nuclear-news

Looking to Blame Anyone But Israel for Youth’s Anti-Israel Turn

Ari Paul, February 5, 2026, https://fair.org/home/looking-to-blame-anyone-but-israel-for-youths-anti-israel-turn/

Younger Americans are turning against Israel. “On both the left and the right, young Americans are growing more skeptical of offering unconditional US support to Israel,” Politico (9/29/25) reported. Brookings (8/6/25) ran the headline “Support for Israel Continues to Deteriorate, Especially Among Democrats and Young People.” According to the Forward (11/21/25), “Younger Jews are more than twice as likely to identify as anti-Zionist than the overall population.

Pro-Israel media are looking for blame. It’s often easy to paint youth opinion that is out of sync with official state policy as emotionally driven social justice warriorism, the result of hearts not yet hardened by life’s cold realities. The Zionist media narrative is looking for the culprits who have apparently miseducated our youth, turning them not just into Israel critics, but Jew haters.

‘Panicked’ by young people

At the Atlantic (12/15/25), Yair Rosenberg wrote a piece headlined “The More I’m Around Young People, the More Panicked I Am,’” with the subhead, “Anti-Jewish prejudice isn’t a partisan divide—it’s a generational one.” To his credit, Rosenberg starts off reporting on very real instances of antisemitism, but then watch carefully what he does in the middle:

Young people also tend to be more critical of Israel than their elders, leading a minority to excuse or even perpetuate anti-Jewish acts in America in the name of Palestine. These critics are likely to consume anti-Israel content on their social-media apps of choice. The platforms then funnel some of those users toward antisemitic material—a sort of algorithmic escalator that ends up radicalizing a percentage of them.

In the first sentence, the only evidence Rosenberg cites is a link to his own article (Atlantic, 5/22/25) about how “Elias Rodriguez allegedly shot and killed two people as they were exiting an event at the Capital Jewish Museum,” with the headline “A Dangerous Disguise for Antisemitism.” Rosenberg said the “assailant used the Palestinian struggle as a pretext to harm Jews.”

But as I have previously written (FAIR.org, 5/29/25), much of the media framed this attack as antisemitic without any factual basis. While there was plenty of evidence that the act was political, with Rodiguez’s manifesto denouncing Israel as a “genocidal apartheid state,” there wasn’t any evidence that the attacker held antisemitic views, or targeted the event because of the faith of the victims. If someone obsessed with Saudi Arabia’s aggression in Yemen killed two Muslim workers at the Saudi embassy, that would certainly be anti-Saudi political violence, but not necessarily anti-Muslim terror.

‘Sewer of filth and lies’

Rosenberg doesn’t quite say that today’s young critics of Israel are necessarily antisemites, but argues that by putting anti-Israel content on social media, they’re helping to drive traffic to actual antisemitism. This is a framing that lets Elon Musk—who famously gave a Nazi salute at Donald Trump’s second inauguration—off the hook for overseeing the rise of this antisemitic content on X (CNN, 9/29/25).

Politico (9/29/25) cites Israel’s “latest moves to launch a ground offensive in Gaza City…and deny evidence of widespread famine” as reasons for the country’s loss of support among young people.

Younger Americans are turning against Israel. “On both the left and the right, young Americans are growing more skeptical of offering unconditional US support to Israel,” Politico (9/29/25) reported. Brookings (8/6/25) ran the headline “Support for Israel Continues to Deteriorate, Especially Among Democrats and Young People.” According to the Forward (11/21/25), “Younger Jews are more than twice as likely to identify as anti-Zionist than the overall population.”

Pro-Israel media are looking for blame. It’s often easy to paint youth opinion that is out of sync with official state policy as emotionally driven social justice warriorism, the result of hearts not yet hardened by life’s cold realities. The Zionist media narrative is looking for the culprits who have apparently miseducated our youth, turning them not just into Israel critics, but Jew haters.

‘Panicked’ by young people

“Younger Americans…are likely to trust and get their news from lightly moderated social-media platforms,” writes Yair Rosenberg (Atlantic, 12/15/25), “which often advantage the extreme opinions, conspiracy theories, and conflict-stoking content that drive engagement.”

At the Atlantic (12/15/25), Yair Rosenberg wrote a piece headlined “The More I’m Around Young People, the More Panicked I Am,’” with the subhead, “Anti-Jewish prejudice isn’t a partisan divide—it’s a generational one.” To his credit, Rosenberg starts off reporting on very real instances of antisemitism, but then watch carefully what he does in the middle:

Young people also tend to be more critical of Israel than their elders, leading a minority to excuse or even perpetuate anti-Jewish acts in America in the name of Palestine. These critics are likely to consume anti-Israel content on their social-media apps of choice. The platforms then funnel some of those users toward antisemitic material—a sort of algorithmic escalator that ends up radicalizing a percentage of them.

In the first sentence, the only evidence Rosenberg cites is a link to his own article (Atlantic, 5/22/25) about how “Elias Rodriguez allegedly shot and killed two people as they were exiting an event at the Capital Jewish Museum,” with the headline “A Dangerous Disguise for Antisemitism.” Rosenberg said the “assailant used the Palestinian struggle as a pretext to harm Jews.”

But as I have previously written (FAIR.org, 5/29/25), much of the media framed this attack as antisemitic without any factual basis. While there was plenty of evidence that the act was political, with Rodiguez’s manifesto denouncing Israel as a “genocidal apartheid state,” there wasn’t any evidence that the attacker held antisemitic views, or targeted the event because of the faith of the victims. If someone obsessed with Saudi Arabia’s aggression in Yemen killed two Muslim workers at the Saudi embassy, that would certainly be anti-Saudi political violence, but not necessarily anti-Muslim terror.

‘Sewer of filth and lies’

The root of the antisemitism problem at X is not criticism of Israeli war crimes (FAIR.org, 1/23/25).

Rosenberg doesn’t quite say that today’s young critics of Israel are necessarily antisemites, but argues that by putting anti-Israel content on social media, they’re helping to drive traffic to actual antisemitism. This is a framing that lets Elon Musk—who famously gave a Nazi salute at Donald Trump’s second inauguration—off the hook for overseeing the rise of this antisemitic content on X (CNN, 9/29/25).

Nor does he recognize that Meta is aggressively policing against criticism of Israel, even as it ends efforts to proactively screen out hate speech like antisemitism (Washington Post, 2/25/25). Last year, Meta announced “that it will expand its policies to classify the misuse of the term ‘Zionist’ as a proxy for ‘Jews’ as antisemitic and Tier 1 hate speech” (World Jewish Congress, 6/9/24). Al Jazeera (10/24/24) also reported on “testimonies of routine deletion of Palestine-related posts and a deep-seated pro-Israel bias” at Meta.

Rosenberg is rightly concerned that there are too many far-right extremists promoting white nationalism and antisemitism on social media networks (Wired, 5/2/24; PBS, 8/13/24), and these corporate regimes are too tolerant of such activity on their sites. But Rosenberg manages to twist this into an argument that young people need to shut up about Gaza.

Of course, many people are upset about anti-Israel content on social media not because it leads to antisemitism, but because it’s anti-Israel: The reason for the shift in youth opinion isn’t Israel’s behavior, the argument goes, but social media’s influence. Hillary Clinton blames youth criticism of Israel on TikTok (Hollywood Reporter, 12/2/25). The Australian (12/12/25) wrote: “Young people live now on social media. And social media is an unregulated sewer of lies and filth.” The Israeli government has reportedly recruited social media personalities and public relations firms to tell its version of the story (Jerusalem Post, 10/3/25; Al Jazeera, 10/30/25).

‘Brainwashed’ into opposing sex pests

The issue of this generational divide is the center of a piece at Free Press (12/17/25) by Olivia Reingold, called “The Jewish Parents Who Raised Mamdani Voters.” For the unacquainted, Free Press was bought by Paramount (10/6/25), now controlled by oligarch David Ellison, thus turning the once-marginal publication into the closest thing the right has to the New Yorker. (The acquisition also elevated Free Press co-founder Bari Weiss, noted right-wing pundit, to CBS News editor-in-chief.)

Free Press quoted one parent in particular, Sagra Maceira de Rosen, whose bio describes her as “chair of SIO Global, an investment and advisory firm working with private equity and investment.” She said she was “horrified” that Mamdani won the election. What’s worse for her was that her grown child campaigned for him. “I fear that kids I care for—my children—are brainwashed.”

Parents looked for answers. Reingold reported:

They wondered if they should have parented differently. Did their children get enough Jewish education? Were they brainwashed by their elite private schools? Where did they go wrong?

“Maybe I failed in the sense that the kids didn’t go to Israel enough,” a 63-year-old physician in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, told me. He said his daughter, a civil rights attorney, holds anti-Zionist views and refused to vote for former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo due to his alleged sexual harassment. “It would’ve been better if they went more, just to see the lies they’re being told.”

It’s not clear if the doctor or Reingold knows what they’re saying here. Jewish kids need to 1) go to Israel to get indoctrinated and 2) stop being appalled by sexual harassment. These issues are more connected than one might think, as a Jewish Currents (4/18/18) investigation by Lilith executive editor Sarah Seltzer found widespread problems of sexual violence within Birthright, the program offering young Jews free guided trips to Israel.

Lacking ‘a capacity for critical thinking’

Another parent, Lisa Fields Lewis, lamented that her grown children liked Mamdani:

Lewis was raised by an Israeli mother; her father survived Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. She said the rise of Mamdani awakened a “generational trauma” in her. Now, she can’t shake the feeling that history is repeating itself. And kids don’t seem to realize just how dangerous Mamdani’s views are, Lewis said.

With Mamdani set to be sworn in just after midnight on January 1, Lewis doesn’t know if their relationship can return to normal any time soon. “I feel sad,” Lewis said. “I feel envious of my friends whose kids are proud Zionists, or at least have the capacity for critical thinking.”

It’s not FAIR’s job to comment on others’ parenting skills, but Lewis just told the world she thinks her children don’t have a “capacity for critical thinking”; the tension in this household might have to do with a lack of respect, rather than just differing politics. What’s really dangerous here is that the author doesn’t challenge the absurd suggestion that “Mamdani’s promise of providing free buses and righting the city’s widening income gap” is the first step in sending the Jews to the camps.

By what measure does the Free Press think Mamdani is dangerous for Jews? It pointed out that he “has consistently denied Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state,” saying instead that “Israel should exist ‘with equal rights for all’—a bar the nation already meets.”

Reingold can’t decide what she wants here: a Jewish state or a state that doesn’t discriminate.  Maintaining the former requires preventing the latter, as Palestinians that have been under Israeli control for nearly 60 years need to be denied the right to vote in Israeli elections. Jews from anywhere in the world have a “right to return” to Israel, but non-Jewish refugees from pre-1948 Palestine do not. A number of human rights groups, including an Israeli one, have found that the legal separation of peoples in Israel proper and the Occupied Territories amounts to apartheid (B’Tselem, 1/12/21; Human Rights Watch, 4/27/21).

Reingold went on, “More recently, the mayor-elect has caught flack for his controversial appointments to his transition committees, which include fringe anti-Zionist rabbis.” Again, there’s nothing here that represents antisemitism–instead, there’s inclusion of Jews. The problem is that Mamdani is close to clergy whose politics don’t align with the Weiss editorial regime. To put things into perspective, Mamdani won a third of the city’s Jewish vote (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 11/5/25)—not a majority, but not exactly a “fringe” either.

‘A problem of disobedient children’

These pieces spend a lot of ink displaying anxiety for this generational divide, but never really ask why it exists. If they did that, they might find out that while many in the older generation could indulge the fantasy that a pre-Netanyahu Israel was engaged in a peace process, when mainstream Israeli leaders paid lip service to the idea of a two-state solution, younger Jews only know a place of extreme bellicosity.

Any voter in their 20s doesn’t remember the Oslo Accords or Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands with Yasser Arafat (Conversation, 9/12/23). Instead, what they know is a country that has mostly been under the control of the right-wing Likud party and its extremist allies, an anti-democratic slide into authoritarianism (Haaretz, 10/30/25; Committee to Protect Journalists, 12/11/25), government corruption (New York Times, 11/30/25), settlement expansion (UN News, 9/29/25), alliances with the European far right (CNN, 3/26/25; Foreign Policy, 5/9/25) and several lopsided wars against Gaza.

But neither the Atlantic nor the Free Press can say this. The answer can’t be that Israel’s actions against Palestinians and its decaying political system are turning people off. No, the problem is that young people are led astray by social media and distance from real education.

“While Israel’s actions have always been structured by apartheid and ethnic cleansing, the scale and the visibility of its structural violence has been placed at the center of American political discourse,” said Benjamin Balthaser, author of Citizens of the Whole World: Anti-Zionism and the Cultures of the American Jewish Left. “Americans, not just Jews, are compelled to respond.”

He added, “That the Free Press sees this as a problem of disobedient children or a lack of Torah school is not unlike Hillary Clinton blaming outrage at Israel on TikTok videos and social media.

February 7, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster | Leave a comment

Artificial intelligence will not revive the nuclear industry

 January 25, 2026 by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/01/25/artificial-intelligence-will-not-revive-the-nuclear-industry/

On the contrary, we need renewable energy and natural intelligence, writes Stéphane Lhomme

The current boom in artificial intelligence is accompanied by a massive increase in energy and water consumption, and, according to what we are told, this phenomenon is only just beginning and will grow exponentially. 

However, far from taking measures to stop or at least slow down this phenomenon, industrial and political leaders are instead competing with announcements and decisions to support it. As a result, various countries, including France, are trying to attract data centers by promising their owners, mainly the famous GAFAM (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft), to provide them with cheap and, above all, “green” electricity. 

France is offering its nuclear power because, as everyone knows, nuclear power is “clean”… if we are willing to forget the devastation caused by uranium mines, the massive radioactive, chemical, and thermal discharges from power plants into rivers and oceans, radioactive waste, and the occasional contamination of an entire country or continent (during disasters such as Fukushima and Chernobyl). 

During the World Nuclear Energy Exhibition (WNE) held in Paris from November 4 to 6, 2025, the vast majority of the media reported the countless announcements about a supposed “return to favor of nuclear power,” which, however, is just as illusory as the “great return of nuclear power” announced in the early 2000s – already accompanied by much fanfare at the time – by the same media outlets and sometimes the same journalists, who are taking advantage of the general amnesia of our “information” societies.

Despite the efforts of the high priestess of nuclear power at the time, Ms. Lauvergeon, revered by most of the media (always the same ones!) before leading her company Areva into bankruptcy (we are still waiting for the investigations that have been ongoing for 15 years to result in a trial), there was no “great comeback.”

Producing 17.1% of the world’s electricity in 2001, nuclear power has since seen its share steadily decline to below 10% in 2020 and below 9% in 2024 (8.97% to be exact). A veritable collapse as a “return to favor.” But we would have to believe that this time, buoyed by GAFAM and their unlimited checkbooks, the nuclear industry will truly experience a golden age (or rather a plutonium age). Let’s take a look at some of the thunderous announcements made in recent months.

Last June, Google announced that it would be relying on nuclear fusion to power its data centers! Let’s just remember that for 70 years, the major nuclear powers have failed completely in this endeavor, even when they joined forces in the Iter project in Cadarache (Bouches-du-Rhône). If nuclear fusion really is what powers Google, then this search engine is bound to shut down quickly!

In fact, last October, Google fell back on a plan B: restarting the Duane Arnold nuclear power plant in Iowa, which had been shut down since 2020. Never one to be late in relaying the nuclear industry’s announcements, AFP produced a dispatch reminding readers that this was the third project of its kind.

Indeed, the restart of the Palisades nuclear power plant in Michigan has been announced for 2023. But almost no one mentioned the official report of October 2024 revealing that the reactor, which had been shut down for several years, was severely affected by corrosion.

In reality, it is highly likely that this plant will never restart, nor will the Duane Arnold or Three Mile Island plants: in the latter case, the plan is to restart reactor 1, which was shut down in 2019, and not reactor 2 (whose core melted during a serious accident in 1979), as reported by the media, which we will charitably describe as inattentive.

Another avenue for the supposed “return to favor of nuclear power” and its ability to fuel the insane consumption of AI is that of the famous SMRs, small modular reactors, which are of course touted as being “safe, easy to build, and inexpensive.” So all we had to do was think of it.

However, the 127 SMR projects identified worldwide by the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency, far from making this idea a reality, show instead a total lack of focus: many start-ups are chasing subsidies generously granted by politicians who are ignorant and, above all, terrified of being seen as dinosaurs who have missed the boat on renewal.

The SMR bubble is about to burst. In France, the main start-ups (Naarea, Newcléo, Jimmy, etc.) are in serious difficulty or have already suspended payments, and EDF’s Nuward project has been postponed indefinitely. In the US, the only project that had made any progress, NuScale, has already closed down.

After initially announcing the construction of new nuclear reactors (large or SMRs), then falling back on restarting shut-down reactors, GAFAM companies are now cautiously turning to existing facilities. In the US, for example, gas-fired power plants are being called upon. In addition, Meta (Facebook) has signed an agreement to purchase the output of the Clinton nuclear power plant (Illinois), a plant that is currently in operation: this is safer than relying on virtual or shut-down plants!

It is already clear that, wherever data centers are built, GAFAM will monopolize electricity production to the detriment of the population. This situation, which one might have thought was the stuff of science fiction, is already a reality in the US, for example in Virginia, Georgia, and Arizona, where the population is deprived of water, which is monopolized for cooling the numerous data centers built in these states, which attracted them by exempting them from taxes (again to the detriment of the population).

The same is true, for example, in Chile and already, or soon, in all countries that have had the bad idea of welcoming these famous data centers. Selfishly, we can only hope that, despite the grandstanding of the showman Macron, France will fail to attract data centers. It will then be the “winners” of this absurd race who will fall victim to GAFAM, and thus there will be electricity and water left for the needs of the French population. It should also be noted that various countries are beginning to take measures to slow down or suspend the installation of data centers.

Unfortunately, it is to be feared that nothing and no one will put a stop to the madness of AI and its senseless consumption of electricity (not to mention the “mining” of bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies, an activity that also consumes a tremendous amount of energy and water).

However, contrary to what is claimed in the numerous articles mentioned above, nuclear power will not be able to meet this demand: as demonstrated by the failures of large reactors—EPR (France) and AP1000 (USA)—as well as SMRs, the construction of nuclear power plants is far too uncertain, slow, and costly.

Moreover, according to the International Energy Agency, since 2020, 90% of new electricity generation capacity worldwide has been renewable, which is much cheaper than nuclear power and, above all, can be brought online very quickly. AI will therefore not save nuclear power; quite the contrary: once they have finished with their absurd announcements, even the GAFAM companies will turn away from it and choose realistic options. That said, while it is of course much better for electricity to be renewable rather than nuclear, one wonders where the progress will be if it is monopolized to power AI rather than meet the needs of the population.

On this subject, there is still time to cancel the senseless EPR reactor projects (even renamed EPR2 to make them seem like an improvement), which EDF is proving incapable of building and operating, and to devote the available money to realistic, decentralized energy efficiency and renewable energy projects that are supported by and for the population: Natural intelligence and renewables rather than artificial “intelligence” and nuclear power.

