nuclear-news

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

The problem for nuclear energy is social acceptance

Social acceptance a big challenge to nuclear energy’ Manila Times
BY JORDEENE SHEEX LAGARE ON SEPTEMBER 2, 2017 BAGAC,  BATAAN: Social acceptance is the biggest hurdle in coming up with a national position on the nuclear power program, according to an Energy official.

Energy Undersecretary Donato Marcos said a wide public acceptance regarding the use of nuclear energy would make it easier for the executive and legislative departments to make a decision regarding the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).

A national position is one of the 19 requirements prescribed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for the Development of a National Infrastructure for Nuclear Power.

Pre-feasibility study

A pre-feasibility study on rehabilitating the BNPP is also vital to crafting a national position on the 620-megawatt (MW) facility in this province, Marcos said.

He told reporters on Wednesday that six countries were interested in conducting due diligence on the nuclear power facility, including China, Korea, Japan, France, and the United States.

The Nuclear Energy Program Implementing Organization (Nepio) is currently working on a national leadership for the objective recommendation on BNPP by December…..http://www.manilatimes.net/social-acceptance-big-challenge-nuclear-energy/348176/

September 4, 2017 Posted by | Malaysia, politics | Leave a comment

Trump’s war planning advisors – billionaire private military contractors !

White House Hires Billionaire War Profiteers To Aid In War Planning, Mint Press News, Blackwater founder Erik Prince and billionaire Stephen Feinberg reportedly “recruited” for war planning, by Jake Johnson July 11th, 2017[good tweets included on original]  

Two of President Donald Trump’s closest aides have reportedly solicited advice from two wealthy private military contractors — Erik Prince, founder of Blackwater, and Stephen Feinberg, the billionaire owner of DynCorp International—on how to proceed with the sixteen-year-long war in Afghanistan.

September 2, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

CEO of South Carolina’s state-owned utility Santee Cooper to get $millions, despite nuclear failure

Retiring utility CEO to receive $1 million in 1st year, Seattle Times, By SEANNA ADCOX, The Associated Press, COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The retiring chief executive of South Carolina’s state-owned utility will be paid more than $1 million in the first year of his retirement, which follows the abandonment of a nuclear power project.

Documents provided Friday by Santee Cooper show CEO Lonnie Carter will also leave with nearly $859,000 in a 401K-style plan to invest or draw down from as he wishes.

The 58-year-old will receive roughly $800,000 annually for the next two decades, then $345,000 yearly for the rest of his life. His contract provides an additional $270,500 — half of his current salary — over the first year of his retirement.

 Carter announced his resignation last week after 35 years with the public utility, the last 13 as CEO. But he remains at the helm until the board names an interim replacement, expected within the next several weeks. His impending departure marks the first executive to leave following the July 31 decision to halt construction on two partly built reactors that customers have been funding since 2009.

The retirement package involves his state pension, his 2011 contract and Santee Cooper’s two benefit plans for executives. One is the 401K-style account. The other provides up to $455,200 annually for 20 years, depending on this year’s bonus. It’s unclear whether he’ll receive the total compensation his contract allows.

Carter’s salary is $541,000. Last year, he received a $330,500 bonus for meeting corporate goals such as power costs, safety and customer satisfaction, according to the utility.

Carter had been eligible for retirement since 2011, but the utility’s board had asked him to remain until the nuclear project’s completion. Carter was not asked to leave, and no other executive departures are expected, board Chairman Leighton Lord said last week.

 Santee Cooper was a 45 percent partner with South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. in the effort to expand the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station in Fairfield County north of Columbia, where they have shared ownership of an existing reactor for more than 30 years.\
 The two decided to abandon construction after jointly spending nearly $10 billion, leaving nearly 6,000 people jobless. The utilities’ customers have already paid more than $2 billion on the failed project through a series of rate hikes since 2009, which covered interest costs on financing.

The companies don’t expect to refund anything. Customers could end up paying off that debt over decades…….

Since 2011, Santee Cooper executives were paid more than $70,000 in bonuses for the now-abandoned project. More than half of that went to Carter, The State newspaper reported in Friday’s papers.

 “The performance goals tied to the nuclear project were specific and measurable, and all payouts were based on those goals being met,” said Santee Cooper spokeswoman Mollie Gore.

SCE&G paid nearly $21 million in bonuses to top executives, some of which was for reaching milestones in the nuclear project. The privately owned SCE&G did not say how much of the bonus money was specifically for the nuclear project. http://www.seattletimes.com/business/state-owned-utility-also-paid-bonuses-for-nuclear-project/

September 2, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s divisive effect on Americans – shown by new poll

Most American Voters Believe President Trump Is ‘Tearing the Country Apart’ http://time.com/4922605/donald-trump-fox-poll/,Mahita Gajanan, Aug 31, 2017 The majority of voters surveyed in a recent Fox News poll said President Trump is dividing the U.S.

According to the poll, 56% of voters think Trump is tearing the country apart, while 33% said he is drawing it together.

 The poll, conducted with registered voters between Aug. 27 and Aug. 29, further found that most people are more dissatisfied with the current events in the U.S. than they were a few months ago. Sixty-four percent of those surveyed said they are not satisfied with how things are going in the country, while 35% said they are satisfied. In April, 45% said they were satisfied, while 53% said they were not.

Trump’s job approval ratings in the Fox News poll have also dipped since April, with 55% disapproving of his work as president and 41% approving. Only forty-eight percent of voters disapproved in April.

The poll also highlights differences in perspective between Trump voters and those who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. While 80% of Clinton voters believe white supremacists pose a larger threat to the U.S. than the news media, 75% of Trump voters believe the opposite. When asked if they think Trump will finish his term as president, 92% of his supporters said he would, while 29% of Clinton voters said he would not.

Fox News said it conducted the poll with 1,006 randomly chosen voters across the country. The margin of error for the poll is plus or minus three percentage points.

September 2, 2017 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

America’s Military Now Run by Military Industrial Complex Lobbyists?

Fill the Swamp: Trump to Put Military Industrial Complex Lobbyist in Charge of the Army, Last Wednesday, it was reported that Donald Trump was moving to nominate Raytheon lobbyist Mark Esper for secretary of the Army. Raytheon is one of the “big five” defense contractors, and the president’s decision comes at a time when concerns are being raised over the idea of defense industry executives being placed in senior positions at the Pentagon.Daily Liberator, By:  James Holbrooks, 29 Aug 17 

This article first appeared at ANTIMEDIA……

The Washington Examiner, which broke the news in an exclusive after speaking with unnamed D.C. sources, reported that Pentagon officials “privately expressed confidence that Esper, with his military, Pentagon and Capitol Hill experience, will win quick Senate confirmation.”

That would be a change of pace. Esper’s nomination is Trump’s third attempt to fill the position of Army secretary.

A ROCKY ROAD

Trump’s first choice, New York billionaire and owner of the Florida Panthers hockey team, Vincent Viola, withdrew back in February over concerns about financial conflicts of interest……..

Assuming Mark Esper hangs in there and keeps his name in the running for Army secretary, he’ll need to pass vetting by the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC). That hearing isn’t expected to take place until September. But it was within that committee, back in June, that SASC chairman John McCain first voiced concern over members of the defense industry taking key positions at the Pentagon.

THE CHAIRMAN MAKES NOISE

In a hearing Defense News called “surprisingly contentious,” McCain threatened to block the SASC confirmation of Patrick Shanahan for deputy defense secretary, the number two spot at the Pentagon below defense secretary James Mattis. One of the reasons, the Arizona senator made clear, was Shanahan’s ties to industry contractors.

Shanahan had been with Boeing since 1986 before accepting Trump’s nomination. He was a member of the Boeing Executive Council and had even earned the nickname “Mr. Fix-it” within the corporation for his ability to turn around troubled projects.

At the hearing, McCain cited Shanahan’s industry past, saying he was “not overjoyed” that the would-be deputy secretary spent so much time at one of the big five defense contractors. He also said Shanahan’s ilk serving at the Pentagon was “not what our Founding Fathers had in mind.”

McCain, a Republican, went further weeks later, bluntly stating in a hallway interview in Congress that he “did not want people from the top five corporations” to fill positions at the Pentagon. Party politics aside, at least some lawmakers across the aisle appear to share his concern.

Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat who sits on the SASC, told Defense News in early July that “real concern about the concentration of these people” exists because decision-making processes may be “influenced by [their]prior employment.”

Similarly, Senator Richard Durbin, another Democrat, said the Trump administration has “turned a blind eye to the whole question of conflicts of interest from start to finish.”

Despite such criticisms, the SASC gave Shanahan the green light, and the Senate officially confirmed him last Tuesday. This means that right now, the two most powerful men at the Pentagon have significant past connections to the defense industry.

For those unaware, for years Secretary of Defense James Mattis was a board member of one of the big five contractors, General Dynamics, and up until the point of his nomination had nearly $600,000 in vested stock options with the corporation, according to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings.

LUCKY BREAK

In a convenient bit of timing, John McCain was absent at Shanahan’s full Senate confirmation on July 18, as he was recovering from surgery to remove a blood clot, which ultimately revealed a brain tumor. The same could be said for Ellen Lord, who went through SASC vetting relatively unscathed on the very same day and now awaits the committee’s nod to move on to a full Senate vote.

Lord has been CEO of Textron Systems, a global aerospace and defense conglomerate, since 2012. As with what happened to Shanahan, Lord likely would have faced a harsh grilling from McCain. Commenting on Lord’s smooth sail through her SASC hearing, Defense News wrote:

“That may have been due to the absence of Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who chairs SASC. McCain, recuperating at home from a recent surgery, previously told Defense News he is concerned about the number of defense industry figures entering key Pentagon roles.”

The same good fortune was bestowed upon a former Lockheed Martin vice president on Thursday. Ryan McCarthy passed his SASC vetting for undersecretary of the Army, and if the Senate eventually confirms both him and Mark Esper, it would mean the top two Army positions at the Pentagon would be filled by defense industry executives.

It was speculated that former Lockheed Martin attorney David Ehrhart would come under heavy scrutiny at his SASC hearing for Air Force General Counsel, the department’s chief legal officer. The same would have surely gone for John Rood, Trump’s expected pick for undersecretary of defense for policy and current head of international sales at Lockheed.

But with the SASC confirming defense industry figures in McCain’s absence, it now appears the Arizona senator’s leeriness was the only substantive thing holding up the show.

DOWN A DARK PATH

Like Senator Richard Durbin and others in Congress who don’t like the emerging trend under Donald Trump, most in the mainstream media will only go so far as to highlight the myriad conflicts of interest between the Trump administration and the corporate world.

Right now, for example, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is catching fire for being the CEO of ExxonMobil when it violated sanctions on Russia back in 2014. The U.S. Treasury Department just hit Exxon with a $2 million fine for that move, and Exxon promptly filed a lawsuit against the government in response………http://www.thedailyliberator.com/fill-swamp-trump-put-military-industrial-complex-lobbyist-charge-army/

August 30, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump spending up big on nuclear weapons

Trump Forges Ahead on Costly Nuclear Overhaul, Sweeping Aside Doubts, By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROADNYT, AUG. 27, 2017 During his speech last week about Afghanistan, President Trump slipped in a line that had little to do with fighting the Taliban: “Vast amounts” are being spent on “our nuclear arsenal and missile defense,” he said, as the administration builds up the military.

The president is doing exactly that. Last week, the Air Force announced major new contracts for an overhaul of the American nuclear force: $1.8 billion for initial development of a highly stealthy nuclear cruise missile, and nearly $700 million to begin replacing the 40-year-old Minuteman missiles in silos across the United States.

While both programs were developed during the Obama years, the Trump administration has seized on them, with only passing nods to the debate about whether either is necessary or wise. They are the first steps in a broader remaking of the nuclear arsenal — and the bombers, submarines and missiles that deliver the weapons — that the government estimated during Mr. Obama’s tenure would ultimately cost $1 trillion or more.

Even as his administration nurtured the programs, Mr. Obama argued that by making nuclear weapons safer and more reliable, their numbers could be reduced, setting the world on a path to one day eliminating them. Some of Mr. Obama’s national security aides, believing that Hillary Clinton would win the presidential election, expected deep cutbacks in the $1 trillion plan.

Mr. Trump has not spoken of any such reduction, in the number of weapons or the scope of the overhaul, and his warning to North Korea a few weeks ago that he would meet any challenge with “fire and fury” suggested that he may not subscribe to the view of most past presidents that the United States would never use such weapons in a first strike.

“We’re at a dead end for arms control,” said Gary Samore, who was a top nuclear adviser to Mr. Obama.

While Mr. Trump is moving full speed ahead on the nuclear overhaul — even before a review of American nuclear strategy, due at the end of the year, is completed — critics are warning of the risk of a new arms race and billions of dollars squandered.

The critics of the cruise missile, led by a former defense secretary, William J. Perry, have argued that the new weapon will be so accurate and so stealthy that it will be destabilizing, forcing the Russians and the Chinese to accelerate their own programs. And the rebuilding of the ground-based missile fleet essentially commits the United States to keeping the most vulnerable leg of its “nuclear triad” — a mix of submarine-launched, bomber-launched and ground-launched weapons. Some arms control experts have argued that the ground force should be eliminated……

the Trump administration appears determined to hold on to the ground-based system, and to invest heavily in it. The cost of replacing the Minuteman missiles and remaking the command-and-control system is estimated at roughly $100 billion. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/27/us/politics/trump-nuclear-overhaul.html

August 28, 2017 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

House Armed Services Committee member accuses Trump of rushing nuclear contracts

Armed Services Dem accuses Trump admin of rushing nuclear contracts, The Hill, BY ELLEN MITCHELL – 08/27/17 House Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith (D-Wash.) on Sunday accused the Trump administration of rushing two major nuclear weapons programs.

“This week, the Air Force awarded four contracts worth nearly $2.5 billion to begin developing two new nuclear weapons. Yet this administration has not even completed its Nuclear Posture Review,” Smith said in a statement.

“We are rushing on autopilot to fund these programs.” The Pentagon in April officially began the nuclear posture review, which was ordered by President Trump in January. It’s the first review of the U.S. nuclear weapons policy since 2010, and won’t be done for several more months.

