Casks hold dangerous radioactive elements like Cesium-137, Strontium-90 and Plutonium-239, fuel bi-products created inside reactors, which remain dangerous for generations.
Here’s what they do to people.
Taiwan about to close second nuclear reactor
Taiwan to shut down 2nd nuclear reactor within days, July 12, 2019 (Mainichi Japan) TAIPEI (Kyodo) — Taiwan’s Atomic Energy Council agreed on Friday to shut down a second nuclear reactor on Monday when its 40-year operating license expires, moving the island a step closer to nuclear-free status.
The decommissioning of the No. 2 reactor of the No. 1 nuclear power plant in Shimen, New Taipei City, follows that of the plant’s No. 1 reactor, closed for the same reason last December.
Taiwan still has two other nuclear power plants, each with two reactors.
In a statement, the council said it issued the decommission license Friday to Taiwan Power Co., the builder and operator of the facility, after the state-owned power utility submitted relevant documents.
Li Chi-ssu, deputy director of the council’s Department of Nuclear Regulation, told Kyodo News that with the license, the company can now begin the lengthy process of discharging and storing spent fuel rods.
It originally planned to store them at an outdoor dry storage facility, but cannot do so due to the opposition of the New Taipei City government……….
The operating licenses of the two reactors at the No. 2 nuclear power plant in Wanli, New Taipei City, will expire in December 2021 and March 2023, and those of the other two reactors at the No. 3 facility in Pingtung, southern Taiwan, in July 2024 and May 2025. https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20190712/p2g/00m/0in/095000c
Even the nuclear industry itself is pretty pessimistic about its future
Viewpoint: Building a belief in nuclear, financially and emotionally, WNN, 08 July 2019 “………. . Nuclear technology remains emotive and controversial in some countries, and public pressure can ultimately move policy, as has been seen in Germany, which is abandoning nuclear generation entirely, despite the impact this has on its ability to meet CO2 reduction targets.Delivering projects, on time and to budget
The nuclear industry is also susceptible to wavering investor confidence, as has been evident recently in the UK. Nuclear plants are exceptionally large and long-term investments, so private-sector investors set the bar very high when it comes to incentives and the reassurances they need before making final investment decisions.
When Hitachi suspended work on its Wylfa Newydd project, it cited the size of the financial burden as one of the main factors, while the high cost of Hinkley Point has, in part, been explained by the fact that EDF could only borrow capital funding at high interest rates. That’s because this project is deemed ‘risky’, and well over half the cost was attributed to raising the money over the lifetime of the project.
Following the publication of the UK National Infrastructure Assessment last year, these high borrowing costs for nuclear have come into even sharper focus. This report recommended that the Government restrict support to “one more nuclear plant before 2025” as the costs of renewable technologies were “far more likely to fall, and at a faster rate”.
Delays and cost increases don’t help public perception. ………… It’s our responsibility as an industry to work together to change perceptions and provide stakeholders with the confidence that nuclear projects will be delivered on time and to cost, and to set out the evidence that demonstrates why nuclear energy must form part of the future energy mix. If we can’t do this then the trust simply won’t be there, and neither will the investment……..
we’re working alongside other leading industry bodies including Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power, the Electric Power Research Institute, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency to deliver events like the Innovation for the Future of Nuclear Energy – A Global Forum, which took place in Korea last month………
Present a more positive future
There are many exciting possibilities for nuclear, from innovation in waste management and recycling to the emergence of small modular reactors. But, in order to realise this future, the industry has some short-term hurdles that it must overcome. And in particular we must drive efficiencies into existing programmes and onto existing plants.
EDF has said that, by applying lessons learned at Hinkley Point, huge economies of scale can be achieved if a second pair of EPR reactors are built at Sizewell. Even so, the confidence may not be there yet for stakeholders and investors to appreciate where the returns lie. We need to focus on what can make a real difference now, in order to bring 
about that future.
It’s a crucial time for the nuclear sector. ……. can we work together to drive transformative change and help persuade all those who will need to invest in its future, both emotionally and financially, to believe in it too? http://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Viewpoint-Building-a-belief-in-nuclear,-financiall
War with “small” nuclear weapons – No Such Thing As a ‘Small’ Nuclear War
There Is No Such Thing As a ‘Small’ Nuclear War (But Trump Wants Mini Nukes)
A really bad idea? National Interest, he Democratic lawmakers who control the U.S. House of Representatives are pushing back against Pres. Donald Trump’s plan to expand the United States’ nuclear arsenal with new and smaller “tactical” weapons.
The Democrats’ version of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which funds the military, faces opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate, as well as from the president himself. Trump has threatened to veto the NDAA, potentially setting up a budgetary showdown that could force the Pentagon to operate on so-called “continuing resolutions” that essentially copy previous years’ budgets.
A really bad idea? National Interest, he Democratic lawmakers who control the U.S. House of Representatives are pushing back against Pres. Donald Trump’s plan to expand the United States’ nuclear arsenal with new and smaller “tactical” weapons.
The Democrats’ version of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which funds the military, faces opposition in the Republican-controlled Senate, as well as from the president himself. Trump has threatened to veto the NDAA, potentially setting up a budgetary showdown that could force the Pentagon to operate on so-called “continuing resolutions” that essentially copy previous years’ budgets.
Trump in 2017 laid out a plan for a host of new and modernized nuclear weapons, including less-powerful nukes that some hardliners believe are more useful than larger-yield weapons are and could make limited atomic wars feasible and survivable on a planetary level.
But many nuclear experts disagree. No nuclear war is “small,” they argue. And any nuclear war would be devastating for the entire human race and the only planet that’s known to support life.
The House bill “signals a new, much-needed change in direction for U.S. nuclear weapons policy, one that would reduce the nuclear threat and cut some spending on these weapons,” wrote Eryn MacDonald, an expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Massachusetts.The House bill stands in stark contrast with the version the Senate passed easily in late June [2019], which would fully fund the Trump administration’s nuclear programs and in some cases even increase funding.
We support passage of the House version of the NDAA; if its version becomes law, it will be a victory not only for U.S. security, but also for common sense.
The House bill is chock-full of positive provisions. For example, it would prohibit deployment of the Trump administration’s new ‘low-yield’ nuclear warhead; cut funding for an unnecessary replacement for the current ground-based intercontinental ballistic missile; and reduce the excessive, but congressionally mandated, requirement for the number of plutonium pits that the National Nuclear Security Administration has been told to produce.The House’s version of the NDAA defunds the W76-2 low-yield warhead for the U.S. Navy’s Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles, which MacDonald described as “an ill-conceived attempt to lower the threshold for nuclear war.”
The W76-2 “would thrust U.S. ballistic-missile submarines into regional conflicts instead of reserving them for their crucial role as a nuclear deterrent, providing a secure means of retaliation if they should ever be needed,” MacDonald added.
The Trump administration requested $19.6 million for the Navy to begin installing these new warheads on missiles later this year. The House defense authorization bill sensibly zeros out this money, but Republicans plan to offer an amendment to the bill on the House floor that would restore that funding……….https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/there-no-such-thing-small-nuclear-war-trump-wants-mini-nukes-66431
USA nuclear industry in the doldrums – desperate efforts to revive it
U.S. to extend nuclear reactor lifespans http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0005869248 PARIS (Reuters) 12 July 19 — The United States plans to extend the lifespans of existing nuclear reactors and support new technologies as it seeks to revive an industry seen as crucial to its energy security, a senior U.S. official said on Thursday.U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Dan Brouillette told an International Energy Agency conference on nuclear and hydrogen in Paris that both technologies were crucial for reducing carbon emissions and boosting energy security.
The U.S. nuclear industry has been in the doldrums for years because of competition from cheap natural gas and falling wind and solar power costs.
Several nuclear plants have closed while a project to build two reactors in South Carolina was abandoned in 2017 with the reactors half-built and billions of dollars in sunk costs.
“We believe strongly that a strong domestic nuclear energy [industry], enabled by our existing fleet and enhanced by game-changing advanced nuclear technologies is critical to our nation’s energy security, our national security, our environmental sustainability,” Brouillette said.
