France considering building 6 new EDF nuclear reactors at a cost of at least 46 billion euros ($51 billion)
France’s EDF expects six new nuclear reactors to cost 46 billion euros: Le Monde, PARIS (Reuters) 11 Nov 19 – French power utility EDF estimates it would cost at least 46 billion euros ($51 billion) to build six of its latest generation EPR nuclear reactors if the government decides to build them, French newspaper Le Monde reported on Saturday.The estimate was in a confidential document presented to the board of state-controlled EDF at the end of July, it said.
However, the Flamanville EPR reactor under construction in northern France has been plagued by cost overruns and a series of technical problems resulting in years of delays.
EDF, in which the state has an 84% stake, said in October the project which began in 2006 would cost 1.5 billion euros more than previously expected, raising the total cost to 12.4 billion euros.
Reporting by Leigh Thomas; Editing by Edmund Blair full story https://www.reuters.com/article/us-edf-nuclear-epr/frances-edf-expects-six-new-nuclear-reactors-to-cost-46-billion-euros-le-monde-idUSKBN1XJ074
A UK Labour govt would make ‘collective’ decision over use of nuclear weapons?
|
General election: Labour government would make ‘collective’ decision over use of nuclear weaponsEmily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, says Labour would maintain ‘ambiguity’ over circumstances in which Trident deterrent might be used , Independent Andrew WoodcockPolitical Editor @andywoodcock, 11 Nov 19
A Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour government would make a “collective” decision on whether to use nuclear weapons in response to an imminent threat, the party’s shadow foreign secretary has said. Emily Thornberry came under fire from Conservatives after suggesting that Mr Corbyn would share the decision on whether to press the nuclear button with senior colleagues. Labour’s official policy is to retain the UK’s independent Trident deterrent, but the party leader has previously said that he would not be willing to use nuclear weapons…… https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-labour-nuclear-weapons-trident-corbyn-thornberry-deterrent-a9198881.html |
|
Scottish National Party could want scrapping of Trident nuclear system, in return for co-operating with minority Labor government
Questioned about whether the issue of Trident would stop the SNP holding negotiations with another political party in the case of a hung parliament, Mr Blackford said the SNP had been “pretty consistent” that they did “not wish to see nuclear weapons” on Scottish soil.
He explained how his party would “come up with a wish-list” of policies they would want to secure for a potential confidence and supply deal with a future UK Government…….
The SNP’s parliamentary candidate for Ross, Skye and Lochaber described Britain’s nuclear arsenal as “not fit for purpose,” explaining: “The simple fact of the matter is I’m not sure that we’re taking our responsibilities for conventional defences as seriously as we should be doing and to waste up to £200 billion on these weapons of mass destruction that can never be used is a fallacy.”
During campaigning last week, Nicola Sturgeon made clear she wanted nuclear weapons removed from Scotland “as soon as it is safely possible”. The First Minister explained: “When we’re talking about nuclear weapons, safety has to be the primary consideration but the SNP is implacably opposed to nuclear weapons.”
The First Minister explained: “When we’re talking about nuclear weapons, safety has to be the primary consideration but the SNP is implacably opposed to nuclear weapons.”……..
Although Jeremy Corbyn is well-known as being personally opposed to Britain retaining nuclear weapons and Scottish Labour has come out against Trident, the UK Labour Party backs the policy and included support for renewing the nuclear arsenal in its last manifesto……. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18026979.blackford-signals-scrapping-trident-part-snp-wish-list-support-corbyn-govt/
Philippines not prepared for the dangers of nuclear energy
Philippines unprepared for nuclear energy: Senate energy panel chair, https://news.abs-cbn.com/business/11/06/19/philippines-unprepared-for-nuclear-energy-senate-energy-panel-chair, Katrina Domingo, ABS-CBN News, Nov 06 2019 MANILA – The Philippines is “not ready” to use nuclear power as an energy source, a senator said Wednesday, adding more should be done to prepare for potential risks.
The Department of Energy announced recently its plan to draft a national nuclear program, which the Senate Energy Committee, chaired by Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian, will investigate.
“Saan natin itatapon ang nuclear waste? Pag may leakage ano ang gagawin natin? Meron ba tayong capability? Handa ba tayo in case of a nuclear leak?” he told reporters.
(Where will we dump nuclear waste? What will we do in case of a leak? Do we have the capability? Are we ready in case of a nuclear leak?)
The DOE should be more transparent about the benefits of harnessing nuclear power before it drafts a nationwide plan. Coal and solar are cheaper alternatives, he said.
“Nuclear energy is a very controversial source of energy dahil ang risk ay napakataas (because the risk is very high),” he said.
The government is eyeing the deployment of modular nuclear plants to some islands where electricity supply is low, Energy Sec. Alfonso Cusi earlier said.
The Philippines also signed a memorandum with Russia’s state-owned Rosatom for a pre-feasibility study for nuclear power plants. President Rodrigo Duterte “wants to learn more” about nuclear power, which could lower electricity prices and stabilize supply, Cusi said.
“We are hungry for power and we will tap any sources that would satisfy our own needs now,” he said.
Iran building a second nuclear reactor at Bushehr plant
|
Iran begins constructing second nuclear reactor at Bushehr plant, Aljazeera, 10 Nov 19,
New reactor – and a third planned to be built – will each add more than 1,000 megawatts to Iran’s power grid. Iran began constructing a second nuclear reactor at its Bushehr power plant – a facility being fuelled by uranium enriched further than the limits outlined in the faltering 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.While celebrating the start of construction on Sunday, Iranian officials also condemned United States pressure campaign of sanctions that blocks Tehran from exporting its crude oil. On Sunday, trucks with spinning concrete mixers poured their slurry into the prepared base of the second reactor as journalists watched in Bushehr, some 700km (440 miles) south from Iran’s capital, Tehran. Bushehr’s working reactor stood behind it. …….https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/191110133645713.html |
Boris Johnson and the UK plan for nuclear fusion
Boris Johnson’s nuclear energy pledge backed by UK firm with ‘answer to world’s problem’ By CALLUM HOARE. Express UK, Nov 5, 2019 A UK firm has pledged to build on Boris Johnson’s plans to take the “big step” in treading the path for nuclear energy which the Prime Minister claimed will be on sale “around the world” during the Conservative Party conference in Manchester.
The only thing that’s going to restrict us is capital.
“To an investor – no one wants to invest in fusion for safety, it’s very high risk – don’t worry about cracking fusion, it’s about cracking the finance.”
Pulsar Fusion recently opened up the UK’s biggest nuclear fusion centre in a secret location near Bletchley, Buckinghamshire.
Mr Dinan is confident his company will, during the next few months, create matter hot enough to replicate the temperature of the Sun in the UK.
A vacuum chamber will form the heart of the reactor and it is claimed it could soon reach temperatures above 100 million degrees Celsius.
UK firms given £18m for mini nuclear power stations
|
Firms handed £18m for mini nuclear power stations, Construction Enquirer , Aaron Morby, 8 Nov 19,
A consortium including BAM Nuttall and Laing O’Rourke has netted Government match funding to develop the next generation of compact nuclear power stations. The new small-scale power stations are being designed to be manufactured in sections in regional factories, before being transported to existing nuclear sites for rapid assembly inside a weatherproof canopy…… Firms involved include: Assystem, BAM Nuttall, Laing O’Rourke, National Nuclear Laboratory, Rolls-Royce, Atkins, Wood, The Welding Institute and Nuclear AMRC. The consortium ultimately aims to generate a joint investment of £500m focused on designing a first-of-its-kind small modular reactor, which would form the core of the new compact plants…… https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2019/11/08/firms-handed-18m-for-mini-nuclear-power-stations/ |
|
USA’s intercontinental ballistic missiles- epitome of nuclear corruption
   Why Are We Rebuilding the ‘Nuclear Sponge’? https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-are-we-rebuilding-%E2%80%98nuclear-sponge%E2%80%99-94371
Welcome to the “nuclear sponge.” A bizarre idea that has outlived its questionable Cold War-era usefulness, the nuclear sponge is the United States’ collection of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles intended to “soak up” a nuclear attack. by Tom Z. Collina Akshai Vikram 6 Nov 19, The media is abuzz about the epic battle between corporate titans Northrop Grumman and Boeing over who will win the $100 billion contract to build a new nuclear-armed ballistic missile. For those who are keeping score, it looks like Northrop will win a sole-source contract, which would be a disaster for taxpayers.
But media coverage of the Clash of the Titans is missing the real story. This is not about contractor wars or sweet-heart deals. This is about the integrity of our government: why, thirty years after the end of the Cold War, are we rebuilding nuclear weapons that we do not need? Why are we spending national treasure to buy weapons that make us less safe?
What if we told you that residents of Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wyoming are being used as bait in a nuclear war with Russia? Surely, no sane person would accept or offer such terms. However, if you live anywhere near these states, you already have a nuclear target on your back. Welcome to the “nuclear sponge.” A bizarre idea that has outlived its questionable Cold War-era usefulness, the nuclear sponge is the United States’ collection of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) intended to “soak up” a nuclear attack. Before the development of nuclear-armed submarines that can hide their locations at sea, ICBMs were the crux of American nuclear strategy. Today, however, their only purpose is to draw fire away from other targets (like New York and San Francisco) in the (suicidal and thus highly unlikely) event of a first strike by Russia. The Air Force does not plan to launch the missiles in a war, but to have them draw a nuclear attack to the Upper Midwest.
We’re not making this up—that’s what former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told Congress. However, sacrificing the Upper Midwest not only undervalues the people who live there but would not actually spare the residents of other states. A major nuclear war with Russia would doom the entire nation. It would little matter whether one resides in Manhattan or Montana.
Why then are we rebuilding the nuclear sponge? The answer, as House Armed Services Committee Chair Adam Smith (R-CA) recently highlighted, has much more to do with parochial interests and money than national security. When asked at a recent press conference why states would want to host the missiles, and thereby put themselves at risk, Smith said, only partly in jest, “They’re fond of their missiles. Apparently, they want to be targeted in a nuclear first strike.” And then, more seriously, he said “They want the jobs . . . no matter the circumstances. And that’s not rational. It’s parochial.”
 With current ICBMs getting older, the Trump administration has greenlit a new cohort of missiles as part of an almost $2 trillion nuclear rebuild plan over the next thirty years. The price tag for the new ICBM alone is potentially $140 billion. That contract is currently slated to go to Northrop Grumman, even as it fights off a Federal Trade Commission investigation for unfair competition, which may cost taxpayers “billions.”Northrop Grumman and others have hijacked the nuclear-security agenda of the United States through the usual Washington channels: lobbying and
 campaign contributions. In the 2018 election cycle, Northrop spent $5.6 million in campaign contributions. In fact, Northrop spends more than any other defense contractor on lobbying and is just behind Amazon and Facebook. Defense contractors have grown even more powerful with a willing ally in the White House. Simply put, the Trump administration has filled its top national-security ranks with people holding extensive ties to major defense contractors. Mattis worked for General Dynamics and received speaking fees from Northrop Grumman. The current defense secretary, Mark Esper, worked for Raytheon. Ex-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly worked for DynCorp; former Deputy Defense Secretary Mike Shanahan’s employment history at Boeing goes back over thirty years. Meanwhile, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood worked for Lockheed Martin as did former Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson. In fact, that’s where she skirted lobbying restrictions. This list goes on. Programs such as a new ICBM are strategically unnecessary, economically unsustainable, and morally abhorrent. The missiles would be destroyed in a first strike (Russia knows where they are; you can find them on Google Maps) and serve no purpose except to “absorb” blows in a war whose fallout would kill most Americans anyway. Some jobs are created—but far more jobs could be created if the money was spent in other ways. In 2019, there are surely better ways to employ people than to have them guard Cold War relics. As Smith observed after visiting bases that host nuclear weapons, “what struck me was that the job is unbelievably boring.” Maybe that’s why substance abuse continues to plague these sites, with service members literally falling asleep on duty. Clearly, our nuclear policy needs a reboot. As Sen. Elizabeth Warren(D-MA) has said “Take any big problem we have in America today and you don’t have to dig very deep to see the same system at work . . . despite our being the strongest and wealthiest country in the history of the world, our democracy is paralyzed. And why? Because giant corporations have bought off our government.” Warren was talking about climate change, guns, and healthcare, but her remarks hold just as true for nuclear weapons. The next president must tackle corruption in nuclear policy aggressively—by throwing away the nuclear sponge. Tom Collina is Policy Director and Akshai Vikram is a Hale Fellow at Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation in Washington DC. |
|
Senator Elizabeth Warren questions Holtec Exemption from Emergency Planning Requirements at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
 Senator Warren Statement on Holtec Exemption from Emergency Planning Requirements at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-statement-on-holtec-exemption-from-emergency-planning-requirements-at-the-pilgrim-nuclear-power-station 4 Nov 19, Boston, MA – United States Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released the following statement today following news federal regulators at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) plan to exempt Holtec International from emergency planning regulations as the firm works to decommission the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station:
“I’m disappointed to learn Holtec will be exempt from important emergency preparation and planning safeguards as it decommissions the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station,” said Senator Warren. “The Southeastern Massachusetts community has rightly continued to raise important questions about the plant’s decommissioning and they deserve answers, not more strong-arming.”
In October 2018, Senator Warren raised concerns about safety and lack of public input during Pilgrim’s shutdown last year and raised similar concerns regarding communications with local residents in her statement. In August 2019, she called for community concerns to be addressed before Pilgrim was allowed to change hands from Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. to Holtec.
|
|
Wyoming’s Governor Gordon OK with the idea of nuclear waste dump
|
Gov. Gordon open to nuclear waste storage
https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Gov-Gordon-open-to-nuclear-waste-storage-14805930.php
Nov. 3, 2019 CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — Gov. Mark Gordon says he is open to Wyoming pursuing a nuclear waste storage facility though he doesn’t personally believe it’s the best industry for the state.
Gordon told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle’s editorial board last week that if a good reason can be found for such an industry in Wyoming and it has adequate safeguards, he’s not going to stand in its way. The governor says he will wait to see what the state Legislature finds in its studies of the idea before making a decision. |
|
A USA Bill to make sensible but significant cuts to “nuclear weapons and delivery systems.”
New Bill Renews Debate on Nuclear Modernization, https://www.cato.org/blog/new-bill-renews-debate-nuclear-modernization November 1, 2019 By Eric Gomez
On Tuesday, Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) and Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) reintroduced bicameral legislation that would save U.S. taxpayers $75 billion on nuclear modernization costs over the next decade. The “Smarter Approach to Nuclear Expenditures Act,” or SANE Act, proposes sensible but significant cuts to “nuclear weapons and delivery systems.”
According to a press release from Sen. Markey’s office, the SANE Act will include the following:
- Reduce the purchase of Columbia-class submarines from 12 to 8, cut the existing ICBM fleet from over 400 to 150, and reduce deployed strategic warheads from approximately 1,500 to 1,000 – saving $13.1 billion
- Cancel the development of a new air-launched cruise missile and an associated warhead life extension program – saving $13.3 billion
- Reduce to 80 the purchase of new B-21 long-range bombers – saving $11.6 billion
- Cancel the development of new ICBMs and a new nuclear warhead – saving $13.6 billion
- Cancel the development of a new submarine-launched cruise missile – saving $9 billion
- Limit the plutonium pit production target to 30 per year – saving $9 billion
Sen. Markey stated that “The United States should fund education, not annihilation; that is our future…We need sanity when crafting America’s budget priorities, and more and improved nuclear weapons defies common sense.”
Rep. Blumenauer added that “these disastrous weapons will never be the answer to solving our complex and ever-changing national security threats…We should not be investing trillions of dollars of our budget on an outdated and irresponsible nuclear arsenal.”
At the time of the press release, the SANE Act was co-sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and by eight members in the House. It has also been endorsed by several prominent organizations, including the Ploughshares Fund, Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND), Peace Action, Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), Global Security Institute, and World Future Council.
Caroline Dorminey, policy director of WAND and my former colleague here at Cato, stated, “With defense budgets skyrocketing and a bow wave of costs bearing down on the Pentagon in upcoming years, now is the time for hard choices. Senator Markey, Representative Blumenauer, and cosponsors offer a clear alternative that will keep Americans safe without wasting their tax dollars on weapon systems that serve our past, not our future.”
Dorminey, who also co-edited Cato’s recently released America’s Nuclear Crossroads: A Forward-Looking Anthology with me and whose recommendations from her chapter on how best to manage nuclear modernization echo many of the proposals within the bill, also noted that “the SANE Act demonstrates [that] there are ample opportunities to craft a revised nuclear modernization plan that better reflects the shifting strategic priorities and evolution of threats facing the United States.”
Sen. Markey and Rep. Blumenauer have introduced various versions of the SANE Act in past years without success. Given current fiscal and political realities, perhaps this time will be different. Yet, whether the SANE Act passes or not, the legislation highlights the need for policymakers to have a robust debate on the merits of the modernization plan, if not America’s nuclear posture more broadly.
You can read the full bill here. To learn more about this and other pressing issues in nuclear deterrence and arms control, download a copy of America’s Nuclear Crossroads.
Exelon wants tax-payer subsidies for nuclear reactors – threatens to close 4, otherwise.
Exelon threatens to close four nuclear plants in Illinois if Springfield doesn’t act https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/exelon-threatens-to-close-four-nuclear-plants-in-illinois-if/article_b4d2cc7e-fbff-11e9-9619-ab5ee6984f21.html, By Cole Lauterbach | The Center Square, Oct 31, 2019
Exelon’s CEO said Thursday that four of the company’s nuclear facilities in Illinois could be shuttered if state lawmakers don’t take action to make them more profitable.
Exelon President and CEO Christopher Crane said in an earnings call Thursday that the company “can’t sit here for years and bleed cash and build up debt” by keeping four of our nuclear plants operating in the absence of legislation from Springfield that would make those plants more profitable.”
The company had previously said the Byron, Braidwood and Dresden plants were in danger of being shuttered. On Thursday, the company said the LaSalle plant also was at risk of closure.
“Some are more dire than others at this point and we need to move forward with the legislation to prevent the loss for the state from an environmental perspective and an economic perspective,” Crane said.
The four Illinois plants represent a significant portion of Exelon’s nuclear fleet.
At issue is the interaction between federal regulators and Exelon’s Illinois-based facilities that get green-energy credits, allowing those facilities to sell energy on the wholesale market at more competitive rates than other energy providers, such as coal plants.
Crane’s comments came two weeks after one of the company’s former executives, Exelon Utilities CEO Anne Prammagiore, abruptly retired and the corporation disclosed that it had been served with multiple subpoenas in connection to a federal probe involving state Sen. Martin Sandoval and the company’s lobbying practices. This week, Prammagiore also resigned as chair of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, according to media reports.
A veteran legislator told Crain’s Chicago Business last week that it would be difficult for Exelon to get much done in Springfield until lawmakers know more about the federal investigations.
Two of Exelon’s nuclear facilities benefit from legislation that Crane said kept them open, which included rate increases on consumers.
Wyoming legislators and their secret vote about nuclear waste dump
|
Secret Wyoming nuke dump vote merits public outrage, https://www.wyofile.com/secret-wyoming-nuke-dump-vote-merits-public-outrage/ July 23, 2019 by Kerry Drake 16 Seven Republican legislators pulled a skunk out of a hat with a secret vote to once again explore storing nuclear waste in Wyoming. This must be the “Wyoming way” so many state lawmakers boast about when describing how they do the people’s work.
The plan to store spent nuclear fuel rods at old uranium mines in the Gas Hills and Shirley Basin was hatched by Sen. Jim Anderson (R-Casper) and Rep. Mike Greear (R-Worland), co-chairmen of the Joint Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee. The Legislative Management Council did not assign the topic to their committee or any other before the Legislature adjourned in March. There was no discussion of the topic in an open meeting, no posted notice that it was up for consideration and zero public input. Hiring the state out as a nuclear waste dump appeared in no legislative documents prior to the Management Council’s July 8 email vote to approve study of the matter. The only reason anyone knows that we’re spending taxpayer dollars to study this hairbrained scheme is because WyoFile requested a record of all recent email votes by the Management Council. House Speaker Steve Harshman and Senate President Drew Perkins, both Casper Republicans, didn’t talk about the proposed interim topic or announce the vote to the public. They just went along and passed it. House Majority Leader Eric Barlow (R-Gillette) joined five Democrats who opposed the measure. Anderson told WyoFile reporter Angus Thuermer Jr., who broke the story about the vote, that “temporarily” storing the spent nuclear fuel rods here could bring in up to a billion dollars a year from the federal government. Wyoming could have been making a haul off nuclear waste for decades, Anderson added, if “environmental terrorists” hadn’t stopped the so-called Monitored Retrievable Storage site in Fremont County. Then-Gov. Mike Sullivan, responding to polls that showed four-fifths of Wyomingites opposed the project, wisely halted it in 1992. “I think they’ll be back terrorizing us again,” Anderson told Thuermer. It’s nice to know what he thinks of opponents to a project he tried to hide. Oh, there will be protests all right. Now that the public knows what’s been going on behind their backs, people will be able to decide for themselves who is truly concerned with trying to protect Wyoming’s priceless environment and who is trying to make billions of quick bucks putting it at risk. Is it too much to ask for legislators to give us a break on this issue and bury it instead of highly radioactive nuclear waste? It’s long worn out its welcome. |
|
Get the facts straight on nuclear energy
To Editor of the Reformer, I was disturbed by the letter written by Kendall Neutron of San Diego, CA (“Nuclear waste can be dealt with safely”) and published in the Oct. 19-20 Reformer. Neutron claims to be a nuclear engineer who also claims to have a simple solution to the problem of safe storage and disposal of nuclear waste.I question the cost and safety of the solutions that are described.
Over 140 scientists from all over the world collaborated to write the book “Drawdown” edited by Paul Hawkin and published in 2017. They rank nuclear energy at No. 20 in the top 100 strategies to reduce or reverse global warming and describe these warnings:
Gen. 1 and 2 nuclear reactors (which include those built at Chernobyl and Fukushima and all those in the U.S.) use water to slow down nuclear chain reactions and use enriched uranium fuel. These are all located near major rivers or oceans making them capable of spewing nuclear radiation into major water supplies should any accident occur. The world watched this happen in Chernobyl and Fukushima, and to say that “nuclear energy is already the safest, cleanest, most eco-friendly, and least resource intensive way of generating constant power” is UNTRUE.
In addition to this, “Drawdown” reports this fact: “While virtually every other form of energy has gone down (in cost) over time, a nuclear power plant’s (cost) is four to eight times higher than it was four decades ago. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, advanced nuclear is the most expensive form of energy besides conventional gas turbines, which are comparatively inefficient. Onshore wind is a quarter of the cost of nuclear power.”
This is why the U.S. and Germany are closing down their older nuclear facilities and not planning new ones. China has 33 nuclear plants in operation and about 22 under construction as they move away from coal fired plants due to air pollution and global warming. China is also building solar and wind power at a very fast rate and producing electric vehicles of all kinds and is committed to reaching peak carbon dioxide in 2030 with a reduction of its carbon footprint from that day forward.
Let’s get the facts straight and continue to implement all kinds of less costly and less dangerous ways of producing and storing energy. In New England let’s work on replacing our last few aging nuclear plants with large offshore wind arrays such as Vineyard Wind which could produce at least 400 megawatts of power in its first stage of development.
Turkey Has Long Had Nuclear Dreams
In September, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told members of his party that it is time for his country to acquire its own nuclear bomb.
Such a move would mark a sharp break from previous obligations by Turkey, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which bars non-nuclear states from acquiring nuclear weapons. But this is not the first time that Turkey—which has played host to U.S. nuclear weapons since the late 1950s—has craved its own nuclear weapons program.
As part of our Document of the Week series, Foreign Policy is posting a copy of a Sept. 26, 1966, memo describing to then-Ambassador Parker T. Hart a troubling conversation Clarence Wendel, the U.S. minerals attache at the U.S. Embassy in Ankara, had with a “reliable” Turkish scientist on Turkey’s nuclear ambitions.
The memo, one of 20 previously declassified documents on nuclear weapons in Turkey compiled this week by the National Security Archive, claims the source disclosed that officials from Turkey’s General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration “had been asked to cooperate with General [Refik] Tulga and Professor Omer Inonu (Professor of Physics at METU) [Middle East Technical University] in a Turkish program to develop an ‘Atomic Bomb.’”
Wendel, according to the memo, had flagged a number of developments suggesting the claim may be credible, including: “Repeated Turkish assertions that a 200 mega-watt nuclear reactor is planned for Istanbul”; the stockpiling of reserves of 300 to 600 tons of uranium in low-grade ore deposits; and the “delaying and haggling tactics of the Turkish negotiators during discussions of the extension of the bilateral agreement on peaceful uses of atomic energy which primarily concerned the transfer of safeguards responsibility from the U.S.A. to the International Atomic Energy Agency.”……..https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/01/turkey-long-nuclear-dreams-erdogan-bomb/
1.This Month
Will $23 Billion Nuclear Bailout Cause Nuclear Fallout?
SHOCKING & Wasteful Price of Nuclear Power Revealed!
of the week
Ohioans Against Nuke Bailout https://www.facebook.com/OhioansAgainstNukeBailout/
Greta Thunberg on viral Trump-stare: – I think I was very shocked | SVT/TV 2/Skavlan
PETITION https://www.ohioansagainstnukebailouts.com/petition
Free Julian Assange, before it’s too late. Sign to STOP the USA ExtraditionPETITION
Rapid Sea-Level Rise “Threat Multipliers” to Coastlines, Nuclear Power Plants, and Mega-Cities
-
Archives
- November 2019 (101)
- October 2019 (262)
- September 2019 (248)
- August 2019 (310)
- July 2019 (390)
- June 2019 (353)
- May 2019 (326)
- April 2019 (366)
- March 2019 (366)
- February 2019 (317)
- January 2019 (341)
- December 2018 (310)
-
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
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
