Russia funding and building new nuclear power station in Finland
Russian nuclear corporation to start construction of Hanhikivi NPP in Finland in 2017 http://tass.ru/en/economy/864293 NOVO-OGAREVO, March 22. /TASS/. Construction of the Hanhikivi 1 nuclear power plant in Finland to be implemented by the Russian nuclear corporation Rosatom will start in 2017. Such information is contained in materials for the working visit of Finland’s President Sauli Niinisto to Moscow.The power plant is expected to start generating electric power in 2024.
In December 2013, Rusatom Overseas [Rosatom’s subsidiary – TASS] and Finnish Fennovoima signed the contract for construction of Hanhikivi-1 nuclear power plant. Along with the construction contract, a ten-year fuel contract was signed with Russia’s company TVEL.
Russia’s revenues from the Hanhikivi-1 nuclear power plant project will amount to €17.5 bln , head of Rosatom Sergey Kiriyenko said earlier. Of this amount only taxes to the federal budget will exceed €3 bln, he added.
According to Finnish media, the project’s cost will reach €6-7 bln, of which €1.6 bln will be invested by Fennovoima and the rest by Rosatom. The commissioning of the new nuclear power plant is scheduled for 2024.
Rusatom Overseas is to supply 1,200Mt reactor for Hakhikivi-1.
Growing risk of nuclear war in Europe
Risk of nuclear war in Europe growing, warns Russian ex-minister, Reuters, BRUSSELS | BY ROBIN EMMOTT, 20 Mar 16, The East-West standoff over the Ukraine crisis has brought the threat of nuclear war in Europe closer than at any time since the 1980s, a former Russian foreign minister warned on Saturday.
“The risk of confrontation with the use of nuclear weapons in Europe is higher than in the 1980s,” said Igor Ivanov, Russia’s foreign minister from 1998 to 2004 and now head of a Moscow-based think-tank founded by the Russian government.
While Russia and the United States have cut their nuclear arsenals, the pace is slowing. As of January 2015, they had just over 7,000 nuclear warheads each, about 90 percent of world stocks, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
“We have less nuclear warheads, but the risk of them being used is growing,” Ivanov said at a Brussels event with the foreign ministers of Ukraine and Poland and a U.S. lawmaker.
NATO’s secretary general Jens Stoltenberg has warned Russia of intimidating its neighbors with talk about nuclear weapons, publicly voicing concerns among Western officials.
MISSILE DEFENSE
Ivanov blamed a missile defense shield that the United States is setting up in Europe for raising the stakes. Part of that shield involves a site in Poland that is due to be operational in 2018. This is particularly sensitive for Moscow because it brings U.S. capabilities close to its border………http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-idUSKCN0WL0EV
USA worried about weapons proliferation risks in China’s Nuclear Recycling plan
China’s Plans to Recycle Nuclear Fuel Raise Concerns U.S. energy secretary airs worries about proliferation risks ahead of nuclear-security summit WSJ, By BRIAN SPEGELE, 17 MAR 16, BEIJING—China’s plans to process spent nuclear fuel into plutonium that could be used in weapons is drawing concern from the U.S. that Beijing is heightening the risk of nuclear proliferation.
U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, in Beijing for talks, said Thursday that China’s plans to build a nuclear-recycling facility present challenges to global efforts to control the spread of potentially dangerous materials……..
Mr. Moniz’s comments marked a rare public expression by the Obama administration of concern over China’s reprocessing plans. The differences, which the governments have discussed privately, are being aired ahead of a visit by President Xi Jinping to Washington this month for a summit with President Barack Obama and other world leaders on nuclear security.
The issue comes down to the different choices countries make over how to handle potentially dangerous waste created by commercial nuclear reactors. In the U.S., spent fuel is treated as sensitive material and is stored, and reprocessing is banned out of proliferation concerns.
Elsewhere, including in France and Japan, spent fuel is recycled to extract plutonium to be used in nuclear reactors. The U.S.’s concern is that the bigger the stockpiles of plutonium, the higher the risk that some of it could be refined for use in nuclear weapons or taken by terrorists……
U.S. concerns about nuclear reprocessing and proliferation are particularly acute in the Asia-Pacific region, “where the perception is there is less international cooperation, less transparency,” said Mark Hibbs, a nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace………
larger Chinese stockpiles of isolated plutonium could prompt Japan, especially, to build up its caches.
Civilian plutonium stockpiles reached 271 metric tons by the end of 2014, up from around 150 metric tons in the 1990s, the International Panel on Fissile Materials, an independent group looking at nonproliferation policy, said in its latest annual report.
The official Xinhua News Agency reported in September that construction of China’s reprocessing facility may start in 2020 and take a decade to complete. The project is expected to have a processing capacity of 800 metric tons of spent fuel a year…..
Previously, the U.S. has questioned the economic viability of such projects, which are expensive to build and operate, as well as proliferation issues, Ernest Moniz said……
Mr. Hibbs from the Carnegie center said China’s decision to pursue reprocessing couldn’t be justified on economic or commercial grounds, given the billions of dollars needed to construct one large-scale facility. But China may be acting strategically, guaranteeing future fuel supply by recycling, he added.
Last June, state-owned China National Nuclear Corp. and France’sAreva SA agreed to speed up negotiations on building the facility. Areva didn’t respond to a request for comment on Mr. Moniz’s remarks and CNNC said its press officers weren’t available.
Write to Brian Spegele at brian.spegele@wsj.com http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-plans-to-recycle-nuclear-fuel-raise-concerns-1458228504
Political importance to world’s nuclear powers, of getting Hinkley project happening
“The governments of the UK, France, and China have invested huge amounts of political capital in seeing Hinkley Point C come to the point of construction,” he said.
“This political capital lies with the public, convincing them that nuclear is part of a low-carbon future; [with the] the financial institutions, convincing them that when the UK makes a decision it sticks to it and hence the UK is an investable proposition; and with international governments—when the UK makes an international agreement it is binding.”
The UK’s Next Nuclear Power Plant Could Collapse Before It’s Built Motherboard, BY NICOLE KOBIE 15 March 2016 The UK could face power outages and missing emissions targets if the nuclear plant isn’t built – but that doesn’t mean it should be
Nuclear power stations are always controversial, but the UK’s proposed Hinkley Point C is particularly so. It may well be the most expensive object ever built; it guarantees higher power bills; and it’s already taken down executives, despite construction yet to start.
Hinkley Point C is set to be the first new nuclear power station built in the UK since 1995, poised to hit the grid as older nuclear sites and coal are ditched. However, its high costs are now leaving the project—and the future of the UK’s power supply—in danger.
Set to be built in Somerset by energy company EDF, which is majority-owned by the French government, there’s a chance Hinkley Point C may collapse before it’s built, and it’s nothing to do with protesters or environmental complaints. The problem with Hinkley is money: its costs risen to £18 billion ($25 billion)—with some projecting the final cost to be £24 billion ($34 billion)—and EDF has yet to finalise funding. Though it is expected to sign off on the project soon, financial analysts stressed last week that EDF can’t afford to build it.
The delays may already cause shortages in the UK’s electricity supply as it’s currently planned, which would naturally worsen if the project fails to get off the ground. The plant is supposed to start operations in 2025, when several older nuclear sites are decommissioned and the deadline hits for shutting down coal plants. Tony Roulstone, a professor setting up the University of Cambridge’s new MPhil in nuclear energy, believes the project will take ten years to construct, and given work isn’t expected to start until 2018 or 2019, will miss its deadline. “This will put the UK in a difficult position because they were counting on electricity from Hinkley by 2025,” Roulstone said.
“As some have said, the UK does not have a plan B,” he added. “The AGRs [advanced gas-cooled reactors, which make up most of the UK power stations] will close down by 2030 and at that stage we would have just one nuclear power station, Sizewell B.”
Hinkley Point C is expected to provide 7 percent of the UK’s energy. At the moment, about a fifth of the UK’s power comes from the eight currently-operating nuclear plants, but seven of those are due to be decommissioned. That, alongside theplanned closure of coal plants, which make up 22 percent of our power today, led the Institution of Mechanical Engineers to claim in a report we could see a potential supply gap of 40 to 55 percent by 2025…………..
EDF is set to make a final decision on funding the project soon, ahead of a board meeting in April, after multiple delays. However, back in February the project’s director, Chris Bakken, stepped down to “pursue new professional opportunities,” and more recently the company’s finance director, Thomas Piquemal, departed, with rumours suggesting he believed the project would damage EDF’s finances too much.
The board-level turmoil might actually be a sign that EDF’s remaining executives plan to approve the project, according to Martin Freer, director of the Birmingham Centre of Nuclear Education and Research and a professor of physics at the University of Birmingham. “My take on the resignation of the chief of finance signals that the HPC [Hinkley Point C] decision is being pushed through against the judgement of financial caution,” Freer told me. “EDF are at a point in their history where they roll the dice and hope to be lucky.”
Roulstone noted that the new plant’s construction cost is the same as EDF’s capitalisation. “Only major sales of assets and/or funding by the French government can rescue EDF and hence Hinkley,” he said………
Freer suggested that there’s more than power supply and emissions targets at risk. “The governments of the UK, France, and China have invested huge amounts of political capital in seeing Hinkley Point C come to the point of construction,” he said. “This political capital lies with the public, convincing them that nuclear is part of a low-carbon future; [with the] the financial institutions, convincing them that when the UK makes a decision it sticks to it and hence the UK is an investable proposition; and with international governments—when the UK makes an international agreement it is binding.” http://motherboard.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-uks-next-nuclear-power-plant-could-collapse-before-its-built
Iran says that its missile tests don’t violate nuclear agreement, U.N. resolution
Iran: Missile tests don’t violate nuclear agreement, U.N. resolution John Bacon, USA TODAY March 10, Iran on Thursday rejected claims that missile tests conducted this week violate the nuclear agreement it reached with the U.S. and other nations or a United Nations resolution.
Iran Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossein Jaberi Ansari said the missiles were conventional armaments for “legitimate defense” and not designed for carrying nuclear warheads, the state-controlled IRNA news agency reported……..
The nuclear deal does not directly address missile restrictions. The U.N. Security Council lifted its ban on such testing when the deal was struck, but passed a resolution that “calls upon Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles … including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”……….. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/03/10/iran-missile-tests-violate-no-deals/81578348/
International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is abiding by nuclear agreement
Iran Abiding by Nuclear Deal, UN Agency Says International Atomic Energy Agency’s report says Tehran keeping within limits of July agreement, WSJK By LAURENCE NORMAN Feb. 26, 2016 Iran has carried out most of its commitments under the nuclear agreement reached in July, the United Nations’ atomic agency said Friday, although for a time it exceeded the permitted amount of heavy water, which can be used to produce plutonium.
In its first report on Iran’s compliance deal since the agreement went into effect in mid-January, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran’s stock of heavy water had reached 130.9 tons, above the 130 tons limited permitted by the deal, the diplomats said.
However, the stockpile fell when Iran shipped 20 tons of heavy water out of the country on Wednesday. The IAEA verified the amount that was shipped, the report said.
One diplomat said the IAEA allows for a margin of error of 1 percentage point in such measurements, which means that Iran wasn’t technically over the limit…..
The nuclear deal saw Iran agree to scale back its nuclear activities and infrastructure in exchange for the lifting of tight, related sanctions imposed by the U.S., the European Union and the United Nations……. http://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-abiding-by-nuclear-deal-un-agency-says-1456515699
USA govt’s position: its nuclear companies should be exempt from civil or criminal liability
How American Penalties Dwarf the Liability US Nuclear Firms Will Face in India, The Wire BY AMIT BHANDARI, INDIASPEND.ORG ON 21/02/2016 A $48-billion (Rs 3.26 lakh crore) penalty claimed by the US government from Volkswagen for cheating on diesel-car emissions is about 200 times as large as the $225 million (Rs 1,500 crore) insurance pool set up by Indian insurance companies to compensate US nuclear companies for mishaps in India.
If a US nuclear company were to build a reactor in India that suffered a catastrophe, and people were to die in India, the US government’s position seems to be that American suppliers shouldn’t face
. The US believes the Indian civil nuclear liability law, which calls for both penalties, is unduly harsh. Rather than say so directly, US officials keep repeating that the “Indian law is inconsistent with the international liability regime.”
The Indian civil nuclear liability law holds the equipment supplier responsible for any incident caused by the supplier or its employees. The Indian liability law differs from those of other countries because it was drafted keeping in mind the 1984 Bhopal tragedy – where despite 5,000 deaths and effects across generations, no one was held criminally liable.
Although the Indian government wants to protect US nuclear companies against the Indian liability law, critics argued that these companies are using India’s eagerness to avoid any liability, if something goes wrong…….
Indian firms also fined in the US
While the US nuclear industry wants to avoid any liability in India for acts of omission or commission, Indian companies have often been slapped with large fines for violations of US law.
Pyongyang orders South Koreans out of Kaesong, labels closure of industrial zone ‘declaration of war’
North Korea says it is kicking out all South Koreans from the jointly run Kaesong industrial zone and freezing the assets of companies operating there, calling the South’s move to suspend operations a “declaration of war”…….
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-11/north-korea-says-south-kaesong-withdrawl-declaration-of-war/7161700
Russia will fund building of nuclear power, an attractive deal for South Africa?
Russia, China front runners in South Africa’s nuclear project-source
* Other countries could be included in building plants
Reuters, By Peroshni Govender JOHANNESBURG, Feb 12 South Africa will finalise requirements for its 9,600 megawatt nuclear power plant by April, with Russia and China the front-runners to win the bid, a government official involved in the negotiations told Reuters.
Pretoria has earmarked billions of rand for much needed power generation but its nuclear build of 9,600 megawatts by 2030 at a price tag of up to 1 trillion rand ($63.46 billion) has raised concerns over whether it would be affordable.
Fears that what could be the most expensive procurement in the country’s history will be made behind closed doors, without the necessary public scrutiny have been raised by the opposition, claims the government has rejected.
“From what I have seen, the Russians do have a case and so do the Chinese. If we go with two countries, it could include the Chinese,” said the official, who did not want to be named because he is not authorised to speak to the media. “If we go for one country, it would be the Russians.”
Political alliances, Pretoria and Moscow’s membership of the BRICS association of five emerging economies and Russia’s ability to fund the project have put them as the favourites, the official said.
Russia’s willingness to build the plant at its own expense, operate it for 20 years and charge South Africa for the power and running costs had given that country an even better chance to clinch the deal, the official said.
Officials at the nuclear unit in the energy department were not available to comment…..http://uk.reuters.com/article/safrica-nuclear-idUKL8N15Q3MN
Iran has kept all its commitments on nuclear deal
U.S. Official: Iran Has Kept Commitments On Nuclear Deal So Far, Radio Free Europe, By Golnaz Esfandiari February 11, 2016
WASHINGTON — A senior U.S. official says Iran so far has kept its commitments under the nuclear agreement with world powers implemented last month.
Stephen Mull, the State Department’s lead coordinator for implementing the deal curbing Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief, told the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee on February 11 that there is no evidence that Tehran is cheating.
“Whenever we’ve detected that there may be a potential for moving away from the commitments, we’ve engaged with our Iranian counterparts, and they’ve addressed those concerns every single time,” Mull said.
Mull and John Smith, acting director of the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, testified at the first senior-level congressional hearing held on the nuclear deal since it was implemented on January 16……http://www.rferl.org/content/iran-nuclear-deal-keeping-commitments/27546065.html
China and Soviet Union nearly started World War III
How the Soviet Union and China Almost Started World War III The National Interest, Robert Farley 9 Feb 16 Americans tend to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis as the most dangerous moment in Cold War brinksmanship. Despite some tense moments, Washington and Moscow resolved that crisis with only the death of U.S. Air Force pilot Maj. Rudolph Anderson Jr.
Seven years later, in March 1969, a contingent of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers raided a Soviet border outpost on Zhenbao Island, killing dozens and injuring scores. The incident brought Russia and China to the brink of war, a conflict that might have led to the use of nuclear weapons. But after two weeks of clashes, the conflict trailed off.
What if the brief 1969 conflict between China and the Soviet Union had escalated?…….http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-the-soviet-union-china-almost-started-world-war-iii-15152
Signing of Trans Pacific Partnership: Bernie Sanders opposes it
U.S., 11 nations sign contested Trans-Pacific corporate takeover; Sanders vows to kill it if elected | 03 Feb 2016 | Representatives of a dozen nations met in New Zealand to sign the debated Trans-Pacific Partnership, which seeks to bolster economies and investments between the United States and a number of Pacific Rim governments. The TPP agreement was signed by the parties on Thursday, New Zealand time, during a formal ceremony in Auckland.
Among the deal’s opponents is a man who could succeed Obama in the White House — Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who pledgedWednesday to kill the TPP agreement if he gets elected. “As your president, not only will I make sure that the TPP does not get implemented, I will not send any trade deal to Congress that will make it easier for corporations to outsource American jobs overseas,” he said. [See also: University: Obama’s TPP ‘trade’ deal will whack 448,000 jobs, not save them as promised 28 Jan 2016.]
Why the Nuclear Lobby and Australian Politicians want Australia as world’s radioactive trash dump
from CaptD 31 Jan 16 The first reason is MONEY and I mean BIG Money. Politicians are always gear for Nuclear 
Payback*
* http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+payback
Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other “costs” are for others.
The “other” reason is that the Nuclear Industry and their Utilities are desperate to create a radioactive waste dumping site for waste is that they are going to want to site Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) very soon, which companies like SD’s General Atomic are now working on. Since CA has a law that says no more nuclear reactors, until a waste site is developed, the lack of a disposal site is the biggest roadblock they face preventing them from deploying SMRs in CA.
I believe that most Utilities will want to phase out Nat. Gas fired Peaker plants and install SMR’s “because they don’t emit CO2.” That is, unless they are going to be making big money using nat. gas like SDG&E will be, since they already have a contract to import Nat. Gas from Mexico (which Sempra owns a share of, so they will be kind of buying Nat. Gas from themselves) for use in their two new state of the art Billion Dollar Peaker Plants that the CPUC just approved for them (despite the fact that the cost of Wind and Solar generation continues to drop almost monthly)!
SCE just had the CPUC decide against approving a Nat. Gas Peaker plant for them, so you can bet that they are now getting “very excited” about installing one or more SMR’s at San Onofre, since the grid wiring connection is already in place and they are going to be guarding that “nuclear waste” site for decades to come.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/jan/08/oceanside-takes-stand-relocating-san-onofres-nucle/
BTW: All waste facilities should be run by the Government, that way they will always be responsible for it, since Big Waste Corp.’s can go out of business any time they want as as everybody knows Radiation is FOREVER since 50 or more than 100 years is forever to everyone living today.
China supports UN move to denounce North Korea over nuclear test
China backs U.N. move to denounce North Korea over nuclear test, WP, By Carol Morello and Simon Denyer January 28 16, BEIJING — Secretary of State John F. Kerry and China’s foreign minister agreed Wednesday to move ahead with a U.N. resolution condemning North Korea for its latest nuclear test, but they appeared as far apart as ever on how far to push Pyongyang………https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/china-agrees-to-sanctions-against-north-korea-during-kerry-visit/2016/01/27/2d09569a-bfcd-11e5-98c8-7fab78677d51_story.html
Untested and unsafe technology ? Jaitapur nuclear power station
Last year on the Republic Day, to please the United States President Obama who was the chief guest, Modi government effectively surrendered the govt’s option to sue the nuclear vendors in case of a nuclear accident by creating an insurance pool from public funds to channel suppliers’ liability back to the taxpayers, taking an about turn from earlier strong reservations of the BJP on nuclear liability.
This year, Modi’s government seems bent on finalising an insanely dangerous and destructive nuclear project.
Another Republic Day, another compromise on nuclear safety? A year after giving in on nuclear liability during Barack Obama’s visit, India’s enthusiasm to seal a deal with France on the expensive and dangerous Jaitapur nuclear project is disturbing. Scroll In 28 Jan 16 Kumar Sundaram On Tuesday, chief guest Francois Hollande looked on as India showcased its military might at the Republic Day parade in New Delhi. Nearly 2,000-km away in Maharashtra, farmers and fisherfolk in the port town of Jaitapur are gearing up to protest the French president’s visit. They believe that the nuclear reactors India wants to import from France pose a threat to their lives, livelihoods and the local ecology.
Untested and unsafe technology
In the joint declaration issued on Monday in New Delhi, the two governments reaffirmed their commitment to go ahead with the nuclear deal. The project has been in the pipeline for almost a decade now, and last several bilateral annoucements have ceremoniously menioned the nuclear agreement. The intense negotiations to finalise the commercial agreement are yet to be completed as the staggering cost of the project remains a major sticking point.
The Modi government has added “make in India” in the declaration, a reference to the prime minister’s ambitious plan to turn India into a hub of manufacturing. Now, this is more than a ceremonial insertion and has potentially dangerous implications. The joint declaration mentions “large-scale localisation” of components for the nuclear power project at Jaitapur, a Memorandum of Understanding for which was signed between the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and French government-owned nuclear corporation Areva last year. “Transfer of technology” is also being considered, claims the declaration.
The French company Areva, which is verging on bankruptcy after the Fukushima disaster, desperately needs this project to survive. Its terminal financial crisis has also led to a major re-structuring in France. To save Areva from bankruptcy, the Électricité de France, a govt owned electricity utility company has bought majority stake in Areva. Areva has resorted to massive job cuts – it did 6,000 lay offs worldwide in 2015 – and is frantically seeking investorsto rescue itself from the crisis.
It is actually this financial crisis that has forced Areva to consider partial closure and outsourcing of its reactor manufacturing business. There too, it is giving away only the parts which it cannot absolutely manage on its own for financial and safety reasons. And the European Pressurised Reactor design fits in this scheme. France is building reactors in Jaitapur of the same design, of 1650MWe capacity each. Totalling 9,900 Mwe, Jaitapur would be the world’s largest nuclear power park.
The safety of this design, especially the vulnerabilities of the Reactor Pressure Vessel – the huge iron core where radioactive fission takes place – came under serious questions, raised by France’s own nuclear safety regulator Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire in April last year. Later in 2015, Areva had to ask the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend certification review for EPR design. The US has been postponing certification for the European Pressurised Reactor( since 2007. In Finland’s Olkiluoto, the only other place where Areva is building these reactors, the project was supposed to be completed in 2009 but has run into massive cost and time over-run and cannot be completed before 2018. The Finnish regulator has taken Areva to the court on this issue and Finland has cancelled the order for the 4th reactor. Even in China’s Taishan, the only other place where such a reactor is under construction, the project has been delayed. Ironically, just after two days of publication of Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire’s report, Modi re-affirmed the commitment to buy the reactors from France during his visit to Paris last year in April.
In another extremely dangerous irony, the Modi govt is lauding Jaitapur as a “Make in India” project. The localisation in this case is nothing more than Areva passing off its burden and risks to Indian companies. Without much experience in nuclear sector, Larsen and Toubro has been given the task of collaborating in manufacturing of pressure vessel, the same crucial equipment in which the French regulator has found vulnerabilities. There is also pressure on L&T to keep the cost to the minimum, which would have its own safety implications. Technology transfer in this case actually means experimenting an untested and unsafe technology on the Indian people……….
U-turns and misadventures
For its entire 10-year entire stint in the opposition the Bharatiya Janata Party kept opposing Manmohan Singh government’s nuclear policy, but now nuclear deals have become matters of pride for Modi’s foreign sojourns. In 2010, the BJP had sought a review of the environmental clearance given to the Jaitapur project on the eve of the visit of the then French president Nicholas Sarkozy. But now the government has sought an extension of the same.
Last year on the Republic Day, to please the United States President Obama who was the chief guest, Modi government effectively surrendered the govt’s option to sue the nuclear vendors in case of a nuclear accident by creating an insurance pool from public funds to channel suppliers’ liability back to the taxpayers, taking an about turn from earlier strong reservations of the BJP on nuclear liability.
This year, Modi’s government seems bent on finalising an insanely dangerous and destructive nuclear project.
Kumar Sundaram is Senior Researcher with the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace, India. http://scroll.in/article/802473/another-republic-day-another-compromise-on-nuclear-safety
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (92)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 