The U.S. Department of Energy agrees with the IEA that extending the life of existing reactors is perhaps the most competitive way to produce low-carbon electricity, he said. The department was working to help extend the licenses for the existing fleet out to 80 years, he added
U.S. Congress setting a more reasonable course for nuclear weapons policy
 The House is Setting a New, More Rational Direction for US Nuclear Policy, Union of Concerned Scientists
ERYN MACDONALD, ANALYST | JULY 10, 2019, The House today began debating its version of the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress’ annual effort to oversee US security policy and set defense program funding levels. What’s different this year is the bill signals a new, much-needed change in direction for US nuclear weapons policy, one that would reduce the nuclear threat and cut some spending on these weapons.
The House bill stands in stark contrast with the version the Senate passed easily in late June, which would fully fund the Trump administration’s nuclear programs and in some cases even increase funding. We support passage of the House version of the NDAA; if its version becomes law, it will be a victory not only for US security, but also for common sense. The House bill is chock-full of positive provisions. For example, it would prohibit deployment of the Trump administration’s new “low-yield” nuclear warhead; cut funding for an unnecessary replacement for the current ground-based intercontinental ballistic missile; and reduce the excessive, but congressionally mandated, requirement for the number of plutonium pits that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has been told to produce. This new, rational direction in nuclear policy is being spearheaded by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the new chair of the House Armed Services Committee and an outspoken critic of many of the Trump administration’s nuclear weapons policies. He and his like-minded colleagues are using their newly minted majority power to rethink the role that nuclear weapons play in US security policy. Defunds W76-2 “low-yield” warhead……. Cuts funding for Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent……. Reduces pit production requirements The House defense authorization bill also reduces a congressionally mandated requirement for the NNSA to produce plutonium pits, the fissile core of nuclear weapons….. Reconsiders the Trump administration’s proposed new nuclear warhead …….. Considers a ‘no-first-use’ policy There’s even more to like about the House defense authorization bill. For example, it would require a federally funded research and development center to assess the risks and benefits of a US no-first-use nuclear policy, including gauging the potential reactions by US allies. …….. https://allthingsnuclear.org/emacdonald/rational-nuclear-policy
|
|
Russia’s grandiose nuclear ambitions – expressed in its floating nuclear plant for the Arctic
Russian floating nuclear plant prepares for towing into Arctic seas, Plant to support 50,000-person Chukotka region with power for oil and gas industries Katie Toth · CBC News Jul 10, 2019 Russia’s controversial nuclear barge is ready to travel through the Arctic seas — and observers across the globe are watching.
Greenpeace has called it a “floating Chornobyl.”
But the Akademik Lomonosov, which will dock in the Eastern Siberian town of Pevek, also provides a small glimpse into Russia’s northern ambitions and the role of nuclear power in achieving them.
Russia’s atomic energy agency, the Rosatom State Atomiс Energy Corporation (ROSATOM), has said in news releases that the future floating nuclear power plant will be a key piece of infrastructure as it develops its Arctic shipping route.
Meanwhile, the agency has started work on a fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers to keep that route open. Its latest three ships can cut through three metres of ice, and each can produce 350 megawatts of power.
It’s a lot more difficult to counter a catastrophe there than anywhere else on the globe.– Jan Haverkamp, Greenpeace
Rebecca Pincus, an assistant professor with the U.S. Naval War College, says Russia’s vision for itself as a global superpower in the 21st century hinges on the far North.
Russia’s grand strategy for the century is centred on developing Arctic resources,” Pincus said. “That economic engine [is] … integral to Russia relaunching its place in the world.”
According to statements by ROSATOM, the plant will supply the 50,000-person Chukotka region with power and it will support “key industries” in this oil-and-gas rich region.
‘It’s a classical Russian solution’
The choice to build a floating nuclear power station is “a fabulous little encapsulation of all the challenges Russia faces in developing its Arctic zone,” Pincus said. “Floating a nuclear power plant to a tiny little city in the Russian Arctic is colossally challenging, colossally expensive … it’s a classical Russian solution.”
………. Jan Haverkamp, a nuclear energy expert with Greenpeace, says his organization is right to be worried. The Lomonosov will be docking in one of the most remote places in the world.
The Lomonosov, prior to a paint job. Greenpeace is concerned about the plant and its isolated location, saying that it would be difficult to counter a catastophe in the remote region. (ROSATOM)
“It’s a lot more difficult to counter a catastrophe there than anywhere else on the globe,” he said.
Haverkamp is also concerned about the power being used to extract fossil fuels.
“Climate change is a given.… Opening up new fossil projects at the moment, when the world needs to be fossil-free in 2050, does not seem to make very much sense.”
Meanwhile, ROSATOM says this barge is only a small piece of a new future for floating nuclear power. It’s building a second generation of the floating nuclear units, and it’s in talks with several countries looking to buy nuclear barges of their own.
Emails to ROSATOM’s media contact were not returned before publication.
The barge will start getting towed to Pevek in August. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/russia-floating-nuclear-plant-1.5206448
Tax-payer funding absolutely critical to Russia’s nuclear industry
State support pivotal to Russia’s nuclear sector, says report, WNN 12 July 2019
Russia’s nuclear power industry consists of 89 enterprises that are owned by the state-run joint stock company Atomic Energy Power Corporation (AEPC), or Atomenergoprom, its Russian name.
Since commissioning its first, five-megawatt, nuclear power plant, in Obninsk in 1954, Russia has been one of the world’s leading countries in nuclear power generation, S&P says, and the country plays an important role in all parts of the nuclear cycle, from mining to construction.
The report – What Makes Russia’s Nuclear Sector Competitive – says state support includes capacity-supply agreements, ad hoc equity contributions from the government, and low nuclear liabilities that accrue only after 2011……….
“We expect domestic nuclear capacity to increase only moderately because electricity demand in Russia is stagnating, given only modest GDP growth, a significant potential for energy savings, and the government’s intention to avoid raising electricity prices through additional increases in capacity payments,” the report says.
The key risks, according to S&P, concern international projects: tighter requirements for new builds, which are likely to mean potential delays – “as seen with” the Hanhikivi project in Finland; and, nuclear phase-out policies in Western Europe that “could weigh on exports in the longer run”.
“That said, we believe exports of fuel and enrichment services should be resilient in the next several years because Russia mostly exports to nuclear-supportive countries under long-term contracts,” the report says.
“Meanwhile, treatment of nuclear waste or decommissioning services could increase in importance,” it adds.
AEPC has “solid” profitability and financial metrics compared with international and local peers, S&P says, which provides “financial capacity” for new nuclear power construction, domestically and abroad.
Although Russia is involved in a “record number” of international nuclear power construction projects, the prime contractor is AEPC’s unrated sister entity Atomstroyexport, and AEPC is only directly involved in two projects, Hanhikivi in Finland (34%) and Akkuyu in Turkey (96%), the report notes.
AEPC covers all stages of the civil nuclear cycle, from uranium extraction (about 13% of global production) through enrichment and fuel fabrication (about 36% and 17% global market shares) to electricity generation in Russia. It is the sole operator of nuclear plants with 29.1 GW, or 12% of Russia’s total installed capacity, and 18% of the country’s electricity production, at ten plants and 35 units in operation. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/S-P-report-on-Russia
USA. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez move to declare climate crisis official emergency
 Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez move to declare climate crisis official emergencyGuardian, Emily Holden in Washington, 9 Jul 2019 Democrats to introduce resolution in House on Tuesday in recognition of extreme threat from global heating A group of US lawmakers including the 2020 Democratic presidential contender Bernie Sanders are proposing to declare the climate crisis an official emergency – a significant recognition of the threat taken after considerable pressure from environment groups. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic congresswoman from New York, and Earl Blumenauer, a Democratic congressman from Oregon, plan to introduce the same resolution in the House on Tuesday, their offices confirmed. A Sanders spokesperson said: “President Trump has routinely declared phony national emergencies to advance his deeply unpopular agenda, like selling Saudi Arabia bombs that Congress had blocked. “On the existential threat of climate change, Trump insists on calling it a hoax. Senator Sanders is proud to partner with his House colleagues to challenge this absurdity and have Congress declare what we all know: we are facing a climate emergency that requires a massive and immediate federal mobilization.” Climate activists have been calling for the declaration, as data shows nations are not on track to limit the dangerous heating of the planet significantly enough. The UN has warned the world is experiencing one climate disaster every week. A new analysis from the economic firm Rhodium Group today finds the US might achieve less than half of the percentage of pollution reductions it promised other countries in an international agreement……. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/08/climate-crisis-sanders-ocasio-cortez-emergency |
|
Iran to breach nuclear deal limits: still far from producing a nuclear weapon
Iran Announces New Breach of Nuclear Deal Limits and Threatens Further Violations, NYT, By David D. Kirkpatrick and David E. Sanger, July 7, 2019
Iran said on Sunday that within hours it would breach the limits on uranium enrichment set four years ago in an accord with the United States and other international powers that was designed to keep Tehran from producing a nuclear weapon……….. The steps Iran has taken are all easily reversible. …..
In violating the limits on uranium enrichment, Tehran still remains far from producing a nuclear weapon. It would take a major production surge, and enrichment to far higher levels, for Iran to develop a bomb’s worth of highly enriched uranium, experts say. It would take even longer to manufacture that material into a nuclear weapon……..
The European strategy for the next few months, one senior diplomat involved in the discussions said, is to buy some time and hope to defuse the crisis. There is no immediate urgency about starting the process for “snapback” sanctions, and European officials, led by the French, hope to begin some kind of negotiation process that would make that unnecessary.
If Iran’s increase in the enrichment level is modest — say, to 5 percent, a level often used for fueling reactors — there would be no political momentum for sanctions, especially because European officials largely view President Trump as the instigator of the nuclear deal’s demise. ……
For a year after Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from what he called a “terrible” deal negotiated by his predecessor, Iran stayed within the accord’s limits. It pressed Britain, France and Germany to make good on their promises to compensate the country for oil revenues and other losses resulting from American sanctions. …….https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/07/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-limits-breach.html
French government wants an independent audit of EDF’s Flamanville nuclear plant
Reuters 5th July 2019 The French government has requested an independent audit of EDF’s
(EDF.PA) Flamanville nuclear plant, which faces new cost overruns and
delays of up to three years after a regulator ordered repairs last month.
ASN, the French nuclear watchdog, said that state-owned EDF would have to
repair eight faulty weldings in the reactor’s containment building,
adding that it had rejected a request to delay repairs until 2024.
(EDF.PA) Flamanville nuclear plant, which faces new cost overruns and
delays of up to three years after a regulator ordered repairs last month.
ASN, the French nuclear watchdog, said that state-owned EDF would have to
repair eight faulty weldings in the reactor’s containment building,
adding that it had rejected a request to delay repairs until 2024.
France’s Economy minister Bruno Le Maire told BFM television on Friday
that “incidents” at Flamanville, northern France, were
“unacceptable”, adding that he had asked a former executive with car
maker PSA (PEUP.PA), Jean-Martin Folz, to conduct an independent inquiry.
that “incidents” at Flamanville, northern France, were
“unacceptable”, adding that he had asked a former executive with car
maker PSA (PEUP.PA), Jean-Martin Folz, to conduct an independent inquiry.
Ohio Lawmakers Miss Deadline to Save Two Nuclear Plants, Vow to Keep Trying
FirstEnergy says it will continue decommissioning plants outside Cleveland and Toledo but can wait a few weeks longer for state aid By Kris Maher, July 7, 2019
The oil-and-gas industry, environmental groups and renewable energy companies have lined up to oppose the legislation, as Ohio becomes the latest state to wrestle with balancing a diverse energy portfolio with clean-energy goals and local economic interests….. (subscribers only)
Britain’s nuclear power projects not economically viable, and adding to global warming
Nuclear power is helping to drive the climate crisis, Guardian, 3 July 19 Linda Rogers says the CBI has its head in the sand over nuclear reactors and Iain Climie wants politicians prepared to fund action to combat the climate emergency
Has the Confederation of British Industry got its head in the sand, or in the record levels of carbon-intensive concrete just poured at the Hinkley C nuclear site (Build more nuclear reactors to help climate crisis, says CBI, 28 June)? Nuclear power, apart from destroying biodiversity throughout its life cycle, produces up to 37 times the CO2 emissions of renewable energy sources, owing partly to the mining and refining of uranium. The impact of this process on people and the environment is not included in the rationale for nuclear power in the UK.