Stéphane Lhomme is the founder and director of Observatoire du nucléaire. This article was originally published by Observatoire du nucléaire.

January 27, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster | Leave a comment

Exposing the World Nuclear Association’s Bullshit

 5 January 2026 Noel Wauchope https://theaimn.net/the-world-nuclear-association-looks-forward-to-a-successful-2026/

From an edited transcript of World Nuclear Association Director General Sama Bilbao y León’s World Nuclear News podcast interview.

“What do you think are the main priorities for the year ahead?“

“I think that for everybody in the global nuclear industry, it is essential that we move from ambition to action, to see real projects deployed, many of them.We also need to see many final investment decisions, and see more countries moving forward with nuclear projects.”

COMMENT: Well, the nuclear industry has certainly been big on ambition. But in 2025, not so much on action. It has been bogged down with financial wrangling over the costs of new projects, such as the UK’s Hinkley Point C, and Sizewell C projects, and of the plethora of small nuclear reactor wannabe.

“Finance continues to be an important piece of the puzzle, and in more and more projects we see private investors understanding how they can contribute. We are seeing this in Poland, we saw this in the UK, and I think that we are going to see this in many other jurisdictions. We will continue to work on the supply chain.”  This year we will have our second World Nuclear Supply Chain Conference. We are really pleased that it is going to be held in Manila in the Philippines… Also, we are looking closely at India’s plans.”

“This year we will have our second World Nuclear Supply Chain Conference. We are really pleased that it is going to be held in Manila in the Philippines. The ASEAN region is moving forward with nuclear projects very, very quickly and most of the countries are growing their economies incredibly quickly, which of course translates into enormous energy demand. And many of them – Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore – they are really looking at nuclear as a key piece of the puzzle.”

COMMENT: There’s a fair bit of confusion in the Western world about who’s to pay for the setting up of a few very big nuclear reactors, of thousands of “small’ and “mini” reactors, of the security costs, and the huge decommissioning and waste disposal costs. Even government-run nuclear in Russia finds this a financial burden, while China, still pursuing some new nuclear, is investing massively in solar and wind. No wonder the World Nuclear Association is keen to sell to the “third world.”

“We are seeing the realignment of some of the laws in India, the Atomic Energy Act and also the liability laws, that are going to hopefully incentivise international cooperation, international participation in the Indian market. because India has incredible ambitions for 100 GW of new nuclear by 2047. India has great capabilities itself, but global contributions could also be fabulous for these ambitions. The changes also encourage more involvement from the Indian private sector, which could be really game-changing.”

COMMENT: India’s new law undercuts the operator’s cost of nuclear incidents while allowing foreign suppliers to walk away with no liability. This is in line with moves in the USA to weaken safety regulations.

“One of the big issues for the public is nuclear waste.”

“That is true, but I think that in 2026 we are going to see the entering into operation of the geological repository in Onkalo, Finland. I think this will be a key opportunity to show the world that the questions about what to do with nuclear waste and used nuclear fuel are not a technology problem. It is actually most often a problem of policy, politics, and political will. So I think it is great that Finland is being proactive. I think that Sweden is a minute behind, and then France is also very close by. So I think it will be a key year for that part of the fuel cycle also.

COMMENT: Not that simple. Further delay in Finnish repository licence review. A multi-million dollar dispute rages over Olkiluoto 3 – only lawyers will win. Sweden is building the world’s second nuclear waste storage site amid safety concerns. Sweden’s nuclear waste plan is a 100,000 year gamble. France’s plan to bury accumulated highly radioactive waste at Bure, 250 kilometres east of Paris, remains at an impasse.

April will see the 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident

COMMENT Doncha love the way these nuclear hypocrites turn every bad thing into a plus?

Chernobyl’s so good as a lesson. Never mind the fact that the damaged protection dome is spewing radiation out, and they can’t get rid of the toxic melded waste inside .

“It is always good to look back and make sure that we have really learned all the lessons and taken the opportunities for improvement from previous events. 2026 will also be the 15th anniversary of Fukushima. I think that the industry has been very good at reflecting on these events and extracting all the lessons to be learned.”

Fukushima’s intractable and ever mounting problem of nuclear wastes

“I think that the safety culture at a global level continues to be better than ever. I think that international collaboration has always been great in nuclear, but certainly the collaboration that ensued after Chernobyl, and certainly after Fukushima is a testament to how well the nuclear industry is collaborating. “

COMMENT. Note that here the WNA boasts that nuclear power helps action on climate change, (but later on, boasts its partnership with with fossil fuel industries)

“but they need to be put in context with the impacts of things like using fossil fuels on human health, on the environment and obviously on climate change. We really need to look at the entire life-cycle of all energy sources and to recognise that there is not one energy source that is a silver bullet for anything. I think that perhaps Fukushima’s anniversary and Chernobyl’s anniversary will be an opportunity for us as a society to become more pragmatic and realistic about the risks and opportunities of all these technologies.”

What do you think are the key planned events for the year?

“We hit the ground running at Davos at the World Economic Forum this year, from 19 January – this is perhaps the second time that nuclear energy is really going to be visible there, so we are excited about that opportunity. Immediately after Davos there is India Energy Week in Goa, which is the second-largest energy conference in the world.”

“In March, we will be at CERAWeek in Texas, a very important event where we are bringing together nuclear energy with many of these large energy users, in particular the oil and gas industry, that are really aligning themselves to best understand how nuclear can contribute to their decarbonisation and energising efforts. “

“And then, in April, we will have the World Nuclear Fuel Cycle Conference in Monaco. In May, we will be in Manila at the World Nuclear Supply Chain Conference, and World Nuclear University’s Summer Institute will be in the summer in Lyon in France. And of course we will come back together in September here in London for the World Nuclear Symposium, which will be even bigger and better than the one that we did in 2025. We really wanted to bring the nuclear and finance communities together to answer each other’s questions and demystify nuclear, so financiers recognise that nuclear projects are nothing more, nothing less, than large infrastructure projects. We are now working together with the finance community to put together a nuclear financing guide to pull together best practices and lessons learned to support financiers and nuclear developers going forward. “

COMMENT. Note that while the nuclear lobby pretends to solve climate change, in reality they’re not only in cahoots with oil and gas lobbies, but they intend to take over global climate action, as they planned for in previous COPs

 “Later in the year, there will be Africa Energy Week at the end of September in Cape Town, and Singapore International Energy Week is a great opportunity to bring together all those ASEAN countries. There will also be the World Energy Congress taking place in Saudi Arabia and also COP31 in Turkey. So if people thought that 2025 was crazy, I think it is clear that 2026 is looking like it will be just as busy.”

“So interesting times ahead…

“Definitely. This is the time. We’ve been discussing how the stars are aligning for nuclear energy and I think that we are there. The stars are definitely aligned. This is the moment where we, the global nuclear industry, really need to be proactive and active and make the most of this opportunity. We really need to work together with our governments. We need to work together definitely with the nuclear regulators, with the finance community, with large energy users, and we cannot leave behind civil society. We have seen major improvements in public acceptance and interest in nuclear, but we need to continue to be proactive to engage with civil society, to make sure that no question is left unanswered. ”

COMMENT: A lot of questions not even asked. The mind boggles. Not a mention of the now terrifying possibilities of cheap little drones targeting nuclear reactors, and nuclear waste pools. Not a mention of the fearful progress being made on smaller nuclear “tactical weapons”. Not a mention of the new Highly Enriched nuclear fuels for new generation nuclear reactors – that bring big risks of nuclear weapons proliferation. And of course, in the current energy economics – really no need for new nuclear reactors. (except to provide technical staff, academic “cover” and hidden funding for the nuclear weapons industry).

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/in-quotes-what-to-watch-out-for-in-2026

January 6, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster | Leave a comment