nuclear-news

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

Sceptisim over Boris Johnson’s promises environment and climate

The Conversation 13th Dec 2019, Rebecca Willis: Climate change had a higher profile in the UK election campaign than ever before, with parties competing hard over their offer to concerned voters.

But this was a debate that the Conservatives – who won a landslide majority – largely stood back from. Their manifesto was light on detail compared to the other parties, and Boris Johnson chose not to take part in the first ever UK televised leaders’ debate on climate.

Conservative candidates were conspicuous by their absence in local climate
hustings, too. Neither was climate mentioned in their legislative plan for
the first hundred days. The Conservative government did legislate for a net
zero carbon emissions target back in June, following the advice of the
Committee on Climate Change. And there was an explicit manifesto pledge to
deliver on this target, with no signs of backtracking.

In his speech to the party faithful on the morning of his election, Johnson declared his ambition to “make this country the cleanest, greenest on Earth, with the most far-reaching environmental programme”, adding: And you the people of this country voted to be carbon-neutral in this election – you voted to be carbon-neutral by 2050. And we’ll do it.

But targets don’t reduce carbon. Policies do. And despite its much-admired Climate Change Act, the UK’s policy record lately has not been good. The Committee on Climate Change have repeatedly warned that the UK is off track to meet future commitments, a verdict shared by the independent Climate Action Tracker project, which assesses each country’s performance against the Paris Agreement. It rated the UK as “insufficient”, with policies compatible
with a 3°C world – not the 1.5°C level that we desperately need.

If the new government is serious about its commitment, it will have to signal this soon, and with confidence. Steps that it could and should take straight
away include: instigating a swift review of governance for net-zero, giving
responsibility and resources to other government departments, and,
crucially, to local areas, to deliver on carbon strategy; prioritising
climate and environmental protection in negotiations for a trading
relationship with the European Union; moving quickly to consult on a
phase-out date for petrol and diesel vehicles, as promised in its
manifesto; removing the de facto ban on onshore wind energy, which the
Committee on Climate Change advised needs to increase in capacity by 1GW a
year; confirming its opposition to fracking, and making its moratorium
permanent; pledging to formally consider the results of the national
citizens’ assembly on climate change, Climate Assembly UK, due to report
in 2020.

https://theconversation.com/what-boris-johnsons-government-needs-to-do-to-show-it-is-serious-on-climate-change-128885

December 16, 2019 Posted by | climate change, politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK election. Green Party grew by 60%

Business Green 13th Dec 2019, The Green Party saw its total number of votes grow by over 60 per cent in yesterday’s election, delivering the biggest percentage gains of any party following a campaign that saw environmental issues take centre stage.
Caroline Lucas retained her seat in Brighton Pavilion, increasing her share
of the vote by almost five per cent to 57 per cent.

https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3084650/green-party-celebrates-60-per-cent-vote-surge

December 16, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear power the worst, most unsuitable, most expensive power option for Ontario

December 14, 2019 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

U.S. Democrats cave in to a weak compromise National Defense Authorization Act

December 14, 2019 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

UK Conservatives get big donations from fossil fuel and weapons companiess

Unearthed 11th Dec 2019, The Conservative election campaign has received hundreds of thousands of pounds from wealthy investors in the global fossil fuels industry, according to a new analysis by Unearthed. Some of the companies and projects benefiting from donors’ investments are opening up new fossil fuel reserves – even as the world battles climate change and the UK
prepares to host a crunch summit next year.

One of the Tory’s major donors also runs a hedge fund that holds significant investments in a major weapons manufacturer and a mining giant. Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats have taken a significant donation from a subsidiary of a hedge fund that has a major stake in the energy firm being blamed for California’s deadly wildfires and another stake in a French oil services firm.

