Former Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann wants USA to bomb Iran
Bachmann Calls For US To Bomb Iran’s Nuclear Hardware, The DC, 10 Sept 15 WASHINGTON — Former congresswoman and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann called on the U.S. to bomb Iran’s nuclear hardware, which she said would “get the attention of these thugs in the Middle East.”
Bachmann, who spent part of her career on the House Intelligence Committee, spoke with The Daily Caller Wednesday while waiting for the rally against the Iran deal to begin. As the sun beat down on the crowd, Bachmann was resolute in her stance that the U.S. should seriously consider bombing Iran to stop their nuclear ambitions.
“As we stand here today, you can end this nuclear program today. All you do is deliver bombs on the nuclear hardware,” Bachmann told TheDC. “We’re not talking about bombing shopping centers and killing innocent kids in Iran. We’re talking about taking out weapons of death. That’s the nuclear hardware.”…….
Bachmann also wants the U.S. to pump more weapons into Israel and give them bunker-busting bombs and more access to United States aircraft carriers in case the Israelis want to launch a strike……. http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/10/bachmann-calls-for-us-to-bomb-irans-nuclear-hardware/#ixzz3lVWHVy8w
Outrageous decision of USA’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to cancel research on cancer-nuclear links
Vital cancer study canceled: NRC will hide the truth about nuclear reactor risks Beyond Nuclear today decried the outrageous decision by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to cancel a study that would have examined cancer incidence and mortalities and the connection to U.S. nuclear facilities.
“Study after study in Europe has shown a clear rise in childhood leukemia around operating nuclear power facilities, yet the NRC has decided to hide this vital information from the American public,” said Cindy Folkers, radiation and health specialist at Beyond Nuclear.
The study, initiated in 2009 and carried out under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), had completed Phase 1 and was looking at seven pilot nuclear sites around the country, a project that was estimated to cost $8 million.
“An $8 million price tag for the next phase of this study is a drop in the bucket for an agency with a $1 billion annual operating budget,” added Folkers. The NRC identified the “significant amount of time and resources needed and the agency’s current budget constraints” as its excuse for terminating the study.
Folkers noted that, in reality, nuclear industry manipulation, rather than budget constraints, could be behind the NRC’s sudden decision to abandon the NAS study.
In documents obtained by Beyond Nuclear it was revealed that NRC staff had been approached by the president of U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), John Boice, offering a cheaper, faster and less sensitive study design to replace the NAS study, although the NRC has not yet agreed to accept the NCRP bid.
Read the full press release and feel free to circulate. http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2015/9/8/vital-cancer-study-canceled-nrc-will-hide-the-truth-about-nu.html
UK nuclear lobby is seeking a blank cheque from the governmnet
So where is the British flight into ‘nuclear power is cheap somewhere’ fantasy leading us? Well, to nationalisation, of course
What the pro-nuclear lobby now wants is for limitless sums of money to be siphoned off from public spending on education, health and whatever else and spent on building nuclear power stations. The money will be notionally borrowed, a contract that will be concocted that will claim that the electricity consumer will pay the money back at a later date, and the balance will be paid for by, well, less schools, hospitals etc. Meanwhile a story will be manufactured about how all of this is cheap.
The state will end up giving the whole project a blank cheque so that the disastrous construction process can be bankrolled entirely from a bottomless pit of state finances.
The notion that nuclear is cheaper somewhere else is a myth http://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-notion-that-nuclear-is-cheaper.html by Dr David Toke The British attitude to the notion that nuclear power is not cheap after all is a bit like a child who first hears that Father Christmas does not, after all, exist. Disbelief, and in this case a belief that if only Father Christmas is nationalised, then it will still be true. The psychologists call this cognitive dissonance, in other words if a fact is uncomfortable to you, you believe that the fact is wrong.
France heading towards a nuclear industry phaseout?
France tilting toward nuclear phase-out, DW 10 Sep 15 As the traditionally strong French nuclear power industry continues to be plagued by technical and financial difficulties, the government has sought to cut nuclear power in favor of renewables. French Environment Minister Segolene Royal sparked rebuke Tuesday (08.09.2015) by tying shutdown of the country’s oldest nuclear plant to the opening of an EPR reactor that has been delayed for six years already………last year, Areva recorded a loss of 5 billion euros. The group hasn’t sold a single power plant in the last seven years, and the Fukushima disaster looks to have had further impacts on demand for new reactors.
Third-generation nuclear reactors – so-called European Pressurized Reactors (EPR) – were initially considered a secure technology for the future and the flagship of the French nuclear industry. But even they have been fraught with problems.
Despite Royal’s recent statement, recently passed legislation on renewable energy in France may be the most telling sign that the winds of change appear to be blowing – toward a nuclear phase-out.
Technology of the future turns sour
Operational start of the Olkiluoto 3 EPR in Finland has been delayed from 2009 to 2018, and the Flamanville 3 reactor in France from 2012 to 2018. Construction costs for Flamanville 3 have exploded, from 3.3 to more than 10 billion euros. Two EPR reactors at the Hinkley Point nuclear facility in England have also been the focus of controversy, as construction costs are much higher than initially projected. Financing for completing the project has still not been secured.
There is also the prospect of major safety issues. In mid-April it became known that there were weak points in the steel vessel that surrounds the reactor at the French Flamanville plant, which could lead to cracking under pressure.
The French Nuclear Safety Agency (ASN) called the situation “very serious,” and has demanded a comprehensive report by October.
If the regulating authority judges the vessel unsafe, it would be a disaster for Areva. Replacing it would take several years and result in additional costs in the hundreds of millions of euros, experts say.
Yannick Rousselet, a nuclear energy expert at Greenpeace, says further delays would deal a death blow to the EPR project. Aside from the two European reactors, no EPR installation has been successfully completed – there are just two projects in China.
“Only a few years ago, Areva told us that worldwide it would be finalizing two to three reactors per year,” Rousselet said. “The reality today is that the EPR as an industrial project is dead.”
EDF steps in to save AREVA. The French state owns 86.5 percent of Areva and 84.5 percent of EPR, which is the world’s second-largest electricity provider and a major nuclear power producer.
In an emergency meeting with President Francois Holland in June, it was agreed that EDF should buy in to Areva’s reactor business.
“Without these measures, Areva wouldn’t survive the year,” said Mycle Schneider, editor of the World Nuclear Industry status report.
And according to Schneider, help for Areva doesn’t spell an end French nuclear power’s problems.
EDF is considerably larger than Areva, and has an annual turnover of 70 billion euros. But Schneider points out its also has 37.5 billion euros of debt. Schneider sees this mountain of debt as a central problem.
According to the Paris audit office, the company faces an additional 50 billion euros in costs for dismantling and disposal of nuclear waste.
From nuclear to renewables?
As nuclear energy faces these problems, winds of change appear to be blowing through the French energy system.
Marc Bussieras, head of EDF’s economic strategy department, is open to energy production without nuclear. EDF’s priority is a cost-effective strategy, he told DW.
“Today in France, there are economic reasons in favor of installing renewable energy capacity,” Bussieras said.
Marc Bussieras, head of strategy at EDF, said at a DW panel renewables make economic sense
The French government is seeking to promote an energy transition through new legislation, which is also hoped to create jobs. The law, adopted in July 2015, states that the share of nuclear power in France’s energy mix should be reduced from 75 percent today to 50 percent by 2025. The shortfall in power supply should primarily be covered by wind and solar.
According to a study commissioned by the national environmental agency (ADEME), a complete phase-out of nuclear power and switch to 100 percent renewable energy should be possibly – and economically viable – by 2050…….
Schneider sees other opportunities for the nuclear industry. “The future lies in the huge market for demolition and nuclear waste management,” Schneider said. “New constructions will remain the exception.” http://www.dw.com/en/france-tilting-toward-nuclear-phase-out/a-18692209
No accountability for the $billions being spent on Oak Ridge Uranium Processing Facility.
BUSTED! UPF bomb plant to break the bank at $11 Billion, UPF Update. Orepa.org 10 Sep 15Nuclear Regulatory Commission prevents hearing on Fermi nuclear plant
Nuclear regulators halt plans for Fermi 2 hearing BY TOM HENRY BLADE STAFF WRITER
http://www.toledoblade.com/Energy/2015/09/09/Nuclear-regulators-halt-plans-for-Fermi-2-hearing.html#Ge8j5KJYItT4iPTj.99 NEWPORT, Mich. — Anti-nuclear activists trying to stop DTE Energy’s Fermi 2 nuclear plant from getting a 20-year license extension were dealt a setback Tuesday when the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission killed their plans for a special hearing about the plant’s continued operation.
The agency’s commissioners overruled a decision by the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to grant a hearing on three issues, or contentions, as regulators call them.
The plant’s operating license expires March 20, 2025.
Three environmental groups — Don’t Waste Michigan, Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, and Beyond Nuclear — filed a request for a hearing with four proposed contentions challenging DTE’s application.Another environmental group, Citizens Resistance at Fermi 2, also known as CRAFT, filed a separate hearing request with fourteen proposed contentions.
Requests for the hearing were opposed by DTE and the NRC’s staff.
The NRC said its rules for allowing hearings on such contentions “are designed to ensure that only focused, well-supported issues are admitted for hearing.”
The coalition of groups said it plans to appeal the NRC’s decision in federal court.
The agency’s licensing board had granted a hearing on safety and environmental contentions regarding the common transmission line corridor shared by Fermi 2 and the proposed new Fermi 3 reactor.
Activists warned of a “domino effect” if either of those reactors or their high-level radioactive waste storage pools released radiation. Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com, 419-724-6079, or via Twitter @ecowriterohio.
Despite Sendai restart, the outlook for Japan’s #nuclear industry is poor
Japan nuclear power outlook bleak despite first reactor restart, Yahoo News, 1 Sept 15, By Kentaro Hamada and Aaron Sheldrick TOKYO (Reuters) – The number of Japanese nuclear reactors likely to restart in the next few years has halved, hit by legal challenges and worries about meeting tougher safety standards imposed in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, a Reuters analysis shows…….
analysis shows that of the other 42 operable reactors remaining in the country, just seven are likely to be turned on in the next few years, down from the 14 predicted in a similar survey last year.
The findings are based on reactor inspection data from industry watchdog the Nuclear Regulation Authority, court rulings and interviews with local authorities, utilities and energy experts. They also show that nine reactors are unlikely to ever restart and that the fate of the remaining 26 looks uncertain.
“Four-and-a-half years after the events started unfolding at Fukushima Daiichi, the Japanese government, the nuclear utilities and the NRA have not succeeded in overcoming complete planning insecurity for investors. The outlook for restarts is as cloudy as ever,” said Mycle Schneider, an independent energy consultant in Paris…….
LEGAL WOES
Legal challenges from local residents have hit all atomic plants, with the country’s most nuclear-reliant utility Kansai Electric Power issued with court rulings preventing the restart of four reactors despite two of them already receiving NRA approval to switch on.
Kansai has appealed the judgments but the court cases may take years to resolve if the rulings are not overturned on the first appeal.
Tougher safety standards and stricter implementation of rules since Fukushima have also been hitting restarts. Japan Atomic Power has been battling a regulatory ruling that one of its reactors sits above an active fault, meaning it must be decommissioned.
And highlighting the pitfalls of rebooting the industry, Kyushu Electric was forced to slow the ramp up of power from its Sendai No. 1 reactor after it restarted around mid-August due to problems with pumping equipment. Engineers warn that firing up reactors that have been offline for prolonged periods could be fraught with such troubles……..http://news.yahoo.com/japan-nuclear-power-outlook-bleak-despite-first-reactor-013149457–finance.html
German govt to change nuclear liability law – to make utilities pay up for nuclear exit costs
Germany proposes changes to nuclear liability law- draft law http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/02/germany-nuclear-idUSB4N10101R20150902 BERLIN, SEPT 2 The German government has proposed changes to a law to prevent German utilities from evading the payment of billions of euros needed to fund the country’s nuclear exit, according to a copy of the draft law seen by Reuters.
The document says that utilities will be liable for the costs of shutting down power plants and disposing of nuclear waste even if they give up control of subsidiary companies or spin-offs.
A spokesperson for the economy ministry said the draft law was currently being discussed by government departments.
Under current corporate laws, companies are liable for spun off units for five years, but there has been concern utilities might break up to avoid paying for the dismantling of Germany’s nuclear plants, the last of which will be shut for good in 2022. (Reporting byGernot Heller; Writing by Caroline Copley; Editing by Madeline Chambers)
Michigan residents urged to submit comments on Canada’s nuclear waste dump plan – Congressman Dan Kildee –
Congressman Dan Kildee Urges Michiganders to Submit Comments on Canadian Plan to Bury Nuclear Waste on the Shores of the Great Lakes August 19, 2015 Current 90-Day Comment Period ‘Critical Opportunity’ for Citizens to Have Voices Heard and Stop Plan, Kildee Says
Congressman Dan Kildee (MI-05) today announced a new community initiative today to protect the Great Lakes and encourage Michigan residents to get involved to stop a Canadian plan to bury nuclear waste less than a mile from Lake Huron.
Currently, Canada has opened a 90-day comment period seeking comments from both U.S. and Canadian citizens on the proposed plan. Today Congressman Kildee, joined by Michigan Senate Democratic Leader Jim Ananich and concerned citizens, announced a new write-in campaign to the Canadian Minister of the Environment to ensure that Michiganders’ voices are heard on this important issue that threatens our Great Lakes. Instructions on how to submit public comments are below.
“We must protect the Great Lakes from harm, including from the threat of Canadian nuclear waste,” Congressman Kildee said. “Burying nuclear waste less than a mile from Lake Huron just doesn’t make sense and is too much of a risk to take, especially considering nuclear material remains radioactive for thousands of years. There is growing opposition to this plan, both in the U.S. and Canada, and now Michiganders have a chance to be heard and express their views too. I encourage all Michigan residents to speak up and submit comments to Canadian officials during this open comment period to demonstrate that Michigan stands united against this threat to our Great Lakes.”
Today’s announcement in Flint is the latest effort by Congressman Kildee in recent weeks to raise awareness about the potential Canadian plan and stop the burying of nuclear waste so close to the Great Lakes. Last week, along with Senators Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters, Congressman Kildee announced new legislation to invoke the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and mandate that a new study be conducted to examine the proposal’s risks………
To date, 168 municipalities – in both the U.S. and Canada – have passed resolutions opposing the plan, including Flint, Mich., Bay County, Mich.; Toronto, Ontario; Chicago, Ill.; Wayne County, Mich.; Milwaukee, Wisc.; Essex County, Ontario; and Rochester County, New York. The Michigan State Senate also has passed a resolution opposing the Canadian nuclear waste storage site.
To submit their comments, Michigan residents must write to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by September 1, 2015. Comments can be submitted by mail or email.
Anyone who would like to submit comments by mail should send them to: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency; 22nd Floor, 160 Elgin Street, Ottawa ON K1A 0H3
Anyone who would like to submit comments by email should send them to:ceaa.conditions.acee@ceaa-acee.gc.ca http://dankildee.house.gov/congressman-dan-kildee-urges-michiganders-to-submit-comments-on-canadian-plan-to-bury-nuclear-waste-on-the-shores-of-the-great-lakes/
Dr Ian Fairlie on US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC): Consultation on radiation standards
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC): Consultation. Dr Ian Fairlie Consultant on Radioactivity in the Environment LONDON United Kingdom www.ianfairlie.org, 28 Aug 15,
Introduction On June 26 2015, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) stated it was seeking public comments by September 8, on petitions stating that the Linear No Threshold theory of radiation’s effects was not a valid basis for setting radiation standards and that the hormesis model should be used instead.
In more detail, the NRC has received three petitions for rulemaking requesting that the NRC amend its “Standards for Protection Against Radiation” regulations and change the basis of those regulations from the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model of radiation protection to the hormesis model. (See the Appendix for details of the petitions.) The LNT model assumes that biological damage from radiation is linearly related to exposure and is always harmful, ie without a threshold.
The hormesis model assumes that exposures to low radiation levels is beneficial and protects the human body against deleterious effects of high levels of radiation. The NRC has stated it is examining these petitions to determine whether they should be considered in rulemaking and is requesting public comments.
US environmental groups are concerned that, if the NRC agreed with the petitions, it would introduce rules to weaken radiation protection standards at US nuclear facilities. On the other hand, according to two NRC staffers (Brock and Sherbini, 2012), the NRC apparently pays attention to the evidence on risks of low levels of radiation………
No evidence below 100 mSv? It is necessary at this point to directly address the argument often raised by hormesis advocates – that there is little evidence of effects below 100 mSv.
This is incorrect.Older evidence exists -see http://www.ianfairlie.org/news/a-100-msv-threshold-forradiation-effects/for a list of studies and the newer evidence, as we have just seen, clearly shows this fact as well. B. Radiobiological Evidence Current radiobiological theory is consistent with a linear dose-response relationship down to low doses (ie below ~10 mSv). The radiobiological rationale for linearity comes from the stochastic nature of energy deposition of ionising radiation. It was explained by 15 of the world’s most eminent radiation biologists and epidemiologists in a famous article (Brenner et al, 2003) as follows: “1. Direct epidemiological evidence demonstrates that an organ dose of 10 mGy of diagnostic x-rays is associated with an increase in cancer risk………..
The Importance of LNT in Radiation Protection Regardless of dissenting views on LNT, the reality is that most concepts used in radiation protection today are fundamentally based on the LNT theory. For example, LNT underpins the concepts of absorbed dose, effective dose, committed dose, and the use of dose coefficients (ie Sv per Bq of a radionuclide). It also allows radiation doses (i) to be averaged within an organ or tissue, (ii) to be added from different organs, and (iii) to be added over time.
LNT also permits annual dose limits; optimization -ie comparison of practices; radiation risk assessment at low and very low doses; individual dosimetry with passive detectors; collective dose, and dose registers over long periods of time. 9 In fact, the LNT underpins all legal regulations in radiation protection in the US and in the rest of the world.
Indeed, if the LNT were not used, it’s hard to imagine our current radiation protection systems existing at all. However this statement should not be misconstrued to mean that the LNT is used just because it’s convenient: the LNT is used because the scientific evidence for it is comprehensive, cogent and compelling……..
Conclusions
(i) the debate The validity or otherwise of LNT and hormesis have been the subject of hundreds of scientific articles and debates over several decades. Unfortunately, much of the literature on hormesis or adaptive response is based on faulty science or on misconceptions, or on misinterpretations, or on all three.
This is particularly the case with several US and UK journalists who write with confidence on how radiation risks are exaggerated. Their knowledge and experience of radiogenic risks are limited to say the least, but these journalists, almost on a weekly basis, misinform and mislead the public about radiation risks, so the existence of the US petitions is perhaps unsurprising.
However real scientists are increasingly standing up and opposing the poor science used by hormesis advocates. Very recently, four Swiss scientists from the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Bern; the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel and the University of Basel published a study which revealed that exposure to high rates of background radiation resulted in increased cancer risks to children (Spycher et al, 2015). http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1408548/
In other words, the petitions appear to be based on preconceptions, or even ideology, rather than the scientific evidence which points in the opposite direction. The petitions should not be used by the NRC to justify weakening regulatory standards at US nuclear facilities. A question remains whether the NRC should have accepted the petitions for review. Presumably the NRC has discretion not to review or to refer back spurious, mischievous, or ill-founded petitions.
Will UK government lock Britain into Hinkley Nuclear White Elephant?
while these might be reasons for the Government to pull out of the project, it won’t be able to once the deal has been signed. And if the problem is that the strike price is too high, it’s unlikely that EDF or the other funders will want to pull out either.
At the Hinkley point of no return, is this a nuclear white elephant? The Independent, A 
deal for the £24.5bn power plant in Somerset could be signed in October after the Government agreed terms with the energy giant EDF. But, writes Tom Bawden, environmentalists are far from alone in opposing an ‘expensive mistake’ TOM BAWDEN 27 August 2015 One of Britain’s most controversial energy projects for decades – the £24.5bn nuclear power development at Hinkley Point in Somerset – is poised to get the green light.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has gone so far as to say households will be £74 a year better off in today’s money by 2026-30 than they would be without Hinkley Point C.
But the detractors are not in the least bit convinced, with analysts, politicians and even some rival power companies dismissing the project as a colossal waste of money. Shortly before his sudden departure from RWE Npower this week, the chief executive of the big six provider, Paul Massara, said future generations would look back on Hinkley Point C as an “expensive mistake”.
Despite the strength of opposition to the project, David Cameron is expected to sign a final deal in October during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the UK; the Chinese are big backers of the project….
We look at some of the main challenges to completion.
The political justification
An in-depth report into Hinkley Point C by HSBC bank saw “ample reason for the UK Government to delay or cancel the project”. It argued that the justification for the plant was “receding” because the UK’s energy consumption is falling just as a threefold rise in the number of giant interconnectors, hooking the country up with mainland Europe, means we could import energy much more cheaply than generating it at Hinkley Point.
Furthermore, while UK electricity generation is set to fall, capacity looks set to hold up surprisingly well, in part because of rising wind and solar power. As a result, the strike price is very difficult to justify, HSBC argued.
But while these might be reasons for the Government to pull out of the project, it won’t be able to once the deal has been signed. And if the problem is that the strike price is too high, it’s unlikely that EDF or the other funders will want to pull out either.
Engineering problems
The new reactors at Hinkley Point will use the EPR – European Pressurised Reactor – model, a highly sophisticated new design that is supposed to be safer and more efficient than older reactors, but which has been fraught with problems and is not yet up and running at any site in the world.
The three other sites planning to use the new model have all suffered huge delays – in Finland, France and China – and Hinkley Point would be the fourth. Concerns about EPRs have mounted this year after a potentially catastrophic mistake was identified in the construction of an identical EPR power plant in Flamanville, Normandy……….
Problems at Areva
Areva, the French state-owned reactor designer behind the EPR model, has fallen deep into the red. It has not sold a new reactor since 2008 as problems with its reactors have pushed plants in France and Finland billions of euros over budget.
But EDF and the French government have moved to address Areva’s financial weakness, meaning it is unlikely to cause problems for the Hinkley Point project by going bust. EDF has agreed to take control of Areva’s main reactor division in a deal orchestrated – and with the implicit financial support of – the French government.
Legal problems
Austria has launched a legal challenge to the European Commission’s ruling that the guaranteed price for the new Hinkley Point reactors amounts to legal state aid. The case is expected to drag on for two to three years…… http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/at-the-hinkley-point-of-no-return-is-this-a-nuclear-white-elephant-10475849.html
Nuclear lobby working hard at education – 5 centres in Nigeria
5 Nigerian universities host nuclear energy centres of excellence —NAEC August 28, 2015 Premium Times Franklin Osaisai, chairman of the Nigerian Atomic Energy Commission, NAEC, has said that five Nigerian universities now host nuclear energy centres of excellence.
Mr. Osaisai, who disclosed this in an interview with newsmen on Friday in Abuja, said that the Nuclear Technology Centre, Sheda, was also a part of the nuclear centres of excellence.
He said the first two were the Centre for Energy Research and Training (CERT), Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria and Centre for Energy Research and Development (CERD), Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife.
He listed the latest centres as the Centre for Nuclear Energy Research and Training (CNERT), University of Maiduguri, and Centre for Nuclear Energy Studies (CNES), University of Port Harcourt.
The other is the Centre for Nuclear Energy Studies and Training (CNEST), Federal University of Technology, Owerri.
According to him, the establishment of these centres without a corresponding increment in the allocation to NAEC led to the reduction in funding of CERT and CERD.
“It is the mandate of NAEC to develop nuclear technology for the economic development of the country and produce and dispose atomic energy.
“To carry out research into matters connected with the peaceful uses of atomic energy, among others.
“CERT and CERD are arms of NAEC but in order to boost capacity of nuclear research and training, government created a lot of other centres.
“Remuneration, compensation, allowances are part of the public service and everything is paid according to guidelines.
“We have tabled the challenges of funding the centre to before the appropriate authorities; everything is now paid through IPPIS.’’……….http://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/189141-5-nigerian-universities-host-nuclear-energy-centres-of-excellence-naec.html
UK’s Hinkley Point C nuclear station is now officially mothballed
Hinkley C Mothballed – Is it in its Death Throes? http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/news/comment/hinkley-c-mothballed-is-it-in-its-death-throws/ Two very recent articles in Click Green and Professional Engineer indicate that Hinkley Point C is now officially mothballed. Indeed the project seems to be in its death throes.
We already knew that site preparation work at Hinkley Point C was stopped in April 2015, up to 400 construction workers were laid off, and the Final Investment Decision was delayed until the autumn. (1) What wasn’t clear at the time was that NNB Genco – the consortium planning to build the reactors which consists of EDF Energy, China General Nuclear Corp and other investors – put a cap on future spending on the project. (2)
On 1st July the site entered Care and Maintenance which means that activity at the site is limited to the management of material stockpiles and water management zones, remediation of asbestos contaminated land and archaeological surveys. (3)
The budget cap seems to have been greater than the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) was expecting. ONR, of course, charges NNB Genco for all the work it carries out to regulate its activities.
ONR says it has taken the decision to suspend the production of future inspection reports until a Final Investment Decision is made. It has also suspended attendance at the local liaison committee – the Cannington Forum. These suspensions are most likely because NNB Genco no longer has the budget to pay for them, so the consortium will have asked ONR to stop visiting the site to do inspections and stop attending the forum because it can’t afford to pay. In retaliation ONR says it is “monitoring the impact of the budget constraint upon NNB Genco’s competency and capability”. In other words NNB Genco had better watch out or it will lose its status as an organisation competent and capable of holding a nuclear license.
ONR says its inspectors “continue to engage with the programme of design and safety case activities” related to the start of nuclear safety related construction. Its August newsletter said that further submissions are expected in September this year and the Pre Construction Safety Case related to nuclear island construction was ready for ONR to begin initial engagement at the end of July this year. (4)
So while some desk work appears to be continuing all major work on-site appears to have stopped and NNB Genco is so uncertain that the final investment decision will be positive it has asked ONR to stop as much work as possible to save money – even to the point of threatening its own status as a nuclear capable organisation. The Click Green website says:
“Despite recently publishing a list of preferred suppliers for the £24 billion project, the French firm were in behind-the-scenes talks with the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), during which they informed them of their decision to mothball the site.”
It looks as though it may be all over for Hinkley Point C bar the shouting.
(1) Gloucestershire Echo 2nd April 2015 http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/400-jobs-lost-Barnwood-based-EDF-stops-site-work/story-26271600-detail/story.html
(2) Click Green 20th Aug 2015 http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/news/national-news/126381-exclusive-edf-mothballs-planned-hinkley-c-nuclear-power-site.html
(3) Professional Engineering 20th Aug 2015 http://www.power-eng.com/articles/2015/08/construction-halted-at-hinkley-point-c-nuclear-project-site.html
(4) See page 7 ONR Regulation Matters August 2015http://www.onr.org.uk/documents/2015/regulation-matters-issue-1.pdf
Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty backs Iran nuclear agreement
Esty supports Iran nuclear agreementhttp://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Local-congresswoman-announces-support-of-Iran-6464745.php, August 25, 2015 Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty, D-5, announced Tuesday her support of the Iran nuclear agreement.
Esty said she thoroughly reviewed the deal negotiated between the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and Germany that aims to curb Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon in exchange for sanctions relief before making her decision.
“I have attended classified briefings, examined classified materials, and sought answers,” Esty said. “I have met to discuss the agreement with my constituents, Jewish leaders throughout Connecticut, national security and nuclear energy experts, and Israeli leaders during my recent trip to Israel…After careful consideration, I believe implementing this agreement — which is far from perfect — gives us the best chance to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program.”
Esty said the deal limits Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon, and also contains provisions that allow sanctions to return if the agreement is violated.
“This agreement is not ideal, but is the best available option,” Esty said. “I have listened to critics and constituents raise legitimate concerns — concerns that I believe will help guide the United States in our duty to enforce Iran’s compliance with the agreement and ensure that they meet not just the letter of the agreement but also its spirit.”
New measures to promote rooftop solar, by President Obama
US President Barack Obama unveils measures to encourage solar power use,SMH, August 25, 2015 GARDINER HARRIS. The Obama administration has announced a slew of small measures designed to encourage the use of solar power in the US hours.
The measures included making an additional $US1 billion ($1.4 billion) in loan guarantee authority available in an existing federal program for the kind of residential rooftop solar projects that have become popular in places like California.
But none of the announced measures would provide the impact on the solar industry of the Clean Power Plan, which was announced this month and requires states to cut carbon emissions by an average of 32 per cent. That plan provides strong incentives for much of those reductions to come from the development of renewable energy resources – exactly what executives at the conference in Nevada are looking to sell.
“We’re going to make it even easier for individual homeowners to put solar panels on their roof with no upfront cost,” President Barack Obama told the summit. “A lot of Americans are going solar and becoming more energy-efficient not because of tree huggers — although trees are important, just want you to know — but because they’re cost-cutters.
With the nation’s new electrical needs growing only modestly, renewable power executives are depending on electric utilities finally retiring their aging coal-fired power plants and replacing them with renewable power sources. That process is happening anyway, but the administration’s power plan is expected to accelerate it……..http://www.smh.com.au/environment/us-president-barack-obama-unveils-measures-to-encourage-solar-power-use-20150825-gj71e8.html#ixzz3jsRuU7g4
1 This Month
22 June – Virtual Event –Climate Change: New Data, New Debate
Monday, June 22, 2026 2:30 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. CT
YouTube. Register here
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
1st July – Webinar Waste of Space: The Environmental Harm of Military and Civil Space Activity st July, 7 pm
Report Launch Online: We are seeing an increasing exploitation of space for military and commercial purposes. This must change.
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
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 (221)
- 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 