nuclear-news

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

The Australian election as a game of cricket: cost of living is the issue, but does Nature bat last?

December 26, 2024 , By Noel Wauchope,  https://theaimn.net/the-australian-election-as-a-game-of-cricket-cost-of-living-is-the-issue-but-does-nature-bat-last/

It is not nice to talk about politics at this happy festive time. But you can talk about cricket. Indeed, in Melbourne, it is your patriotic duty. So, I will – sort of.

A prestigious political analyst, Paul Bongiorno, writes in The Saturday Paper about the focus of campaigning for the 2025 Australian federal election. He sees both political parties emphasising the economy, and the “cost of living”. But Bongiorno warns that climate change could suddenly become once more the big factor in the political game, if summer does bring bushfires and floods.

Bongiorno argues that Dutton and the Liberal Coalition are out to stop renewable energy development:


“If the Dutton-led Coalition manages to take the treasury benches, the brakes will be dramatically applied to climate action. The energy transition would be stalled and billions of dollars of new-energy investment put in jeopardy.

A key Labor strategist says… it would take only another summer of catastrophic bushfires or floods to significantly jolt public opinion.”

Bongiorno goes on to argue that “The portents here are not favourable for Dutton.” And he cites powerful arguments about “deep flaws” in Dutton’s energy plan’s economic modelling. Bongiorno draws the conclusion that if climate change extremes hit Australia, voters will recognise the value of renewable energy, and vote for the present Labor government’s policies on climate action.

If only that would be the effect of weather disasters – Australian voters embracing action on climate change – the development of renewable energy and energy conservation!

Paul Bongiorno is a much-admired and well-informed analyst. And I am presumptuous to doubt his opinion. But I do doubt it. Look what happened in 2023, with the Australian public first supporting the concept of an Aboriginal Voice to Parliament, but finally voting a resounding “No” to that plan.

How did it happen?

We are in a different era of media and opinion. We are in extraordinary times. When it comes to national elections, people still do vote according to what they see as “their best interest”. It’s just that now, due largely to the power and influence of “social” media, information about “one’s best interest” has become very confusing.

We thought that the Internet would give everyone a voice. And it did. But very soon the new information platforms found money and power could be bought by corporate interests, and indeed, that they themselves could become ultra-lucrative corporations. The media has become a smorgasbord of conflicting information, with so much of it not fact- checked. The “old” media still checks its facts (though I’m not sure about Sky News), but the old media has always been beholden to corporate influence. Even the ABC is circumspect in what it covers, and what it omits – and still makes sure to provide “balance”, even when one side is plainly unreasonable.

Anyway, for the old media to compete – the news has to be preferably exciting, dramatic, even violent. Except for sport and feel-good stuff.

In the new zeitgeist of 24 hour information barrage from so many different outlets, political news can be, and indeed is, swamped by cleverly designed brief messages, from forces like the Atlas Network, from the dominant global fossil fuel corporations. That swamping propelled many Australians to vote against the Aboriginal Voice.

In political news, media emphasis has shifted dramatically away from facts to personalities. In the USA, Donald Trump was seen as a strong, confident, interesting man, as against weak, indecisive, (and female) Kamala Harris. In Australia, there’s an obvious contrast between careful, measured, Anthony Albanese, and strong, outspoken Peter Dutton. In the USA, it didn’t matter that Trump offered few positive policies, so in Australia, the Liberal Coalition does the same.

In the USA, with a population of 334.9 million, approximately 161.42 million people were registered to vote. But only about 64% of these actually did vote in the 2024 general election. in the 2024 general election. So, the majority of Americans don’t vote anyway. Trump was elected by a minority. The rest either didn’t care, or weren’t able to vote.

The Australian election system is so different. With compulsory voting, preferential voting, and the nationwide and highly reliable Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), most Australians do vote. You’d think that with factual news being provided by mainstream media, climate change information would become so important to voters, in the event of summer weather disasters. Paul Bongiorno thinks so.

I think so, too, But the advantage for Peter Dutton in the current national mood might be twofold.

First, Dutton is still that “tough, decisive person” with a tough plan, too – nuclear power instead of renewables. Secondly, the Dutton plan can so easily be marketed as the only real solution to global heating – nuclear power portrayed as “emissions free”, and “cheaper” than solar and wind power.

Never mind that there are substantial greenhouse gas emissions from the total nuclear fuel cycle. Never mind the astronomic cost. Never mind problems of radioactive wastes, safety, and weapons proliferation. The very telling point is that nuclear reactors cannot be up and running in time to have the needed effect on cutting greenhouse emissions. The time for effective action is now, not decades later.

Action on climate change is critical for Australia – and now!

But for the global nuclear lobby, getting Australia as the new poster boy for nuclear power – is critical – now!

Nuclear power should be a dying industry. There is ample evidence of this: reactors shutting down much faster than new ones are built, and of the mind-boggling cost of decommissioning and waste disposal. However, “peaceful” nuclear power is essential to the nuclear weapons industry – with the arms industry burgeoning in tandem with the increasing risk of nuclear war. It seems that the world cannot afford to weaken this war economy.

And the cost and trouble of shutting down the nuclear industry with its tentacles in so many inter-connected industries, and in the media, and in politics, is unimaginable.

The old poster boy, France, has blotted its nuclear copybook recently with its state energy company EDF deep in debt, and things rather crook with its latest nuclear station. But hey! What about Australia, a whole continent, with a national government perhaps ready to institute nuclear power as its prime energy source, and all funded by the tax-payer!

The long-promised nuclear renaissance might really come about – led by Australia, the energetic new nation, with its AUKUS nuclear submarines, with brand-new nuclear waste facilities, and kicking off this exciting new enterprise – nuclear power. This is the opportunity for a global nuclear spin machine to gear up for an onslaught on Australia. They really need the Liberal-National Coalition to win this election.

Dutton will be fed with the right phrases to regurgitate. It’ll be all about a “balanced” economy – nuclear in partnership with renewables and so on, if people have any worries about that. All the same, there are those problems of pesky independent politicians like Monique Ryan and David Pocock, and there’s still the ABC, Channel 9 TV and its print publications.

First, I’m hoping that Australia does avoid bushfires and floods this summer. And second, I’m hoping that in the event of climate disasters, Australians will choose the Labor Party with its real plan for action against climate change, and reject the Coalition with its nuclear power dream. There is a good chance of this result.

I’m hoping that Paul Bongiorno is right, if climate change does bat last in the election game, and that I am wrong about the power of personality politics + slick lies.

December 27, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics | Leave a comment

FRANCE’S NUCLEAR ENERGY POLICY: A CHRONICLE OF FAILURE – FLAMANVILLE 3.

FRANCE’S NUCLEAR ENERGY POLICY: A CHRONICLE OF FAILURE – FLAMANVILLE 3

25 December 2025

France’s ambitious nuclear energy policy, once hailed as a cornerstone of its energy independence, has faced a long series of missteps, delays, and spiralling costs. The Flamanville 3 reactor, emblematic of these challenges, has taken over two decades from decision to anticipated commercial operation, showcasing the systemic failures in planning, execution, and financial management. This timeline highlights the stark realities behind France’s nuclear endeavours.

TIMELINE: 2002 FRENCH NUCLEAR RENAISSANCE

2002: POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS BEGIN

Discussions around a nuclear renaissance gain traction in France. Policymakers and EDF propose new reactor designs to bolster energy independence and address climate goals.

DECISION: 2004

The decision to build the Flamanville 3 reactor marked the beginning of a new chapter for France’s nuclear ambitions. With an estimated cost of €3.3 billion and a planned construction timeline of 56 months, this European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) was touted as a symbol of technological advancement. However, the project’s initial promise soon gave way to setbacks.

INITIAL WORKS: 2006

Preliminary works commenced in 2006, with optimism running high. The EPR design, developed to enhance safety and efficiency, was heralded as the future of nuclear energy. Yet, from the outset, the complexity of the design began to reveal challenges that would compound over time.

REACTOR CONCRETE: 2007

In 2007, construction on the reactor’s concrete base began, symbolising tangible progress. Simultaneously, the cost estimate was revised to €3.3 billion, as technical adjustments and initial delays started to emerge. Early warnings about budget overruns and scheduling issues were largely ignored.

GRID CONNECTION: 2024

After 17 years of setbacks, the reactor was finally connected to the grid. By this point, the budget had ballooned to €13.2 billion, a nearly fourfold increase from the original estimate. The delays and cost overruns underscored critical deficiencies in project management and regulatory compliance, as over 7,000 design changes required significant material additions.

COMMERCIAL OPERATION: 2025 Q1 The reactor is expected to achieve commercial operation in early 2025, over a decade behind schedule. The protracted timeline—more than 20 years from decision to operation—illustrates the systemic inefficiencies plaguing France’s nuclear energy strategy.

COST OVERRUNS AND FINANCIAL STRAIN

The financial fallout from Flamanville 3 is emblematic of broader challenges in the nuclear industry. Initially budgeted at €3.3 billion, the project’s costs had soared to €19.1 billion by 2020, with further increases likely. These overruns mirror similar issues faced by EDF’s international projects, such as Hinkley Point C in the United Kingdom and Olkiluoto 3 in Finland. Hinkley’s budget has nearly doubled to an estimated £46 billion, with completion now pushed to 2029–31.

EDF’S MOUNTING DEBTS AND CHALLENGES

EDF, the state-owned utility tasked with leading France’s nuclear initiatives, has been burdened by mounting debts. With a €65 billion debt load and a near €18 billion loss in 2022, EDF’s financial woes have raised questions about its capacity to handle multiple large-scale projects. Efforts to stabilise its finances through state support and electricity price adjustments have provided temporary relief but have not addressed structural issues.

BROADER IMPLICATIONS

The delays and cost overruns at Flamanville and other EPR projects have cast doubt on the viability of France’s nuclear renaissance. President Macron’s commitment to building six to 14 new reactors appears increasingly untenable given EDF’s financial and operational struggles. Moreover, these challenges have weakened France’s position as a global leader in nuclear technology, with international competitors advancing at a faster pace.

A FAILED STRATEGY

The failure of France’s nuclear energy policy is evident in its inability to deliver projects on time and within budget. The Flamanville 3 reactor, once a beacon of innovation, has become a cautionary tale of mismanagement and overreach. As France doubles down on nuclear energy, it must confront the hard truths of its flawed approach and consider whether a pivot to more agile and cost-effective renewable energy solutions is necessary to ensure its energy security and economic stability.

France connected its first nuclear reactor to the grid this century. Construction was to take 56 months.

2002 TIMELINE STARTS THE

FRENCH NUCLEAR RENAISSANCE

Initial works: construction was to take 56 months.

Timeline:

• decision: 2004

• initial works: 2006

• reactor concrete: 2007

• grid connection: 2024

• commercial operation: 2025 Q1

22 December 2024 Reports

We don’t know the final cost of France’s new #nuclear reactor at Flamanville, but guestimates it’ll be a few hundred $million higher than the 2020 figure:

• 2007 cost estimate: €3.3bn

• 2020 cost estimate: €19.1bn

December 26, 2024 Posted by | France, politics, Reference | Leave a comment

Israel to Annex the West Bank – Why Now? And What are the Likely Scenarios?

By Ramzy Baroud / CounterPunch, December 23, 2024

Israel is getting ready to annex the occupied Palestinian West Bank. The annexation will be a major step backward on the road to Palestinian freedom and will likely serve as a catalyst for a new Palestinian uprising.

Though annexation has been on the Israeli agenda for years, this time around a ‘great opportunity’ – in the words of extremist Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich – has presented itself and, from an Israeli point of view, cannot be missed.

“I hope we’ll have a great opportunity with the new US administration to create full normalization (of the Israeli occupation),” the minister was quoted as saying by Israeli media.

This is not the first time that Smotrich, among other Israeli extremists, has made the connection between Trump’s advent to the White House and the illegal expansion of Israel’s borders.

Two reasons make Israel’s far-right optimistic about Trump’s arrival: One, the Israeli experience during Trump’s first term in office, where the US president allowed Israel to claim sovereignty over illegal settlements, the Syrian Golan Heights, and occupied East Jerusalem; and, two, Trump’s more recent statement in the run-up to the elections.

Israel is “so tiny” on the map, Trump said while addressing the pro-Israeli group ‘Stop Antisemitism’ at an event last August, wondering: “Is there any way of getting more?” The statement, absurd by any definition, caused joy among Israeli politicians, who understood it to be a green right for further annexations.

Israel’s aims for colonial expansion also received a boost in recent days. Following the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s rule in Syria, Israel immediately began invading large swathes of the country, reaching as far as the Quneitra governorate, less than 20 kilometers away from the capital, Damascus.

What is taking place in Syria serves as a model of what to expect in the West Bank in coming months…………………………………………………………………………………………………

While such annexation will not change the legal status of the West Bank, it will have dire consequences for the millions of Palestinians living there, as annexation is likely to be followed by a violent campaign of ethnic cleansing, if not from the whole of the West Bank, certainly from large parts of it.

Annexation will also render the Palestinian Authority legally irrelevant – as it was created following the Oslo Accords to administer parts of the West Bank in anticipation of a future sovereignty, which never actualized. Will the PA agree to remain functional as part of the Israeli military administration of a newly annexed West Bank?

Palestinians will certainly resist, as they always do. The nature of the resistance will prove critical in the success or failure of the Israeli scheme. A popular Intifada, for example, will overstretch the Israeli military, which will likely use an unprecedented degree of violence to suppress Palestinians but will unlikely succeed.

Annexing the West Bank at a time that Palestine, in fact, the whole region is in turmoil, is a recipe for perpetual war, which, from the viewpoint of Smotrich and his ilk is the actual ‘great opportunity’, as it will secure their political survival for years to come.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press, Atlanta). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net  https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/12/23/israel-to-annex-the-west-bank-why-now-and-what-are-the-likely-scenarios/

December 26, 2024 Posted by | Israel, politics | Leave a comment

Chris Hedges: How Fascism Came

By Chris Hedges / Original to ScheerPost, 23 Dec 24


For over two decades, I and a handful of others — Sheldon Wolin, Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, Barbara Ehrenreich and Ralph Nader — warned that the expanding social inequality and steady erosion of our democratic institutions, including the media, the Congress, organized labor, academia and the courts, would inevitably lead to an authoritarian or Christian fascist state. My books — “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America” (2007), “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle” (2009), “Death of the Liberal Class” (2010), “Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt” (2012), written with Joe Sacco, “Wages of Rebellion” (2015) and “America: The Farewell Tour” (2018) were a succession of impassioned pleas to take the decay seriously. I take no joy in being correct.

“The rage of those abandoned by the economy, the fears and concerns of a beleaguered and insecure middle class, and the numbing isolation that comes with the loss of community, would be the kindling for a dangerous mass movement,” I wrote in “American Fascists” in 2007. “If these dispossessed were not reincorporated into mainstream society, if they eventually lost all hope of finding good, stable jobs and opportunities for themselves and their children — in short, the promise of a brighter future — the specter of American fascism would beset the nation. This despair, this loss of hope, this denial of a future, led the desperate into the arms of those who promised miracles and dreams of apocalyptic glory.”

President-elect Donald Trump does not herald the advent of fascism. He heralds the collapse of the veneer that masked the corruption within the ruling class and their pretense of democracy. He is the symptom, not the disease. The loss of basic democratic norms began long before Trump, which paved the road to an American totalitarianism. Deindustrialization, deregulation, austerity, unchecked predatory corporations, including the health-care industry, wholesale surveillance of every American, social inequality, an electoral system that is plagued by legalized bribery, endless and futile wars, the largest prison population in the world, but most of all feelings of betrayal, stagnation and despair, are a toxic brew that culminate in an inchoate hatred of the ruling class and the institutions they have deformed to exclusively serve the rich and the powerful. The Democrats are as guilty as the Republicans.

“Trump and his coterie of billionaires, generals, half-wits, Christian fascists, criminals, racists, and moral deviants play the role of the Snopes clan in some of William Faulkner’s novels,” I wrote in “America: The Farewell Tour.” “The Snopeses filled the power vacuum of the decayed South and ruthlessly seized control from the degenerated, former slaveholding aristocratic elites. Flem Snopes and his extended family — which includes a killer, a pedophile, a bigamist, an arsonist, a mentally disabled man who copulates with a cow, and a relative who sells tickets to witness the bestiality — are fictional representations of the scum now elevated to the highest level of the federal government. They embody the moral rot unleashed by unfettered capitalism.”

…………………………………………………………………… The political philosopher Sheldon Wolin called our system of governance “inverted totalitarianism,” one that kept the old iconography, symbols and language, but had surrendered power to corporations and oligarchs. Now we will shift to totalitarianism’s more recognizable form, one dominated by a demagogue and an ideology grounded in the demonization of the other, hypermasculinity and magical thinking.

Fascism is always the bastard child of a bankrupt liberalism.

“We live in a two-tiered legal system, one where poor people are harassed, arrested and jailed for absurd infractions, such as selling loose cigarettes — which led to Eric Garner being choked to death by the New York City police in 2014 — while crimes of appalling magnitude by the oligarchs and corporations, from oil spills to bank fraud in the hundreds of billions of dollars, which wiped out 40 percent of the world’s wealth, are dealt with through tepid administrative controls, symbolic fines, and civil enforcement that give these wealthy perpetrators immunity from criminal prosecution,” I wrote in “America: The Farewell Tour.”

The utopian ideology of neoliberalism and global capitalism is a vast con. Global wealth, rather than being spread equitably, as neoliberal proponents promised, was funneled upward into the hands of a rapacious, oligarchic elite, fueling the worst economic inequality since the age of the robber barons. The working poor, whose unions and rights were stripped from them and whose wages have stagnated or declined over the past 40 years, have been thrust into chronic poverty and underemployment…………………………………………………

“The permanent lie is the apotheosis of totalitarianism,” I wrote in “America: The Farewell Tour”:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

It is not going to get better. The tools to shut down dissent have been cemented into place. Our democracy cratered years ago. We are in the grip of what Søren Kierkegaard called “sickness unto death” — the numbing of the soul by despair that leads to moral and physical debasement. All Trump has to do to establish a naked police state is flip a switch. And he will.

“The worse reality becomes, the less a beleaguered population wants to hear about it,” I wrote at the conclusion of “Empire of Illusion,” “and the more it distracts itself with squalid pseudo-events of celebrity breakdowns, gossip and trivia. These are the debauched revels of a dying civilization.”  https://scheerpost.com/2024/12/23/chris-hedges-how-fascism-came/

December 24, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Martial Law Fiasco Casts Doubt Over Korea’s Nuclear Power Push

Enegy Connect, By Bloomberg, By Heesu Lee, Dec 16, 2024

— South Korea’s embrace of nuclear energy has been thrown into doubt as President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment case raises the possibility of the opposition coming to power and overhauling the nation’s broader energy strategy.

With Yoon suspended from office because of a botched attempt to impose martial law, his push to build more reactors at home and ramp up exports of Seoul’s nuclear technology is at risk of stalling, alongside a flagship oil and gas discovery. Stocks related to the nuclear sector and the drilling project have already suffered losses due to souring investor sentiment since the political crisis began.

Asia’s fourth-largest economy has pledged to curb emissions by 40% from 2018 levels by 2030 and, while Yoon has come out in support of nuclear, successive governments have been criticized for dragging their feet on adding more renewables like solar and wind. The country is due to update its climate targets by early next year, but the political upheaval has now complicated that.

Opposition leader Lee Jae-myung, Yoon’s most likely successor if he loses the impeachment case, is seen as more climate-friendly. During his campaign in the 2022 presidential election, which he narrowly lost, he pledged to expand renewables, bring forward the country’s 2050 net zero target by a decade, and pushed for stricter emissions targets with early phase-out of coal-fired power plants.

At the same time, he has opposed building new nuclear reactors but is set to allow the use of existing facilities. ……….

critics argued that Yoon’s nuclear-centric strategy sidelined the potential of renewable energy, which aligns more closely with global green initiatives. At the same time, his push for oil and gas exploration off the country’s east coast also faced a backlash from climate activists and opposition lawmakers, who claimed these policies undermine the decarbonization efforts of the world’s eighth-biggest emitter.

For now, all eyes are on South Korea’s Constitutional Court, which must decide whether or not to validate Yoon’s impeachment within 180 days. If it does, an election must be held for a new president within 60 days. 

All this could delay the parliamentary approval needed for the country’s long-term energy roadmap plan…………………………………………..https://www.energyconnects.com/news/renewables/2024/december/martial-law-fiasco-casts-doubt-over-korea-s-nuclear-power-push/

December 22, 2024 Posted by | politics, South Korea | Leave a comment

Starmer backs minister accused of embezzling billions in Bangladesh

Tulip Siddiq denies claims that she brokered corrupt deal with Russia to build nuclear power plant.

 Keir Starmer has given his full support to Tulip Siddiq, the Treasury
minister, after Bangladesh’s anti-corruption commission accused her and
family members of embezzling billions as part of a deal for a nuclear power
plant. Siddiq, whose role as economic secretary to the Treasury includes
responsibility for tackling financial corruption.

She has denied any involvement in the claims. While Downing Street strongly defended her, it
is another headache for Starmer after a turbulent few months that included
the sudden departure of another minister, the former transport secretary
Louise Haigh.

 Guardian 19th Dec 2024m https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/19/labour-minister-accused-of-involvement-in-embezzling-billions-in-bangladesh

December 22, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

With no real enemies, US poised to spend $1.8 trillion for national security in 2025.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 18 Dec 24

Not one of the other 194 countries poses the slightest threat to the US Homeland. Yet the US foolishly provokes confrontation with Russia and China, the first and third most nuclear armed states.

With no enemies lurking near our borders, the US plans to spend $1.8 trillion next year to promote not defense, but US adventurism abroad.

750 bases in 80 countries overseas billeting 160,000 soldiers does not come cheap. Additionally, the US has squandered upwards of $200 billion to destroy Ukraine in our proxy war against Russia, and obliterate Gaza by our Middle East aircraft carrier Israel.

That helps explain why Congress is about to pass an $895.2 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to fund discretionary activities of our Defense Department. Adding in mandatory defense spending of $25.8 billion swells the Pentagon’s budget to a cool $921 billion.

But don’t forget nuclear weapons programs, Homeland Security, cost to treat vets from America’s forever wars and miscellaneous foreign adventures. These add another $796.8 billion, making a national security grand total for 2025 a staggering $1,776,800,000. A far distant second in defense spending is China at less than a quarter trillion.

How can this be in the hyped ‘greatest democracy on Earth’? Simple. The administration, Congress, presidential candidates, the media offer not one word of discussion, much less protest about this monstrous squandering of US treasure to get millions killed, injured, starved, sick and homeless in countries America has no business meddling in.

America’s national security budget may as well be planned and passed on Mars, far from the radar of America’s 155,000,200 clueless voters having no say in this monstrosity whatsoever.

Of course, with the US war party crossing Russian red lines like it’s in a demolition derby, nuclear war becomes more likely than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis 62 years ago. If that happens, any important discussion of our $1.8 trillion national security budget will be moot.

December 19, 2024 Posted by | politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Despite 100% Pentagon Audit Failure Rate, House Passes $883.7 Billion NDAA

“Instead of fighting the rising cost of healthcare, gas, or groceries, this Congress prioritized rewarding the wealthy and well-connected military-industrial complex,” said Defense Spending Reduction Caucus co-chairs.

Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams, 11 Dec 24

Despite the Pentagon’s repeated failures to pass audits and various alarming policies, 81 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives voted with 200 Republicans on Wednesday to advance a $883.7 billion annual defense package.

The Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2025, unveiled by congressional negotiators this past Saturday, still needs approval from the Senate, which is expected to vote next week. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Wednesday that he plans to vote no and spoke out against the military-industrial complex.

The push to pass the NDAA comes as this congressional session winds down and after the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) announced last month that it had failed yet another audit—which several lawmakers highlighted after the Wednesday vote.

Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), co-chairs and co-founders of the Defense Spending Reduction Caucus, said in a joint statement, “Time and time again, Congress seems to be able to find the funds necessary to line the pockets of defense contractors while neglecting the problems everyday Americans face here at home.”

“Instead of fighting the rising cost of healthcare, gas, or groceries, this Congress prioritized rewarding the wealthy and well-connected military-industrial complex with even more unaccountable funds,” they continued. “After a seventh failed audit in a row, it’s disappointing that our amendment to hold the Pentagon accountable by penalizing the DOD’s budget by 0.5% for each failed audit was stripped out of the final bill. It’s time Congress demanded accountability from the Pentagon.”………………………………………………………

As Omar, a leading critic of the U.S.-backed Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip, also pointed out: “The NDAA includes a provision that blocks the Pentagon from using data on casualties and deaths from the Gaza Ministry of Health or any sources relying on those statistics. This is an alarming erasure of the suffering of the Palestinian people, ignoring the human toll of ongoing violence.”

Israel—which receives billions of dollars in annual armed aid from the United States—faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court last month issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The NDAA includes over $627 million in provisions for Israel.  https://www.commondreams.org/news/ndaa-2025

December 17, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The Australian Libera/National Coalition is playing voters for mugs once again with its nuclear costings

the Coalition documents released on Friday don’t seem to get around to mentioning is that its proposal for nuclear power involves taxpayers taking on all the massive financial risks (apart from the other sorts) and costs.

By Laura Tingle, 7.30 ABC 17 Dec 24

The August 2010 federal election campaign was conducted amid continuing shock waves from the Julia Gillard coup against Kevin Rudd a little less than two months earlier.

So, you may be forgiven for forgetting much that happened in the actual campaign, and specifically, how the federal Coalition didn’t bother releasing the costings of its election promises until just 48 hours before voters went to the polls.

It had already refused to submit the policy promises for independent analysis — which in those days was done by Treasury and the Department of Finance rather than the Parliamentary Budget Office.

That refusal might not have mattered too much to the broad sweep of history if the election result had been different. But a knife-edge result left three crossbench House of Representatives MPs to make the call on which side of politics would get their support and, therefore, be able to form government.

In making their decision the “Three Amigos” — Tony Windsor, Bob Katter and the subsequently infamously loquacious Rob Oakeshott — relied heavily on a Treasury and Finance analysis requested by them post-election.


Its findings? That the Coalition’s claimed budget savings were out by almost $11 billion. In the current age of announcements measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars, that might not sound like a lot.

But given that the claimed cost of Coalition policies was originally only $31.5 billion, that’s a rather spectacular …. miscalculation.

It felt for all the world like the work of an ill-prepared, lazy opposition that thought it could coast to office amid the chaos of a dysfunctional government. And it almost did.

A perfectly timed announcement

There’s something spookily familiar about the circumstances now, as the opposition finally unveiled its much-promised nuclear energy costings on a Friday one week before the country closes down entirely for Christmas.

There may be a lot more detailed modelling in the document prepared by Frontier Economics for the Coalition than there was in 2010.

But the modelling, and more importantly the Coalition’s political message wrapped around it, doesn’t answer the myriad of questions raised by the idea of nuclear energy. And this belated release of what we are led to believe is a signature policy for the election comes as the Coalition still hasn’t released details of most of its other key policies — from tax to immigration.

The decision to release the costing on December 13 feels like the Coalition is once again playing voters for mugs at a time when it is up against a federal government that has spent the year apparently determined to prove it is not very good at politics, or persuading voters that it knows what it is doing.

The Frontier modelling does implicitly raise important questions about the government’s own energy plans: just how much coal-fired power will the system need as we move towards a system that is dominated by renewables, and for how long?; how much gas will be needed (and is it in the right place) to be used to “firm” or underwrite the system?; how much can we really rely on battery technology that is still evolving to store renewables? and just how much transmission infrastructure do we need (and where) for a mostly renewables future?


The government has “sort of” answered these questions. Most analysts will tell you that it is almost impossible to answer them precisely because the wheel is still in spin. Prices and technologies are changing.

But, up against an opposition leader who is better at cut-through messages, it will need to do a lot better than that.

Crucial to the political debate is the fact that much of the uncertainty around these decisions arises because they are being made by individual investors who are taking on all the risks in building new energy capacity.

And this must surely be the threshold point of difference with what the federal Coalition is proposing.

For the one thing that the Coalition documents released on Friday don’t seem to get around to mentioning is that its proposal for nuclear power involves taxpayers taking on all the massive financial risks (apart from the other sorts) and costs.

The Coalition wants this big shift to be overseen by a public sector which it usually loves to point out is notoriously bad at running big projects, either directly or via massive subsidies.

The nuclear divide

The electorate is a lot more disengaged than it was in 2010, but the politically dangerous part of the nuclear policy from the government’s perspective is how it plays to regional Australia and, a bit like Brexit, likely divides the country into two very different blocks of voters.

Many regional voters, most pollsters will tell you, are worried about job losses as coal mining disappears, are unconvinced renewables offer job replacements, and are very exercised about the proliferation of wind and solar farms, and by the transmission lines to link them to the grid.

Earlier talk of small nuclear reactors has disappeared from the model set out using the Frontier modelling, and that modelling doesn’t seem to make provision for the fact that there are usually high costs for a first build, or that most expert opinion says it will take until at least 2040 to have the regulatory system and build in place for a first nuclear reactor to be functional, not 2036………………………………………………………………..

The Coalition has been pledging all year that its plans would lead to lower energy prices for stressed households.

But Peter Dutton had to sidestep on that issue on Friday because there is no clear mechanism for his plans to bring down those costs any time soon.

All the energy experts will be poring over the details for days. One could say they would be poring over them for weeks but (almost as if it was planned that way) the media coverage and the debate seem likely to come to a screeching stop in a week’s time as everything shuts down for Christmas.

Like the 2010 election costings, not many voters may remember the details of any analysis.

But the Coalition will have to be hoping there is no political equivalent of the Three Amigos to answer to this side of the 2025 election.

Laura Tingle is 7.30’s chief political correspondent.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-14/politics-dutton-release-nuclear-costings/104723416

December 17, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics | Leave a comment

Biden Aims to Go Out With a Bellicose Bang

Does the white house get it, any of it? No. See the RT headline, December 2: “White House touts ‘massive surge’ in arms shipments to Kiev.” The article quotes Jake “World War III” Sullivan blabbering about throwing more money down the endless Ukraine drain. You’d think he might have got the November election message that half the country has had it with this war. But no, the morons in charge shout from the rooftops that they will not be deterred from their wickedness and stupidity.

Eve Ottenberg, 13 Dec 24,  https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/12/13/biden-aims-to-go-out-with-a-bellicose-bang/

Having failed thus far to ignite Nuclear Armageddon, what’s up next for the U.S. military industrial complex? I’ll tell you: New bases in Europe, 47 of them, to be exact, in Scandinavia in coming years. That’s Joe Biden’s legacy, a blood transfusion to NATO’s moribund carcass by adding Finland and Sweden and thereby ballooning the Empire’s global military footprint, a footprint of over 800 imperial foreign military bases already bankrupting us Welp, we’re gonna get 47 more, per journalist Patrick Hennigsen, and they’re gonna be near Russia. If you’re a Finn or a Swede, you might want to consider emigrating, since the pusillanimous NATO to which you now belong has set you up as a tripwire for the Atomic Apocalypse. That’s Biden’s legacy.

Don’t think for a minute these bases make anyone safer. Quite the contrary. Besides being hugely provocative and thus endangering the local population, the bases’ U.S. soldiers are in harm’s way. Moscow eloquently demonstrated this on November 25. That was when Russia retaliated for recent ATACMS assaults, manned and operated by U.S. personnel. Most of that personnel are now dead. That’s because Russia shot its unstoppable Iskander missiles at the launchers, killing at least 30 U.S. operators.

Also “up to 40 fighters, mostly from the U.S. were eliminated in a missile strike on a command center…in the city of Kharkov on November 25,” RT reported November 28 [“Russian Defense Ministry reveals response to long-range Ukrainian strikes”]. This is the fate that may await U.S. soldiers on foreign military bases, because Russia’s extensive weapons menu is chock-a-block with all types of hypersonic missiles against which the west is defenseless. And Washington’s so busy provoking Moscow, that the kremlin will much more eagerly share this technology with its allies – China, Iran and North Korea – than it did before Joe “War Is My Legacy” Biden idiotically triggered Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

So dozens of Americans have or will be coming home in body bags, and U.S. weaponry got crushed and surprise! Not a peep in U.S. corporate media. That’s because our news outlets report American, ahem, “Ukrainian” strikes on Russia, using our vaunted but really mainly symbolic ATACMS, and report it with great fanfare, groveling before supposed superlative American weapons, but the consequences? The punishment? Not so much, since, Gee, that might make Biden and by extension Washington look bad. Can’t have that in American legacy news media. But hey, the Hindustan Times reported it, with headlines, like, “Russia Reduces Ukraine’s Western Weapons to Rubble,” and “Ukraine Loses All ATACMS, Storm Shadows? ‘NATO Train’ with Long-Range Missiles Blown Up by Russia.” How reassuring to know some nations still have a free press, even if they are halfway across the globe.

Meanwhile, all-around nitwits in the Biden administration chatter blandly about “Ukraine taking the fight to Russia.” Ukraine? Hello? Is that the new shorthand for the United States? Because make no mistake, the kremlin isn’t under any illusions about who’s firing ATACMS into Russia. Moscow’s leadership knows full well the info downloaded from U.S. satellites is classified and thus only Americans can eyeball it, and that only Americans are allowed to do the targeting. A Ukrainian may push the last button, but everything done before that comes from Washington. And the Russians are mad as hornets. For those of us who dwell in or near major American cities, that paints a big bullseye on us; in fact, the only thing stalling such targeting is the patience and sanity of Russian president Vladimir Putin. But remember, he’s a politician too, and one under tremendous pressure from his right flank to retaliate hard against the U.S.

Luckily, for those of us oddly averse to being incinerated, the recent Russian Iskander strikes, as the Hindustan Times reported, may well have destroyed much of the ATACMS and Storm Shadow cache. And we all know the west lacks the military industrial production depth to replace them quickly. Once the western military cupboard is bare, it will stay that way for a good while. The U.S. simply ain’t the manufacturing behemoth it once was.

In fact, much of our military production depends deeply on supply chains linked to China and, indeed, directly on Chinese manufacturing. And clouding the American defense picture, on December 1, Beijing’s sanctions on “the export of about 700 dual-use items took effect,” reported Asia Times that day, although what really grabbed headlines two days later was Beijing’s ban on sale of three rare earth minerals – gallium, germanium and antimony – to the U.S., a ban predicted in these CounterPunch pages, long ago. China has also sanctioned multiple American defense firms and senior executives. And more such export controls are coming. Bye the way, dual-use refers to civilian-military. So at the very least, Beijing’s new export control list will “prevent the U.S. from obtaining China’s critical metals, rare earths and key electronic parts.” China, long in the cross-hairs of voluble American congressional nincompoops, finally took their blather seriously. Incidentally, it’s not at all clear how these sanctions will affect China shipping weapons materials to Russia. My suspicion is, they won’t.

According to one Chinese military writer quoted by Asia Times: “The launch of the export control list is a precise attack to the heart of the U.S. military industry. This is not an ordinary ‘embargo’ but an all-round blockade to completely cut off the Chinese supply chain that the U.S. relies on.” So Biden’s oft-repeated, imbecilic crowings about war over Taiwan, and congress’ dimwitted howls for attacks on China have consequences, namely, Beijing taking steps to defang the American military beast, a monster directed, apparently, by birdbrains.

Does the white house get it, any of it? No. See the RT headline, December 2: “White House touts ‘massive surge’ in arms shipments to Kiev.” The article quotes Jake “World War III” Sullivan blabbering about throwing more money down the endless Ukraine drain. You’d think he might have got the November election message that half the country has had it with this war. But no, the morons in charge shout from the rooftops that they will not be deterred from their wickedness and stupidity.

China’s list of weapons-necessary products now prohibited from sale to the U.S. includes “computers, electronic devices, chemicals, sensors, lasers and aviation navigation systems. If China uses the list to fight a technology war, the U.S. won’t be able to find alternative products elsewhere.” So, um, about arming and equipping those 47 military bases in Scandinavia, I suppose Uncle Sam could always cannibalize dishwashers and washing machines to propel American weapons, the way the Biden team’s supposed geniuses like commerce secretary Gina Raimondo told us the Russians did in Ukraine (ho, ho!). Or we could use shovels, like the bubbleheads in our corporate media claimed those desperate Slavs did. Those were the same news outlets that told us, early on, Russia would soon run out of missiles. Well, now we learn that in addition to Russia positively BRISTLING with missiles, Moscow has all sorts of unstoppable hypersonic missiles, some of them as powerful as nuclear bombs without the radiation, and evidently, to judge from the Oreshnik, far more precise and capable of busting bunkers hundreds of meters underground. We in the west have failed to assemble even one hypersonic missile, while a few Russian Oreshniks could likely wipe out an entire military base. I guess now they’ll all be pointed at Scandinavia.

Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest novel is Booby Prize. She can be reached at her website.

December 16, 2024 Posted by | politics, Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Congress Revives Cold War Tactics With New Anti-Communism School Curriculum

The Crucial Communism Teaching Act

Even many members of the Progressive Caucus voted in favor, proving that anti-communism is as popular on the left as it is on the right.

a quickly-escalating Cold War against China

 December 14, 2024  Alan MacLeod,  https://www.mintpressnews.com/congress-revives-cold-war-tactics-with-new-anti-communism-school-curriculum/288830/

Congress has just passed a new bill that will see the U.S. spend huge sums of money redesigning much of the public school system around the ideology of anti-communism. The “Crucial Communism Teaching Act” is now being read in the Senate, where it is all but certain to pass. The move comes amid growing public anger at the economic system and increased public support for socialism.

The Crucial Communism Teaching Act, in its own words, is designed to teach children that “certain political ideologies, including communism and totalitarianism…conflict with the principles of freedom and democracy that are essential to the founding of the United States.”

Although sponsored by Republicans, it enjoys widespread support from Democrats and is focused on China, Venezuela, Cuba and other targets of U.S. empire. The wording of the bill has many worried that this will be a centerpiece of a new era of anti-communist hysteria, similar to previous McCarthyist periods.

The curriculum will be designed by the controversial Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and will ensure all American high school students “understand the dangers of communism and similar political ideologies” and “learn that communism has led to the deaths of over 100,000,000 victims worldwide.” It will also develop a series titled “Portraits in Patriotism,” that will expose students to individuals who are “victims of the political ideologies” in question.

A Discredited Book

The 100 million figure originates with the notorious pseudoscience text, “The Black Book of Communism.” A collection of political essays, the book’s central claim is that 100 million people have perished as a result of the communist ideology. However, even many of its contributors and co-writers have distanced themselves from it, claiming that the lead author was “obsessed” with reaching the 100 million figure, to the point that he simply conjured millions of deaths from nowhere.

Its methodology was also universally panned, with many pointing out that the tens of millions of Soviet and Nazi losses during World War II were attributed to communist ideology. This means that both Adolf Hitler himself and many of his victims are counted towards the vastly overinflated figure. The book was condemned by Holocaust remembrance groups as whitewashing and even lionizing genocidal fascist groups as anti-communist heroes.

The principal organization promoting the 100 million figure today is the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which has shown a similar level of both anti-communist devotion and methodological rigor. The group, set up by the U.S. government in 1993, added all worldwide COVID-19 deaths to the victims of communism list, arguing that the coronavirus was a communist disease because it originated in China. It is these people who will be designing the new curriculum that will be taught in social studies, government, history, and economics classes across the country.

China Hawks

One of the central goals of the bill is also to “ensure that high school students in the United States understand that 1,500,000,000 people still suffer under communism.” This is a clear reference to China, a rapidly developing country that, in just two generations, has gone from one of the poorest on Earth to a global superpower, challenging and even surpassing the United States on many quality-of-life indicators.

The bill goes on to detail how the school curriculum will “focus on ongoing human rights abuses by such regimes, such as the treatment of Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region” by the Chinese “regime” and its “aggression” towards “pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong,” and Taiwan, who it labels “a democratic friend of the United States.”

Furthermore, many of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation’s “Witness Project” case studies – likely the source for the “Portraits in Patriotism” series – are from China. This includes Rushan Abbas, the founder and executive director of the Campaign for Uyghurs, a pressure group funded by CIA front organization, the National Endowment for Democracy. Abbas was also previously employed as a translator at the notorious Guantánamo Bay torture camp.

The U.S. is currently engaged in a quickly-escalating Cold War against China that includes channeling money and support to separatist movements, including those in Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan, as MintPress News has reported. In September, the House of Representatives passed a bill that authorized $1.6 billion to be spent on anti-Chinese messaging worldwide.

Latin America: a Model and a Target

The other major target of the bill will likely be socialist or communist-led governments in Latin America. The act’s sponsor is Maria Elvira Salazar, a Republican Congressperson representing Miami. A part of Florida’s famously conservative Cuban-American community, in 2023, she introduced the FORCE Act, which attempted to block any U.S. president from normalizing relations with Cuba unless its government is overthrown. She has repeatedly condemned President Biden for easing the (illegal) U.S. sanctions on Venezuela. And in July, she denounced what she described as the “socialist curse in Central America and the Caribbean,” singling out Cuban, Venezuela, Honduras, and Nicaragua as countries requiring regime change.

She is, however, an avid supporter of the far-right President of Argentina, Javier Milei, accepting his invitation to attend his inauguration. Argentina, she said, “is going to set the course and point of reference for the rest of Latin America as to the way that a country should be governed… Free market economy, small government, individual liberties, freedom, private sector, no corruption, that’s what we’re trying to do.”

Perhaps the only foreign country she praises more than Argentina is Israel, whose actions she has supported at every step, even going so far as to denounce what she called the “one-sided pressure for a ceasefire” in Gaza.

Salazar’s bill passed easily, 327-62, with limited opposition from Democrats or Republicans, who voted for and against it in roughly equal measures. Even many members of the Progressive Caucus voted in favor, proving that anti-communism is as popular on the left as it is on the right.

A New McCarthyism?

The imminent passing of the Crucial Communism Teaching Act harkens back to earlier anti-communist periods in American history, namely the Red Scare of the 1910s and the McCarthyist era of the 1940s and 1950s. During those times, organized labor movements were ruthlessly attacked, workers from all professions, including professors, government officials, and teachers, were fired en masse, and some of America’s brightest minds had their careers derailed due to their political leanings. This included singer Paul Robeson, actors like Charlie Chaplain and Marilyn Monroe, playwright Arthur Miller and scientist Albert Einstein.

The point of these operations was to break any opposition to the power of the state and big business and ensure the United States maintained its capitalist course. Today, however, fewer Americans than ever are happy with the current political and economic system. A recent Gallup study found that only 22% of the public are satisfied with how things are going, with a majority responding that they are “very dissatisfied.” Living standards have been stagnating or dropping for decades, and alternative economic systems are becoming more desirable. A 2019 poll from Axios found that 48% of adults under 35 prefer socialism to capitalism, including 57% of female respondents.

There are some signs that Washington is slowly moving towards a new McCarthyist era. President Trump, for example, has promised to carry out mass deportations of leftists once he becomes president, stating:

I will order my government to deny entry to all communists and all Marxists. Those who come to join our country must love our country. We don’t want them if they want to destroy our country… So we’re going to be keeping foreign Christian-hating communists, socialists, and Marxists out of America.”

“At the end of the day, either the communists destroy America, or we destroy the communists,” he explained. But he also stated that American citizens espousing anti-capitalist views would be purged. “My question is, what are we going to do with the ones that are already here, that grew up here? I think we have to pass a new law for them,” he said.

That Trump would actually deport millions of American citizens en masse appears like too drastic a step right now, but it is clear that both Democrats and Republicans are serious in their anti-communist convictions. Therefore, the Crucial Communism Teaching Act will likely only be the start of this campaign.

December 16, 2024 Posted by | Education, politics, Reference, USA | Leave a comment

Australia’s Nuclear Neverland politics: The Lost Boys of Costings | The West Report

It’s hard to take the Coalition’s nuclear energy policy seriously, so we didn’t. And frankly, why would they put taxpayers on the hook for the biggest public funded project in history when renewables are crowding private investment en masse? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSeaybp9oAA

December 14, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics | Leave a comment

Trump and Nuclear Energy: There Are Questions

By James Pethokoukis, October 29, 2024 https://www.aei.org/economics/trump-and-nuclear-energy-there-are-questions/?fbclid=IwY2xjawHFoTFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHQxPhKajCptbr5dJgCAd1ZhE0x5OIXLC1-lH_txOvx1zcexr7tF8oqHmYQ_aem_Nlh9f2T4vRa-IsURORqqrA

The 2024 GOP platform from the Republican National Convention promises that “Republicans will unleash Energy Production from all sources, including nuclear, to immediately slash Inflation and power American homes, cars, and factories with reliable, abundant, and affordable Energy.” And much the same message from the party’s presidential nominee:

Starting on day one, I will approve new drilling, new pipelines, new refineries, new power plants, new reactors and we will slash the red tape. We will get the job done. We will create more electricity, also for these new industries that can only function with massive electricity.

But what does that scenario look like, exactly? Trump addressed the issue during his recent podcast with Joe Rogan. As reported by E&E News: 

Trump told Joe Rogan in an interview released Friday that he thought projects to build more of the large nuclear reactors currently on the grid, while “very clean,” have a tendency to be complex and to go over budget. He also expressed concern over the energy source’s safety implications. “They get too big, and too complex and too expensive,” Trump said of U.S. nuclear reactors. “I think there’s a little danger in nuclear.” … On Rogan’s show, Trump said two failed nuclear projects were evidence of why large reactors may not be the answer to meeting energy demand, likely referencing the Bellefonte Nuclear Station in Hollywood, Alabama, and the V.C. Summer nuclear plant near Jenkinsville, South Carolina. “They did one in Alabama. They did one in, I think, South Carolina. They do them wrong,” Trump said. “They build these massive things. Then the environmentalists get in.” Trump pointed to small modular reactors as a potential answer to long-running cost concerns surrounding the energy source. He believes that smaller reactors, which can be built in a factory, could avoid the complexities associated with large reactors.

As the piece correctly points out, none of the two dozen or so nuclear reactors that generate two-thirds of French energy are SMRs, a technology that optimists hope will be deployed by decade’s end. Those optimists include mega-retailer Amazon, which recently announced it was partnering with Dominion Energy to explore building a small modular reactor near Virginia’s North Anna nuclear plant. The project aims to support Amazon Web Service’s growing clean energy needs, particularly for AI operations. What’s more, Amazon is hardly the only tech company interested in nuclear to power its data centers, as the chart below [on original] outlines:

But Trump’s vote for nuclear energy abundance seems to conflict with his distaste for the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)—despite the considerable IRA  funding going to red states—which includes substantial nuclear power incentives, including a production tax credit for existing plants, investment tax credits for new nuclear projects, and support for advanced reactor development and nuclear-powered hydrogen production. That framework might change if Trump wins a second term, but it also seems likely that expanded nuclear power in the US “will require public-private collaboration, regardless of whether we decide to focus on building conventional reactors or next-gen designs,” as energy analyst Thomas Hochman told me back in July. For what it’s worth, some professional Washington observers think incentives for nuclear have enough GOP support to survive attacks on the IRA should Trump win.

December 13, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear sector’s views on second Trump administration mixed as Rogan interview raises questions

Donald Trump enacted pro-nuclear policies during his first term and supported an “all-of-the-above” energy policy during the campaign, but some advocates fear a “divide between words and actions.”

Utility Dive, Nov. 8, 2024, By Brian Martucci

Dive Brief:

  • President-elect Donald Trump in August vowed to “approve new drilling, new pipelines, new refineries, new power plants [and] new reactors” on “day one” of his administration.
  • But Trump has more recently sounded skeptical about federal backing for large-scale nuclear builds like Vogtle, which he said in an Oct. 25 interview with podcaster Joe Rogan “get too big, and too complex and too expensive,” raising questions about his second administration’s willingness to support the industry.
  • The nuclear sector has mixed views on the incoming administration’s potential support, with some expressing optimism that Trump would build on pro-nuclear policies enacted during the Biden and first Trump administrations and others concerned about a pullback in federal funding for advanced nuclear development.

Dive Insight:

The second Trump administration is likely to “pursue an overall domestic energy agenda focused on energy production and dominance in the United States” but may not continue the Biden-Harris administration’s “massive appropriations” to the nuclear sector, American Nuclear Society Director of Public Policy John Starkey said.

At least one prominent Trump ally, environmental lawyer and former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has an anti-nuclear track record. Kennedy, a Trump ally who is expected to have an official role in the incoming administration, fought for years to close New York’s Indian Point nuclear plant. More recently, he has voiced opposition to federal nuclear energy subsidies.

“We should have no subsidies … all the companies should internalize their costs in the way that they internalize their profits,” Kennedy told Tesla CEO and fellow Trump backer Elon Musk in an online discussion last year.

But the first Trump administration was broadly supportive of the U.S. nuclear industry. It provided billions in loan guarantees to facilitate construction of Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4; supported the failed Carbon Free Power Project at Idaho National Laboratory, a proposed 462-MW plant that would have used NuScale’s small modular reactor technology; and advanced the pro-nuclear Partnership for Transatlantic Energy Cooperation, the Trump presidential campaign said in 2023.

In 2019, Trump signed the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act, or NEIMA, which paved the way for the technology-neutral Part 53 advanced reactor licensing pathway. The NRC is expected to finalize Part 53 regulations by 2027.

“We look forward to working with the new administration to advance policies that extend the lives of existing nuclear reactors, usher in a new era of advanced technologies and support a global marketplace for U.S. exports,” Nuclear Energy Institute President and CEO Maria Korsnick told Utility Dive……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuclear-energy-sector-mixed-views-second-trump-administration-joe-rogan/732407/?fbclid=IwY2xjawHFoYpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHUakuD2-A16vIr3S063461cig0CymSgxOs5gaAOLJV6GiinQd89Cgy9kBw_aem__hlKjpEPqkmj7Ro11hAMAg

December 12, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The Fall of Assad & What it Means for The Middle East (w/ Alastair Crooke) | The Chris Hedges Report 

December 9, 2024, By Chris Hedges / The Chris Hedges Report  https://scheerpost.com/2024/12/09/the-fall-of-assad-what-it-means-for-the-middle-east-w-alastair-crooke-the-chris-hedges-report/

The fall of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, ending a 55-year dynasty begun by his father, dramatically shifts the pieces on the chessboard of the Middle East. The rebel group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, is armed and backed by Turkey and was once allied with Al Qaeda. It is sanctioned as a terrorist group. Turkey’s primary goal is to prevent an independent Kurdish state in northern Syria where Kurds have formed an autonomous enclave. But it may not only be Turkey that is behind the overthrow of Assad. It may also be Israel. Israel has long sought to topple the Syrian regime which is the transit point for weapons and aid sent from Iran to the Lebanese militia group Hezbollah. The Syrian regime was backed by Russia and Iran, indeed Russian warplanes routinely bombed Syrian rebel targets. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has gloated about the ousting of Assad calling it an “historic day” and said it was a direct result of Israel’s actions against Hezbollah and Iran. But at the same time, Israel will soon have an Islamic state on its border.

Syria, a country of 23 million, is geopolitically important. It links Iraq’s oil to the Mediterranean, the Shia of Iraq and Iran to Lebanon, and Turkey, a NATO ally, to Jordan’s deserts.

Assad’s decision to brutally crush a pro-democracy movement triggered a 14-year-long civil war in 2011 that led to 500,000 people being killed and more than 14 milliondisplaced.

Now What? Will Hayat Tahrir al-Sham seek to renew relations with Iran? Will it impose an Islamic state, given its jihadist roots? Will Syria’s many minority groups, Alawite, Druze, Circassian, Armenian, Chechen, Assyrian, Christian and Turkoman,be persecuted, especially the Alawites, a heterodox offshoot of Shiite Islam comprising around 10 percent of the population, which Assad and the ruling elites were members of? How will it affect the U.S.-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, which holds the Syrian oil-rich territory in north and east Syria? Why are the U.S. and Israel bombing targets in Syria following the ouster of Assad? Will the new regime be able to convince the U.S. and Europe to lift sanctions and return the occupied oil fields? What does this portend for the wider Middle East, especially in Lebanon and the Israeli occupied territories?

Joining Chris Hedges to discuss the overthrow of the Assad regime and its ramifications is former British diplomat Alastair Crooke. He served for many years in the Middle East working as a security advisor to the EU special envoy to the Middle East, as well as helping lead efforts to set up negotiations and truces between Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian resistant groups with Israel. He was instrumental in establishing the 2002 ceasefire between Hamas and Israel. He is also the author of Resistance: The Essence of the Islamist Revolution, which analyzes the ascendancy of Islamic movements in the Middle East

December 11, 2024 Posted by | MIDDLE EAST, politics | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »