Russian environmental defenders under attack
For future updates follow RSEU on facebook.
For more information contact:
Vitaly Servetnik,
Russian Social-Ecological Union / Friends of the Earth Russia
Email: vitservetnik@gmail.com
Program Area: Environmental Human Rights Defenders
Member Group: Russian Social Ecological Union (RSEU)
Many Canadian organisations dispute the government’s plan for small nuclear reactors
 Feds throw support behind development of mini nuclear reactors; action plan released, Saskatoon / 650 CKOMThe Canadian PressDec 18, 2020 “……. Among steps in the plan is developing prototypes and demonstration models.,,,,,
Dozens of groups, including opposition parties, some Indigenous organizations and environmentalists, want the government to fight climate change by investing more in renewable energy and energy efficiency rather than in the new reactors. They argue nuclear energy costs far too much money and is far from clean given the growing mound of radioactive waste it generates. O’Regan said the government is actively trying to figure out what do with the dangerous material….. The federal government estimates the global market for SMRs will be worth between $150 billion and $300 billion a year by 2040 but critics question the validity of the estimate. They also wonder who exactly might want one. …https://www.ckom.com/2020/12/18/feds-throw-support-behind-development-of-mini-nuclear-reactors/ |
|
2 million yen ($19,300) incentive for families to move to near crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant
|
Under the program that will start in fiscal 2021, the Reconstruction Agency will provide an additional amount of up to 4 million yen to those who start new businesses in 12 cities, towns and villages where residents had been ordered to evacuate from after the triple meltdown at the plant. Eleven of those municipalities had come under the central government’s evacuation order, while in the remaining municipality, Hironomachi, residents were ordered to leave by the town government. Katsuei Hirasawa, the reconstruction minister, said on Dec. 17 that his agency is focused on repopulating those areas because only around 20 percent of residents have returned there even after the evacuation orders were lifted. One requirement is that the families must live in the locations for at least five years. The agency will provide 1.2 million yen to families that relocate to the 12 areas from other parts of Fukushima Prefecture and 2 million yen to those from other prefectures. The amount is 800,000 yen for single-person households that relocate from other areas of the prefecture and 1.2 million yen for those from outside the prefecture. …….. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14031389 |
|
For the USA, despite the “Green Nuclear Deal” propaganda, solar power islooking a whole lot better.
Nuclear vs Solar: The Race For Renewable Dominance , Oil Price By Alex Kimani – Nov 11, 2020
“……….. the main sticking point to the promotion of thorium as a cleaner nuclear fuel is that it remains unproven on a commercial scale. Thorium MSRs (Molten Salt Reactors) have been in development since the 1960s by the United States, China, Russia, and France, yet nothing much ever came of them. Further, only about 50 of the world’s 440 reactors can currently be configured to run on thorium.
…… Unfortunately, practical nuclear fusion remains a long-shot and could be decades away from becoming a commercial reality.
We simply don’t have the luxury of time.
Further, nuclear power in the U.S. faces an uncertain future. ……………
Solar rising
Whereas the nuclear sector comeback has its work cut out for it, solar power has clearly been on the ascendancy thanks in large part to falling costs.
Nuclear advocates have pointed to rising electricity costs in California as the reason why other states should think twice before adopting its model. Environmental Progress has reported that between 2011 and 2018, power costs in the Golden State increased by 27.9% compared to a 4% national average. This period coincided with a period when California has been aggressively ramping up its renewable generation capacity. Renewable sources currently account for ~30% of California’s electricity generation with an aim to double that by 2030 and hit 100% by 2045.
But that’s being a bit disingenuous because it fails to capture just how much solar costs have fallen over the timeframe.
According to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), solar installation costs have dropped by more than 70% over the past decade, opening up vast new markets and systems nationwide. The organization says prices as of Q2 2020 dropped to their lowest levels in history across all market segments, with utility-scale prices ranging from $16/MWh – $35/MWh, thus making it competitive with all other forms of generation. Meanwhile, costs for the average-sized residential system were cut in half from a pre-incentive price of $40,000 in 2010 to roughly $20,000 today.
And no, renewables are not to blame for California’s blackouts.
……………..Strongly Bullish
Despite these challenges, the solar sector remains strongly bullish.
Indeed, S&P Platts says that the shift to renewable energy is likely to continue full steam ahead regardless of fed policies noting that the energy transition has “clearly been moving forward on a regional basis,” despite lacking clear endorsement at the federal level under Trump.
It remains to be seen whether nuclear energy can command the same level of support. https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Nuclear-vs-Solar-The-Race-For-Renewable-Dominance.html
EDF did a small survey of Suffolk community opinion -weighted to favour nuclear industry?
Suffolk towards the building of a new nuclear power station on the coast.
The survey was carried out by a company called ICM Unlimited on behalf of
EDF, which is looking to build the Sizewell C station. ICM interviewed a
representative sample of 500 adults in east Suffolk over the phone between
November 5 and November 19.
dismissed the research as “meaningless”, saying a sample of 500 people – in
an area with a population of 247,000 – was “hardly representative”. All
those that took part in the survey live in the area with data having been
weighted to the population profile of the East Suffolk Council adult
population.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizewell-c-survey-shows-favourable-results-6854678
Sizewell C nuclear plan – a disastrous and expensive mistake
heritage coast, but quite possibly the entire county, could be changed for
ever by the arrival of two new European pressurised reactors (EPRs).
‘Sizewell C, a proposed new nuclear power station in Suffolk, has the
potential to generate the reliable low carbon electricity the country needs
for decades to come’ is the claim made by EDF Energy, the French-owned
company behind the project. It also has the potential to be a disastrous
and expensive mistake. Many believe it already is.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/building-sizewell-c-would-be-a-nuclear-sized-disaster#
Iran builds at underground nuclear plant
|
Iran builds at underground nuclear plant, The West Australian Jon GambrellAAP. Fri, 18 December 2020 Iran has begun construction on a site at its underground nuclear facility at Fordo amid tensions with the US over its atomic program, satellite photos obtained by The Associated Press show.
Iran has not publicly acknowledged any new construction at Fordo, whose discovery by the West in 2009 came in an earlier
round of brinkmanship before world powers struck the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran.
While the purpose of the building remains unclear, any work at Fordo likely will trigger new concern in the waning days of the Trump administration before the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden.
Already, Iran is building at its Natanz nuclear facility after a mysterious explosion in July there that Tehran described as a sabotage attack.
“Any changes at this site will be carefully watched as a sign of where Iran’s nuclear program is headed,” said Jeffrey Lewis, an expert at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who
studies Iran.
Iran’s mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspectors are in Iran as part of the nuclear deal, also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
|
|
|
Mutsu Mayor Soichiro Miyashita made it clear that spent nuclear fuel facility will not go ahead.
|
Mayor again stands in way of plan for spent nuclear fuel, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN, December 18, 2020, Utilities have revived plans to expand the use of an intermediate storage facility for spent nuclear fuel, but immediately objections were voiced by the same mayor who quashed a similar proposal two years ago.The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan (FEPC) on Dec. 17 formally announced that it would push forward with the plan to allow all utilities that operate nuclear power plants to use the intermediate storage facility in Mutsu, Aomori Prefecture.
Kazuhiro Ikebe, head of FEPC, met the same day with economy minister Hiroshi Kajiyama, who oversees the nuclear power industry, and presented the proposal. Kajiyama pledged his cooperation to realize the plan. However, also on Dec. 17, Mutsu Mayor Soichiro Miyashita made clear that he would never allow all utilities to use the facility, which will be operated by Recyclable-Fuel Storage Co. (RFS) starting in fiscal 2021. RFS was jointly established by Tokyo Electric Power Co. and Japan Atomic Power Co. Under the original plan, spent nuclear fuel from only those two companies will be stored at the Mutsu facility in the northern prefecture. But in 2018, Kansai Electric Power Co. indicated that it also wanted to store its spent nuclear fuel at the Mutsu facility. Kansai Electric operates nuclear power plants in Fukui, a central Japan prefecture that faces the Sea of Japan. Fukui prefectural government officials asked the utility to find a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel outside of the prefecture. When word reached Miyashita about the Kansai Electric plan, he immediately opposed, and the utility was forced to retract the proposal. Under the latest FEPC proposal, other utilities besides TEPCO and Japan Atomic Power would be able to use the Mutsu facility as long as they paid storage fees. But the real, near-term beneficiary would still be Kansai Electric……. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14031110 |
|
NuScale exultant that their scam small nuclear reactors have conned the Canadian government
|
NuScale Power Commends Government of Canada on Release of SMR Action Plan, December 18, 2020,PORTLAND, Ore.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–NuScale Power commends the Government of Canada and the Department of Natural Resources (NRCan) for the release of its Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Action Plan, which acknowledges the role that SMR technologies can play in achieving the country’s clean energy goals and sets forth a pathway to advancing nuclear technology in Canada. We are excited about the launch of Canada’s SMR Action Plan and applaud the Canadian government for taking this significant step towards seeing SMR technologies actualized as a key part of its energy sector,” said NuScale Power Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Hopkins. “NuScale will support this action plan with our proven, reliable, and scalable technology that is suited to meet the specific power needs of regions across Canada.” ….. “NuScale is eager to play a part in helping Canada become a world leader in SMR development,” added Hopkins. “We have strong partnerships in the Canadian energy sector that augment our technology’s alignment with Canadian needs and look forward to strengthening them as the SMR Action Plan is implemented. This includes supply chain partnerships across Canada that we are prepared to leverage for projects in Canada, and around the world.” NuScale has signed Memoranda of Understandings with Ontario Power Generation and Bruce Power…… https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201218005700/en/NuScale-Power-Commends-Government-of-Canada-on-Release-of-SMR-Action-Plan |
|
How will Biden get the “nuclear football” i Trump does not attend the inauguration?
Here’s what happens to the ‘nuclear football’ if Trump decides to skip Biden’s inauguration https://www.businessinsider.com.au/what-happens-to-nuclear-football-if-trump-skips-biden-inauguration-2020-12?r=US&IR=T
- American presidents are accompanied by a military aide carrying a briefcase with the tools necessary for nuclear war.
- During presidential inaugurations, nuclear command authority and the “nuclear football” are transferred to the new president.
- But President Donald Trump may not participate in President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration, which could complicate the transfer.
- The Pentagon said there was a plan for the transfer in that scenario but declined to provide details. But nuclear-weapons experts and a former military aide who carried the briefcase provided some insight.
An important yet discreet part of the inauguration of a new president is the transfer of command and control authority over the US nuclear arsenal, but there is the possibility President Donald Trump will not attend President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration, which could complicate matters.
Trump has refused to say whether he will attend Biden’s inauguration, but multiple reports have suggested that the president will skip the swearing-in ceremony of his successor and hold a political rally elsewhere instead.
So what happens to the “nuclear football” that accompanies the president if Trump doesn’t show? How does it get to Biden?
“That’s a good question,” Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, told Insider. “It is an unprecedented situation.”
The president has the sole authority to conduct a nuclear strike, and wherever he goes, he is accompanied by a military aide carrying a briefcase called the “president’s emergency satchel,” more commonly known as the nuclear football.
Every president since John F. Kennedy has been accompanied by the aide carrying the hefty briefcase, which gives the commander in chief the ability to command US nuclear forces while away from physical command and control centres.
The briefcase does not contain a button that can instantly unleash hundreds of nuclear warheads deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and strategic bombers. Instead, the briefcase contains communication tools, codes, and options for nuclear war.
Separate from the football, presidents carry a card, sometimes called the “biscuit,” on their person containing authentication codes. In a nuclear conflict, the president would use the codes in coordination with the tools in the briefcase to identify himself to the military and order a nuclear strike.
Incoming presidents are typically briefed on their nuclear responsibilities before taking the oath of office. Then, during the inauguration, the codes they received that morning or the day before become active, and control of the football is quietly and seamlessly passed to the new president.
Trump described that moment as “sobering” and “very scary,”telling ABC News in 2017 that “when they explain what it represents and the kind of destruction that you’re talking about, it is a very sobering moment.”
The transfer of the nuclear football is supposed to occur at noon as the new president is sworn in. The military aide who has been carrying the briefcase hands it off to the newly designated military aide, former Vice President Dick Cheney said in a past Discovery documentary. This traditionally happens off to the side and is not a part of the show.
If Trump is not at the inauguration, then the transfer process will be different. Still, the transfer will need to be instantaneous, said retired Air Force Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson, who carried the football for former President Bill Clinton.
“That’s the way it has to be,” he told Insider. “For the process to work, you have to have this clear handing off of responsibilities.” He said that how that happens would be up to the Pentagon, which serves the office of the commander in chief, not the man.
A Pentagon spokesperson told Insider the Department of Defence had a plan for the transfer on Inauguration Day but declined to provide any further details.
“We war game this stuff, and we practice it ad nauseam for years and years,” Patterson said. “There are systems in place to make sure that happens instantaneously. There won’t be any kind of question about who has it, who is in charge at that point in time.”
“We don’t take this stuff lightly,” he added. “There won’t be any kind of hiccup. It will just go down without anybody even noticing, which is what is supposed to happen.”
Kristensen, the nuclear weapons expert at FAS, speculated that the plan could resemble plans in place for situations in which a president is suddenly killed or incapacitated, situations in which nuclear command and control authority and all accompanying equipment have to be immediately transferred to the vice president or another designated survivor.
Stephen Schwartz, a nonresident senior fellow with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, recently discussed with the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation what would happen to the nuclear football if Trump did not attend the inauguration.
Schwartz, known for his research on the nuclear football, said there was more than one football. In fact, he explained, there are at least three of them — for the president, vice president, and a designated survivor.
He said that if another nuclear football had not already been prepared, one likely would be before the inauguration. There would be a military aide ready then to begin following Biden as soon as he is sworn in. And, at that time, Trump’s nuclear command and control authority would presumably expire.
“Hopefully President Trump will be there and it will be just a handoff, which is what it’s been for decades,” Patterson said, adding that if he didn’t, “it’s not that big of a deal” because the military will make sure that the transfer occurs as needed.
Turkey’s unfinished nuclear plant already redundant
Critics say Turkey’s unfinished nuclear plant already redundant
Turkey’s power plant building spree has resulted in an enormous idle capacity but the construction of new plants continues at the expense of taxpayers despite the country’s bruising economic woes. Al-Monitor Mustafa Sonmez Dec 15, 2020
Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), in power for 18 years, is under increasing fire for poorly planned, prodigal investments whose long-term financial fallout is coming into sharper relief as the country grapples with severe economic woes. Standing out among the most dubious investments is a series of power plants, including a nuclear energy plant still under construction, that have created an idle capacity threatening to haunt public finances for years.
The miscalculations date back to the AKP’s early years in power, when the Turkish economy — fresh from an IMF-backed overhaul — enjoyed unprecedented inflows of foreign capital that stimulated economic growth of up to 7% per year. The AKP’s economic credentials thrived, translating to lasting political gains. The government encouraged construction as the main driver of growth, even if it relied almost entirely on the continued flow of foreign funds. While the country’s energy consumption grew its power production lagged behind and required larger imports of gas, oil and even coal to power electricity plants.
…….The government-backed investment frenzy rested on the assumption that the economy would sustain its growth pace of 6-7% per year. This belief, however, was not justified. Amid ups and downs since 2014, the economy has slowed and so has its energy demand. Consumption has increased only 44% over the past decade, according to official figures, meaning that a significant capacity is now idle while the investments continue to gulp bulky public funds and many of them have caused lasting environmental damage.
………Chief among the ongoing projects is the nuclear power plant that Russia’s state-owned nuclear energy company Rosatom is building in Akkuyu, on Turkey’s southern Mediterranean coast, under an intergovernmental agreement signed in 2010. The facility, scheduled to become operational in 2023, will be the country’s first nuclear power plant, with a capacity of 4,800 megawatts. The build-operate-transfer project has been granted a 49-year production license that expires in June 2066.
Under the deal, the Russians assumed the financing of the project, estimated to cost $20 billion, while the Turkish government provided the land free of charge and promised to purchase 70% of the plant’s electricity production for 15 years at the price of 12.35 cents/kWh. The estimate was that the cost of the 15-year purchase guarantee would total 57 billion liras, but amid the dramatic deprecation of the currency since 2018, the sum has already swelled to 140 billion liras.
Even before the currency turmoil, the project risked delays due to financing snags. Whether it could be finished on time or whether the builders and Ankara could now face additional costs remains to be seen. But given the country’s energy consumption trend, one thing is already clear: the project was a gross, prodigal misstep economically, not to mention the safety and environmental concerns over the plant’s location in an earthquake-prone area.
Ankara, however, seems to have not learned a lesson. Plans remain underway for a second nuclear power plant in Sinop, on the country’s northern Black Sea coast. The government is looking for new partners after a Japanese-led consortium abandoned the project due to prohibitive costs.
According to the Energy Ministry’s 2019-2023 strategy paper, Ankara will seek an intergovernmental deal different from that with Russia and the details of the project, including its capacity and fuel and reactor types, will be decided once the builder is found.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/12/turkey-nuclear-plant-become-redundant-before-completion.html#ixzz6gpABtCr7
Why is UK govt taking the financial and flooding risk of Sizewell nuclear, when renewables are clearly safer and cheaper?
Tax Research UK 16th Dec 2020, There is an article in the FT this morning that suggests something thatshould be obvious, but needs saying. And that is that renewable energy is
now bringing deflation into the energy market.
Management. As he puts it: With the US poised to rejoin the Paris Agreement
under the incoming Biden administration and the proliferation of net-zero
commitments from various governments, the romance between equity markets
and renewable-energy goes from strength to strength.
overlooked: the underlying reason for the astonishing transformation of
renewables over the past decade from niche to mainstream competing
head-to-head with fossil fuels is economic rather than environmental.
fuels are intrinsically inflationary. This has huge implications for the
distribution of value across the global energy system over the next three
decades.
on the Suffolk coast where the chance that it will be flooded within the
foreseeable future is high? I wish I knew. We now have the option of viable
energy to sustain the transition we need. More investment in it only
increases its appeal. And yet still we stick with the harmful solutions. I
have never got this. I never will.
Britain: Controversial funding arrangements for unnecessary Sizewell C nuclear project ?
 Sizewell C: government reignites £20bn nuclear power station row, Talks with EDF could lead to energy customers being charged for construction costs, Guardian, Jillian Ambrose Energy Energy correspondent, Tue 15 Dec 2020 The government has reignited a row over Britain’s nuclear energy ambitions by agreeing to restart talks with EDF over plans to build a reactor at Sizewell C in Suffolk.The talks could lead to the government taking a direct financial stake in the project before the end of the current parliamentary term in 2024, and using a new financial model that would make the public liable for cost overruns.
The formal negotiations over the £20bn nuclear plant will hinge on whether the French state-owned EDF can prove it has learned lessons from its Hinkley Point nuclear project in Somerset, and that a successor plant would offer the public value for money. If it succeeds it may be offered a multi-billion-pound deal that allows it to charge energy customers for the cost of construction while it builds the reactor, effectively putting bill payers on the hook for delays or cost overruns. Ed Miliband, Labour’s shadow business secretary, accused the government of “kicking big decisions into touch” and failing to offer a “definitive statement today one way or the other on financing, costs or an overall plan. The decision to restart talks is also expected to reopen a debate over whether nuclear energy can offer good value for money, and whether the UK needs new nuclear reactors to help meet a steep rise in demand for low-carbon electricity to power a boom in electric vehicles, induction hobs and heat pumps. …….. The decision to restart formal negotiations follows a hiatus in talks that have been dogged by concerns over cost, and the involvement of China General Nuclear Power (CGN), which owns 20% of the project. But environmental campaigners, including Greenpeace, have warned that nuclear reactors are “unnecessary” and expensive compared with renewable energy combined with battery storage technology. The community group Stop Sizewell added that the reactor posed a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the nearby Minsmere nature reserve. ……. The government said it would only consider playing a greater role in the Sizewell project if there was “clear value for money for consumers and taxpayers”. It is also planning to back a new generation of small modular nuclear reactors, or “mini nukes”, which can be built at a lower cost…… https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/dec/14/sizewell-c-government-talks-nuclear-power-station-edf-suffolk |
|
UK’s Sizewell nuclear project could be a costly fiasco like Hinkley Point C
|
Britain must tread with caution on new nuclear
The country’s first power plant in over 20 years is costly and late,THE EDITORIAL BOARD, Ft.com, 14 Dec 20, The government cannot afford a repeat of what happened with Hinkley Point. Thanks to spiralling construction costs and a controversial support system that guaranteed EDF and its junior partner, China’s CGN, a steep price for the electricity, it has become one of the most expensive nuclear reactor projects in the world. Under the 2013 deal, the coalition government agreed a price of £92.50 per megawatt hour for the electricity — at the time, close to double the wholesale price. The price is also indexed to inflation. Since then, the cost of renewables has plummeted, making Hinkley Point look even more expensive. ….. https://www.ft.com/content/b528ba1c-3e29-4472-89ef-6627b60b6b0c
|
|
UK Sizewell nuclear project could be a costly fiasco like Hikley Point C
|
Britain must tread with caution on new nuclear
The country’s first power plant in over 20 years is costly and late,THE EDITORIAL BOARD, Ft.com, 14 Dec 20 The government cannot afford a repeat of what happened with Hinkley Point. Thanks to spiralling construction costs and a controversial support system that guaranteed EDF and its junior partner, China’s CGN, a steep price for the electricity, it has become one of the most expensive nuclear reactor projects in the world. Under the 2013 deal, the coalition government agreed a price of £92.50 per megawatt hour for the electricity — at the time, close to double the wholesale price. The price is also indexed to inflation. Since then, the cost of renewables has plummeted, making Hinkley Point look even more expensive. ….. https://www.ft.com/content/b528ba1c-3e29-4472-89ef-6627b60b6b0c
|
|
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- 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)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 