Trump Wants “Alternative Facts” on Climate Change. We Saved the Real Ones.
Daily Kos ·”……Today, the new White House team is taking a deeply troubling step to hide the truth by shuttering the EPA’s climate change website and, by extension, deleting volumes of important scientific information. And it is part of a very troubling pattern: President Trump once famously proclaimed that climate change was an idea “created by and for the Chinese.” And, in an all-out assault on science and reality, he has nominated Scott Pruitt – a man so extreme that we broke 35 years of silence on cabinet nominees to oppose his nomination – to head the Environmental Protection Agency.
Hinkley Point nuclear prject will be delayed because of Btitain’s exit from EU atomic treaty
Brexit will delay new British nuclear power stations, warn experts
Analysts say exit from EU atomic treaty is ‘lose-lose’ that will raise costs and safety questions at plants such as Hinkley Point C, Guardian, Adam Vaughan, 27 Jan 17, Britain’s first nuclear power station in two decades will be delayed by a government decision to quit Europe’s atomic power treaty, experts have warned.
Ministers revealed on Thursday that Brexit would involve the UK leaving Euratom, which promotes research into nuclear power and uniform safety standards.
The news poses problems for the Hinkley Point C station in Somerset, while raising questions over safety inspection regimes and the UK’s future participation in nuclear fusion research.
Referring to Hinkley and other nuclear projects in the pipeline, he said: “The UK nuclear industry is critically dependent on European goods and services in the nuclear supply chain and their specialist nuclear skills. Leaving Euratom will inevitably increase nuclear costs and will mean further delays.”
EDF, which is building the Hinkley project and hopes to construct other plants, has told MPs that “ideally” the UK would stay in the treaty, as it provided a framework for complying with international standards for handling nuclear material.
Without mentioning Hinkley, the French state-owned company also warned that restrictions on the movement of people because of Brexit could delay delivery of new energy infrastructure.
Antony Froggatt, a research fellow at the Chatham House thinktank, said: “Outside of Euratom and the single market, the movement of nuclear fuel, equipment and trained staff will be more complicated.”
He noted that because the UK was a supporter of nuclear power, Brexit would affect the balance of nuclear policies in the EU, where Germany, Italy and even strongly pro-nuclear France had taken steps in recent years to reduce their reliance on atomic power.
Vince Zabielski, a nuclear energy specialist at the law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, said: “If the UK leaves Euratom before new standalone nuclear cooperation treaties are negotiated with France and the US, current new build projects will be placed on hold while those standalone treaties are negotiated.”
Other lawyers questioned why the government had decided to quit Euratom and in the manner it had done so, in the explanatory notes accompany the article 50 bill.
“There doesn’t seem to have been any real explanation as to why, because we are going towards the unknown at great speed. Legally we don’t have to [leave Euratom because the UK is leaving the EU],” said Jonathan Leech, a senior lawyer and nuclear expert at Prospect Law.
“At the moment, the UK standing on the world nuclear stage is predicated on a series of cooperation agreements, and those we have the benefit of from being a member of Euratom, and the few bilateral agreements are based on Euratom, too. Take that away and you have no basis for international nuclear cooperation.”
He said quitting Euratom would create unnecessary uncertainty for new nuclear power and research into fusion power, a cleaner alternative to nuclear fission in which the UK has been a world leader for decades……. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/27/uk-exit-eu-atomic-treaty-brexit-euratom-hinkley-point-c
Britain quits European nuclear body
New power stations in doubt after Brexit change, THE TIMES, The new wave of British nuclear power stations was in jeopardy after the government announced it would pull out of a Europe-wide nuclear co-operation organisation.
Ministers sneaked out the news that the UK would leave the European Atomic Energy Community, known as Euratom, within the notes accompanying the bill published yesterday to trigger Article 50, the process for leaving the European Union.
Euratom was established through a 1957 treaty and plays a crucial role in ensuring compliance with international nuclear safeguards as well as establishing a European market for nuclear goods and services.
The decision to announce Britain’s planned exit from Euratom yesterday caught the nuclear industry by surprise and caused concern in parts of government. Some ministers wanted to delay the announcement because of…http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-quits-european-nuclear-body-pgmq9m9fc
Linda Gunter busts the spin of America’s “new nuclear” salesmen
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/01/20/nuclear-fiddling-while-the-planet-burns/ There is a climate crisis upon us. Polar ice is melting. Sea level rise is happening. Time is running out. Emergency solutions are the only option — energy supplies that can come on fast and sustainably.
Sadly, some in the U.S. Congress would rather bury their heads in radioactive quicksand, sinking our money into nuclear energy research at national laboratories that have sought but failed to find illusory atomic answers for decades.
The House and Senate are re-introducing near identical versions of the “Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act of 2017,” which promises to throw our money down the nuclear rabbit hole rather than direct major funding to renewable energy solutions that are already addressing climate change quickly and effectively but should be supported and accelerated before it’s too late.
The Act states as its purpose “To enable civilian research and development of advanced nuclear energy technologies by private and public institutions, to expand theoretical and practical knowledge of nuclear physics, chemistry, and materials science, and for other purposes.” It passed the House last year but stalled in the Senate.
In reality, it is another futile tilt at the so-called “advanced reactor” windmill, when real windmills would actually do the job far faster, more safely and cheaply and without all the attendant risks of tinkering with radioactive materials and perpetuating a deadly waste problem into eternity.
The bill states it would authorize research, modeling and simulation of “advanced nuclear reactor concepts” that are “inherently safe.” This chimera has been chased for decades and inherent safety won’t be found in the designs the national laboratories are pushing, such as the sodium-cooled reactor, proven to be literally explosive.
So-called new generation “fast reactors” are another old idea from an old research establishment, the Argonne National Laboratory, which would be delighted to be on the receiving end of this latest transfusion. Argonne’s first attempt at a fast neutron reactor was canceled by the U.S. Congress in 1994.
A new documentary, The New Fire, (a singularly odd choice of title given the subject), celebrates the excitement of eager young scientists determined to invent the better nuclear mousetrap. But back in 1996 the National Academy of Sciencesalready acknowledged that the development of a reactor that could recycle its own waste would have very high costs and marginal benefits and would take hundreds of years — time we definitely do not have.
The thrill of theoretical experimentation in the laboratory may be exciting for young engineers. But they shouldn’t get our money. Nor should we hand these aspiring atomic alchemists the mandate to cure climate change. That race is already being won by renewable energy research and implementation. It is in this field where the real “innovation” lies and where Congress should be directing their mandate and funding dollars.
American scientists are now organizing their own march on Washington
Scientists are planning their own march on Washington | January 25, 2017 Scientists are now organizing their own mass march, demanding the new administration respect science and heed their warnings about climate change.
The idea of a scientists’ march on Washington began in earnest on Reddit, with scientific professionals discussing how to best make their voices heard with respect to getting President Trump to heed their warnings on climate change. Scientific redditors then decided to put out a call to action for all scientists and anyone who supports empirical science to come together in Washington, DC after seeing the resounding success of the historic Women’s March on Washington and around the country.
“This isn’t just about jobs to us, if we cared about money we wouldn’t be in this field in the first place. This is about the future of every organism on earth, many that haven’t even been born yet,” wrote Reddit user RetardCharizard. “We have to fight.”
Caroline Weinberg, a public health researcher, told the Washington Post that the Trump administration’s gag orders on government agencies that study climate change and how it affects the U.S. was the last straw.
“We were inspired (well, infuriated) by the current attacks on science from the new administration,” Weinberg wrote in an email to the Post. “Slashing funding and restricting scientists from communicating their findings (from tax-funded research!) with the public is absurd and cannot be allowed to stand as policy.”
A Twitter account for the march has already been launched, and says a date announcement is forthcoming.
Trump gagging scientists – this is scary stuff
Gag Order Or Not, Here’s Why Trump Cracking Down On Government Science is So Scary, Modern Farmer By on January 25, 2017 You may have seen news about a crackdown on communications between USDA (and the EPA, HHS, and Department of the Interior) and the public. In this latest affront, the administration on Monday directed the USDA to stop all “outward-facing” communications. But by Tuesday night, the gag-order had been “rescinded.” So what’s going on? And what could happen if scientists can’t speak to the public?
It all started yesterday, when BuzzFeed obtained a memo distributed on Monday within the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS). The memo was written by Sharon Drumm, chief of staff for ARS, and it informed the more than 2,000 ARS scientists—who study everything from methane emissions to the economy of rural America and have a major focus on climate change—to, essentially, keep quiet. Here’s the text, provided to Modern Farmer by the Christopher Bentley, director of the office of communications at ARS:
“Starting immediately and until further notice, ARS will not release any public-facing documents. This includes, but is not limited to, news releases, photos, fact sheets, news feeds, and social media content.”
According to reports today, however, a second email went out to ARS late Tuesday evening stating that Drumm’s note should have never been issued and has been “hereby rescinded.”
Wait, what?
The Play-By-Play
Once BuzzFeed published the memo yesterday, people got loud. News of a gag-order on the USDA was the latest of several similar edicts:
- The Department of the Interior, after tweeting images Friday comparing President Trump’s meager inauguration crowds to the throngs at President Obama’s 2009 inauguration, found its Twitter account shut down, only to reappear the next day with an apology.
- Tuesday, Badlands National Park’s account tweeted a few facts about climate change—a subject President Trump has repeatedly and falsely claimed to be “controversial”—that were soon deleted.
- The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was told not to respond to any public questions, but to wait for the new leadership to arrive.
- And the Environmental Protection Agency—which Trump pledged to “abolish” during his campaign and whose nominee to head the department, Scott Pruitt, is an avowed enemy who’s currently suing the agency—has issued a complete freeze on all communications (including social media, email, press releases and website updates), as well as a funding freeze on its grants and contracts.
Trump ordering USDA scientists—who conduct a great deal of research on climate change given agriculture is a notable contributor—to cease communicating with the public seemed to follow a pattern……..
Even if the Drumm memo has truly been rescinded, similar policies have been enacted at other governmental organizations. This isn’t a weird aberration; it’s part of a systematic clampdown on the parts of the government that the Trump administration finds problematic. So let’s take a look at how a crackdown on government science could affect the nation……….
This isn’t just a matter of keeping reporters from doing their jobs,” says Humiston. “There are real safety issues at stake here.” http://modernfarmer.com/2017/01/gag-order-not-heres-trump-cracking-government-science-scary/
Poland suspends costly nuclear plans, Czech Republic goes ahead with fuzzy nuclear financing
Czech government presses ahead with nuclear plans as Poland suspends programme, Radio Prague 26-01-2017 Chris Johnstone Same day, two different stories about nuclear power in the Czech Republic and neighbouring Poland.
On Wednesday, the Czech government announced the creation of three working groups to push ahead with plans to build nuclear reactors in the country to replace aged capacity and boost nuclear power production to around half of the country’s electricity needs.
In Warsaw, the Polish finance ministry announced it was suspending its very ambitious nuclear programme aimed at securing future power supplies and curbing the use of coal-fired power plants. The ministry said that previous financing proposals burdening the state budget were simply not acceptable. The nuclear plans could still be revived but other options, such as modern coal plants would also be looked at, the ministry added.
In Prague, the statement from the Ministry of Industry and Trade said that the creation of the new working groups gave new impetus to the government strategy to boost nuclear power. That was agreed mid-way through 2015 by the current government………..
Czech nuclear plans are currently a mixture of the fairly clear, fairly fuzzy, and extremely unclear. It’s clear that a decision will be needed by around 2025 if a new reactor or reactors are to be built at Dukovany to replace the four units there which will be phased out from 2035 onwards. That’s the overwhelming priority. State controlled ČEZ is currently piloting the nuclear preparations, but it could eventually give way to a specially created state company or some joint venture with the international nuclear constructer eventually selected. And the overall power outlook, not just electricity prices but future demand as well given the continued roll-out of renewables and EU moves to curb demand are all also major intangibles.
Some of the targets for the working groups to report back are as early as May and June but other stretch out for the years to come. In theory though the Czech government should be making a decision about whether it will be willing to finance new nuclear capacity by the middle of the year. But whether any decision will be binding on a new government so close to elections is another question.
So, while Wednesday’s news looked so different on the surface, the doubts and uncertainties about new nuclear are widely shared. http://www.radio.cz/en/section/business/czech-government-presses-ahead-with-nuclear-plans-as-poland-suspends-programme
Nuclear workers’ pensions slashed – not a good omen for UK’s Tories, in Copeland byelection
Tories threatened by their own nuclear meltdown in Copeland By Natalie Bloomer Politics.co.uk, 26 January 2017 Since the Copeland byelection was called, speculation has been rife about the damage Jeremy Corbyn’s nuclear stance could do to Labour’s chances. But while the Tories have been quick to exploit this, they have been much slower to wake up to their own nuclear problem. And it’s one which has the potential to swing the outcome of next month’s vote……..
Throughout the campaign there have been concerns within the local Labour party and among some union members that Corbyn’s views on nuclear could have an impact. But a far more pressing concern for many of the workers on site is the ongoing dispute with the government over their pensions.
Unions say that changes to the workers’ final salary pension scheme, which have been proposed by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), could see pensions slashed by thousands of pounds. After a meeting with government ministers yesterday, unions announced that a planned strike ballot would be put on hold while talks continue. But the issue has by no means gone away. http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/01/26/tories-threatened-by-their-own-nuclear-meltdown-in-copeland
Nuclear lobby dumping its climate change argument, in order to suit Donald Trump
Under Trump, INL pivots its nuclear message Post Register January 24, 2017 By LUKE RAMSETH lramseth@postregister.com Idaho National Laboratory officials are considering how to shift their message under a Trump administration that has sent mixed signals on energy research and the existence of climate change.
Radiation Free Lakeland (RFL) urges UK Labor leader to oppose nuclear power station planned for Moorside
Jeremy Corbyn urged to oppose nuclear power station planned for Moorside A campaign group is calling on 
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to publicly oppose nuclear new-build plans in west Cumbria. News and Star, 24 Jan 17
Radiation Free Lakeland (RFL) has written to Mr Corbyn to urge him to lodge his “firm and outspoken” opposition to plans for a three-reactor station at Moorside, on land next to Sellafield.
By doing so, adds RFL, Mr Corbyn would “galvanise and inspire nuclear opponents, and give them a compelling reason to vote Labour”.
RFL’s letter comes in the week that Mr Corbyn – who has been described as “anti-nuclear” by opponents – has twice visited Copeland ahead of a hotly-anticipated Parliamentary by-election to replace Jamie Reed. In her letter to Mr 
Corbyn, RFL’s Marianne Birkby points to safety concerns about the design of the AP1000 reactors proposed for Moorside, and the “intolerable nuclear burden” already faced locally…..
She also draws his attention to a petition – Stop Moorside: the biggest nuclear development in Europe – that has attracted over 11,000 signatures.
She said: “We oppose Moorside and feel that you may be underestimating the strength of feeling against the plans. “When you appeared on The Andrew Marr Show last weekend, you missed the chance to condemn the project.
“Please set aside the siren voices that are working hard to convince you that outright opposition to Moorside would be a vote-loser.
“Instead, listen to the voices of resistance, which include many Labour voters previously encouraged by your rational, well-informed spepticism of the nuclear industry and its taxpayer-funded spin doctors.”
NuGen, the firm behind plans for Moorside, is currently analysing feedback from last summer’s public consultation into the plant.
The firm hopes to get the final go ahead in 2018. http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/Jeremy-Corbyn-urged-to-oppose-nuclear-power-station-planned-for-Moorside-30bf74c4-e216-4b83-92d3-439aacffc817-ds
USA Congress supports small nuclear reactors
Congress Passes Unconventional Nuclear Power Bill ANDREW FOLLETT, Daily Caller, 24 Jan 17 House lawmakers passed legislation Monday to support unconventional nuclear power.
If signed by President Trump, the proposal could change how the government regulates nuclear power and create a boom in the utilization of advanced unconventional reactor technology. The bill was sponsored by two Republicans and three Democrats.
“We believe that trailblazing the advance of nuclear energy technology including Gen 3+, Small Modular Reactors, Non-Light Water Reactor (LWR) Advanced Reactors and Fusion Reactors is one of the key imperatives for U.S. market competitiveness,” David Blee, executive director of the U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council (NIC), told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“It is vital to maintaining the U.S. lead in technology innovation, safety enhancements, energy security and clean energy,” Blee said…….
Energy companies in Idaho and Utah announced plans in June to build twelve small modular reactors to provide electricity to nine western states.
Getting regulators to consider approving an unconventional nuclear design is incredibly expensive. The company NuScale was required to produce a 12,000-page document and spend $500 million dollars just to get the government to consider its designs. The company thinks it won’t be able to commercialize small modular reactors by 2026 at the earliest due to regulatory delays…….
Getting regulatory approval from the NRC to build a new conventional reactor can take up to 25 years…….. http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/24/congress-passes-unconventional-nuclear-power-bill/
Trump’s nuclear weapons boast – back to the ‘Star Wars’ Budget Buster?
Trump’s Nuclear Defense Plan: Another ‘Star Wars’ Budget Buster? The Fiscal Times, January 24, 2017 President Ronald Reagan cowed the Soviet Union and eventually brought its leaders to the bargaining table with the threat of a costly space-based nuclear missile system dubbed “Star Wars.” In March 1983, Reagan formally launched the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) to develop and deploy an “impenetrable shield” to protect the U.S. from a Soviet missile attack.
Although the U.S. ultimately spent more than $200 billion on a system that was never successfully developed and deployed, Reagan’s high-stakes defense gambit was credited by many for helping to hasten the end of the Cold War…….
Now a new addition to Trump’s evolving defense posture, the website declared that the United States would develop a “state of the art missile defense system” to guard against attacks from North Korea, Iran, and other rogue states.
The announcement was bereft of details about the technical capabilities or the potential cost to taxpayers for a more sophisticated missile defense system than the land-based and seaborne systems currently deployed in California and Alaska and aboard Navy destroyers in the Pacific.
In addition to the missile shield, the Trump White House said a new military budget would be submitted to Congress outlining a plan to rebuild the military and increase cyber-warfare capabilities. “We will make it a priority to develop defensive and offensive cyber capabilities at our U.S. Cyber Command, and recruit the best and brightest Americans to serve in this crucial area,” the statement declared.
Since then, Trump and his aides have had little more to say about their proposed missile defense initiative, leaving defense policy experts to scratch their heads and speculate on what the new president has in mind. ……..http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/01/24/Trump-s-Nuclear-Defense-Plan-Another-Star-Wars-Budget-Buster
Trump’s first White House website post – will scrap Climate Action Plan
Donald Trump will eliminate landmark climate protection plan, says first post on White House website http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-white-house-president-global-warming-climate-change-environment-a7538206.html
The Climate Action Plan was introduced four years ago as a national strategy for tackling climate change Andrew Griffin @_andrew_griffin 21 January 2017 Donald Trump’s first post on the White House website suggests destroying the US’s strategy to tackle climate change.
After President Trump took over the site, he posted six “Issues” to its home page. The first of those is an “America First Energy Plan”.
The first proposal in that document suggests getting rid of “burdensome regulations on our energy industry”. Those include getting rid of “harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the US rule”.
President Trump doesn’t suggest a replacement for any of those regulations, and goes on to suggest that getting rid of them will save money and keep America secure.The Climate Action Plan was landmark legislation introduced by Barack Obama in June 2013. It served as a “national plan for tackling climate change”, according to the government.
The key parts of the plan were divided into three sections. Those outlined plans to cut carbon pollution in the US, actions to get the country ready for the effects of climate change, and plans for how to lead international efforts to address global warming.No part of the Mr Trump’s environmental document makes any mention of climate change or global warming – something that President Trump has in the past said was just a Chinese hoax. The only mention of the environment calls for “responsible stewardship of the environment”, but that refers only to keeping water and air clean. “Lastly, our need for energy must go hand-in-hand with responsible stewardship of the environment,” the document reads. “Protecting clean air and clean water, conserving our natural habitats, and preserving our natural reserves and resources will remain a high priority.”It also says that Donald Trump will focus the Environmental Protection Agency onto “protecting our air and water”, and presumably away from climate policies.
President Trump says that his environmental policies will join up with his economic ones, by encouraging more spending in the US economy. The document says that he will encourage the burning of coal, and the use of shale oil and gas in the US.By doing so, he will be able to use the revenues to pay for the rebuilding of “roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure” that he promised to his voters. It will also help stimulate the agriculture industry, he claimed. President Trump says that his environmental policies will join up with his economic ones, by encouraging more spending in the US economy. The document says that he will encourage the burning of coal, and the use of shale oil and gas in the US.That will also allow the US to achieve energy independence from the OPEC alliance of oil producing countries. But President Trump says he will continue to work with countries in the Gulf – many of which are in OPEC – “to develop a positive energy relationship as part of our anti-terrorism strategy”.The document also calls for a new focus on coal and a revival of the country’s coal industry. President Trump has claimed that he will do that by backing “clean coal” – but it’s not clear that such a thing would actually be possible and whether such thing as clean coal could actually exist.
Trump’s White House website distorts the figures on American wages
Trump White House Distorts Wages Figure on First Day, Climate Central By John Upton 22 Jan 17 Shortly after Donald Trump was sworn in as president on Friday, the White House said that eliminating power plant climate rules, a clean water rule and other environmental regulations would “greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.”
Toshiba desperately seeking funding for UK nuclear project, seeks tax-payer subsidy
Toshiba faces pressure to secure funding for UK nuclear project, Ft.com by: Andrew Ward and Jim Pickard in London, 22 Jan 17 Toshiba is facing pressure to secure investment from a South Korean energy group and the UK government to keep afloat a multibillion-pound British nuclear power project as the Japanese conglomerate struggles with mounting financial difficulties.
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (156)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 