As the CBI looks for investment from abroad, UK taxpayers will pick up the bill for the likely time and cost overruns of new nuclear build under the regulated asset-based funding proposals so welcomed by the CBI. Nuclear has failed to achieve the investment needed so far because it is no longer seen as economically viable. Even Hitachi (one of the world’s largest multinationals) cannot magic Wylfa Newydd into a commercially viable business. In January this year, Hitachi announced it had failed to squeeze the UK government for the very high levels of subsidies desired by large investors upfront for Wylfa. Nobody can afford the costs or the many risks attached to building new nuclear power stations.
Linda Rogers
PAWB (Pobl Atal Wylfa B/People Against Wylfa B) https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/02/nuclear-power-is-helping-to-drive-the-climate-crisis
Dark money and the planned nuclear power bailout in Ohio
Who paid all that money to buy all those nuclear bailout ads raining on Ohio? https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/07/02/who-paid-all-money-buy-all-those-nuclear-bailout-ads-ohio-house-bill-6/1443145001/
Josh Goad, Cincinnati Enquirer July 3, 2019 If you’re an Ohioan with a TV or radio, you’ve probably heard about a nuclear power bailout bill that lawmakers are considering in Columbus. But what you can’t find out is exactly how much money is being spent on those ads – or who originally gave the money for them.
House Bill 6 seeks to tax Ohioans 80 cents a month through their utility bill to bailout First Energy Solutions’ nuclear power plants in Northern Ohio. Critics say the bill, which also will boost costs for commercial and industrial customers, will discourage the use of renewable energy for businesses across the state. Proponents say the bill will help Ohio stay energy independent and keep badly needed jobs in the communities around the plants.
The bill, which has the backing of powerful House Speaker Larry Householder, triggered up to $8.3 million in ads and other campaign spending, published estimates show. For comparison, a record $45 million was spent in the 2018 Ohio gubernatorial race.
Yet an Enquirer analysis of ad purchases for and against House Bill 6 and reported to the Federal Communications Commission shows just $2.7 million in sales. The Cincinnati market, the state’s third largest, was the leader in ads on the bailout bill.
Why the gap between the $2.7 million hard figure and the $8.3 million estimate? Some broadcasters, including Cincinnati’s WCPO-TV, are choosing not to post billings for the ads – and under FCC rules, they don’t have to do so.
The big money behind the bill hasn’t been reserved for ads this year. Groups allied with Householder put $800,000 into ads for Ohio’s 2018 campaigns, boosting candidates who put Householder into the speaker’s seat. A couple of the winning candidates also are key sponsors of House Bill 6.
But donors behind the campaign money, and for many of the ads you’ve seen about the bill, can’t be pinpointed.
The money backing the bill primarily started with a 501(c)(4) or “dark money” organization called Generation Now that doesn’t have to list donors. Generation Now then gave to a political action committee, which must disclose donors. So while it’s clear which candidates got the “dark money” boosting the nuke plant bailout went, it’s uncertain who originally contributed it or the money that bought airtime.
Who runs Generation Now and is on its board isn’t clear. But the Columbus address of a longtime Householder adviser, Jeff Longstreth, is listed as the principal office in documents filed to the Ohio Secretary of State. So far, the 501(c)(4) hasn’t filed paperwork with the IRS – a step that such nonprofits seeking to stay in existence take. Paperwork that’s normally filed with broadcasters, listing the board members of groups airing political ads also is missing.
How much is being spent?
Generation Now has spent over $1.9 million on ads supporting House Bill 6, documents filed with the FCC show. This is out of around $2.7 million reported being spent on ads across Ohio on the proposal.
First Energy, which owns the plants being bailed out, backs the Ohio Clean Energy Jobs Alliance. The alliance has spent around $275,000 on ads in support of the bill and has stuck to Facebook for distribution.
