5.3 billion to $9.3 billion, citing higher interest rates
and materials costs. On a per-megawatt basis, the project had become as
expensive as Vogtle.

“The small reactors being hyped by the nuclear
industry and its allies are simply too late, too expensive, too uncertain
and too risky,” said David Schlissel, an analyst for the Institute for
Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, who has urged utilities to pursue
alternatives like solar and geothermal power. Other challenges loom. The
United States isn’t yet producing enough of the specialized fuel for
advanced reactors. There’s no long-term plan for nuclear waste. Siting
new plants can be contentious: Last year, officials in Pueblo County,
Colo., withdrew plans to replace a retiring coal plant with a reactor after
local backlash.

 New York Times 12th Nov 2023

November 17, 2023 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Something fishy: Welsh Councils excluded from latest Hinkley Point C Consultation. 

 The Welsh capital of Cardiff may lie less than 20 miles as
the fish swims from the site of the huge Hinkley Point C nuclear power
station now under construction on the coast in Somerset, but French-owned
EDF is choosing not to consult with the City Council on its latest plan to
vary its Development Consent Order (DCO).

Cardiff is not the only Welsh
council excluded from the list of consultees that the operator has agreed
with the UK Government should be solicited for their views on the changes,
for in fact most of the local authorities in South Wales which border onto
the Severn Estuary – Bridgend, Newport, Port Talbot, Swansea, and the
Vale of Glamorgan – are excluded.

To the Welsh Nuclear Free Local
Authorities, the exclusion of these Councils as statutory consultees
appears illogical for one of the changes that EDF is seeking is the
‘removal of the requirement to install an acoustic fish deterrent (AFD)
system’, which many campaigners believe will have a massively detrimental
impact on the marine life of the Severn Estuary.

 NFLA 13th Nov 2023

Something fishy: Welsh Councils excluded from latest Hinkley Point C Consultation

November 17, 2023 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Uncharted waters: Navy navigating first-ever dismantling of nuclear-powered carrier

The challenges for the Navy to dispose of the former USS Enterprise have driven the service to stand up a new office to deal both with “The Big E” and the pipeline of Nimitz-class carriers to come.

Breaking Defense, By   JUSTIN KATZon November 15, 2023 

WASHINGTON — For more than a decade, the US Navy has considered the former Enterprise (CVN-65) no longer operational. In fact, since 2018, the 1,101-foot behemoth has been mostly floating pier side in Newport News, Va., awaiting final dismantlement and disposal.

Ships come and go in the Navy, but their disposal is not usually such a prolonged and complicated affair. They can be used as target practice for what the Navy calls a “SINKEX” or handed over to scrapping and salvaging companies, among other options.

But for a host of reasons, those routes are non-starters for the service’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Instead, after studying the problem for years, the service has finally settled on a path forward: enlisting commercial industry for a job it has historically done itself, and likely creating a new norm for how all nuclear-powered carriers will be disposed of going forward.

To lead that charge, Breaking Defense has learned the Navy has set up a new office just to focus on the inactivation and disposal of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers…….

Whatever the service ends up doing, both analysts and the Navy have said it will likely set precedents for future carriers facing disposal, and the clock is ticking. The longer it takes, the more likely it is the Pentagon will risk a buildup of older carriers taking up various private and public ports around the country.

Even if everything goes according to the Navy’s preliminary plans, time is not on the service’s side. Public Navy documents show that Enterprise will not begin dismantlement until 2025, and the work will continue through 2029 — meaning even if everything stays on track, the work will be ongoing when the second nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, USS Nimitz (CVN-68), is scheduled to leave the operational fleet in 2026. The USS Eisenhower (CVN-69) will follow suit not long after.

“The Navy has really had a tough time figuring out … what’s the process we’d go about dismantling this thing,” said Bryan Clark, a fellow at the Hudson Institute and retired submariner. “That’s why the Enterprise in particular has been sitting around waiting to be dismantled. And we’re going to have the same problem with the Nimitz.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/uncharted-waters-navy-navigating-first-ever-dismantling-of-nuclear-powered-carrier/

November 17, 2023 Posted by | decommission reactor | 1 Comment

US, UK to Push Pledge to Triple Nuclear Power by 2050 at COP28

Nov 14, 2023, John Ainger, Rachel Morison and Akshat Rathi, Bloomberg News

(Bloomberg) — The US will lead a push at the COP28 climate summit to triple the amount of installed nuclear power capacity globally by 2050, marking a major turnaround for the controversial technology at the climate negotiations.

The declaration will call on the World Bank and other international financial institutions to include nuclear energy in their lending policies, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News. The US will likely be joined by the UK, France, Sweden, Finland and South Korea in the pledge to be signed Dec. 1 in Dubai, according to people familiar with the matter.