The analysis looked at donations to political parties over £50,000 during the first three weeks of the election campaign and the financial holdings of
investment companies, as collected and presented by Bloomberg.

https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/12/11/donations-election-campaign-investments-fossil-fuels/

December 12, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

The status of Japan’s nuclear policy and future prospects

December 10, 2019 Posted by | Japan, politics | Leave a comment

France’s nuclear industry in dire straits

The French nuclear revolution is rusting away, December 6, 2019, THE AUSTRALIAN, Henry Ergas “……..France’s nuclear power industry faces a future that is more uncertain than ever.  The problems gripping the industry were highlighted late last month in an official report prepared by the former president and chief executive of PSA Peugeot Citroen, Jean Martin Folz.

While the report’s focus is on the difficulties that have plagued the construction of a new reactor at Flamanville in northwestern France, its implications reach much further.

With nuclear power plants accounting for more than 70 per cent of its overall electricity generation, no country is as dependent on nuclear energy as is France.

The decision to rely so massively on nuclear energy was taken in 1974, after the oil shock of the previous year had underlined France’s vulnerability to Middle Eastern oil. Prime minister Pierre Messmer launched a crash program that led to the construction of 56 reactors in just 15 years.

…….. however, most of France’s generators are approaching the final decade of their useful life. Planning for their replacement has been a stop-start affair, with the Greens’ increasingly strident opposition to nuclear power deterring successive governments from taking action.

As a result, only the Flamanville plant received the go-ahead, with construction beginning in 2007 for an expected entry into service in 2012. Virtually from the outset, the project was beset by woes. At this stage, the total costs of construction are four times greater than initially estimated, while the plant will not enter service before the end of 2022.

The problems stem partly from the sheer complexity of the new reactor, which is the first of its kind to be built in France.

Additionally, the catastrophe at Fukushima in 2011 led to regulatory changes that necessitated costly redesigns. And the project has suffered more than its fair share of mismanagement, aggravated by a byzantine allocation of responsibilities between EDF, the main French electricity utility, which oversaw the project, and many layers of subcontractors.

However, as the Folz report shows, the primary cause of the difficulties lies in the erosion of the industry’s skill base during the long hiatus from the end of the crash program in 1990 to the initiation of Flamanville………

There is, at this point, no prospect of France scaling up its nuclear program ………The cost blowout at Olkiluoto drove Areva, the “national champion” of France’s nuclear industry, into bankruptcy.

Even with an injection of $7.3bn in public funds EDF, which acquired Areva, lacks the balance sheet strength to underwrite new projects, while the French government’s borrowing ability is hampered by its already too high levels of debt.

To make matters worse, the regulated prices at which EDF has to sell the power it generates mean that it cannot charge its European clients the full value of the baseload it supplies.

As for global investors, who might provide the debt financing EDF would require, they are wary of projects that are risky in themselves ….

Given those constraints, the government has announced a modest plan to eventually build six additional reactors. So far, however, there are no actionable decisions beyond the completion of Flamanville. And work on the next generation of reactors….. has been quietly downgraded, making it likely that there will no fourth generation reactor of French design.

The consequences for France itself are far-reaching. Beginning in the late 1950s, French firms succeeded in one high-technology market after the other by developing or acquiring a rather basic design (including the Westinghouse Pressurised Water Reactor, the Mirage jet fighter and the TGV high-speed train) that they up­graded while producing it on a large scale.

That era is over, and there is every sign France is struggling with almost all the major projects it has in train.

The Folz report should therefore come as an ominous warning for Australia’s submarine project, as it identifies French industry’s serious managerial and technological weaknesses in a range of areas, such as precision welding, that are crucial to that project’s success……. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/the-french-nuclear-revolution-is-rusting-away/news-story/afe4546ed799939cf117d71f05035c5e

December 7, 2019 Posted by | business and costs, France, politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear power headed to be excluded from EU green finance scheme

‘Do no harm’: Nuclear squeezed out of EU green finance scheme, By Frédéric Simon | EURACTIV.com Dec 6, 2019 European Greens claimed victory on Thursday (5 December) after EU negotiators reached agreement on a green finance taxonomy aimed at channelling billions of private investor’s money into clean technologies. Coal, and – in principle – nuclear power, are out.

The deal, reached by national envoys and EU Parliament negotiators yesterday evening, marks a stunning defeat for France, which lobbied hard to win recognition for nuclear energy as a low-carbon source of energy…….

Do no harm” test

But the European Parliament “resisted attempts from national governments to politicise the environmental criteria” underpinning the EU’s new sustainable finance classification scheme, the Greens said in a statement.

A strengthened “do no harm” principle means nuclear power will – in all likelihood – be excluded from the EU’s green finance taxonomy when experts sit down to agree detailed implementing rules next year, they said.

The ‘no-harm’ test “will help avoid nuclear energy from being considered an environmentally sustainable investment,” the Greens said in a statement to the press.

The taxonomy will provide investors, pension funds and private equity firms with “a common definition of what is green and what is not” in order to channel more capital into sustainable businesses and prevent “green-washing,” the European Commission said last year when it tabled the proposed new regulation.

The deal creates three categories for sustainable investments: “green”, “enabling” and “transition”. It also obliges companies with more than 500 employees to disclose how much of their activities are compliant with the three new categories, the FT reported.

“Today’s compromise will shift financial flows away from dirty, carbon intensive investments and into sustainable economic activities,” said Bas Eickhout, a Dutch Green MEP who was the European Parliament’s lead negotiator on the draft EU regulation.

“Any investment in coal cannot be considered sustainable,” he said in a statement……..

EU experts will now have to sit down and lay out thresholds to determine which economic activities can qualify as green. These will include CO2 emission limits for power production, which EU experts have tentatively set at 100g of CO2 per KWh – a threshold that would, in principle, exclude natural gas.

Here again, the Greens claimed they won guarantees ensuring those implementing rules “will be prepared by a balanced platform of experts” – not national envoys.

During the negotiations, France pushed for technical thresholds to be decided by a group of experts appointed by EU national governments. But the Greens resisted those attempts, saying that would have exposed the group to political pressures.

“The key part of the agreement is the strong independent governance structure,” Jess said.

“The text establishes an independent Platform on Sustainable Finance who will be responsible for developing and maintaining the full taxonomy going forward,” he explained. The expert group will also be responsible for monitoring capital flows and advising governments in their economic transition.

The agreement still needs to be formally endorsed by EU member states and the European Parliament. https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/do-no-harm-nuclear-squeezed-out-of-eu-green-finance-scheme/

December 7, 2019 Posted by | EUROPE, politics | Leave a comment

NRC Approves Transfer of Nuclear Plant Operating Licenses From FirstEnergy Solutions to Energy Harbor,

NRC Approves Transfer of Nuclear Plant Operating Licenses From FirstEnergy Solutions to Energy Harbor, On November 25, FES announced that it will change its corporate name to Energy Harbor when its restructuring process is completed.AKRON, Ohio, Dec. 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — FirstEnergy Solutions (FES) announced today that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved the transfer of the operating licenses for the Davis-Besse, Perry and Beaver Valley nuclear power stations from the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) to Energy Harbor Nuclear upon the company’s successful emergence from restructuring.

On November 25, FES announced that it will change its corporate name to Energy Harbor when its restr

completed…..https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nrc-approves-transfer-nuclear-plant-140000164.html

December 5, 2019 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. election – views of Presidential candidates about nuclear weapons

Nuclear weapons — they’re still out there. Presidential candidates have ideas on them,  San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko Dec. 1, 2019 ,  One topic that’s gotten little attention during the presidential campaign is the high-stakes issue of nuclear weapons. That’s partly because campaigns tend to focus on bread-and-butter issues, like health care and taxes. They largely steer clear of foreign policy, especially an aspect that’s downright terrifying.

But it’s an issue that matters, to the nation and the world. And the candidates’ public statements, and responses to Chronicle queries, reveal divergent views.

One question that has surfaced is whether the United States, the only nation that has ever used atomic weapons, should reverse its policy and declare it would not strike the first nuclear blow in a future war.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., has introduced legislation that would establish “no first use” of nuclear weapons as binding law. Sen. Bernie Sanders, independent-Vt., is a co-sponsor. Former Vice President Joe Biden told a public gathering in June that “I supported it 20 years before she introduced it.” Several other presidential hopefuls — Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii; entrepreneur Andrew Yang; spirituality author Marianne Williamson; billionaire Tom Steyer — have endorsed the concept.

The only Democratic candidate with a contrary view is Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, who said in the second presidential debate in July that “I wouldn’t want to take that (first use) off the table.”

But others — Sens. Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and former U.S. Housing Secretary Julián Castro — have told interviewers in recent months that they hadn’t reviewed Warren’s proposal and weren’t ready to take a position on it.

The interviewers were from the Union of Concerned Scientists, which favors nuclear de-escalation and sent young people to campaign events to question the candidates.

One prominent candidate, South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, appears to have come down on both sides…….

Besides no first use, The Chronicle asked candidates about the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, signed by the United States in 1963 but never ratified by the Senate; the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, a disarmament pact endorsed by the U.N. General Assembly and ratified by 33 nations so far, but not by the United States or any other nuclear powers; and the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a 1988 agreement between the Soviet Union and the United States under President Ronald Reagan that banned land-based ballistic missiles with a range of up to 3,400 miles. The Trump administration withdrew from that treaty in February.

Some candidates did not respond, including Warren, Harris and Booker. Among those who did, Sanders, Williamson and Steyer took the firmest positions in support of the weapons treaties……..

While Warren’s campaign did not reply to questions about the treaties, the senator has publicly opposed the nuclear buildup proposed by Obama and endorsed by Trump.

“No new nuclear weapons,” Warren said in a November 2018 speech on foreign policy. “We should not spend over a trillion dollars to modernize our nuclear arsenal, at a time when the president is doing everything he can to undermine generations of verified arms-control agreements.”

Perhaps some of those discussions will reach a public forum as the campaign continues.  Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com Twitter:@BobEgelko  https://www.sfchronicle.com/nation/article/Nuclear-weapons-they-re-still-out-there-14873992.php

December 3, 2019 Posted by | politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK election. Nuclear power is a hot topic in Wales

December 3, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Catastrophic weather in Australia does not influence its climate denialist government

 

Time is running out for a climate adaptation plan, Independent Australia

By Chad Satterlee | 30 November 2019  While the climate-deniers in power continue to burn our country, they still have no contingency plan to help those affected, writes Chad Satterlee.

THE POSSIBILITY that the effects of climate change could be more extreme and materialise much sooner than expected was never hypothetical. At the end of the last ice age, it is estimated that temperatures in some regions of the world spiked between five and 15 degrees celsius in just a few decades.


Catastrophic climate conditions have already arrived in Australia. With a growing sense that the events of the last few weeks could be the new normal, dealing with the immediate effects of climate change may take increasing priority over historically unsuccessful emissions reduction efforts.

It is striking that Australia has no unified climate adaptation plan.

Our bushfires are escalating in number and intensity. Given this reality, leaving individuals to enact their own bushfire survival plans again and again seems inadequate. In light of successive governments upholding policies designed to discourage asylum seekers from risking their lives at sea, where is the plan to permanently move residents out of areas surrounded by highly flammable material?  …..

These are just a few matters of relevance, before we even get to responses to heat stress (cooler living spaces), or the erratic intensity of droughts (innovative measures to ensure food and water security), storms (systematic storm-proofing of property) and floods (moving communities to higher ground where necessary).

All of this will require a great deal of resources and coordination. While governments, both State and Federal, have been much too slow to act, politicians interested in keeping their jobs could conceivably be motivated to do so by increasingly engaged voters.

At the same time, the market has failed to respond anywhere near adequately and it is hard to see it doing so. The private sector-led installation of the flood-proofing infrastructure Brisbane needs is nowhere to be seen.

When warmer temperatures melt arctic ice, sun-reflecting white layers on that ice disappear, causing more heat to be absorbed by darker surfaces, a further rise in temperature and a further melting of ice. A number of chain reactions operate like this in the climate system. There could be many more that have not yet been discovered and that could behave in unanticipated ways.

Under some scenarios, changes could be so rapid that even attempts to adapt could become impractical. We haven’t a moment to lose. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/time-is-running-out-for-a-climate-adaptation-plan,13365

December 2, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, climate change, politics | Leave a comment

Suffolk Coastal Labour opposes the development of new nuclear capacity at Sizewell

Suffolk Coastal Labour 27th Nov 2019, Suffolk Coastal Labour does not support the concept of ‘The Energy Coast’. The branding itself puts at risk the visitor and tourist economy of East Suffolk which depends on The Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

It conflicts with established identities such as ‘The Sunshine Coast’ and ‘The Heritage Coast’. The huge industrial projects proposed threaten the local economy and environment without bringing any benefits. Traffic congestion on the A12 and ruralroads will discourage visitors and compromise the quality of life of localresidents.

In Suffolk Coastal, Labour opposes the development of new
nuclear capacity at Sizewell. The Sizewell C development cannot be
undertaken without unacceptable impacts on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It will compromise the future of RSPB
Minsmere, and, especially during the construction period, other Sites of
Special Scientific Interest and the highly sensitive local environment. It
will threaten jobs and prosperity in the visitor and tourist economy, the
agricultural sector and food and drink industries. It offers very few new
permanent jobs for local people. Current proposals to mitigate the worst
effects of the construction project are grossly underfunded and will not
relieve the impact of huge numbers of vehicle movements for goods and
people on the A12 and surrounding rural roads. There are no proposals to
invest adequately in rail alternatives.

https://www.suffolkcoastallabour.org.uk/gene

December 2, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s Labour and Greens parties have highly prioritised climate change action

David Lowry’s Blog 29th Nov 2019, A letter writer in today’s Times newspaper complained that politicians have not prioritized climate change in their manifestos.
Here is my response:
Your correspondent Lesley Boase asks “why isn’t urgent action climate
change at the top of [political parties’] manifestos”? The day before
the letter appeared, the Labour Party launched its 48-page manifesto for
the environment ‘A Plan for the Environment. At its launch in
Southampton, Mr Corbyn stressed” The reality is this election is our last
chance to tackle the climate and environment emergency,” in setting out
“Labour’s plan for real change to protect our planet and restore our
natural world.” He added: “We have no time to waste…we have a choice.
We can shut our eyes, cross our fingers and entrust our fate to a system
that has already driven our planet to the brink of catastrophe. Or we can
do everything possible to tackle the biggest threat we face.
The opening of the foreword to the Green Party manifest states: “Above all, the climate and environmental emergency rages from the Amazon to the Arctic. The science is clear – the next ten years are probably the most important in our history.”

http://drdavidlowry.blogspot.com/2019/11/political-parties-prioritise-climate.html

December 2, 2019 Posted by | climate change, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Premiers of Ontario, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick to plan development of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

Ontario, Saskatchewan, N.B. premiers to announce nuclear reactor deal, Global News  BY STAFF THE CANADIAN PRESS November 30, 2019 “….. The Ontario government said Premier Doug Ford will meet with Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe and New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs for an announcement at a hotel near Pearson International Airport on Sunday afternoon.

A spokesman with Moe’s office confirmed the announcement is connected to an agreement on technology for small modular reactors, while a spokeswoman for Ford’s office said it’s an agreement to work together to determine the best technologies for the deployment of small modular reactors in Canada……

Moe has said that Saskatchewan will address climate change over the next decade by looking to carbon capture and storage technology and by increasing research efforts around small modular nuclear reactors.

However, the possibility of bringing nuclear power to Saskatchewan could still be years away    https://globalnews.ca/news/6239231/premiers-nuclear-reactor-deal/

December 2, 2019 Posted by | Canada, politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »