South Africa’s nuclear company Eskom urging government to freeze renewable energy program
Is Eskom building a case for nuclear power?, Business Day Live, BY SALIEM FAKIR JULY 28 2016, IT IS disconcerting that Eskom is advising the government to freeze a globally acclaimed renewable energy programme based on a perceived misunderstanding of the benefits of the renewable energy independent power producer (IPP) programme.
Eskom has justified its recent announcement not to sign further power purchase agreements with independent power producers with reasons that range from questions about the need for additional renewables and baseload IPPs, to improved operating performance, its large-scale new build programme, and protecting consumers from higher prices by not buying additional capacity.
Yet, the renewable energy programme is regarded as highly successful, and it delivers a wide range of benefits at the best prices given that it is a buyer’s market.
Eskom’s own 2016 financial report states that wind and solar are now cheaper than coal-generated electricity. The Treasury has stated that 92 renewable energy programme projects have attracted R193bn in private sector investment, totalling a contribution of 6,327 MW of capacity to the national grid. The total projected value of goods and services to be procured from broad-based black economic empowerment suppliers is put at more than R101bn.
Investment in renewables accounted for 85.8% of total direct foreign investment in SA in 2014. A Council for Scientific and Industrial Research report revealed that wind energy produced net savings of R1.8bn in the first half of 2015 and was also cash positive for Eskom by R300m.
The net savings can be attributed to avoiding diesel and coal fuel costs, as well as the economic costs of load shedding. Renewable energy in total generated a net benefit for the economy of up to R4bn. Renewable energy production has cut 4.4m tonnes of carbon dioxide.
At a policy level, the government has indicated that renewable energy has to be ramped up. The country’s energy vision and the National Development Plan call for a greater mix of energy sources and a greater diversity of IPPs in the energy industry, with the 2010 Integrated Resource Plan’s vision calling for 17,800 MW of renewable energy to be in place by 2030.
Internationally, SA is a signatory to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) global climate change agreement to keep planet emissions beneath 1.5°C by honouring carbon emissions reduction targets.
Legally speaking, Eskom is a buyer of electricity, with the Department of Energy procuring capacity in line with ministerial determinations. The government’s commitment has been laudable. It is worrying that Eskom seems to wish to erode this………..
It seems Eskom is building a case for nuclear and this is the real reason behind the freeze on further renewable procurement. There is no guarantee that the proposed large nuclear new build programme will be cheap, considering that Medupi and Kusile are proving to be more expensive than some renewables. We would urge pragmatism and prudence on their part.
• Fakir is the head of the policy and futures unit with the World Wide Fund for Nature in SA. http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/2016/07/28/is-eskom-building-a-case-for-nuclear-power
Climate change a focus for the USA Democrats election policy
Finally, Climate Change Gets Stage Time At The Democratic Convention“This election is about climate change, the greatest environmental crisis facing our planet,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said. Huffington Post, 26/07/2016 Just one night into the Democratic National Convention, things are looking a whole lot brighter for the environment under a potential Hillary Clinton presidency than anything we heard in Cleveland last week.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), long a champion of climate action, dedicated a large portion of his speech in Philadelphia on Monday addressing “the greatest environmental crisis on our planet.”……
Those sentiments were echoed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) just moments earlier. In her keynote address, Warren called out the fossil fuel industry while praising Clinton’s inclusion of climate action as a key part of her campaign……..
The inclusion of climate topics at the DNC is a far cry from the almost nonexistent mention of climate change and fossil fuel money at last week’s RNC. Republican nominee Donald Trump, who has called climate change a “hoax” and said he isn’t a “great believer” in man-made global warming, didn’t mention the environment onceduring his acceptance speech.
The only person to speak about the issue on the RNC stage was Harold Hamm, a fracking mogul who said, “climate change isn’t our biggest problem,” and instead called for more oil and gas production, Grist reported.
Scientists have long called for extreme action to halt the worst effect of climate change. Representatives from 195 nations reached a landmark deal in Paris last year pledging to lower greenhouse gas emissions…….http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/climate-change-dnc_us_5796e480e4b0d3568f84585a
French government propping up nuclear company EDF with a cash boost
French nuclear company EDF to get cash infusion http://www.dw.com/en/french-nuclear-company-edf-to-get-cash-infusion/a-19428058
The French government has said it will go ahead with a 4-billion-euro share issue for state-controlled electricity firm EDF. The move will help finance the construction of two controversial nuclear reactors in the UK. The French state – which holds 85 percent of EDF – said it will buy three billion euros’ worth of the newly issued EDF shares sometime this year. The fourth billion will be chipped in by other investors.
EDF’s board of directors is expected to give final investment approval this week for the construction of two EPR nuclear reactors at Hinkley Point in southwestern England, home to two old Magnox reactors that are no longer in operation and two AGR gas-cooled reactors whose construction began in 1967 and are still in operation, but whose decommissioning date is currently set for 2023.
EDF had delayed the final investment decision on the new Hinkley Point reactors several times, as it sought other investors to share the costs amid concerns the heavily indebted company will struggle to meet its financial commitments.
Internal skeptics abound The six labor-union representatives sitting on EDF’s 18-member board have repeatedly opposed the project. They wanted to see it delayed by three years to give EDF time to complete the construction of similar reactors in France, Finland and China, which are several years behind schedule.
The company’s works council secretary, Jean-Luc Magnaval, told the news agency Reuters that his union had filed a complaint on the matter with a Paris court, which has scheduled a hearing on the case for August 2.
EDF’s chief financial officer has resigned over the threat the project represents to the company’s finances.
EDF is also planning to speed up renovation of its 58 nuclear reactors in France, a task expected to cost about 51 billion euros.
EDF, which has already spent about 3 billion euros on Hinkley Point C, needs the project “to maintain its know-how and prepare for the retirement and renewal of its aging French and British nuclear fleet,” chief executive Jean-Bernard Levy told shareholders on Tuesday. He added that the new capital would also help the bolster the company’s credit rating and its ability to refinance its 37.4 billion euro debt.
Sparing no expense The Hinkley Point project is a joint venture between EDF and China General Nuclear Power Corporation. It’s one of the world’s most costly nuclear power plant projects.
The most recently projected price tag was a whopping 18 billion pounds ($24 billion, 21.7 billion euros), before Brexit lowered the value of the pound.
However, a complex system of subsidies approved by former UK finance minister, George Osborne, could cost up to 37 billion pounds, according to a recent estimate published by the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change.
Nuclear renaissance?
The UK’s environment secretary, Andrea Leadsom, recently reiterated that the Hinkley Point project will kick-start a “nuclear renaissance” in Britain that would see 18 gigawatts of new capacity added if sites at Sizewell, Bradwell, Moorside, Wylfa and Oldbury are developed along with Hinkley Point C.
Nuclear power accounts for around 16 percent of the UK’s energy requirements, which could drop to three per cent in 2030 unless new reactors are built in the meantime, Leadsom said.
EPR reactors are third-generation nuclear reactors which use pressurised water as their cooling fluid. At present, most operating reactors around the world are second-generation reactors; only around a dozen Generation 3 reactors are in operation so far.
A variety of Generation 4 reactor designs, which engineers hope will be more inherently safe and more cost-efficient than previous generations, are in various stages of prototype development, but none are expected to be commercially available before about 2030 or 2040.
By that time, however, renewable energy technologies and battery storage systems may have attainedsuch a low cost that construction of new nuclear power stations may prove a tough sell financially. That’s already the case for the Hinkley Point C project and for EDF’s other three existing EPR reactor projects around the world, all of which have proven to be far more expensive than optimistic early estimates, and very likely none of which would be getting built had they not been supported by heavy government subsidies.
Report questions value of new nuclear projects in Wales compared with renewables
New nuclear projects in Wales must be ‘cost-competitive’ with renewables, say MPs , Business Green, 26 July 16 Planned nuclear sites in North Wales should only go ahead if government can prove development is ‘value for money’, as Business Secretary Greg Clark visits Japan to fan investor interest in UK nuclear projects
Lawmakers on the Welsh Affairs Committee have published a new report insisting that before proposed nuclear developments at Wylfa Newydd and Trawsfynydd in North Wales go ahead the government must prove the financial viability and community benefit of the projects.
“The government must prove that the cost of any nuclear development is well understood and competitive with renewable sources. These costs must be made public in a format that can be easily understood,” Committee chair David Davies MP said.
“There has to be a demonstrable benefit for the local community as well,” he added. “Local businesses must form a key part of the supply-chain and be given sufficient information to allow this to happen.”………
The report concludes the government should only support the development at Wylfa Newydd if the strike price for the project’s electricity is competitive with renewables and below that of Hinkley Point C, EDF’s controversial nuclear project in Somerset which is due to receive a final investment decision this week. Hinkley’s strike price is £92.50 per MWh – more than double the current market price of power. In comparison, the strike price for onshore wind is around £80 per MWh with some experts now arguing new onshore wind farms can be built at a lower levelised cost than new gas power plants. ……..
Cost estimates for Wylfa Newydd must cover the lifetime of the project, including decommissioning and waste disposal, MPs said, after concerns were raised during their investigation that nuclear power projects are often subject to delays and cost schedule overruns. Cost estimates for Hinkley Point C have ballooned from £16bn in 2012 to almost £21bn earlier this year, while last week EDF’s Paris headquarters were raided by the French finance authorities investigating concerns about its reporting of maintenance and development costs………http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2465917/new-nuclear-projects-in-wales-must-be-cost-competitive-with-renewables-say-mps
 |
Click here to Reply or Forward
|
Nuclear industry to get a heft subsidy from New York residents
A hefty nuclear subsidy Times Union, July 25, 2016 “……… It’s one thing to keep nuclear plants running temporarily while the state transitions to green energy. It’s another to hand nuclear plant operators billions of dollars that could instead be used to move New York that much more quickly to a clean energy future.
The nuclear subsidies are being proposed in the state’s Clean Energy Standard. The CES, also known as the “50-by-30” plan — because it seeks to achieve the 50 percent clean energy goal by 2030 — would shift more of the state’s electricity supply to sources like wind, solar, hydropower and biomass, and away from fossil fuels.
Some want nuclear power in the mix, too, but it has some not-insignificant problems — the risk of an accident, and the still-unresolved question of safe disposal of radioactive waste. It’s hard to see nuclear power plants as being part of an environmentally sound energy future.
As a short-term bridge to that future, however, they could play a part, if they can stand on their own. Supporters say they can’t in the current market.
So the CES would include a program of “zero emissions credits” — a charge that utilities and energy service companies would pay to keep nuclear plants open. Those costs are expected to start at $965 million for the first two years, rising to about $1 billion a year, paid for by, well, pretty much anyone with an electricity bill……
What, however, is a reasonable windfall? Just how much do these plants realistically need to stay open? Is the state fattening nuclear plant profits with money that could be used to fund more alternative energy, and more energy savings programs, and achieve the CES goals even sooner?…….http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-opinion/article/Editorial-A-hefty-nuclear-subsidy-8416153.php
Hillary Clinton selects pro nuclear advocate Tim Kaine as running mate
GOP. 22 July 16 “………Kaine Supported Nuclear Power As A Solution To Meeting Virginia’s Energy Needs. “In Virginia last week, a panel on reducing climate change appointed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) considered adding nuclear power to its menu of recommendations. The governor’s energy plan also supports nuclear power as one solution to meeting the state’s energy needs, which are expected to grow by the equivalent of a million homes in the next decade.” (Lisa Rein and Christy Goodman, “Little Outcry On Nuclear Reactor Proposal,” The Washington Post, 8/4/08)…..https://gop.com/meet-tim-kaine/
Politics trumps good sense as EDF prepares to approve Hinkley Point C nuclear project
handing billions of energy bill payers money over to the French government for an outdated technology makes no business sense
Hinkley Point C nuclear project expected to get go-ahead next week EDF likely to greenlight construction of power plant in Somerset, providing boost to UK government amid Brexit fallout, Guardian, Terry Macalister, 23 July, The Hinkley Point C nuclear project is poised to get the go-ahead from EDF next week in what will be a major boost to a new government trying to steady nerves on the economy after the British vote to leave the European Union last month.
A board meeting of the French energy group on Thursday 28 July is expected to give a final investment decision in favour of building new reactors in Somerset despite internal divisions over the £18bn scheme.
The decision has been repeatedly postponed, partly because of pressure from trade unionists on the board of the partly state-owned French group who claim EDF cannot afford the cost and risk of such a massive project in the UK.
But Jean-Bernard Lévy, EDF’s chief executive, has the support of the British government to press ahead with a scheme that represents an important shop window for selling nuclear technology and expertise worldwide.
EDF said it would discuss Hinkley Point C (HPC) – which involves building two so-called European pressurised reactors (EPR) – at its forthcoming board meeting and underlined the importance of building in Britain. “The HPC project is a major element of the group’s … strategy. The two EPR reactors at Hinkley Point would strengthen EDF’s presence in Britain, a country where its subsidiary EDF Energy already operates 15 nuclear reactors and is the largest electricity supplier by volume.”
EDF would not publicly commit itself to a decision in favour of the project, but nuclear industry sources said all company preparations were being made as if it was a done deal. “We are all expecting the go ahead next week,” the sources said.
The timing could not be better for the UK government, which regards Hinkley as a flagship energy scheme despite criticism from the City about its massive cost.
EDF insists it can build the project for £18bn but a complex system of subsidies agreed by the former chancellor, George Osborne, could cost the consumer up to £37bn, according to a recent estimate published on the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) website………
Critics remained vocal. “It’s right that the UK should remain open for business but handing billions of energy bill payers money over to the French government for an outdated technology makes no business sense,” said John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK.
“A possible final investment decision next week will only show that high-level post-truth politics trumps good sense. The type of reactor EDF wants to build at Hinkley hasn’t yet been shown to work.
“For UK bill payers, the rationale for a massively over-priced power station like Hinkley has long since disappeared but all the key players are too embarrassed to stop it.”………https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/22/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-project
New York’s nuclear subsidy plan will grow to a $multibillion cost to ratepayers
Nuclear Subsidies Are Key Part of New York’s Clean-Energy Plan, NYT By VIVIAN YEE JULY 20, 2016 “………The commission is considering a proposal that makes the state’s three upstate nuclear plants important parts of its efforts to wean itself off fossil fuels, offering nearly $1 billion in ratepayer-financed subsidies over the next two years to save plants battered by rising costs and competition from cheap natural gas.
With very little process, and very little time for the public to even know this is happening, what they’re proposing here is a multibillion-dollar uncompetitive subsidy to one company,” said Jessica Azulay, a spokeswoman for the Alliance for a Green Economy, an environmentalist group.
The alliance has calculated the total cost over 12 years as more than $7.6 billion…..http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/21/nyregion/nuclear-subsidies-new-york-clean-energy-plan.html?_r=0
Assembly Energy Committee queries New York Governor on push for nuclear subsidies
Assembly energy chair questions Cuomo push for nuclear subsidies, Politico By Scott Waldman 07/21/16 ALBANY—The chair of the Assembly Energy Committee is questioning the Cuomo administration’s plan to subsidize upstate nuclear reactors and its potential cost to New York residents.
On Tuesday, Assemblywoman Amy Paulin of Westchester sent a list of pointed questions to the Cuomo administration seeking more information about how much the plan would cost consumers and how much of the subsidy would go to jobs. Paulin, a Democrat, also questioned how it would affect low-income energy customers and asked if the administration had considered whether offshore wind farms could account for some of the emissions-free energy sources the state hopes to cultivate.
Paulin’s request touched on many of the key details about the plan that the administration has yet to release. The administration projected that the plan would cost $1 billion over the next two years, but that costs would climb steeply thereafter. The plan could cost more than $8 billion in the next 12 years, with all of the cost spread through utility bills.
Paulin asked how the plan will spread costs to all utility customers.
“Will the cost for the nuclear tier be evenly distributed among all ratepayers in the state, or will there be some accommodation made for ratepayers who are not served directly from the power produced?” she asked.
The administration has set an aggressive schedule for its plan, and Paulin said the two-week public comment period for the plan was “unusually tight” and requested a response to 13 questions before any action is taken. The PSC is expected to act at its August 1 meeting.
Exelon, which owns three of the four upstate reactors and is seeking to buy the fourth, has said it will close one of them if subsidies are not in place by September………
A coalition of good government groups on Wednesday requested additional time for public comment on the plan. ReInvent Albany, Common Cause and the New York Public Interest Research Group, said they were joining with dozens of environmental and community groups in calling for a 45-day public comment period because of the “magnitude of the potential costs.”
Several French trade unions want “out” of EDF’s Hinkley nuclear project – walk out of meeting
French unions walk out of nuclear sector meeting with minister, Reuters, 18 July 16 Several French trade unions walked out of a meeting with the economy minister on the nuclear sector on Monday, saying they did not want their participation used as a cover to sanction decisions such as on EDF’s Hinkley Point project in Britain.
Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron was expected to meet the energy branch of the trade unions to discuss the overhaul of the French nuclear sector which has been in turmoil since the Fukushima disaster in 2011.
The unions, worried that heavily indebted state-controlled utility EDF is taking on too much, are against the company pushing ahead with an 18 billion pound ($23.4 billion) plan to build a nuclear reactor complex at Hinkley Point in southern England and have asked for it to be delayed.
Macron has backed the project and said he expects EDF to make a final investment decision in September.
Representatives of several unions, including the hardline CGT and FO, arrived at the meeting, read a brief statement and left. “Nothing guarantees us that this meeting is not a facade to endorse a decision that we do not agree to. Among others, we reject any forceful decision on Hinkley Point,” the CGT, FO, CGC and UNSA unions said in a joint statement.
The unions said that although the meeting was about the French nuclear sector that comprises several players such as AREVA and CEA, only EDF was present at the talks….http://uk.reuters.com/article/france-nuclear-edf-idUKL8N1A443U
Scottish independence a sure thing, now that UK govt will renew Trident nuclear missile system?
Trident renewal ‘assures Scottish independence,’ says navy whistleblower William McNeilly https://www.rt.com/uk/351814-trident-renewal-william-mcneilly/ 18 Jul, 2016 As Prime Minister Theresa May convenes Parliament on Monday to debate renewing Britain’s Trident nuclear deterrent, Royal Navy submariner-turned-whistleblower William McNeilly tells RT renewal coupled with Brexit will force Scotland to seek independence.
“They rushed the European vote. Now they want to rush the Trident vote,” said McNeilly.
“Those who support the Trident system lack vision. They talk like they are the ones who want to defend the UK. The truth is they are the ones who will destroy the UK if they get their way.
“Voting to leave the EU, then voting Yes on Trident, will guarantee Scottish independence.”
In May 2015, McNeilly, 27, leaked a report exposing 30 safety and security failures documented over his three-month tour on board one of Britain’s Vanguard submarines. Narrowly escaping jail for the leak, he was dishonorably discharged, returning home to his native Belfast.
McNeilly says renewal will lead to the splintering of the United Kingdom, squander hundreds of billions of pounds, and offer terrorists a vulnerable target.
“Scotland is aiming to get another vote [for independence] and these people want to force the Scottish people to keep Trident. The Trident supporters are on the verge of breaking up the UK with this Trident vote, just like they broke up Europe.
“The majority of Scotland want Trident removed. If they force the Scottish people to keep a nuclear system that is damaging their land and sea, putting their lives and land at risk, costing them an absolute fortune … then the majority of Scotland will vote Yes to leave the UK.”
Already spoiling for a second referendum on Scotland’s independence in the wake of the Brexit vote, in which a majority of Scots voted to “Remain” in the EU, McNeilly believes the Scottish National Party (SNP) will see a vote in favor of Trident’s renewal as the final straw.
“The Better Together campaign were able to secure a No vote in the last [independence referendum] because they used the European Union as leverage. Now the Scottish National Party are the ones who will use the European Union as leverage.
“Trident is the fuel the Scottish National Party needs for an independence vote… the Scottish National Party is striking its matches.”
If Scotland leaves the United Kingdom, the government “will have nowhere to put the submarines and will be forced to spend countless more billions on building a base for them or moving them or looking like complete fools by scrapping them after destroying our unity.”
Democratic senators Urge Obama To Cancel super costly Nuclear Cruise Missile
Senators Urge Obama To Cancel Nuclear Cruise Missile Aaron Mehta, Defense News July 21, 2016 WASHINGTON — A group of ten Democratic senators have penned a letter to US President Barack Obama urging him to cancel development of a new nuclear-capable cruise missile, in what appears to be the next salvo from nonproliferation advocates on Capitol Hill against the weapon.
At issue is the Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) cruise missile, which will replace the Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) program with 1,000 to 1,100 cruise missiles, representing the US Air Force’s standoff nuclear delivery capability. The ALCM program is scheduled to age out in 2030.
Proponents say the LRSO is vital to maintaining America’s nuclear posture into the future. But opponents argue the weapon is too costly and unnecessary given other nuclear options, with a vocal minority in Congress starting to advocate heavily for that position.
“Independent estimates suggest that nuclear weapons sustainment and modernization plans could cost nearly one trillion dollars over the next 30 years, putting enormous pressure on our defense budget at a time when non-nuclear systems will also require major expenditures,” wrote the authors of the letter. “In particular, we urge you to cancel plans to spend a least $20 billion on a new nuclear air-launched cruise missile, the Long Range Standoff weapon, which would provide an unnecessary capability that could increase the risk of nuclear war.”
The letter was signed by Sens. Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer of California, Al Franken of Minnesota, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Bernie Sanders, the Vermont senator who recently ended his campaign for the presidency…….
The letter also urged Obama to officially adopt a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, something the United States has traditionally been unwilling to do.
“In light of our unmatched conventional military capabilities, we do not need to rely on the threat of nuclear first-use to deter non-nuclear attacks on our homeland or our allies,” the authors wrote. “By adopting a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, the United States could reduce the risk of accidental nuclear conflict while deterring both conventional and nuclear threats to our security.”
Neither the desire to drop the LRSO, nor the goal of a no-first-use policy, appears likely to gain much traction with Donald Trump, officially named the Republican nominee for president this week.
Speaking to The New York Times, Trump reaffirmed a commitment to the so-called nuclear triad but was noncommittal on the no-first-use idea………http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/congress/2016/07/21/senators-obama-nuclear-missile-lrso/87384128/
Cumbria demands huge investment to support Moorside nuclear project
Huge investment needed to support Moorside nuclear project, say council, News and Star, 21 July 2016 CUMBRIA’S council leaders say any new nuclear facility built in the county must be accompanied by huge investment in the area’s key infrastructure – such as the road and rail network.
During a meeting at today’s Cumbria County Council cabinet meeting leader Stewart Young said that the authority needed the Government or NuGen – the firm behind the new Moorside development in west Cumbria – to stump up cash in advance so work can can begin…….
“The sheer scale of this nuclear project is unprecedented for Cumbria and in fact unprecedented for the UK. To ensure that everyone benefits we need a guarantee from Government or NuGen or both of extensive additional investment into services like the county’s infrastructure, such as roads, railways and port, as well as accommodation for the workforce, and the development of skills to ensure that as many jobs as possible are taken by Cumbrians.”
The call was made as part of the council’s formal response to the consultation into the Moorside project…… The formal consultation process ends on July 30. http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/latest/Huge-investment-needed-to-support-Moorside-nuclear-project-say-council-731df4b0-d076-4d29-86f7-2eea67a2e265-ds
New Zealand has been well served by its nuclear-free policy
Nuclear-free has ‘served us well’ – Geoffrey Palmer, Radio New Zealand, 22 July 16 An architect of New Zealand’s once contentious anti-nuclear law says it remains the right approach for the country.
The law is in the spotlight as preparations begin for the first visit by an American warship since the landmark legislation was passed in 1987.
Under the law, the Prime Minister must make an assessment of whether the ship will breach New Zealand’s ban on nuclear weapons and nuclear power.
The US has not sent a naval ship since 1983, as it refuses to say whether its ships are nuclear-armed, as required by New Zealand’s nuclear-free law.
The deputy prime minister at the time the nuclear-free law was passed, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, told Morning Report the policy, and the law behind it, was sound…….http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/309192/nuclear-free-has-‘served-us-well’-geoffrey-palmer
USA Dept of Energy funds Florida research into nuclear recycling
Florida State receives #10 million for nuclear research center Florida State 24/7 JULY 21, 2016
Kathleen Haughney Florida State University will receive $10 million from the U.S. Department of Energy to create a new Energy Frontier Research Center… The center will focus on developing technologies for recycling nuclear fuel and cleaning up Cold War-era weapon production sites. It will be led by Thomas Albrecht-Schmitt, the Gregory R. Choppin Professor of Chemistry at FSU……..Three other institutions will also host research centers. They are The Ohio State University, the University of South Carolina and DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. http://news.fsu.edu/Top-Stories/Florida-State-receives-10M-for-nuclear-research-center
1 This Month
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (142)
- May 2026 (306)
- 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)
-
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 