The Pentagon, however, has not waited for the review’s completion in moving ahead with two new nuclear weapons programs.

Last week the Defense Department awarded contracts for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, which will replace the current Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the Long Range Standoff (LRSO) weapon, the next nuclear-capable cruise missile to be fired from aircraft…..http://thehill.com/policy/defense/348197-armed-services-dem-accuses-trump-admin-of-rushing-nuclear-contracts

August 28, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA’s Dept of Energy gives Rick Perry the pro coal pro nuclear report that he wanted

Rick Perry gets his electricity grid study. The coal and mining industries like it. WP, By Steven Mufson August 24 A much-anticipated Energy Department report on the electricity grid made recommendations for regulatory changes that would bolster coal and nuclear power plants.

The changes, if adopted, would alter the way prices are determined in electricity markets, ease environmental reviews for coal plants and speed the permitting process for a variety of energy sources.

The 187-page report rejects the notion that the coal and nuclear plants that have been forced to shut down over the past 16 years had been closed prematurely, noting that cheap, abundant natural gas had been the main factor — not environmental regulations or renewable energy sources as Republican leaders have contended…..

The Energy Department document carries little weight on its own, and most of its recommendations fall in the turf of other departments and agencies.

 But the report has been seen as a test of whether the Trump administration is going to politicize government studies and disregard scientific evidence.

The in-depth look at the state of the grid quickly drew praise from coal and nuclear groups, and sharp rebukes from environmental and solar energy groups.

Among the recommendations is one that suggests that the Environmental Protection Agency ease permitting requirements for new investments at coal-fired plants, a process known as new source review…..

The report also endorsed price changes that would prevent solar and wind energy from providing energy at negative prices, which they can do thanks to federal tax credits.

This hurts other energy suppliers, especially in the nuclear industry, and the recommendation was welcomed.

 “We’re very pleased with the top line recommendation for the implementation of long overdue energy market reforms,” said Joe Dominguez, executive vice president of regulatory affairs at Exelon, the nation’s largest nuclear power utility.

The report suggested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission speed up its permitting process ……

Environmental and renewable industry groups slammed the report for failing to deal with climate change and the drive toward low carbon electricity, and noted that the final report differed from earlier drafts that had been leaked……..https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2017/08/23/fa4a506a-883e-11e7-a50f-e0d4e6ec070a_story.html?utm_term=.00a738b7bf7a

August 26, 2017 Posted by | ENERGY, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Big mistake for Ontario to lock itself into nuclear power

Why Ontario shouldn’t lock itself in to nuclear power,  The province has committed to a dying technology when greener, safer energy innovations are just around the corner, TVO,  Aug 25, 2017, by Richard Laszlo, Richard Laszlo is the founder of Laszlo Energy Services and the author of Pollution Probe’s First Primer on Energy Systems in Canada.

We are at a critical juncture in Ontario, and no less than the economic future of the province is at stake. The Liberals are about to release their long-term energy plan, and the danger is that they’re going to foolishly reinvest in the Darlington and Pickering nuclear plants.

Nuclear power is inflexible, and going all-in on a centralized and costly technology just when solar power, energy storage, and co-generation are becoming more affordable is a big risk. The province could be locking itself out of safer, cheaper, and more flexible energy for generations.

I once supported nuclear power; I’m biased toward fancy technology. I studied engineering and physics and have been working in the energy field for almost 15 years. But I’m trying to look at this objectively, and as someone who winces at every wasted customer and taxpayer dollar.

Our overreliance on nuclear power leaves us with an overabundance of energy in off-peak hours. Nuclear plants are big, complicated, and have to be kept running 24/7 — which forces our energy system to do all sorts of crazy things. When the plants produce surplus electricity, we sell it to neighbouring jurisdictions at a loss or pay them to take it off our hands. Meanwhile, wind and solar owners get paid to produce unneeded power, while gas plants get paid to sit idle in the off chance they are needed.

The amount of waste this system generates is staggering: the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers recently estimated that Ontario squandered more than $1 billion-worth of low-emission electricity in 2016 — enough to power more than 760,000 homes for a year.

It’s a favourite pastime of think tanks like the Fraser Institute as well as certain conservative newspaper columnists to blame renewable power for Ontario’s high hydro rates, but as data from the Independent Electricity System Operator clearly shows, it’s nuclear and gas plants that are responsible for the lion’s share of increases. An overinvestment in nuclear power would make the problem worse.

Based on cost and performance, the Pickering plant should have been shut down already. Based on 1960s technology, it has among the highest operating costs of any nuclear facility in North America. Yet Ontario Power Generation wants to keep it running until 2024, so it’s asking the Ontario Energy Board for permission to raise the price of its nuclear-generated electricity nearly 180 per cent, to 16.5 cents per kWh — more than almost any other technology around, including solar. Dozens of groups — including Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, the Association of Major Power Consumers of Ontario, and the Consumer Council of Canada — have submitted responses to OPG’s request. Nearly all of them express concerns about the economics of the Pickering plan…….

what should the government do instead?

First, it should immediately halt the Pickering extension. The plant’s operating licence expires in 2018, and that’s a good time to shut it down. (Plant employees can work on to decommissioning the site, for which money has already been set aside.)

Second, take good hard look at the Darlington rebuild and seriously consider other options to meet the projected demand. While the rebuilding process has already started, it’s not too late for the government to change direction. The project is expected to cost at least $12.8 billion, but a long history of underestimating nuclear capital costs suggests that number will rise.

Third, plan to meet future demand via a mix of efficiency and clean-energy innovation. The government should set standards on emissions and performance, then let the market bring solutions and fight it out to deliver low-emissions power at the lowest possible price. New generation can be added to the system gradually so we can reap the benefits of falling tech prices.

All this will result in greater CO2 emissions over the short term; the fact is, there will be some increase regardless of whether Ontario continues to invest in nuclear energy. But this way, we’ll replace our supply gradually at much lower costs while still meeting our long-term climate change goals — and without tying ourselves to nuclear power for decades to come. http://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/the-next-ontario/why-ontario-shouldnt-lock-itself-in-to-nuclear-power

August 26, 2017 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

 German Social Democrat candidate for chancellor wants US nuclear arms removed from Germany

US nuclear arms should be removed from Germany – chancellor candidate, Rt. 23 Aug, 2017 German Social Democrat candidate for chancellor Martin Schulz says he will push for US nuclear weapons to be removed from Germany, calling for an end to the “armament spiral” pushed by US President Donald Trump.

“As German Chancellor… I will champion for the withdrawal of the nuclear weapons stationed in Germany,” the leader of the Social Democrats (SPD) said in Trier, addressing a campaign rally on Tuesday.

About 20 US nuclear warheads are currently stationed at a military base in Buechel, Germany, DPA news agency reported, citing unofficial estimates. The SPD leader also made it clear that, unlike Angela Merkel, he is strongly opposed to President Trump’s demands for NATO members to increase their defense spending.

“Trump wants nuclear armament. We reject it,” Schulz said, adding that his position also applies to the North Korea crisis.

“More than ever, the North Korean conflict signals the need for arms limitation, especially [need for] nuclear disarmament.”….

Schulz says the money would be better used for other purposes, like schools. “It cannot be that Federal Republic of Germany looks without any comment or action at how the armament spiral, which is wanted by Trump, continues to develop.”

In an opinion piece last week, German Foreign Minister and SPD leader Sigmar Gabriel slammed Trump’s calls for NATO members to meet the defense spending target of two percent of GDP, accusing Merkel of following Trump’s “dictate” and essentially “kneeling” to the US leader.

“We must free ourselves from the devilish logic saying that security is to be reached through armament,” Gabriel said…..

Strong opposition to Trump’s armament plans also came from European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker earlier this year. “I am very much against letting ourselves be pushed into this,”he said……https://www.rt.com/news/400656-schulz-germany-us-nuclear/#.WZ3nUOZRYVQ.facebook

August 25, 2017 Posted by | Germany, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Donald Trump spouted nonsense about “clean coal” , at rally in Phoenix

Trump thinks clean coal is when workers mine coal and actually ‘clean it’ http://reneweconomy.com.au/trump-thinks-clean-coal-workers-mine-coal-actually-clean-36755/ By Joe Romm on 24 August 2017 ThinkProgress

How off the rails was President Donald Trump’s rally speech in Phoenix Tuesday night? He spouted utter nonsense on clean coal, and it didn’t even make CNN’s story, “Donald Trump’s 57 most outrageous quotes from his Arizona speech.”

Trump appears to believe that clean coal — which, it must always be pointed out, doesn’t actually exist — is when workers mine coal and then physically “clean it.” That does not happen, but facts have never stopped Trump.

“We’ve ended the war on beautiful, clean coal, and it’s just been announced that a second, brand-new coal mine,” said Trump, “where they’re going to take out clean coal — meaning, they’re taking out coal. They’re going to clean it — is opening in the state of Pennsylvania, the second one.” nia, the second one.”

 There are many misstatements or outright lies in those brief lines. First and foremost, “clean coal” is a fantasy. You can’t “clean it.” In terms of carbon pollution, coal is the dirtiest of fossil fuels, so you couldn’t clean coal unless you could remove or capture all the carbon and bury it.

The phrase “clean coal” refers to expensive and mostly non-commercial technologies that reduce pollution and capture carbon dioxide when coal is burned.

Even Robert Murray, CEO of the country’s largest privately held coal-mining company, doesn’t believe in that. “Carbon capture and sequestration does not work,” he said last month. “It is neither practical nor economic.”

Second, there never was a “war on coal.” Indeed, as we reported last month, a leaked draft of the Department of Energy’s electric grid study concluded that factors like environmental regulations and renewable energy subsidies “played minor roles” in the shutdown of big coal plants.

Instead, coal has simply become uneconomic. “[Coal] plants that have retired are old and inefficient units that were not recovering their operations and fuel costs, much less capital cost recovery,” the draft report says.

Finally, Trump’s “second, brand-new coal mine” in Pennsylvania is actually a renovation and reopening project for a metallurgical coal mine.

The increase in the metallurgical coal market is largely being driven by China’s steel industry, not by any policies from Trump, as the Washington Post fact checker explained in June. The mine project will create, at most, dozens of jobs.

The Post gave Trump three Pinocchio’s for lying about the first coal plant back in June. These new statements deserves a lot more.

August 25, 2017 Posted by | climate change, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Baltic or Visaginas: Will any of the two nuclear neighbor-competitor plants get built?


http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2014-04-baltic-visaginas-will-two-nuclear-neighbor-competitor-plants-get-built  
VILNIUS—As the Lithuanian government has it, Russia’s halting its Baltic Nuclear Power Plant project in Kaliningrad Region is a result of Moscow’s failure to secure prospects of exporting the station’s energy and synchronizing the regional grid with that of Europe, but, says Vilnius, Lithuania – where politicians, against public disapproval, still have their sights set on a new reactor in Visaginas – should be able to avoid making the same mistakes. April 14, 2014 by Andrei Ozharovsky   This article was translated by Maria Kaminskaya.  idc.moscow@gmail.com

VILNIUS—As the Lithuanian government has it, Russia’s halting its Baltic Nuclear Power Plant project in Kaliningrad Region is a result of Moscow’s failure to secure prospects of exporting the station’s energy and synchronizing the regional grid with that of Europe, but, says Vilnius, Lithuania – where politicians, against public disapproval, still have their sights set on a new reactor in Visaginas – should be able to avoid making the same mistakes.

Kaliningrad Region “has no link connecting its power lines with Poland, and no guarantees that they will be able to deliver electric power to Lithuania [and] other countries, and building such a powerful site and producing energy in a situation where it can’t be sold to anyone would, I think, be a huge risk for [Russia],” Lithuanian Prime Minister Algirdas Butkevičius said in early April in a conversation with the national radio station LRT, the Baltic portal DELFI reported (in Russian).

Butkevičius said that “anyone familiar with the energy system that exists in Kaliningrad Region understands that after building a [nuclear power plant] they will have to install power lines to provide for transport of electric power to other countries.” And there is, Butkevičius added, another problem still in Kaliningrad Region’s energy system: “according to my information, […] they need to upgrade the domestic power lines as well, since these are worn out,” the prime minister said.

Russia’s project of a nuclear power plant (NPP) in Kaliningrad Region – a Russian territory bordered by the Baltic Sea in the west, Lithuania in the north and east, and Poland in the south, with Belarus lying further to the east – was aimed from the start at selling energy for export to neighboring states: The amount of power that the future Baltic NPP would produce – two units equipped with VVER-1200 reactors to a combined capacity of 2,300 megawatts – is well in excess of the region’s own needs. According to a late March report by the Russian daily Kommersant (in Russian), the region’s peak demand is 827 megawatts.

But all attempts by Russia to land power delivery contracts with potential customers in the European Union – first and foremost, Lithuania and Poland – fell flat, much like the Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom’s negotiations to secure investment funds or loans from energy and banking heavyweights in Europe.

Late last May, news reports broke saying that work at the site in Kaliningrad’s Neman District, where construction started in 2010, had been halted, and that Rosatom was considering an alternative option of building small- and medium-capacity reactors at the site. In an extensive interview given to the popular radio station Ekho Moskvy last June Rosatom head Sergei Kiriyenko admitted the re-planning would cause construction to “definitely halt for a year to two years,” and, possibly, longer.

According to Lithuanian Prime Minister Butkevičius, Vilnius so far has no official confirmation of Russia’s decision to give up its project in Kaliningrad……….

…against the will of their voters

In October 2012, over 62% of votes cast in a national advisory referendum, held alongside  parliamentary elections, said “no” to building a new nuclear power plant in Lithuania……..

In a comment given to Bellona in early April, Linas Vainius, of the Lithuanian environmental organization Atgaja, said that “the referendum incurs explicit legal obligations, and decisions by the parliament should have followed which did not follow.”

“It is unbecoming of democratic parties and a democratic country of the European Union to negate and trample on a decision of their citizens that they expressed in a referendum. And this was a clear decision – ‘no’ to a new nuclear power plant,” Vainius said.

“As we see, the people’s representatives do not – or will not – understand and respect the will of the public. No wonder, given that the public is only remembered when the time comes to rise, with its help, to the height of power,” a statement by Lithuania’s environmental movement Association Žali.lt, published last October, said in response to the government’s continued attempts, over the year that had passed since the referendum, to push for the Visaginas construction.

