State Police to Hold Major Radiological Incident Exercise with International, Federal, State and Local Partners
The Michigan State Police, Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division (MSP/EMHSD) is playing a lead role in the planning, hosting and execution of a historic full-scale radiological exercise. More than 70 local, state, provincial and federal agencies from the United States and Canada will participate in this major radiological incident exercise at various locations in Lansing, southeast Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Ontario from March 14 – 21.
The Cobalt Magnet 2025 exercise is led by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), in partnership with the MSP/EMHSD. It will bring numerous agencies together to ensure preparedness against radiological threats.
“Michigan is home to two active nuclear power plants, with a third slated to return online within the next year,” said Col. James F. Grady II, director of the Michigan State Police and state director of emergency management and homeland security. “Given our location near Canada and other Great Lakes states, Michigan is uniquely positioned to play a critical role in this vital exercise, where the lessons learned will improve safety and response actions impacting the nation and beyond.”
Cobalt Magnet 2025 represents the culmination of 18 months of planning by local, state, provincial and federal responders. The exercise, with more than 3,000 participants, will simulate a nuclear power plant accident. It will enable response personnel to practice scanning for radiological materials, protecting public health and safety, providing emergency relief to affected populations and restoring essential services.
“During the exercise, members of the public may see field teams in protective clothing using radiological monitoring and detection equipment, low-flying aircraft conducting data-gathering overflights and groups of first responders and others staged at various locations,” explained Capt. Kevin Sweeney, deputy state director of Emergency Management and commander of the MSP/EMHSD. “The MSP/EMHSD will host a large portion of the Cobalt Magnet 25 exercise at the State Emergency Operations Center at MSP Headquarters in Dimondale. Multiple State of Michigan agencies will join the MSP in this full-scale exercise.”
Cobalt Magnet 2025 is part of a regular program of training, exercises and planning that help first responders prepare in case of a public health and safety emergency.
For more information on how to prepare before, during and after an emergency or disaster, visit www.michigan.gov/miready or follow MSP/EMHSD on X at @MichEMHS.
‘Nervous and rushed’: Massive Fukushima plant cleanup work involves high radiation and stress
Experts say the hard work and huge challenges of decommissioning the plant are just beginning. There are estimations that the work could take more than a century. The government and TEPCO have an initial completion target of 2051, but the retrieval of melted fuel debris is already three years behind, and many big issues remain undecided.
By ASSOCIATED PRESS, 12 March 2025
OKUMA, Japan (AP) – The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant’s radiation levels have significantly dropped since the cataclysmic meltdown in Japan 14 years ago. Workers walk around in many areas wearing only surgical masks and regular clothes.
It’s a different story for those who enter the reactor buildings, including the three damaged in the 2011 earthquake and tsunami. They must use maximum protection – full facemasks with filters, multi-layered gloves and socks, shoe covers, hooded hazmat coveralls and a waterproof jacket, and a helmet.
As workers remove melted fuel debris from the reactors in a monumental nuclear cleanup effort that could take more than a century, they are facing both huge amounts of psychological stress and dangerous levels of radiation.
The Associated Press, which recently visited the plant for a tour and interviews, takes a closer look.
A remote-controlled extendable robot with a tong had several mishaps including equipment failures before returning in November with a tiny piece of melted fuel from inside the damaged No. 2 reactor.
That first successful test run is a crucial step in what will be a daunting, decades-long decommissioning that must deal with at least 880 tons of melted nuclear fuel that has mixed with broken parts of internal structures and other debris inside the three ruined reactors…………………………………………………
Radiation levels are still dangerously high inside the No. 2 reactor building, where the melted fuel debris is behind a thick concrete containment wall. Earlier decontamination work reduced those radiation levels to a fraction of what they used to be.
In late August, small groups took turns doing their work helping the robot in 15- to 30-minute shifts to minimize radiation exposure. They have a remotely controlled robot, but it has to be manually pushed in and out.
“Working under high levels of radiation (during a short) time limit made us feel nervous and rushed,” said Yasunobu Yokokawa, a team leader for the mission. “It was a difficult assignment.”
Full-face masks reduced visibility and made breathing difficult, an extra waterproof jacket made it sweaty and hard to move, and triple-layered gloves made their fingers clumsy, Yokokawa said.
To eliminate unnecessary exposure, they taped around gloves and socks and carried a personal dosimeter to measure radiation. Workers also rehearsed the tasks they’d perform to minimize exposure…………………………………………………..
a growing number of workers are concerned about safety and radiation at the plant, said Ono, the decommissioning chief, citing an annual survey of about 5,5,00 workers……
Yokokawa and a plant colleague, Hiroshi Ide, helped in the 2011 emergency and are team leaders today. They say they want to make the job safer as workers face high radiation in parts of the plant.
On the top floor of the No. 2 reactor, workers are setting up equipment to remove spent fuel units from the cooling pool. That’s set to begin within two to three years.
At the No. 1 reactor, workers are putting up a giant roof to contain radioactive dust from decontamination work on the top floor ahead of the removal of spent fuel.
To minimize exposure and increase efficiency, workers use a remote-controlled crane to attach pre-assembled parts, according to TEPCO. The No. 1 reactor and its surroundings are among the most contaminated parts of the plant.
Workers are also removing treated radioactive wastewater. They recently started dismantling the emptied water tanks to make room to build facilities needed for the research and storage of melted fuel debris.
After a series of small missions by robots to gather samples, experts will determine a larger-scale method for removing melted fuel, first at the No. 3 reactor.
Experts say the hard work and huge challenges of decommissioning the plant are just beginning. There are estimations that the work could take more than a century. The government and TEPCO have an initial completion target of 2051, but the retrieval of melted fuel debris is already three years behind, and many big issues remain undecided.
Ide, whose home in Namie town, northwest of the plant, is in a no-go zone because of nuclear contamination, still has to put on a hazmat suit, even for brief visits home…….
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-14484347/Nervous-rushed-Massive-Fukushima-plant-cleanup-exposes-workers-high-radiation-stress.html
Human error leads to water spill at Finnish EPR
About 100 cubic metres of slightly radioactive water flowed into rooms
within the containment of Olkiluoto unit 3 after a hatch in the reactor
pool was not properly closed before the filling of the pool began.
World Nuclear News 10th March 2025, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/human-error-leads-to-water-spill-at-finnish-epr
US report discusses possibility of nuclear submarine accident, if subs supplied to Australia
A report to the US Congress discusses the possibility of an accident with a nuclear-powered submarine if it supplies one to Australia.
This comes amid renewed questions over whether an AUKUS submarine deal would leave the US vulnerable, and an accident off the English coast where a tanker carrying jet fuel for the US military has hit a cargo ship.
The risk of a marine accident is one of three risks looked at around the submarines deal that is central to the the AUKUS Pillar One pact.
The congressional research report said an accident “might call into question for third-party observers the safety of all US Navy nuclear-powered ships”.
That could erode US public support and the ability of US nuclear-powered ships to make port calls around the world.
The 111-page report by the Congressional Research Service discussed the US not handing over the subs at all – although Canberra just made a $870m downpayment on them.
Keeping them might make up for the US sub fleet hitting “a valley or trough” around now till the 2030s, and shipbuilding being at a low point, it said.
Donald Trump’s pick for the top defence policy role at the Pentagon, Elbridge Colby, has said AUKUS could leave the US short and “it would be crazy to have fewer SSN Virginia-class [attack submarines] in the right place and time”.
The new research report to Congress said Pillar One was launched in 2021 without a study of the alternatives.
One alternative “would keep all US-made SSNs under the control of the US Navy, which has a proven record extending back to 1954 of safely operating its nuclear-powered ships”.
The original Pillar One pact is for the US to sell between three and five subs to Australia, then Australia to use US and UK nuclear propulsion technology to build another three-to-eight nuclear powered, conventionally armed submarines itself, for a total fleet of eight.
Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles said on Monday that Elbridge Colby was broadly supportive of AUKUS, if enough subs were available.
Canberra was aware of the challenge in the US around producing submarines, “and that’s why we’re contributing to the US industrial base”.
“And it’s a significant contribution and it’s going to increase the availability of Virginia class submarines for the United States.
“That’s a point which has been accepted and understood by the US Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth, in the meeting that I had with him.”
Australia was last year included as a “domestic source” of US military production for the first time, and is aiming to ramp up making ammunition and missiles, as well as test hypersonic weapons with the US and UK.
“That’s going well in the sense that we are making the contributions, we are seeing an increase in production rates, and over the time frame in which we are looking to have our Virginia class submarines transferred to us, we are confident that this challenge can be met,” Marles told the ABC.
In the US, Trump appears most focused on building an ‘Iron Dome’ missile defence system, as he mentioned in his speech to Congress. This would be another huge pressure on military spending.
The report to Congress covered three big risks – accidents and whether Pillar One was the best option for deterrence and “warfighting cost-effectiveness”, and how the tech – the “crown jewels of US military technology” – could be kept secret, especially from China.
It debated a different “military division of labour”.
“Australia, instead of using funds to purchase, build, operate, and maintain its own SSNs, would instead invest those funds in other military capabilities – such as … long-range anti-ship missiles, drones, loitering munitions, B-21 long-range bombers, or other long-range strike aircraft” to conduct “missions for both Australia and the United States”.
The general rule was programmes should not go ahead without a sound business case, it noted.
“There is little indication that, prior to announcing the AUKUS Pillar 1 project in September 2021, an analysis of alternatives … or equivalent rigorous comparative analysis was conducted to examine whether Pillar 1 would be a more cost-effective way to spend defence resources for generating deterrence and warfighting capability”.
The report made no mention of how New Zealand, Japan, Korea and others might join AUKUS Pillar Two, an agreement for sharing advanced military tech.
What if a Fukushima-sized nuclear accident happened in Australia?
Today is the 14th anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, and this morning the good folks at Don’t Nuke the Climate released a huge research project that shows what a Fukushima-style nuclear disaster would look like if it happened at one of Dutton’s seven proposed reactor sites.
About these maps, https://nuclearplume.au/ 11 Mar 25
The seven sites on this map have been selected by the federal Coalition to house multiple nuclear power reactors.
You can select the reactor site and wind direction to see how a Fukushima-scale nuclear disaster would contaminate different areas surrounding the seven sites in Australia.
The interactive map uses a radiation plume map, originally peer reviewed and published by the European Geosciences Union. It shows the deposition of radioactive caesium-137 from the Fukushima disaster as of July 2011. The darker the shading, the higher the level of radioactive contamination and the higher the radiation exposures for people in those areas. At distances far from the Fukushima plant, radiation exposures were low but even low radiation doses can cause negative health impacts including fatal cancers and cardiovascular disease.
Caesium-137 has been one of the most significant radioactive contaminants since the March 2011 Fukushima disaster but many other types of radioactive particles contaminated wide areas (iodine-131, xenon-133, etc.).
Other radiation fallout maps from the Fukushima disaster can be seen here and here.
Ripping up the rules on nuclear power heightens the risk to us all
CND, Labour Outlook 7th March 2025 https://labouroutlook.org/2025/03/07/ripping-up-the-rules-on-nuclear-power-heightens-the-risk-to-us-al
“Ripping up the rules for nuclear greatly exacerbates the risk of accidents, will contaminate more of our environment with radioactive waste, and above all, raise the spectre of nuclear conflict.”
Sam Mason, convenor of CND’s Trade Union Advisory Group explains why the government’s new rules for expanding nuclear power production must be opposed.
The government’s announcement that it is going to ‘rip up the rules to fire-up nuclear power’ may be music to the ears of nuclear proponents but for CND, it is something we must vehemently oppose.
Part of wider planning law reforms to put ‘builders not blockers’ first and ‘build baby, build’, the proposal is to extend beyond the eight sites identified for nuclear power plants in 2009, and to include small or advanced modular reactors. This means nuclear sites could be constructed anywhere across England and Wales, and anyone opposing them on legitimate grounds of safety or the environment for example dismissed as NIMBYs.
According to the government, nuclear is needed for energy security and to satisfy high demand from ‘local users such as data centres, gigafactories, hydrogen and synthetic fuel production and/or industrial clusters’. It also includes using nuclear for district heat networks, being placed closer to centres of population, and in proximity to military activities.
A further driver for the government’s plans is the creation of good jobs, to drive growth and support climate action. With the impacts of climate change accelerating across the globe there is an urgent need to decarbonise our energy system, but nuclear power is not the answer on any of these levels.
The government’s laudable aim to decarbonise electric power by 2030 includes 4.5 gigawatts of nuclear power. For reference, the long over budget and delivery of Hinckley Point C in Somerset is due to generate 3.2gw of power.
Assurances about maintaining high standards of regulation do little to assuage fears of this nuclear proliferation. The addition of a new Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce to speed up delivery will cover both civilian and defence nuclear. Reporting directly to the Prime Minister, it serves to further emphasise we cannot decouple civilian nuclear from the weapons system.
Much is made about the low level of risk from nuclear, including new technologies such as SMRs. However, as we mark the 14th anniversary of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster on 11 March, it should serve as a stark reminder of the impact of nuclear, and its legacy to current and future generations.
Ripping up the rules for nuclear greatly exacerbates the risk of accidents, will contaminate more of our environment with radioactive waste, and above all, raise the spectre of nuclear conflict. We must do all we can to oppose these plans.
Cybersecurity in the Nuclear Industry: US and UK Regulation and the Sellafield Case
Key Points:
With both the U.S. and U.K. strengthening their regulatory frameworks and increasing enforcement powers, nuclear facilities should take steps now to review and upgrade cybersecurity measures. This includes not just updating technical controls, but also ensuring compliance with security plans, auditing systems, and maintaining proper documentation.
Real-world examples from both the U.S. and U.K. demonstrate that nuclear facilities are being targeted by sophisticated cyber attackers, including state actors. This isn’t just a theoretical risk—it’s happening now, and facilities must take it seriously.
The successful prosecution of Sellafield with significant fines (£332,500) shows that regulators are now willing to take strong enforcement action, even when no actual breach has occurred. Nuclear facilities cannot afford wait for an incident before improving their cybersecurity—they must be proactive……………………………………………..
JD Supra 6th March 2025,
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/cybersecurity-in-the-nuclear-industry-2447724/
Continued Incidents Raise Concerns Over Nuclear Security, Says UN
By David Dalton, 5 March 2025, https://www.nucnet.org/news/continued-incidents-raise-concerns-over-nuclear-security-says-un-3-3-2025
Transportation of radioactive materials remains one of most vulnerable areas.
There were almost 150 incidents of illegal or unauthorised activity involving nuclear and other radioactive material reported last year, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) monitoring database.
New data reveals that while the overall number remains consistent with previous years, the continued incidents of trafficking and radioactive contamination cases raises concerns over nuclear security, the United Nations said on its website.
Three of the reported cases were directly linked to trafficking or malicious intent, while in 21 incidents, authorities could not determine whether criminal activity was involved.
Most incidents did not involve organised crime, but experts warn that even a single case of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands could pose serious global risks.
A troubling trend in 2024 was the rise in contaminated industrial materials, such as used pipes and metal parts that unknowingly entered supply chains.
“This indicates the challenge for some countries to prevent the unauthorised disposal of radioactive sources, and at the same time, it confirms the efficiency of the detection infrastructure,” said Elena Buglova, director of the IAEA’s division of nuclear security.
The transportation of radioactive materials remains one of the most vulnerable areas of nuclear security. Over the past decade, 65% of all reported thefts have occurred while materials were in transit.
Nuclear and radioactive substances are regularly transported for use in medicine, industry and scientific research, making them a potential target for theft. With so many different handlers involved during shipping, security gaps persist.
Experts emphasise the need for stronger safety measures while goods are on the move to prevent radioactive material from being lost or stolen.
Enhanced international cooperation is also essential to ensure proper security along supply chains.
More than 145 Reports Added to IAEA Incident and Trafficking Database in 2024
In 2024, 147 incidents of illegal or unauthorized activities involving
nuclear and other radioactive material were reported to the Incident and
Trafficking Database (ITDB), a number aligned with the historical average.
The new data released by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
today underlines the need for continued vigilance and improvement of
regulatory oversight for security of nuclear and other radioactive
material.
IAEA 28th Feb 2025,
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/more-than-145-reports-added-to-iaea-incident-and-trafficking-database-in-2024
Is giving old reactors new life the future of nuclear energy?
Countries want to squeeze more electricity from ageing power plants to help meet
global demand, but the strategy has its own challenges. The Torness nuclear
power station on Scotland’s south-east coast is showing its age. Over the
past few years, cracks have started to appear in the graphite bricks
encasing the uranium-filled fuel rods.
The bricks are too difficult to replace, so engineers routinely lower microscopic cameras into the reactor to monitor the wear and tear caused by radiation. If the cracks start to
jeopardise the reactor’s ability to safely shut down during an extreme
earthquake or other disaster, it cannot stay open.
So far, so good. And the
plant’s owner EDF, the French energy group, intends to keep the station
running until at least 2030, 42 years after it opened in 1988. Station
director Paul Forrest is confident. “But if the graphite inspection
starts surprising us, we will change course,” he says.
His efforts are part of an urgent, global quest to squeeze more years of electricity out of
existing nuclear power plants to meet rising demand for low carbon power as
countries try to move away from fossil fuels. Most of the world’s
operating nuclear power plants, around 400, were built in the 1970s to
1990s and are now coming to the end of their projected lives or original
licence periods.
FT 3rd March 2025 https://www.ft.com/content/91784663-eba2-48e6-a0a3-47e04774c5c0
A Single Trumputin Drone Can Turn the “Peaceful Atom” Into World War 3
Putin, or anyone else of his ilk, would need precisely one technician with one weaponized drone to turn any “peaceful” nuke into a radioactive apocalypse.
Even without drone attacks, America’s 21st century reactor projects are catastrophic economic failures.
No significant supply from SMRs can be realistically expected in less than a decade. None can be protected from drone attacks.
And no explosion at a wind turbine or solar panel will ever cause a radioactive apocalypse.
by Harvey Wasserman, March 2, 2025, https://freepress.org/article/single-trumputin-drone-can-turn-%E2%80%9Cpeaceful-atom%E2%80%9D-world-war-3
Vladimir Putin right now has in his sights nearly 300 pre-deployed atomic weapons set to easily launch a radioactive apocalypse with a single drone strike.
He may already have crashed an early warning into the sarcophagus at Chernobyl.
And taken as a whole, the “Peaceful Atom” lends a terrifying reality to Donald Trump’s Oval Office threat of an impending World War 3.
Some 180 operational “Peaceful Atom” reactors now operate throughout Europe. There are 93 more in the US, 19 in Canada, two in Mexico.
Putin, or anyone else of his ilk, would need precisely one technician with one weaponized drone to turn any “peaceful” nuke into a radioactive apocalypse.
When Donald Trump brought Ukraine’s Volodymir Zelensky into the Oval Office to accuse him of flirting with “World War 3,” atomic reactors were among the specifics he failed to cite.
As of today, more than 50 commercial nuclear power plants are considered operable in France. Another 130+ operate in Belarus; Belgium; Bulgaria; the Czech Republic; Finland; Hungary; the Netherlands; Romania; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; the UK (Germany, Italy and Lithuania have gone nuke-free).
Six reactors are under unstable Russian control at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia; two more are in Kursk, now a hotly contested war zone. Russia has a further three dozen.
Each could blanket the globe with atomic radiation, as has Chernobyl Unit 4 since it exploded on April 26, 1986.
The still-hot Chernobyl core could explode yet again.
Europe has collectively spent more than $2 billion to cover that core with a giant sarcophagus, the world’s largest movable structure.
On February 14, 2025, it was struck by a military drone.
Putin denies ordering the hit. His supporters say it could have been a “false flag.” But the drone itself was of an Iranian design widely used by the Russians.
On-going maintenance at Chernobyl has been conflicted and highly suspect, especially as impacted by the Russian invasion. After decades of denial, nuke supporters admit that what’s left of Chernobyl #4 could explode again. A definitive 2007 study by the Russian Academy of Sciences put the downwind human death toll at more than 985,000…and rising.
Three melt-downs and four explosions at American-designed reactors at Fukushima have raised the stakes. Caused by an earthquake and tidal wave, their lost cores still send unfathomable quantities of radioactive poisons into the Pacific, with no end in sight.
Both Fukushima and Chernobyl have released far more radioactive cesium and other deadly isotopes than did the atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No western insurer will gamble against the likelihood of a new catastrophe caused by natural disasters, faulty designs, operator error, or acts of terror…drone-inflicted or otherwise.
Even without drone attacks, America’s 21st century reactor projects are catastrophic economic failures. Two at VC Summer, South Carolina, are dead, at a cost of $9 billion. Two more at Vogtle, Georgia, came in years behind schedule, billions over budget and completely incapable of competing with renewables. Talks of reviving shut reactors like Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, Michigan’s Palisades and Duane Arnold in Iowa all depend on huge federal subsidies to cover vastly inflated market prices.
Parallel projects in France, Britain and Finland are also very late and far beyond budget.
Soaring costs and lagging production schedules have already killed the first order from NuScale, the first licensed US producer of Small Modular Reactors.
No significant supply from SMRs can be realistically expected in less than a decade. None can be protected from drone attacks.
But the billions SMR (Silly Mythological Rip-offs) backers want to squander on this pre-failed technology will help keep Europe dependent on Putin’s gas.
Germany has shut all its reactors, as have Italy and Lithuania. Putin’s war has destabilized their fossil fuel supply, especially complicating Germany’s transition to 100% renewables, still likely within the next decade.
Corporate hype will not can’t deliver any new nukes, big or small, that can compete with wind, solar, battery backup or increased efficiency, all of whose cost projections continue to plummet.
And no explosion at a wind turbine or solar panel will ever cause a radioactive apocalypse.
But whoever attacked the Chernobyl sarcophagus has made it clear that as long as atomic reactors continue to operate, World War 3 is just a drone strike away.
Harvey “Sluggo” Wasserman wrote SOLARTOPIA: OUR GREEN POWERED EARTH and co-wrote KILLING OUR OWN: THE DISASTER OF AMERICA’S EXPERIENCE WITH ATOMIC RADIATION. Most Mondays at 2pm PT he co-convenes the GREEP Zoom (www.grassrootsep.org)
IAEA mission arrives at nuclear plant in Ukraine through Russia
By Reuters, March 2, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/new-iaea-mission-arrives-russian-held-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-russia-says-2025-03-01/
March 1 (Reuters) – A new monitoring mission from the U.N. nuclear watchdog arrived on Saturday at the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine for the first time through Russian territory, a Russia-installed head of the plant said.
The IAEA rotation came after weeks of delay caused by military activity around the site with each side blaming the other for violating rules to ensure the team’s safe passage to the plant.
“It is fundamentally important that the route passed through the territory of the Russian Federation for the first time,” Yuri Chernichuk, the Russia-installed head of the Zaporizhzhia plant in southeastern Ukraine, said in a video on Telegram.
The arrival of three inspectors, he added, was ensured by Russia’s defence ministry and national guard and followed “intense” consultations between the heads of Russia’s state nuclear power company Rosatom and IAEA.
Reuters could not independently verify the report. The IAEA could not be reached outside business hours to comment on the Russian statement. There was no immediate comment from Ukraine.
Nuclear reactors could become targets of war, defence experts warn
The Australian Security Leaders Climate Group has warned the Coalition’s nuclear plans could leave Australia vulnerable to devastating attacks.
Key Points
- The Australian Security Leaders Climate Group has warned nuclear reactors could become targets of war in Australia.
- Nuclear reactors could be targeted by missile attack and sabotage, the group said.
- The Coalition is planning to build seven small nuclear reactors across five states.
Australian nuclear reactors could become a target of war if the Coalition was to go ahead with plans to build them, a group of former defence leaders warn.
The plan to build seven small nuclear reactors across five states on the sites of coal-fired stations could leave Australia vulnerable to missile warfare and sabotage, the Australian Security Leaders Climate Group says.
The group, including former Australian Defence Force chief Chris Barrie and former director of preparedness and mobilisation at the Department of Defence Cheryl Durrant, is urging the nation not to go down the path of building nuclear power stations.
Modern warfare is increasingly being fought using missiles and unmanned aerial systems, Barrie said.
“Every nuclear power facility is a potential dirty bomb because rupture of containment facilities can cause devastating damage,” he said.
“With the proposed power stations all located within a 100 kilometres of the coast, they are a clear and accessible target.”
Durrant cited the Russia-Ukraine war where both sides have prioritised targeting their opponents’ energy systems
Australia would be no different,” Durrant said.
Nuclear power plants could become a dual target due to their role in energy supply, but also the catastrophic devastation which would occur if facilities were breached.
This means Australia would need to consider introducing expensive and complex missile defence systems and cyber and intelligence resources to defend the plants if war were to break out — which the nation currently lacks.
“Do we prioritise the protection of cities and population centres and military bases, or do we divert vital resources to defending seven nuclear power stations scattered across Australia?” Barrie said.
The group said building nuclear capabilities would derail Australia’s climate targets and exacerbate risks in the region.
IAEA Director General Statement on fire Situation in Chernobyl nuclear station
IAEA, 27 Feb 25
Two weeks after it was hit by a drone, Ukrainian firefighters are still trying to extinguish smouldering fires within the large structure built over the reactor destroyed in the 1986 Chornobyl nuclear accident, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said today.
With unrestricted access, the IAEA team based at the site has been closely monitoring the situation following the strike early in the morning on 14 February that pierced a big hole in the New Safe Confinement (NSC), designed to prevent any potential release into the atmosphere of radioactive material from the Shelter Object covering the damaged reactor, and to protect it from external hazards………………………….
Working in shifts, more than 400 emergency response personnel have been participating in the site’s efforts to manage the aftermath of the drone strike.
“The firefighters and other responders are working very hard in difficult circumstances to manage the impact and consequences of the drone strike. It was clearly a serious incident in terms of nuclear safety, even though it could have been much worse. As I have stated repeatedly during this devastating war, attacking a nuclear facility must never happen,” Director General Grossi said……………………………………………………………………. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-278-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine
Ontario’s outdated nuclear vision poses serious safety and financial risks
Intervenors also raised safety concerns about OPG’s plans for the BWRX-300 high-level spent fuel waste. Edwards said an above-ground spent fuel pool, unprotected by a containment structure, is vulnerable
there’s nothing there. There’s really nothing. There are no safety systems to speak of.”
rabble,ca, by Ole Hendrickson, February 26, 2025
As Ontario seeks to build a small modular nuclear reactor, the standards and safety of Canada’s nuclear industry leave something to be desired.
In October 2022, the federal infrastructure bank committed $970 million towards Canada’s first small modular nuclear reactor. Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has applied to construct a 20-story tall, half underground, BWRX-300 boiling water reactor at the Darlington nuclear site near Toronto.
Independent nuclear experts say the reactor poses significant risks. They brought them to the attention of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) during a five-day public hearing in January 2025.
On January 8, the first day of the hearing, Ontario Premier Doug Ford issued a press release about Fortress Am-Can, his plan for “economic prosperity in Canada and the United States.” Ford said “With our fleet of nuclear power plants and the first small modular nuclear reactors in the G7, Ontario is uniquely positioned to power the future of Fortress Am-Can.”
Independent experts say that nuclear plants are far costlier than a combination of renewables with energy storage systems and conservation measures. They create intractable waste problems. They are slow to deploy, delaying climate action.
Furthermore, the design of Ontario’s “first small modular nuclear reactor” raises major safety concerns.
The BWRX-300 is a slimmed-down, 300-megawatt version of an earlier 1600-megawatt boiling water reactor design from the American company GE-Hitachi. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensed the design, but investors never materialized. General Electric (GE) also designed the boiling water reactors that melted down at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan.
At the CNSC hearing, Dr. Gordon Edwards, a leading independent nuclear expert with the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, disputed claims that the BWRX-300 design is “inherently safe.” He noted that the U.S. NRC has not approved the design. A single system, the Isolation Condenser System, would replace multiple safety systems of its larger predecessor. Edwards suggested that “the eagerness of OPG and CNSC staff to proceed with construction before the design is finalized is based on political, technological, and marketing considerations.”
Sarah Eaton, CSNC’s Director General for Advanced Reactor Technologies, responded for CNSC staff. She said staff use a “trust but verify approach.” CNSC Executive Vice President Ramzi Jammal confirmed that Canada differs from the U.S., where the NRC must certify a design before a license is issued.
Another CNSC staffer, Melanie Rickard, said “We’re talking about hundreds of hours, maybe thousands of hours, to be honest, so that we’re certain that this is going to be acceptable. And we are not certain. There is more work to be done.”
Intervenors also raised safety concerns about OPG’s plans for the BWRX-300 high-level spent fuel waste. Edwards said an above-ground spent fuel pool, unprotected by a containment structure, is vulnerable in a conflict. He added, “look at what’s happening in the Ukraine with the Zaporizhzhia plant with the conflict going on there.”
Dr. Sunil Nijhawan, who followed him, warned that an aircraft impact on a pool with a thousand spent fuel assemblies “can create a radiation disaster affecting Lake Ontario and about five million residences and businesses of southern Ontario.”
Nijhawan said “I’ve been in the industry for a long time. The first time I looked at a boiling water reactor design manual was 50 years ago, 1974, and I’ve kept in touch with development of all sorts of reactor designs… Right now what I see
Intervenors also raised safety concerns about OPG’s plans for the BWRX-300 high-level spent fuel waste. Edwards said an above-ground spent fuel pool, unprotected by a containment structure, is vulnerable in a conflict. He added, “look at what’s happening in the Ukraine with the Zaporizhzhia plant with the conflict going on there.”
Dr. Sunil Nijhawan, who followed him, warned that an aircraft impact on a pool with a thousand spent fuel assemblies “can create a radiation disaster affecting Lake Ontario and about five million residences and businesses of southern Ontario.”
Nijhawan said “I’ve been in the industry for a long time. The first time I looked at a boiling water reactor design manual was 50 years ago, 1974, and I’ve kept in touch with development of all sorts of reactor designs… Right now what I see in this design, to me there’s nothing there. There’s really nothing. There are no safety systems to speak of.”
Nijhawan warned about a loss of “safety culture” throughout Canada’s nuclear industry…………………………….. https://rabble.ca/columnists/ontarios-outdated-nuclear-vision-poses-serious-safety-and-financial-risks/
1 This Month
Website of the Week
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
- January 2026 (127)
- December 2025 (358)
- 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)
-
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 