The opposition to House Bill 6 has put $400,000 into its ads. The total from Ohio Consumers Power Alliance, American Energy Action and Ohioans Against Nuke Bailout compares to the roughly $1.3 million Generation Now has spent in Cincinnati alone.
Why isn’t all the spending being reported?
The FCC requires stations to make ad spending records available for the public record, but only if the ads are focused on a specific candidate or a national issue. State and local issues are not on the short list of requirements.
Some stations choose to file everything for the sake of transparency. Others don’t.
FCC public inspection files show 41 stations in markets across Ohio – Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland-Akron, Toledo, Zanesville and Wheeling-Steubenville – were contacted by Generation Now or other interested parties because they are required to file such contracts by FCC rules.
But 13 stations, including every commercial TV broadcaster in Dayton, did not report how much Generation Now and other organizations spent on ads.
Where did the money come from?
‘Dark money’ is inherently difficult to track. While we don’t know the source, the money can be followed when it changes hands.
Other than the money Generation Now spent in 2019 on ads, the nonprofit also donated over $1 million to the Growth & Opportunity PAC in 2018. The political action committee is based in Lexington, Kentucky, but operates throughout the Midwest.
According to documents filed with the FEC, the PAC only raised around $1.1 million in 2018. Almost all of that money would go on to pay for ads for Ohio Republican candidates during the midterm elections. Though Generation Now did not directly pay for those ads, it did provide the majority of funds necessary through three sizable donations to the PAC.
When the donations were made last year, Generation Now and the PAC had something in common: A treasurer from Dinsmore Agent Co, a subsidiary of Cincinnati-based law firm Dinsmore and Shohl.
Eric Lycan, the treasurer and former lawyer at Dinsmore’s Lexington office, would have overseen the donation. He still serves as the treasurer for both the organization and the PAC, and several documents filed to the FEC include his Dinsmore email address.
The only Ohio-based organization that is easily traceable is Ohio Citizen Action, founded in Cleveland in 1976. Through its education fund, Ohio Citizen Action created the Ohio Consumers Power Alliance, who has paid for $8,000 in anti-House Bill 6 ads.
As nonprofits, Ohio Citizens Action and its education fund report their annual revenues to the IRS but not their donors. The last available filing for the education fund was for 2017, which was posted in January 2019.
Where did the ‘dark money’ go?
Reps. Jamie Callender, R-Concord, and Shane Wilkin, R-Hillsboro, both primary sponsors of House Bill 6, directly benefited from the ads purchased by the Growth & Opportunity PAC.
Of the 22 Republican candidates that received either mail or radio ads, 19 would go on to win a seat in the House. Callender received more in ad spending than any other winning candidate, with $93,000 spent on seven different ad buys.
Householder also had nearly $50,000 worth of ads paid for by the PAC during his election to his Southeast Ohio seat. Another $25,000 was donated directly to Householder by FirstEnergy’s PAC.
Karen Kasler, of public radio’s Statehouse News Bureau, asked Householder earlier this year if House Bill 6 was a priority to him because of his connections to Eric Lycan and the Growth & Opportunity PAC.
“It’s a priority bill for me because I’ve always cared about the energy in the state of Ohio,” said Householder. “I’ll tell you who’s paying for these ads: it’s working men and women from Ohio, who want to save their jobs and it’s Ohio corporations, headquartered in Ohio, that want to stay here. That’s who’s paying for it.”
Why is ‘dark money’ hard to track?
It can be as simple as Generation Now, and other dark money groups, not filing the appropriate paperwork to the IRS. If a tax-exempt organization doesn’t file for three consecutive years, it loses its status. Since Generation Now was incorporated in January 2017, the three-year deadline is approaching.
Though Householder says that hardworking men and women donated money to the organization, Generation Now doesn’t have a donation portal on its website.
While reaching out to Generation Now for comment, Curt Steiner, CEO of Columbus-based Steiner Public Relations, answered instead. He said that he represents Generation Now and that he couldn’t speak on why there is no donation portal.
Why have the ads run recently?
Many of the ads about House Bill 6 played on Ohio’s airwaves talked about getting the bill passed before the end of June.
Some of the ads feature an ominous voice talking about what Ohio’s future might look like under the bill, others showcase somebody who talks about their life and what FirstEnergy has done for them.
So why the deadline for passage? FirstEnergy Solutions needed to know whether to place an order for $52 million worth of fuel for one of its nuclear power plants. It takes months for such an order to be filled.
Action on FirstEnergy Solutions restructuring plan, filed through the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio, has been posted four times, moves that a FirstEnergy spokeswoman described as “not unusual.”
Senate President Larry Obhof, R-Medina, told Statehouse reporters on Saturday he isn’t worried about the delayed fuel purchase.
“I’ve had a number of conversations with (FirstEnergy) going back several months about what the timeline was and there’s always been a little bit of flexibility,” Obhof said.
Meanwhile, House Bill 6 is still awaiting a vote in the Ohio Senate.
Oyster Creek Generating Station is now in the hands of Holtec
Oyster Creek nuclear plant sale to Holtec is complete, App.com, LACEY Oyster Creek Generating Station is now in the hands of Holtec – International, which completed the purchase of the now-defunct nuclear facility on Monday.Oyster Creek, before it shut down in September, was one of the nation’s oldest nuclear power plants. Camden-based Holtec plans to decommission this half-century-old facility and profit off the reactor’s nearly $1 billion decommissioning trust fund, money set aside for dismantling the reactor.
Under the agreement, Holtec subsidiaries Oyster Creek Environmental Protection International LLC will serve as owner and Holtec Decommissioning International will oversee decommissioning.
Holtec purchased the power plant for an undisclosed amount from Exelon Generation of Chicago.
Exelon had originally planned to take the plant down slowly over the course of 60 years in a process that would have allowed some of the facility’s dangerous radioactivity to degrade to safer levels. But Holtec’s proposal seeks to complete the decommissioning within a mere 10 years. The company says its new spent fuel storage systems enable hot, radioactive fuel to be removed from the plant’s cooling pool and placed into storage casks years earlier than originally planned.
Holtec is also applying to build an fuel storage facility in New Mexico, but is waiting on approvals. In the meantime, the spent fuel will be stored in steel and concrete canisters on the plant’s property in Lacey…….
Holtec has also applied to purchase other nuclear plants at Indian Point in New York, Palisades in Michigan, and Pilgrim in Massachusetts from Entergy Nuclear. Each has massive decommissioning trust funds that would be transferred to Holtecupon completion of the sales. …..this is Holtec’s first major expansion into the business of decommissioning.
Currently, Holtec is also developing small modular nuclear reactors….
Inside the cask
Cesium 137
Can burn skin, cause radiation sickness and damage tissue. In high doses, it can cause cancer.
Strontium-90
Is absorbed like calcium within the body and can lead to bone cancer, bone marrow cancer, and cancer in the tissues near bones.
Plutonium 239 and 240
Both remain dangerously radioactive for thousands of years. If inhaled, plutonium particles can scar the lungs, damage bones, liver and spleen and cause cancer.
A local residents group, the Concerned Citizens for Lacey Coalition, is demanding more answers from the company about its plans to quickly demolish Oyster Creek. Coalition member Paul Dressler worries about Lacey being a “guinea pig” for the relatively new and evolving process.
“We want to see transparency,” he said during a meeting with Press staff last week.
Dressler and coalition Chairman Ron Martyn, who live about five miles from the plant, want assurances that Holtec won’t abandon the project if money runs out before completion. They also want to see the regulatory agency that oversees plant decommissioning, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, come up with more stringent rules and best practices for this emerging practice.
“There are too many unanswered questions to go forward, and no one is stepping up to answer the basic business questions,” said Martyn. “It’s not fair to the community, it’s not fair to the state, to operate in such a vacuum.”……… https://www.app.com/story/money/business/2019/07/02/oyster-creek-nuclear-plant-sale-to-holtec-is-complete/1622164001/
Delay in decision on Ohio nuclear bailout
Deadline is blown, but Ohio nuclear plant operators say there’s still time for bailout, By Jul 1, 2019
1 This Month
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (301)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