That will be followed a few days later by a nuclear industry commitment to triple generation resources from 2020 levels, said one of the people, who asked not to be named because the information isn’t public. 

“Nuclear is 100% part of the solution,” John Kerry, the US special presidential envoy for climate, said at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum last week. “It’s clean energy.”

The countries recognize “the key role of nuclear energy in achieving global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions/carbon neutrality by or around mid-century,” a draft of the declaration says. ……….

The declaration is the latest sign of shifting sentiment toward nuclear power, which doesn’t produce carbon dioxide emissions, but has often been criticized over the waste it generates, the cost of building plants and potential security issues. ……… The countries will also commit to new technologies, such as small modular reactors.

……  The US is discussing nuclear cooperation agreements with Kenya and Ghana, and renewing a pact with South Africa, according to Joshua Volz, the US Department of Energy’s deputy assistant secretary for Europe, Eurasia, Africa and the Middle East.

……………… The United Nations’ 28th Conference of the Parties, known as COP28, will take place in the United Arab Emirates, which is the only country in the Arabian Peninsula with a nuclear power program. It’s not clear if the hosts will sign……. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/us-uk-to-push-pledge-to-triple-nuclear-power-by-2050-at-cop28-1.1998524

November 16, 2023 Posted by | climate change | 2 Comments

The U.S.’s Plans to Modernize Nuclear Weapons Are Dangerous and Unnecessary

The U.S. should back away from updating its obsolescent nuclear weapons, in particular silo-launched missiles that needlessly risk catastrophe

BY THE EDITORS,  https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-u-s-s-plans-to-modernize-nuclear-weapons-are-dangerous-and-unnecessary/ DECEMBER 1, 2023

This article is part of “The New Nuclear Age,” a special report on a $1.5-trillion effort to remake the American nuclear arsenal.

The U.S. is planning to modernize its unwanted, unneeded and unsafe nuclear triad of land-, sea- and air-based weapons. Perfectly poised to refight the cold war, these overhauled bombs will waste $1.5 trillion and threaten life on Earth for the century to come. We should rethink this miserable folly rather than once again squandering our wealth while driving a new arms race.

As detailed in this issue of Scientific American, this plan to burn money while imperiling the world has been widely criticized in nuclear policy circles. “Russia and the United States have already been through one nuclear arms race. We spent trillions of dollars and took incredible risks in a misguided quest for security,” former U.S. defense secretary William J. Perry wrote in 2016 as the plans first materialized. “There is only one way to win an arms race: refuse to run.”

Although the Biden administration canceled proposed Trump-era sea-launched missiles, the U.S. nuclear arsenal still bristles with some 3,700 weapons, around 1,700 of them deployed for military use and the rest in storage overseen by the Department of Energy. This quantity is more than enough to threaten the destruction of humanity and Earth’s biosphere—and it is only a fraction of the world’s total, leaving out Russia’s similarly large stockpile and smaller ones in China and other nations. Lowering the numbers and thus the risks of these weapons is a responsibility the U.S. and the Soviet Union first recognized at the end of the 1960s, and this goal should drive military and political decision-making now.

Instead the U.S. is sleepwalking into an ill-considered and little-discussed resurrection of its three-pronged cold war nuclear forces. Meanwhile China is expanding its own arsenal (to one-fourth the size of the U.S.’s). New submarines, missiles and planes, all designed to fit into a military strategy first conceived before the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953, will by 2050 leave the dead hand of the past steering us into another century of pointless risks. In this future, a mistake or misjudgment could exterminate humanity, as nearly happened repeatedly throughout the cold war. We are simply fortunate, nothing more, to have survived the hundreds of false alarms that rang over those decades.

At the center of the government’s proposal is a $100-billion bid to fill 450 nuclear silos in five inland states with hundreds of new nuclear missiles set to launch on hair triggers. Built before submarine-launched missiles became large, accurate and untraceable, these relics are now justified as a “nuclear sponge” to absorb a Russian attack on the U.S. Why plant a $100-billion nuclear “kick me” sign on the country’s breadbasket?

We cannot store the nuclear waste we have now, never mind the additional waste that will result from building these missiles. The so-called nuclear sponging mapped in this month’s issue [see “Sacrifice Zones”] would kill up to several million from radiation exposure, with hundreds of millions in North America being at risk of exposure to lethal fallout. Even a limited nuclear war between India and Pakistan would kill tens of millions worldwide and cause global famine—but how can the U.S. argue for other nations to disarm while burnishing its own nuclear sword in such a heedless fashion?

We aimed this Damoclean sword at ourselves during the cold war when we produced 70,000 of the plutonium “pits” that trigger thermonuclear warhead explosions. Weapons tests of these blasts have left every part of Earth’s surface contaminated with plutonium, with hotspots such as the Rocky Flats in Colorado and the Hanford sites in Washington State still requiring tens of billions of dollars for cleanup. Faltering efforts to restart pit production for the nuclear-modernization effort have cost $18 billion to $24 billion, much of it wasted, and, by the admission of weapons officials at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, they don’t even seem to be immediately necessary.

Why are we risking so much when the lessons of the 20th century are so clear? In the words of the 1991 START Treaty that capped the cold war, “nuclear war would have devastating consequences for all humanity … it cannot be won and must never be fought.” Disregarding Russia’s inability to turn its nuclear arsenal to military advantage while being bombarded by Ukrainian drones, our political class has fumbled away hard-won wisdom about the deadly futility of the arms race. We are recapitulating the dangers the world turned away from decades ago.

Who today benefits from disinterring the arms race? Only defense-industry shareholders and military contractors near silos in North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska. This, in a nation where we have just doubled child poverty out of a refusal to help lower-income families. Surely it would be cheaper, safer and smarter to build factories or universities or research labs in these places, construct low-cost housing next to new engineering or biomedical campuses there, and watch them boom, in a good way, for the next century at a fraction of the silo-overhaul price tag. The 900 nuclear missiles onboard U.S. submarines will meanwhile deter the feared nuclear first strike the obsolescent land missiles were meant to discourage at the dawn of the cold war.

“A worrisome new arms race is brewing,” United Nations secretary-general António Guterres said in September. “This is madness. We must reverse course.” We agree. The only real way to use nuclear weapons is never. They should exist only in numbers large enough to deter their use by others, which they already abundantly do, with not one warhead more.

November 16, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | 2 Comments

Frozen fallout: radioactive dust from accidents and weapons testing accumulates on glaciers.

Physics World, 20 Jun 2023 James Dacey

Glacier surfaces in certain parts of the world contain concerning amounts of toxic radioactive materials, a result of weapons testing and nuclear accidents such as the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. Fallout radionuclides accumulate within cryoconite – a granular sediment found in holes on glacier surfaces – and there is a risk of this material entering local ecosystems as glaciers melt due to climate change. Glaciologists and ecologists say this poses urgent questions. What regions are at highest risk? How diluted is the nuclear material entering proglacial zones? What impact might that have on organisms?…..

more https://physicsworld.com/a/frozen-fallout-radioactive-dust-from-accidents-and-weapons-testing-accumulates-on-glaciers/
—

November 16, 2023 Posted by | climate change, environment, radiation | Leave a comment

Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant starts 3rd round of wastewater release, potentially impacting seafood quality in U.S.

 The Daily Universe, Belle Lewis, November 14, 2023

The Fukushima-Dachii nuclear plant started its third release of nuclear wastewater on Nov. 2 as scientists warn that seafood products from the Pacific Ocean could be contaminated.

Although the International Atomic Energy Agency approved the 30-year water release plan, scientists and civilians in nations bordering the Pacific Ocean have questioned the safety of the plan, especially as it relates to seafood.

In a press release approving of the plan, the IAEA stated, “the discharges of the treated water would have a negligible radiological impact to people and the environment.”

Paul Dorfman, member of the Irish Government Environmental Protection Agency Radiation Protection Advisory Committee and chair of Nuclear Consulting Group, explained that some scientists have questioned IAEA’s approval of the water release.

“I and others are concerned by IAEA’s attitude,” Dorfman said. “Normally even low levels of radioactive pollution will find its way into local seafood, one way or another.”

In 2020, Japan exported 332,926 kilograms of frozen scallops to the U.S. Japan exports many fish products to the U.S.

Samantha Valeriano, a psychology student from Hawaii, said she eats seafood about once a week. She does not often think about where her food comes from but wants to be more cautious following the nuclear water release.

“I think I would be a little more cautious of what I ate, checking labels a little bit more,” Valeriano said. “I would be conscious of what I ate and where it came from.”

As the People’s Republic of China has imposed bans of Japanese fish exports, the U.S. has supported the Japanese market by increasing fish purchases.

In a press release, the United States Embassy and Consulate in Japan explained that military bases in Japan will carry Japanese seafood as a way to buoy up seafood markets and undermine the PRC’s ban.

“United States elected representatives and senior government officials have stood in solidarity with Japan during this baseless ban,” the statement said. “Another step to help provide additional sales to counter the ban was to start selling Japanese seafood at the U.S. military facilities in Japan, both through the commissaries and mess halls.”

According to the statement, government officials like former speaker Kevin McCarthy ate seafood from Japan as a testament to Japan’s safety standards.

However, other U.S. agencies, like the National Association of Marine Laboratories question whether accurate research was conducted by the IAEA and Japanese Government to determine safety of seafood products.

They explain that the lack of data on potential health impacts is a cause for serious concern.

“Many of the radionuclides contained in the accumulated waste cooling water have half-lives ranging from decades to centuries, and their deleterious effects range from DNA damage and cellular stress to elevated cancer risks in people who eat affected marine organisms, such as clams, oysters, crabs, lobster, shrimp and fish,” the statement reads.

Eve Nagareda, medical laboratory science major from Hawaii, shared she wants to avoid seafood from dumping grounds even if levels are considered safe.

“I think I would try to go as far as possible from it,” Nagareda said…………………………………………………………………………..

On Sep. 8, the IAEA conducted seawater sampling off the Japanese Coast. They recorded Tritium levels below the internationally mandated limit of 1,500 bequerels per liter.

Dorfman explained that below-accepted tritium levels does not mean that the ALPS is functioning properly.

“The Japan government and IAEA say that the treatment is sufficient, and levels of radiation, especially tritium, in the water releases are low.” Dorfman said. “However, others note that the treatment process has already failed once before, and may let through a series of radioisotopes, not only tritium.”

A pre-publication scientific paper found that radionucleotides from the Fukushima plant will distribute globally and penetrate into the deep ocean. The highest concentration of these particles would be along the eastern coast of Japan.

This paper contradicts assertions made by the IAEA that once the water is dumped into the Pacific Ocean, the particles will dilute.

Radiation experts often say that “dilution isn’t the solution to pollution,” according to Dorfman.

Why release the water?

After the water is released, the land the tanks occupy will be available for the Japanese government to build facilities to fully decommission the Fukushima-Daiichi Plant.

In the greater scheme of things, it has to be said that the main issue at Fukushima remains the almost impossible task of trying to extract the nearly 880 tonnes of highly radioactive nuclear fuel that have melted in three of the plant’s six reactors,” Dorfman said.

According to Dorfman, decommissioning is far off.

“We are a very very long way away from decommissioning Fukushima,” Dorfman said. “At the moment, there are no feasible plans to do so.”

What is the future of nuclear energy?

As the Fukushima nuclear water release continues its third phase and looks toward its 30-year release plan, scientists like Dorfman consider the overall effectiveness of nuclear power and its potential risks.

“The weight of evidence shows that due to the pace, scale and economics of the renewable evolution, all nuclear can do is make promises it just can’t keep,” Dorfman said.

Dorfman continued to explain how renewable energy will outstrip nuclear soon.

“Nuclear is quite simply just marginal,” Dorfman said. “In terms of cost, time, and do-ability — it’s renewable expansion in all sectors, energy efficiency and management, rapidly advancing storage technologies, grid modernization, interconnection and market innovation from supply to service provision that will power the global net-zero energy transition.”

As Nuclear wastewater disposal continues, organizations like the IAEA and NAML continue to debate the potential health impacts. https://universe.byu.edu/2023/11/14/fukushima-nuclear-power-plant-starts-third-round-of-wastewater-release-potentially-impacting-seafood-quality-in-u-s/

November 16, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans | Leave a comment

Patrick Lawrence: ‘The Hinge of History’- Palestine and the New World Order

What we are seeing at the moment in Palestine is the end of settler colonialism. Settler colonialism is a phenomenon of the last two centuries or so, and it is always accompanied by genocide.

November 14, 2023, By Patrick Lawrence ,  https://scheerpost.com/2023/11/14/patrick-lawrence-the-hinge-of-history/—

Bombing hospitals was, just a few days ago, an undeclared red line the Israel Defense Forces dared not cross without provoking international disgust and condemnation. At writing, the IDF is bombing hospitals and, I read, its soldiers are shooting patients, invalids among them, as they attempt to evacuate buildings soon to be demolished. 

There is disgust and condemnation now, and they find expression not only on the streets of many cities but also in governing circles. Axios reported Monday that an internal State Department memo, signed by 100 officials at State and its aid agency, USAID, accuses President Biden of lying about Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and of complicity in war crimes. On Tuesday, The New York Times put the signatories of another letter to Biden at 400 representing 40 government departments and agencies, including the National Security Council — this in addition to an open letter to Secretary of State Blinken signed by more than 1,000 Agency for International Development employees. So far as I know, this measure of dissent in policy and governing circles is more or less unprecedented. 

Beyond our purple mountains and fruited plains, the Irish Dáil will vote this week on expelling the Israeli ambassador, throwing Israel out of a European Union trade accord for breaching its human-rights clauses, and—a Sinn Féin motion—referring Israel to the International Criminal Court. Emmanuel Macron came out last weekend calling for a ceasefire, the first Western leader to do so. Given Biden’s defiant refusal even to consider asking Israel to accept a ceasefire, the French president has implicitly issued a rejection of Israeli violence and the U.S. policy supporting it.

We cannot make too much of events such as these, but we must not make too little of them, either. These are signs on the surface of much deeper movements a few meters down in our civilization’s soil. Things are gradually coming apart in consequence of Israel’s savagery and America’s abetment of it, at home in the U.S., in the Atlantic world altogether and certainly between the West and the world beyond it. Now it is time to look forward to see what we can see of the world to come. 

Christopher Lydon, who produces Radio Open Source for WBUR in Boston, suggested over the weekend we have reached “a hinge in history—outcomes wildly uncertain.” He made this remark at the start of a long interview with Chas Freeman, the retired ambassador for whom I share with Lydon great admiration. Freeman agreed with the hinge-of-history thought. So do I. All is changing, changing utterly, if you will let me borrow and bend Yeats’s famous line.

Here is Chas on our moment:

This is clearly what Chancellor Scholz of Germany calls a Zeitenwende—that is, an epic-changing moment, a time of major change in a new direction in history. We’ve talked before about the fact that 500 years of global dominance by the Euro–American culture, the Atlantic culture, has come to an end. 

The only exception I can think of is New Zealand, where Māori power countered the British sufficiently to preserve their culture as a separate one….What we are seeing at the moment in Palestine is the end of settler colonialism. Settler colonialism is a phenomenon of the last two centuries or so, and it is always accompanied by genocide.

It may seem unlikely that the Palestinians will do as well resisting the hegemonic West as the Māori in the 19th century, although outcomes, as Chris Lydon says, are wildly uncertain. In any case, one does not want to see a separate, even segregated Palestinian entity emerge from the Israel–Palestine catastrophe so much as a single, secular nation in which cultures of all sorts are integrated and, more than tolerant, wholly accepting of one another. So I argued recently in this space. 

November 16, 2023 Posted by | Israel, politics international | 1 Comment

Consortium green lights European NuScale style (!) small nuclear reactors

Construction Europe By Mike Hayes, 15 November 2023

Industrial bodies from Romania, Italy and Belgium have formed a consortium to advance nuclear energy technology in Europe.

Romanian and Belgian nuclear research centres RATEN and SCK CEN, Italian nuclear company Ansaldo Nucleare and engineering and energy R&D agency ENEA, will take part in the initiative, in collaboration with the US-based nuclear technology company Westinghouse Electric.

The primary objective of the consortium is to develop a small modular lead-cooled fast neutron reactor (SMR-LFR…….

The proposal was reportedly to mirror the efforts of the US NuScale project – a project which has now been cancelled, following a doubling of construction costs.)………………………………https://www.construction-europe.com/news/consortium-green-lights-european-small-nuclear-reactors/8033034.article

November 16, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, EUROPE | Leave a comment

EU’s Ukraine weapons goal ‘unattainable’ – Germany 

Rt.com 14 Nov 23

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said he had been skeptical of Brussels’ pledge all along, citing inadequate production capacities 

The European Union will not be able to make good on its pledge to provide Ukraine with one million artillery rounds by next March, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has admitted. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba has also echoed this assessment.  

Brussels made the promise earlier this year, expecting to reach the ambitious target within 12 months by dipping into existing stocks, as well as by procuring shells from arms manufacturers. However, several media outlets have reported that the bloc is falling behind schedule.   

Speaking ahead of a meeting by EU defense chiefs in Brussels on Tuesday, Pistorius said that “the one million won’t be achieved. One must proceed on this assumption.” The minister blamed the supposed shortfall on inadequate production capacities in European nations, explaining that even if the economy was switched to a wartime mode, the ammunition output would still not become prolific enough overnight.   

Pistorius admitted he had been skeptical about the bloc’s target right from the start when it was set in March, fearing that it could prove unrealistically ambitious.  

Commenting on a report by Bloomberg, which suggested last week that Brussels would not be able to fulfill its promise, Kuleba told local media that the report was “unfortunately” true.  …………………………………………………… more https://www.rt.com/news/587258-german-defense-minister-eu-ukraine-shells-target/

November 16, 2023 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

 Guardian 14th Nov 2023

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

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

 Are staff shortages at Sellafield nuclear power plant affecting safety at the site?

QUESTIONS have been asked over whether a staff shortage at Sellafield
nuclear power plant is affecting safety at the site. The issue was raised
at this month’s meeting of the west Cumbria sites stakeholder group at
Cleator Moor Civic Hall. Neil Crewdson, Sellafield’s site director, was
presenting a progress report on various developments at the site where he
highlighted recruitment issues and a difficulty in attracting staff. But he
outlined a number of ways in which they are hoping to tackle the situation
and turn things around. He said there used to be 200 vacancies a year and
it had risen to 900. He added: “Post Covid we had a step change in people
leaving. With salaries we are trying to make sure they are more
competitive.”

 Carlisle News & Star 14th Nov 2023

https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/23923195.rising-number-vacancies-sellafield-covid/

November 16, 2023 Posted by | employment, safety, UK | Leave a comment

Over 400 of Biden’s Own Administration Officials Demand Ceasefire in Gaza

The letter adds to a wave of letters and memos calling for a ceasefire coming from current and former federal staffers.

SCHEERPOST, By Sharon Zhang / Truthout, November 15, 2023

More than 400 Biden administration employees across dozens of federal agencies have signed a letter calling for an immediate de-escalation of Israel’s siege on Gaza and demanding that President Joe Biden support growing calls for a ceasefire.

The letter, first reported on on Tuesday, includes signatures from employees across more than 30 federal agencies and departments, according to reporters from NBCand The New York Times who viewed the document. The group calls for an end to Israel’s violence and blockade that are causing a massive humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

“We represent a coalition of Biden-Harris Administration political appointees and civil servants, positioned across the domestic and foreign policy spheres, working in federal agencies, departments, independent agencies, and the White House,” reads the first line of the letter.

“We call on President Biden to urgently demand a ceasefire; and to call for de-escalation of the current conflict by securing the immediate release of the Israeli hostages and arbitrarily detained Palestinians; the restoration of water, fuel, electricity and other basic services; and the passage of adequate humanitarian aid to the Gaza strip,” the letter continues.

The letter was first circulated two weeks ago by two political appointees leading the effort. The signatories are anonymous, but the appointees told reporters that employees include both senior and low-level workers, with the majority being political appointees. The employees work in several countries and for a wide variety of agencies, including the Executive Office of the President, as well as the departments of Defense, Interior, and Justice.

The letter also notes that most Americans are against Israel’s genocide in Gaza and support ceasefire calls…………………………………………………………………..
more https://scheerpost.com/2023/11/15/over-400-of-bidens-own-administration-officials-demand-ceasefire-in-gaza/

November 16, 2023 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Zelensky may be ousted – ex-presidential aide

 https://www.rt.com/russia/587135-zelensky-may-be-ousted-aide/ 13 Nov 23

The idea of peace talks between Moscow and Kiev has become a “prevalent narrative” in the West, Oleg Soskin believes

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s unwillingness to consider peace talks with Russia might lead him to being ousted to make such negotiations possible, Oleg Soskin, an adviser to two former Ukrainian presidents, said on Saturday.

Zelensky, who continues to maintain that victory should be achieved on the battlefield, simply “cannot” enter peace talks with Moscow, Soskin said on his YouTube channel. Such actions, he believes, are pushing Russia and at least some of Ukraine’s Western backers to think that they need someone else to represent Kiev who can “agree on even a temporary truce.” In order to achieve that, the current Ukrainian leadership needs to be “neutralized,” the former presidential aide added.

The idea of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine has become a “prevalent narrative” not only in Russia but in the West as well, Soskin suggested. He noted that French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni expressed such ideas not so long ago.

Macron told the BBC in an interview this week that although it was France’s “duty” to support Kiev the time might have come for some “fair and good negotiations” with Russia. Meloni recently told a pair of Russian pranksters, Vovan and Lexus, that “there is a lot of fatigue” in the EU over the conflict. “We are near the moment in which everybody understands that we need a way out,” she added at that time.

Soskin, a renowned economist who was the deputy head of the Institute of the World Economics and International Relations of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences in the 1990s, said that the EU would also be potentially unable to satisfy Kiev’s needs for military equipment and ammunition, particularly if US military aid decreases.

The former official served as a senior adviser to Ukraine’s first president, Leonid Kravchuk, in the early 1990s and was later an economic adviser to the nation’s second leader, Leonid Kuchma, between 1998 and 2000.

Kiev has repeatedly ruled out any talks with Moscow and demands a complete withdrawal of Russian troops from all territories Ukraine claims as its own. Zelensky reiterated this demand in an interview with Reuters this week, adding that Kiev would continue the fight even without US aid if need be.

He also denied media reports about Ukraine’s Western backers allegedly encouraging it to engage in peace negotiations with Moscow. “This is not going to happen,” he said last week.

Russia has repeatedly signaled its readiness to engage in negotiations with Kiev but has insisted that such talks should take Moscow’s security interests and the “reality on the ground” into account. In the autumn of 2022, four former Ukrainian territories – including the two Donbass republics – officially joined Russia, following a series of referendums.

Kiev declared the votes a “sham” and has sought to reclaim control over the four territories, as well as Crimea, which joined Russia in 2014 following another referendum.

November 15, 2023 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Small nuclear reactors in Canada: at what cost? 

Transparency requirements in the U.S. forced NuScale proponents to disclose the projected costs of electricity to potential investors on a regular basis. This is not the case in Canada.

none of the Canadian nuclear proponents have laid out the projected costs of electricity production. In New Brunswick, the government has changed legislation to force the electricity utility to purchase power from new nuclear reactors even when it is not the lowest cost option.

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility  https://crednb.ca/2023/11/13/small-nuclear-reactors-in-canada/

In collaboration with and endorsed by:

Clean Green Saskatchewan, Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick, Friends of the Earth Canada, Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative (Saskatchewan), Ontario Clean Air Alliance, Prevent Cancer Now Le Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie, (Quebec), The Society of High Prairie Regional Environmental Action Committee (Alberta)  23 Nov 23

The sudden cancellation last week of the first small nuclear reactor project in the United States, the NuScale project, calls into question the economic viability of Canada’s plans to develop and deploy small modular reactors.

Potential customers in Utah balked at the soaring projections for the cost of electricity the NuScale reactor would generate, and the project was unable to recruit other customers to buy its power.

Today, in response, civil society groups across Canada are demanding transparency and accountability for the costs of other small nuclear reactor designs planned in this country.

“Canada should stop writing blank cheques to nuclear promoters who cannot deliver on their promises of cheap, reliable electricity,” said Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

Transparency requirements in the U.S. forced NuScale proponents to disclose the projected costs of electricity to potential investors on a regular basis. This is not the case in Canada.

Earlier this year, the target price for electricity from the NuScale project rose by over 50 percent to $89 US per MWh ($122.99 Canadian) with indications that future increases would be forthcoming. Investor confidence was shaken, and the project was scrapped.

The NuScale reactor design has been in development for more than 15 years and the company’s first commercial joint venture with electrical utilities in Utah was launched in 2015.

Governments in New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta have committed to building small reactors, while the Quebec government is conducting feasibility studies.

However, none of the Canadian nuclear proponents have laid out the projected costs of electricity production. In New Brunswick, the government has changed legislation to force the electricity utility to purchase power from new nuclear reactors even when it is not the lowest cost option.

Three years ago, more than 140 civil society groups across Canada signed a statement calling the proposed new reactors a “dirty, dangerous distraction,” from real climate action.

Nuclear critics have consistently said these new reactor designs will take too long to develop, and will cost too much compared with existing proven renewable energy option, to deal effectively with the climate crisis that requires immediate action.

To date, federal and provincial taxpayers have subsidized these reactors through a $970 million low interest loan to Ontario Power Generation, more than $100 million in grants to private companies and public utilities in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and millions more to research fuelling requirements for small reactors at Chalk River.

Civil society groups are demanding accountability for these costly nuclear developments. Without full transparency, taxpayers and ratepayers will be forced to subsidize these experimental reactor projects and pass on an unwanted economic debt legacy to our children and grandchildren, along with the radioactive waste legacy that all nuclear reactors are adding to every day.

Quotes:

Michael Poellet, President, Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative:

“Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) were meant to remedy the grossly excessive, over-budget costs of nuclear power generation. With the price of renewables dropping precipitously the economics of SMRs has only worsened. The cancellation of the NuScale project with its utility partner Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems demonstrates that commercial electrical generation with SMRs is not economically viable. Canadian federal and provincial governments must allow the economic realities to break the spell that enchantment with SMRs has over them.”

rix ?

Media release from CRED-NB and collaborators. Le français suit…

From:

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility 

In collaboration with and endorsed by:

Clean Green Saskatchewan

Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick

Friends of the Earth Canada

Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative (Saskatchewan)

Ontario Clean Air Alliance

Prevent Cancer Now

Le Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie (Quebec)

The Society of High Prairie Regional Environmental Action Committee (Alberta)

For immediate release

November 13, 2023

Small nuclear reactors in Canada: at what cost?

The sudden cancellation last week of the first small nuclear reactor project in the United States, the NuScale project, calls into question the economic viability of Canada’s plans to develop and deploy small modular reactors.

Potential customers in Utah balked at the soaring projections for the cost of electricity the NuScale reactor would generate, and the project was unable to recruit other customers to buy its power.