“Those in power could gain back the respect of the public if they stopped listening to tall tales on the order of those told by [Belarusian President Alexander] Lukashenko and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin about the flourishing future of nuclear power, and if they stuck their heads from behind the dusty walls of the past, before the death knell is rung on this energy sector,” the statement read, referring to another nuclear project underway in the region – the two-unit Belarusian NPP, which is being built to a Rosatom-developed project near Ostrovets in Lithuania’s neighbor Belarus, close to the Lithuanian border.

All three NPP construction plans sparked a wide-scale cross-border activist campaign fighting to preserve the nuclear-free status of the region and uniting the efforts of political, environmental, and other NGOs from Russia, Lithuania, and Belarus in anti-nuclear initiatives and protest actions.

“The world – not just the regions affected by the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters – is fast distancing itself from this Cold War technology, which is not improving at all, but only becoming more expensive,” Žali.lt said in its statement.

August 25, 2017 Posted by | EUROPE, politics | Leave a comment

The State, South Carolina, names the people who brought on the nuclear power fiasco

These are the people who brought us the SCE&G/Santee Cooper nuclear debacle http://www.thestate.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/cindi-ross-scoppe/article168891607.html, CINDI ROSS SCOPPE, Associate Editor, AUGUST 24, 2017 COLUMBIA, SC 

You want names? We’ve got names.

Names of the SC Public Service Commissioners, who have been acting on SCE&G’s rate requests and will decide how much more the utility can charge us for its unfinished nuclear reactors at the VC Summer nuclear facility.

Names of the commissioners who gave SCANA the initial go-ahead to start the project, back in 2008.

Names of SCANA’s management and board members.

Names of Santee Cooper’s management and board members.

 And a link to the names of legislators who approved the law that made it oh, so much easier for us to be charged already — and left holding the bag — for the failed project.

Public Service Commission

The links take you to contact and biographical information about them on the PSC website.

John E. “Butch” Howard, District 1*

Elliott F. Elam, Jr., District 2

Comer H. “Randy” Randall, Vice Chairman, District 3

Elizabeth B. “Lib” Fleming, District 4*

Swain E. Whitfield, Chairman District 5

Nikiya “Nikki” Hall, District 6

G. O’Neal Hamilton, District 7*

* Was serving on the commission in 2008, when the project was given its crucial, initial approval

PSC members in 2008, when the project was given initial approval

John E. “Butch” Howard, District 1, Charleston

David A. Wright, District 2, Columbia

Randy Mitchell, District 3, Saluda

Elizabeth B. “Lib” Fleming, District 4, Spartanburg

G. O’Neal Hamilton, chairman, District 5, Bennettsville

Mignon L. Clyburn, District 6, Charleston

C. Robert Moseley, vice chairman, at large, Irmo

SCANA Corp (parent of SCE&G)

Kevin Marsh, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Names and information about other corporate officers

Board of Directors

Gregory E. Aliff, Certified Public Accountant, Retired from Deloitte & Touche LLP, Reston, VA

James A. Bennett, South Carolina Central Area Executive, First Citizens Bank & Trust Company, Columbia, SC

John F.A.V. Cecil, President, Biltmore Farms, Asheville, NC

Sharon A. Decker, Chief Operating Officer, Tryon International Equestrian Center, Mill Spring, NC

D. Maybank Hagood, Chairman & CEO, Southern Diversified Distributors, Charleston, SC

Kevin B. Marsh, President & CEO, SCANA Corporation, Cayce, SC

Lynne M. Miller, Environmental Consultant, Great Falls, VA

James W. Roquemore, CEO and Chairman, Patten Seed Company, Orangeburg, SC

Alfredo Trujillo, President & COO, Georgia Tech Foundation, Atlanta, GA

Maceo K. Sloan, Chairman, President & CEO, Sloan Financial Group, Chairman & CEO, NCM Capital Management Group, Durham, NC

Santee Cooper

Lonnie N. Carter, President and Chief Executive Officer

Santee Cooper contact information

Names of other corporate officers

Board of Directors

W. Leighton Lord III, Chairman, Nexsen Pruet law firm, Columbia

William A. Finn, 1st Vice Chairman, chairman of AstenJohnson, a specialty textile company for the printing and papermaking industries based in Charleston

Barry Wynn, 2nd Vice Chairman, president of Colonial Trust Company, a private trust company specializing in investment management and estate services, Spartanburg

Kristofer Clark, broker with Easlan Capital and owner of Pristine Properties LLC., Easley

Merrell W. Floyd, retired staff coordinator at Horry Electric Cooperative, Conway

J. Calhoun Land IV, Land, Parker & Welch law firm, Manning

Stephen H. Mudge, co-founder, president and CEO of Serrus Capital Partners, a Greenville-based real estate investment firm

Peggy H. Pinnell, owner of the Peggy H. Pinnell Insurance Agency in Moncks Corner, a State Farm agency

Dan J. Ray, president of DR Capital Group, a Pawleys Island-based financial advisory and investment company

David F. Singleton, president of Singleton Properties, a real estate investment and sales firm, Myrtle Beach

Jack F. Wolfe Jr., past president and CEO of the Mid-Carolina Electric Cooperative in Lexington

Office of Regulatory Staff

Dukes Scott, executive director

You might also want to read these other pieces I’ve written

Here’s who voted to give SCE&G a blank check

How ‘waste not, want not’ became ‘spend more, profit more’

SCE&G nuclear fiasco: It’s complicated. Here are some explanations.

SCE&G law could cost you more than you imagine

This is what has to change after the SC nuclear meltdown

Ms. Scoppe writes editorials and columns for The State. Reach her at cscoppe@thestate.com or (803) 771-8571 or follow her on Twitter or like her on Facebook @CindiScoppe.

August 25, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. Senator wants report on costs and safety of Los Alamos National Laboratory

Senator seeks answers on LANL’s nuclear safety, By Rebecca Moss | The New Mexican, Aug 23, 2017,

A U.S. senator has asked the National Nuclear Security Administration to report to Congress by Thursday on the costs and safety of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s weapons production program and, in particular, the potential for critical accidents.

In early August, U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., a ranking member of the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, sent a letter to Frank Klotz, administrator of the NNSA, saying she had serious concerns about poor federal oversight and management of the laboratory and requesting a report.

The inquiry was triggered by a series of investigative reports by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Public Integrity, which were published in The New Mexican and other newspapers earlier this summer. The series highlighted a number of serious incidents at Los Alamos’ plutonium facility, events that could have led to significant radiological releases and worker deaths. Poor management has resulted in unsafe working conditions, injured workers and federal violations at the plutonium facility and other sites, and senior officials rarely were penalized for the problems, the stories said……

Los Alamos was the only nuclear site that failed its annual review for nuclear criticality safety in fiscal year 2016, a program designed to prevent severe nuclear accidents. The lab was graded as “adequate but needs improvement” the previous year, according to a federal report.

In her Aug. 3 letter to Klotz, McCaskill said, “Private firms contracted to operate and maintain these facilities have not been held accountable in a meaningful way for the safety lapses that occurred under their watch.”….

I have previously noted my concerns regarding DOE’s poor oversight and management of its contracts and its inability to properly exercise effective oversight of its budget,” McCaskill said in the letter.

She asked the National Nuclear Security Administration to report on the current state of operations and safety testing at Los Alamos’ plutonium facility, known as PF-4, and whether safety standards have been met. She also asked the agency to provide costs associated with closing the facility, how much of the agency’s budget for fiscal year 2018 will go to improving safety standards, and if any penalties will be imposed on the lab or its management contractors.

“Does NNSA feel it is meeting its duty to prevent dangerous nuclear accident?” she asked.

U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., said in an email that McCaskill’s letter “raises some very serious and important questions, and I hope the NNSA answers these questions in a timely manner.”…….

Greg Mello, director of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear disarmament-focused nonoprofit, said in a statement that McCaskill’s letter is “only the tip of the iceberg” of problems at Los Alamos.

“Bad management is a feature,” he said. “It is partly why people work at these facilities (LANL in particular) in the first place — low professional standards, high salaries, and lack of accountability.”

Contact Rebecca Moss at 505-986-3011or rmoss@sfnewmexican.com. http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/senator-seeks-answers-on-lanl-s-nuclear-safety/article_2e3901ef-fff5-5086-b270-eeb603c15e07.html

August 25, 2017 Posted by | politics, safety, USA | Leave a comment

Poll shows that most Americans oppose military threats against North Korea

Poll: Most Americans oppose military threats against North Korea, Gephardt Daily, By United Press International – August 21, 2017  Aug. 21 (UPI) — The majority of Americans oppose U.S. military threats against North Korea, according to a new poll. But that opinion changes if diplomatic efforts fail to solve the rift between the two countries.

The CBS News poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe the U.S. “should not” threaten military action against North Korea, while 33 percent said it should.

Among Republicans, however, those numbers are almost reversed. The poll found that 63 percent of GOP supporters believe the U.S. should threaten military action, while 30 percent said it should not.

Among Democrats, the vast majority — 82 percent — said the U.S. should not threaten military action, while only 11 percent said military threats are the right thing to do.

Independents tended to reflect the national average, with 58 percent against military threats and 33 percent in favor.

However, the poll also found that most Americans are in favor of military action if diplomacy doesn’t work…..http://gephardtdaily.com/national-international/poll-most-americans-oppose-military-threats-against-north-korea/

August 23, 2017 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »