The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission found violations of federal regulations at Vogtle nuclear site.
 | |||
U.S. regulator to raise oversight at Georgia Vogtle nuclear power reactor https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-regulator-raise-oversight-georgia-190308554.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFLUuKMz6yKJdBOQz3f8MPdcejq875Aj93HjGgabK-76iDLroU7mahePG2UUtceKXHdb4cvQJDADLfjHUAdSK7rs4T9iB9Q1qhV5_ncjUA7ziTqk0iBJCIU8oMPpX7xIkkm7oOJH6GBmgz Nov 18 (Reuters) Reporting by Brijesh Patel in Bengaluru Editing by Marguerita Choy – The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on Thursday said it will increase oversight at one of the Southern Co (SO.N) operated Vogtle nuclear power plants under construction in Waynesboro, Georgia.
The decision to increase oversight comes after finalizing two inspection findings involving the safety-related electrical raceway system at Unit 3, the NRC said.
The NRC said it had launched a special inspection in June 2021 and found two violations of federal regulations at the site.
NRC inspectors found that Southern Nuclear did not properly implement its corrective action program, resulting in construction quality issues, extensive rework, and a report to the NRC for a significant quality assurance breakdown.”
“They also found that the company did not follow design specifications while installing safety-related cables for reactor coolant pumps and equipment designed to shut down the reactor safely.”
The NRC said these findings fall under a low-to-moderate safety significance and will schedule a supplemental inspection to verify Southern Nuclear understands the root cause and has taken appropriate corrective actions.
Report: Nuclear Plant Failed to Prevent Flooding During Ida
Report: Nuclear Plant Failed to Prevent Flooding During Ida, Claims Journal, By Dave Collins | November 15, 2021 Operators of the Millstone nuclear power complex in Connecticut were too late in activating storm protection protocols when the remnants of Hurricane Ida hit the East Coast in September, resulting in minor flooding at the plant, federal regulators said Friday.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission report said Dominion Energy, which runs the Millstone plant in Waterford along Long Island Sound, violated federal requirements, but deemed the violations of “very low safety significance” and did not issue penalties. The flooding did not affect any nuclear or safety equipment, the report said.
The commission, however, said Dominion’s “performance deficiency was more than minor” and that “required steps to protect risk significant structures, systems, and components from external flooding were not taken until after the consequential rainfall event was in progress.”…………………
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission report said the plant’s operators should have activated flood prevention measures before the storm hit, including closing flood gates, based on forecasts made earlier in the day. But they did not do so until after 8 p.m., when heavy rains already were falling. Two flood gates were not closed at all during the storm, resulting in minor flooding in an area near the Unit 2 reactor, the report said.
The commission said Dominion “did not take timely actions to place the plant in a safe condition prior to the arrival of a major storm.”…………. https://www.claimsjournal.com/news/east/2021/11/15/307069.htm
A year after damaged by fire, French nuclear submarine has been repaired
The French Navy’s damaged nuclear sub is out at sea once more, By Vivienne Machi 3 Nov 21, STUTTGART, Germany — The French Navy’s nuclear submarine Perle has returned to sea following just about a year of work to repair its fire-damaged body and splice it together with a second boat.
In late October, the 26-year-old nuclear attack submarine departed Cherbourg Naval Base, where it has been undergoing repairs by manufacturer Naval Group since October 2020, and returned to the service’s main base in Toulon, French Ministry of Defense spokesman Hervé Grandjean told reporters.
The nuclear attack submarine caught fire while undergoing maintenance in June 2020 in Toulon, and burned for 14 hours. The fore of the submarine suffered the most damage, while the aft of the ship, which houses the nuclear power plant and propulsion, was left intact…………….. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/feindef/2021/11/03/the-french-navys-damaged-nuclear-sub-is-out-at-sea-once-more/
A close shave in 1999 with a flood at France’s Blayais nuclear power plant
“Sensitive affairs”. “Tcherno-Blaye”: the scenario of a French Chernobyl?
What happened at the end of December 1999, during the “storm of the
century”, at the Blayais nuclear power plant in Gironde? Incident under
control or disaster scenario narrowly avoided? That evening, in any case,
one of the jewels of the French nuclear fleet found itself … with its
feet in the water. A flood that could have led to the worst: the meltdown
of a reactor, with its dramatic consequences .
France Info TV 1st Nov 2021
Fire at Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant
Last minute… Fire panic at Mersin Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant. It has
been reported that a fire broke out in the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant,
which is under construction in Mersin. Speaking about the fire, CHP’s Ali
Mahir Basarir said, “This nuclear power plant has been the scourge of
Mersin and Turkey.”
Cumhuriyet 31st Oct 2021
U.S. Navy reports on cause of incident with nuclear-powered submarine in South China Sea
The US Navy has figured out what a nuclear-powered attack submarine ran into in the South China Sea: report, Yahoo News, Ryan Pickrell, Tue, November 2, 2021,
- The US Navy has completed its investigation into a mysterious submarine incident in the South China Sea.
- USS Connecticut grounded on an uncharted seamount, USNI News first reported.
- The investigation has been sent to the fleet commander, who will consider accountability actions.
The US Navy investigators have determined what a nuclear-powered attack submarine hit in the South China Sea last month, USNI News reported Monday, citing defense officials familiar with the investigation and a legislative official.
The Seawolf-class nuclear-powered attack submarine USS Connecticut collided with an unidentified object on October 2, the Navy revealed five days after the incident. Investigators have reportedly determined the submarine ran aground on an undersea mountain, a seamount, the location of which was uncharted………… As of last Wednesday, the US Navy still was not quite sure what the submarine collided with, though defense officials told USNI News that early indications suggested that Connecticut collided with a seamount, an undersea feature that rises from the ocean’s depth…….
As the investigation into the incident has not yet been publicly released, information is still limited on how the submarine ran into an seamount and to what degree members of the crew and command are responsible……. https://news.yahoo.com/us-navy-figured-nuclear-powered-194721944.html
US nuclear submarine accident sparks safety fears in South China Sea
US nuclear submarine accident sparks safety fears in South China Sea https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3152181/us-nuclear-submarine-accident-sparks-safety-fears-south-china?module=perpetual_scroll&pgtype=article&campaign=3152181Busy waterway’s complex underwater terrain and shipping litter make it a challenging environment for the giant vessels
Collision has also highlighted the difficulties in safely disposing of the reactors from decommissioned subs, with no agreed guidelines, experts say. Minnie Chan 16 Oct, 2021
The damage to a US nuclear attack submarine which collided with a mystery object in the South China Sea earlier this month has raised concerns about their operational safety, as well as what happens to damaged and decommissioned nuclear reactors.
Defence experts have warned that nuclear submarines – among the world’s deadliest weapons – are also vulnerable in the event of an underwater accident causing a nuclear leak, regardless of whether they are general-purpose attack subs (SSN) or platforms for the launch of ballistic missiles (SSBN).
Pentagon Denies Chinese Accusation of Cover-Up in Nuclear Attack Submarine Crash
Pentagon Denies Chinese Accusation of Cover-Up in Nuclear Attack Submarine Crash USNI News, By: Heather Mongilio, October 12, 2021, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby on Tuesday denied a Chinese accusation that the U.S. is seeking to cover up a submarine collision in the South China Sea…..
Seawolf-class nuclear attack submarine USS Connecticut (SSN-22) hit an unknown object while underwater on Oct. 2, injuring 11 sailors, USNI News previously reported.
The Navy has not yet said what Connecticut struck, and Kirby referred reporters to the Navy when asked. USNI News previously reported that it was not another vessel.
It took the Navy five days to release information on the crash, which prompted Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian to question the details about the collision, according to a transcript of the foreign ministry’s Monday press conference.
“Such irresponsible attitude and stonewalling and cover-up practice only make the international community more suspicious of the US intention and details of the accident,” Zhao said, according to the transcript.
Zhao called on the United States to clarify the location of the accident, if there was any nuclear leakage and if the crash will affect fishery, according to the statement.
“The US side should take a responsible attitude, give a detailed account of what happened as soon as possible and make a satisfactory explanation to the international community and regional countries,” he said.
…… The submarine arrived at Naval Base Guam on Friday and is undergoing an assessment and preliminary repairs while the Navy investigates the crash, USNI News reported this week.
U.S. 7th Fleet is leading a command investigation into the crash, while Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet heads up a safety investigation, COMSUBPAC spokeswoman Cmdr. Cindy Fields previously told USNI News…. https://news.usni.org/2021/10/12/pentagon-denies-chinese-accusation-of-cover-up-in-nuclear-attack-submarine-crash
China demands answers on US nuclear submarine accident in South China Sea
China demands answers on US nuclear submarine accident in South China Sea, SCMP, Minnie Chan, 8 Oct 21,
Chinese foreign ministry blames freedom of navigation operations as it seeks details on the where and how of collision and the likely nuclear risks. Complex underwater terrain and ongoing nuclear submarine arms race increase risk of accidents in the region, analyst warns
China has demanded further explanation from the United States over a collision involving a US Navy nuclear submarine in the South China Sea last week, slamming the lack of information as “irresponsible” and expressing serious concerns about any “nuclear leak”.
“The United States should clarify more details of the occurrence, including the specific location, the intention of its navigation, what kind of object the sub had struck, whether it caused a nuclear leak that would contaminate marine environment,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said on Friday.
“It’s irresponsible and displays a lack of transparency on the part of the US to deliberately delay and conceal the details of the accident.”
- ……… The incident with the Connecticut comes just weeks after Australia, the UK and the US announced a new security arrangement. The so-called AUKUS pact also created a rift with France, which saw a US$66 billion deal to provide Australia conventional submarines voided in favour of a deal for American-made nuclear-powered ships.
- ……………. A witness on Thursday told an inquest in London into the mysterious sinking of a French trawler that rescuers saw a submarine in the area of the type used by the Dutch navy……………….
US nuclear attack submarine hits object in South China Sea, injuring crew
US nuclear attack submarine hits object in South China Sea, injuring crew, ABC, 8 Oct 21, A nuclear-powered submarine collided with an unknown “object” while submerged in the South China Sea, United States military officials confirmed.
Key points:
- The submarine’s nuclear propulsion plant was not damaged and is operating normally
- It is not clear what the sub collided with, but officials say it could have been a sunken vessel
- An investigation will be launched into the incident
The Seawolf-class fast-attack submarine USS Connecticut struck the “object” on October 2 and while about a dozen sailors were hurt, none of the injuries were life-threatening, the US Navy said in a statement.
Officials said the submarine’s nuclear propulsion plant was not impacted and remained fully operational.
“The submarine remains in a safe and stable condition,” the statement said.
“The extent of damage to the remainder of the submarine is being assessed.”
US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the incident took place in international waters in the South China Sea.
They said it was not yet clear what object the sub had struck but that it was not another submarine.
One official said it could have been a sunken vessel, a sunken container or other uncharted object…………….
In 2009, two British and French nuclear subs were damaged after colliding in the Atlantic while in 2019 14 Russian naval officers were killed in a fire on a nuclear-powered submersible near the Barents Sea. …………….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-08/us-nuclear-sub-hits-object-south-china-sea/100523164
Two French nuclear workers affected by contaminated water
Penly nuclear power plant near Dieppe: two employees affected by
contaminated water. Two EDF employees at the Penly nuclear power plant were
affected by contaminated water, on the night from Friday to Saturday,
October 2, 2021.
Actu.fr 2nd Oct 2021
Nuclear-powered submarines have ‘long history of accidents
Nuclear-powered submarines have ‘long history of accidents’, Adelaide environmentalist warns, ABC By Daniel Keane 17 Sept 21,
The plan to build nuclear-powered submarines in South Australia has alarmed anti-war and environmental campaigners, one of whom says the vessels have a “long history” of involvement in accidents across the globe.
Key points:
- Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the nuclear submarines would be built in Adelaide
- The Greens and other environmental groups say that raises serious public safety concerns
- SA’s former nuclear royal commissioner says the risks can be managed
Prime Minister Scott Morrison unveiled a deal to construct the new fleet of at least eight submarines, declaring a new era of strategic alignment with the United States and United Kingdom, and a new trilateral security partnership called AUKUS.
All Australians benefit from the national interest decisions to protect Australians and to keep Australians safe,” Mr Morrison said.
But Friends of the Earth Australia’s anti-nuclear spokesperson Jim Green said the plan was more likely to compromise public safety than enhance it.
I’m worried about the security and proliferation aspects of this, I’m deeply concerned as an Adelaidean. A city of 1.3 million people is not the place to be building nuclear submarines,” he said.
“North-western Adelaide could be a target in the case of warfare. Of course, that’s a very low risk but if it does happen, the impacts would be catastrophic for Adelaide.
“You should build hazardous facilities away from population centres, partly because of the risk of accidents and partly because of the possibility that a nuclear submarine site could be targeted by adversaries.”
Dr Green said the question of what would become of the spent fuel remained unanswered, and there was “a long history of accidents involving nuclear submarines”.
Many — but not all — of those occurred in submarines built in the former Soviet Union, including the infamous K-19, which was subsequently dubbed “The Widowmaker” and became the subject of a Hollywood film.
After its reactor suffered a loss of coolant, members of the crew — more than 20 of whom died in the next two years — worked in highly radioactive steam to prevent a complete meltdown.
Two US naval nuclear submarines — USS Thresher and USS Scorpion — currently remain sitting at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, at depths of more than two kilometres, after sinking during the 1960s.
More than 200 mariners died in the disasters, and neither vessels’ reactors, nor the nuclear weapons on board the Scorpion, have ever been recovered.
Two years ago, 14 Russian naval officers were laid to rest after they were killed in a fire on a nuclear-powered submersible in circumstances that were not fully revealed by the Kremlin.
Dr Green said Australia’s “nuclear power lobby” had “been quick off the mark”, and was already using the Prime Minister’s announcement to push for further involvement with the nuclear fuel cycle, including atomic energy and waste storage.
“The South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle [Royal] Commission, in its 2016 report, estimated a cost of $145 billion to construct and operate a nuclear waste repository,” he said.
“No country in the world has got a repository to dispose of high-level nuclear waste, and the only repository in the world to dispose of intermediate-level nuclear waste, which is in the United States, was shut for three years from 2014 to 2017 because of a chemical explosion.”…………….https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-17/nuclear-submarines-prompt-environmental-and-conflict-concern/100470362
The Cold War near disasters at RAF Lakenheath could have left Suffolk as a nuclear wasteland
The Cold War near disasters at RAF Lakenheath could have left Suffolk as a nuclear wasteland https://www.suffolknews.co.uk/mildenhall/go-anywhere-just-get-away-from-here-how-suffolk-almost-9215663/ By Dan Barker – dan.barker@iliffepublishing.co.uk , 13 September 2021 During the height of the Cold War nuclear bombs were dotted across the country, ready to wipe the USSR off the face of the map at a moment’s notice: but, on two separate occasions, Suffolk almost became victim to the very weapons which were meant to protect it.
July 27, 1956 was like any other summer’s day. Across the country attention was glued to the Ashes fourth test at Old Trafford, and four American airmen were in a B-47 bomber, on a routine training mission from RAF Lakenheath. But, as they were practising touch-and-go landings, their bomber careered out of control and went off the runway.
it ploughed into an igloo containing three Mark-6 nuclear weapons, tearing the building apart.
The plane then
exploded, killing all four men on board, and showered the world-ending weapons with burning aviation fuel.
Most of A/C [Aircraft] wreckage pivoted on igloo and came to rest with A/C nose just beyond igloo bank which kept main fuel fire outside smashed igloo. “Preliminary exam by bomb disposal officers says a miracle that one Mark Six with exposed detonators sheared didn’t go. Firefighters extinguished fire around Mark Sixes fast.” – Telegram from RAF Lakenheath to Washington DC
Fortunately the atomic power of the bomb was missing that day, with the cores un-installed in all three for storage, but the explosives needed to trigger the deadly nuclear reaction were still in place.
With 8,000 pounds of high explosives combined with depleted uranium-238, they were a nuclear ticking time bomb as firefighters fought to put out the blaze.
Had they exploded the radioactive uranium would have been scattered over a wide area, and, depending on the wind, tens of thousands of people would have been at risk from the toxic dust across Suffolk.
Knowing the enormity of the situation base fire chief Master Sgt L. H. Dunn ordered his crew to ignore the burning wreckage of the bomber, and the airman inside, and douse the flames engulfing the nuclear storage building.
At the time it had been shrouded in secrecy, but decades later one senior US officer made it very clear how lucky Suffolk was to have narrowly missed out on a nuclear disaster. “It is possible that part of Eastern England would have become a desert,” the then former officer told Omaha World Herald in Nebraska, who revealed the potentially catastrophic incident in November 1979.
Another said that “disaster was averted by tremendous heroism, good fortune and the will of God”.
A top secret telegram sent to Washington DC from the base, which has since been revealed, told of the near miss. “Most of A/C [Aircraft] wreckage pivoted on igloo and came to rest with A/C nose just beyond igloo bank which kept main fuel fire outside smashed igloo.
Another said that “disaster was averted by tremendous heroism, good fortune and the will of God”.
A top secret telegram sent to Washington DC from the base, which has since been revealed, told of the near miss. “Most of A/C [Aircraft] wreckage pivoted on igloo and came to rest with A/C nose just beyond igloo bank which kept main fuel fire outside smashed igloo.
Suffolk was lucky this time, but the incident caused great alarm in the British government, and it was decided it would try and block US authorities from ordering base evacuations because of the concern of causing mass panic in the country.
But what would happen if word got out that its most important ally had, almost, accidentally, made a huge part of the United Kingdom a nuclear wasteland?
Simple: Its policy for decades, if the press ever caught wind of the near miss, was to just deny it. After the news was broken in the American press in 1979, only then was it acknowledged something happened.
On November 5 that year the US Air Force and the Ministry of Defence would only admit the B-47 did crash.
In fact it took until 1996, some four decades after the near disaster, for the British state to accept the true scale of the accident in public.
But that near miss wasn’t the only one.
For on January 16, 1961, an F-100 Super Sabre, loaded with a Mark 28 hydrogen bomb caught on fire after the pilot jettisoned his fuel tanks when he switched his engines on.
As they hit the concrete runway the fuel ignited and engulfed the nuclear weapon – a 70 kilotons – and left it “scorched and blistered”.
Suffolk was saved again by the brave work of base firefighters who brought the blaze under control before the bomb’s high explosive detonated or its arming components activated.
T
errifyingly it was later discovered by American engineers that a flaw in the wiring of Mark 28 hydrogen bombs could allow prolonged heat to circumvent the safety mechanisms and trigger a nuclear explosion.
Had it gone, thousands of people would be dead within seconds, and thousands more would have been injured. As with the first incident, as well as the immediate blast, radioactive debris could have fallen in towns as far away as Ipswich and Lowestoft, given the right wind direction, spreading the toxic dust across Suffolk.
Since Clement Attlee ordered the scientists to investigate the creation of a nuclear bomb in August 1945, the British state has known that being a nuclear power comes with risk as well as reward.
It also knew it paid to be part of a nuclear alliance,
NATO, and with it came American nuclear bombs and the risk they brought.
Beyond the maths of working out how large the explosion would have been, it is impossible to know the true implications.
RAF Lakenheath was listed as a probable target for Soviet attack according to now released Cold War era documents, and intelligence agencies and war planners expected two 500 kiloton missiles to hit the site if the West was under attack.
Disaster creates uncertainty. Nobody would have known it was an accident within the minutes and hours after a blast, they would have just been dragged into a nuclear bunker and told of a large explosion at an airbase in Suffolk.
Where would that have left a British prime minister, an American president, and the rest of NATO, thinking they have come under attack?
In July 1956, and again in January 1961, those firefighters didn’t just save Suffolk … they might have saved the world.
Nuclear ballistic missile submarine meltdown, 1961
August 24, https://www.quora.com/Has a nuclear submarine ever had a meltdown? Laurence Schmidt, Worked at Air Liquide America (1975–2010,
In the early Cold War Era, many Russian nuclear submarines had catastrophic engineering plant failures. These failures were caused by the soviet’s rush to equal the USN in its nuclear submarine ballistic missile program; they were poorly design and constructed, lack safety system redundancy and had haphazardly trained crews. But the crews of these boats were heroic in risking their lives to save their boats in stark life and death emergencies at sea.
One example is the case of the K-19, the first Russian nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine, nicknamed the “Hiroshima” boat, because of her numerous incidences.
On July 4, 1961, while at sea, one of its two nuclear reactors SCRAMMED. The primary cooling system had failed, flooding the reactor spare with radioactive water, and there was no backup system to cool the reactor core. As the reactor rods overheated, the engineering staff try a desperate plan to improvise a cooling system; to tie into the sub’s drinking water system. But it would require several men entering the highly radioactive reactor compartment to weld new piping to pumps and valves. The first jury-rigged attempt failed with 8 crewmen being horribly burnt by the high temperatures and exposed to lethal doses of radiation. They all soon died. After other attempts, the jury-rigged system finally worked, but other crew members too close to the reactor compartment would also soon die. The crew was evacuated to a nearby submarine, and the K-19 was towed back to base for repair. In total, 22 of the crew of 139 died of radiation sickness.
A section of the radiation contaminated hull was replaced, and a new power reactor unit was installed. The two original reactors, including their fuel rods, were dumped in the Kara Sea in 1965. A favorite dumping ground for Russian navy nuclear waste, including damaged nuclear reactors to whole ships.
Did the K-19 reactor meltdown? I would say yes.
Radioactive water leak in Valencia, Spain
Environmentalists denounce radioactive water leak, The Portugal News
The Iberian Anti-Nuclear Movement (MIA) has denounced the existence of a “highly radioactive” water leak at the Cofrentes nuclear power plant, located in the Spanish province of Valencia, but the owner says there was no environmental or safety impacts.
By TPN/Lusa, 12 Sept 21,
In a statement sent to Lusa, MIA states that the information on the occurrence of this nuclear accident came from the Tanquem Cofrents platform, which is part of the Iberian movement and that brings together the main ecological groups and organisations of the Valencian civil society.
The accident was recorded on Thursday, with “a leak of highly radioactive water in the turbine of the plant, in the reactor’s primary circuit”……..
According to environmentalists, the Cofrentes plant “is old and deteriorated” which, together with the management policy “of maximising production at all costs, makes it more than predictable that accidents like this or more serious will be repeated.”
“The MIA has insisted that this plant be closed as it endangers all citizens, and that a rapid transition be made to a system based solely on renewable energy, that avoids catastrophic climate change and that will make it cleaner, safer and cheaper,” he concludes.
It also warns of the danger of extending the operation of the Almaraz nuclear power plant, located 100 kilometres from the border with Portugal and next to the Tagus River. https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/2021-09-11/environmentalists-denounce-radioactive-water-leak/62314
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (293)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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 