Today, in response, civil society groups across Canada are demanding transparency and accountability for the costs of other small nuclear reactor designs planned in this country.

“Canada should stop writing blank cheques to nuclear promoters who cannot deliver on their promises of cheap, reliable electricity,” said Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

Transparency requirements in the U.S. forced NuScale proponents to disclose the projected costs of electricity to potential investors on a regular basis. This is not the case in Canada.

Earlier this year, the target price for electricity from the NuScale project rose by over 50 percent to $89 US per MWh ($122.99 Canadian) with indications that future increases would be forthcoming. Investor confidence was shaken, and the project was scrapped.

The NuScale reactor design has been in development for more than 15 years and the company’s first commercial joint venture with electrical utilities in Utah was launched in 2015.

Governments in New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta have committed to building small reactors, while the Quebec government is conducting feasibility studies.

However, none of the Canadian nuclear proponents have laid out the projected costs of electricity production. In New Brunswick, the government has changed legislation to force the electricity utility to purchase power from new nuclear reactors even when it is not the lowest cost option.

Three years ago, more than 140 civil society groups across Canada signed a statement calling the proposed new reactors a “dirty, dangerous distraction,” from real climate action.

Nuclear critics have consistently said these new reactor designs will take too long to develop, and will cost too much compared with existing proven renewable energy option, to deal effectively with the climate crisis that requires immediate action.

To date, federal and provincial taxpayers have subsidized these reactors through a $970 million low interest loan to Ontario Power Generation, more than $100 million in grants to private companies and public utilities in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and millions more to research fuelling requirements for small reactors at Chalk River.

Civil society groups are demanding accountability for these costly nuclear developments. Without full transparency, taxpayers and ratepayers will be forced to subsidize these experimental reactor projects and pass on an unwanted economic debt legacy to our children and grandchildren, along with the radioactive waste legacy that all nuclear reactors are adding to every day.

Quotes:

Michael Poellet, President, Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative:

“Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) were meant to remedy the grossly excessive, over-budget costs of nuclear power generation. With the price of renewables dropping precipitously the economics of SMRs has only worsened. The cancellation of the NuScale project with its utility partner Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems demonstrates that commercial electrical generation with SMRs is not economically viable. Canadian federal and provincial governments must allow the economic realities to break the spell that enchantment with SMRs has over them.”

David Geary, Writer and Researcher, Clean Green Saskatchewan:

“Our group, Clean Green Saskatchewan, was always confident that NuScale and all other SMR startup enterprises, GE-Hitachi included [a new reactor design selected for Ontario and Saskatchewan], would fail because of the ‘bottom line’ … i.e., the economics, the ‘financials’. They simply cannot compete in the energy marketplace…compared to any other electrical energy producing technology.”

Jack Gibbons, Chair, Ontario Clean Air Alliance

“The failure of the most advanced small nuclear project in the U.S. to come even remotely close to being financially viable should be a wake-up call for politicians in Canada dreaming about castles in the sky. Counting on unproven new nuclear technology to provide low-cost power is like counting on snow in July. It is time for Premier Ford to follow Hydro Quebec’s example and develop a financially prudent plan to meet all of Ontario’s future electricity needs by investing in energy efficiency, renewables and storage. It doesn’t make sense to waste public money on high-cost, high-risk nuclear projects when we have much cleaner, safer and lower cost options to keep our lights on.”

Susan O’Donnell, Spokesperson, Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick

“Our provincial government is backing two nuclear start-ups and their experimental small reactor designs. These two designs are based on earlier reactors that never operated successfully commercially despite billions of dollars in public subsidies in other countries. We believe that despite the tens of millions of public dollars given to the start-ups so far, their costly boondoggles will never be built. In effect, our government is kicking the can down the road, delaying real climate action by betting on unicorns and fairy dust.”

Gordon Edwards, President, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

“Public utilities are owned by the government. People elect the government. So every citizen is a shareholder in the utility company and deserves to be kept informed of all business decisions that they will ultimately have to pay for. In the midst of a climate crisis and crippling inflation, Spending Money Recklessly (SMR) is a terrible strategy. We should not delay climate action by wasting our time, our money, and our political will on speculative reactors that are all ‘first-of-a-kind’ experiments.”


Jean-Pierre Finet, Porte-parole, Regroupement des organismes environnementaux en énergie

“There is no social acceptability for nuclear energy in Quebec.  Small modular reactors are not only costly, they take away government funding that would be better used on proven technologies such as heat pumps and heat storage.  It is time that the Canadian government comes clean about the cost of this pseudo clean energy.”

November 15, 2023 Posted by | Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »