wastes « nuclear-news

Leaked document reveals White House nuclear waste plan

By Hannah Northey, Francisco “A.J.” Camacho E & E News,| 07/27/2026

The Trump administration is seeking to move past Yucca Mountain as the nation’s sole repository and store waste in willing states.

The White House is pushing Congress to break a decades-long impasse around the handling of nuclear waste and entice states to get on board, according to a document obtained by POLITICO.

The Trump administration is seeking changes to federal law to allow the Department of Energy to partner with states willing to store waste generated at the nation’s nuclear reactors, according to the document laying out “legislative principles.” It has been circulating on Capitol Hill and among nuclear industry leaders.

When asked about the document, a White House official said Monday that the administration “is always looking for ways to advance our civil nuclear energy sector.”

The legislative blueprint comes as President Donald Trump pushes to quadruple America’s production of nuclear power over the next 25 years, despite there being no long-term solution for the waste piling up at active and decommissioned reactors across the country………………………………………………………………………………………….(Subscribers only) https://www.eenews.net/articles/leaked-document-reveals-white-house-nuclear-waste-plan/

July 30, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Approval for VVER uranium/plutonium fuel production in Germany

VVER-440 fuel. A mixture of enriched uranium with RECYCLED URANIUM and PLUTONIUM received from the used nuclear fuel of other VVER reactors is used instead of a standard enriched uranium.

Friday, 24 July 2026,
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/approval-for-vver-fuel-production-in-germany

The Lower Saxony Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Protection, acting on behalf of the federal government, has approved an application from Framatome subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels to expand its facility in Lingen for the production of fuel for VVER-1000 reactors. The approval is subject to strict conditions.

Framatome subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels (ANF) applied in March 2022 under the Atomic Energy Act for permission to begin producing hexagonal pressurised water fuel elements under licence with TVEL, the fuel arm of Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom. The fuel elements are to be manufactured using Russian licences and Russian technology in a joint venture with TVEL for the Eastern European market. The licence application includes some changes to some manufacturing and testing equipment and the installation of some additional equipment in existing buildings to enable the manufacture of VVER fuel elements.

The federal government had already clarified in a supervisory letter to the state that, given the current assessment by federal security authorities regarding the risk of sabotage or espionage, there was no legal basis for denying the permit.

The Lower Saxony Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Protection has now announced that it has approved ANF’s application, subject to a number of conditions, as “after intensive review and inquiries, [it] had no legal grounds under the Atomic Energy Act to reject or limit the application”. The restrictions it has imposed include a general ban on entry to the facility for employees of TVEL or Rosatom, as well as persons authorised by them. Entry is only permitted in very limited cases and under the supervision of the regulatory authority.

In addition, the ministry said the hardware and software of the TVEL-licensed machines must undergo external security audits, and these machines must be data-integrated with the rest of the fuel element factory’s operational technology and information technology infrastructure. Also, the finished gadolinium fuel rods arriving from Russia must be 100% inspected for potential tampering using active and passive scanners according to the ‘four-eyes’ principle. Furthermore, ANF employees must receive regular training and awareness programmes to protect against espionage and sabotage.

Lower Saxony’s environment ministry said the approval could be revisited “if new risks are identified”, particularly in “national security”, Euractiv reported.

ANF was created in 1975 and currently employs around 400 people in Lingen. ANF fabricates fuel rods and assemblies for pressurised water reactors and boiling water reactors for customers worldwide.

In recent years, especially since the war with Ukraine began, nuclear power operators in European Union countries who had previously relied on Russian-supplied fuel have sought alternative suppliers. Nineteen VVER reactors – developed during the time of the Soviet Union and historically reliant on Russian fuel supplies – are currently in operation in the EU, including four VVER-1000 reactors in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, and 15 VVER-440 reactors in the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary and Slovakia.

Framatome has “a dual-track approach” to supplying fuel to VVER reactors in operation in the EU. In the short term, it will fabricate fuel identical to the proven design currently used by the reactors. In parallel, Framatome is developing and qualifying European sovereign fuels of its own design for VVER-440 and VVER-1000 reactors. The qualification of a new design requires several years within the framework of regulatory and usual certification practices, Framatome notes.

Framatome had planned to produce both VVER-1000 and VVER-440 fuel under licence from and as part of a joint venture with Rosatom at its subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels in Lingen. However, it was recently reported that Framatome has now decided to produce the VVER-440 fuel at its Romans-sur-Isere fuel production site in south-east France. The company expects to submit a request to the French nuclear regulator, the Autorite de Surete Nucleaire et de Radioprotection, by the end of 2026 for approval of the changes needed at the French plant for the production of VVER-440 fuel.

July 29, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | - plutonium, Germany, reprocessing, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Fukushima nuke plant struggles to clear radioactive waste debris

By TOMOYUKI SUZUKI/ Staff Writer, July 25, 2026 https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/16663961

Fifteen years after the nation’s worst nuclear accident, the upper floors of the No. 1 reactor at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant remain littered with wreckage from a hydrogen explosion.

Just clearing all the radioactive waste, a significant step toward decommissioning, remains a mountain to climb at the crippled plant, which suffered triple meltdowns.

The huge amount of debris must be cleared before the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co., proceeds with the removal of spent nuclear fuel assemblies stored in the water-filled cooling pool located on the upper portions of the No. 1 reactor building.

But the long-overdue clearance would require TEPCO to construct new interim storage facilities in a race against time to keep up with the increasing waste volume in what is likened to a “cat and mouse game.”

Experts on nuclear decommissioning say TEPCO and other stakeholders should tackle reducing the radioactive waste as an urgent priority in tandem with the greatest challenge of removing the melted nuclear fuel.

The No. 1 reactor building holds 392 spent fuel assemblies in the cooling pool, apart from the melted nuclear fuel.

A new crane installed on the upper floor is expected to load debris from the hydrogen explosion into containers for the transfer to an on-site solid waste storage facility. The clearing work began on June 22.

The hydrogen explosion at the No. 1 reactor building occurred on March 12, 2011, the day after the magnitude-9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami struck Japan’s eastern Tohoku region, resulting in the loss of power at the facility to cool the reactors.

The blast blew off the structure’s upper floors, scattering numerous pieces of the roof and the overhead crane.

Today, the No. 1 reactor building is shielded with a giant retractable cover, which measures 56 meters by 66 meters. The cover, together with a new crane, weighs about 7,900 tons, the equivalent of two Tokyo Towers.

The cover was installed in January to prevent radioactive dust from escaping into the air and rainwater from seeping inside during the spent nuclear fuel recovery, which is scheduled to begin between fiscal 2027 and 2028.

TEPCO has been conducting checks of the upper floors for potential large cracks. It has been moving some debris through a remote-controlled demolition system.

Containers holding the waste from the clearance work will be stored temporarily in a solid waste storage facility at the plant.

Known as the No. 10 storage facility, it consists of A, B and C buildings. Buildings A and B have been in use since 2024. The newest one, building C, is 50 meters by 180 meters and 20 meters in height.

Inside building C, containers are neatly stacked. Receptacles with readings of high levels of radiation are sited in the center of the building and surrounded by ones with lower readings, which serve as shields to lower air dose rates in the surrounding area.

In contrast, the grounds outdoors appeared jumbled. Trees chopped down to create space for tanks and working space for operators were left lying on some parts of the grounds while waste containers were piled up in the open.

In addition, TEPCO still relies on makeshift storage in areas along the coast that stores waste on an impermeable liner spread underground and covered with soil.

The company intends to house all the radioactive waste in the indoor facilities by fiscal 2028 to safeguard the containers from fire risks and corrosion.

Before the nuclear disaster, the nuclear plant had eight waste storage facilities. The No. 9 and No. 10 facilities were added after the 2011 accident. Construction of the No. 11 facility is underway for the planned opening for May 2028.

If everything goes as planned, the nuclear plant’s capacity for waste storage would rise to 216,000 cubic meters by the end of fiscal 2028, sufficient for an estimated 207,000 cubic meters of waste to be produced by the time.

It is clear, however, that TEPCO may need additional storage space. The company is considering constructing a No. 12 facility, given that the plant’s storage capacity is projected to be full by fiscal 2035.

The entire situation is even more concerning as little progress has been made in the discussion of the final disposal of the vast amount of radioactive waste.

Moreover, waste produced from the treatment of contaminated water, such as slurry and sorbents, is not included in the materials bound for these storage facilities.

TEPCO will transport parts of such waste into the No. 1 large-scale waste storage facility during the current fiscal year. The storage area, which measures 23 meters by 186 meters and 17 meters in height, underwent seismic retrofitting recently and is ready for use.

The big question is the total amount of radioactive waste that will be generated.

The utility estimates that there will be around 800,000 cubic meters of waste by the end of fiscal 2036. But it has not provided a figure for the overall amount during the decommissioning process.

An Atomic Energy Society of Japan committee advising on the decommissioning of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant estimates there will be about 5.6 million cubic meters of radioactive waste–equivalent to 4.5 Tokyo Domes–unless reduction measures are taken.

TEPCO plans to sort waste by radiation level for interim storage. Of the projected 800,000 cubic meters of waste, 70 percent is eligible to be held in solid waste storage facilities.

While the company aims to halve the volume of this waste, it is set to recycle the remaining 30 percent.

Scrap metal or concrete waste with a dose of 0.005 millisievert per hour or more will be cut or partially crushed to reduce the size. For waste with a dose of less than 0.005 millisievert per hour, TEPCO will consider having it melted for recycling.

But the facility for melting metal will likely be completed between fiscal 2032 and 2034, three years behind schedule, due to a design review.

The amount of melted nuclear fuel, or fuel debris, is estimated at 880 tons at the No. 1 through No. 3 reactors where the meltdowns occurred.

TEPCO plans to eventually retrieve all the fuel debris, but it has yet to determine the final disposal method.

Satoshi Yanagihara, a guest professor for nuclear decommissioning at the University of Fukui, called on TEPCO to more aggressively reduce the waste volume.

“Since utilities’ primary focus is on operating power plants, they tend to invest less in the management of nuclear waste in terms of money and human resources,” he said. “Recovering melted fuel is certainly a daunting challenge, but TEPCO should also grapple with how to lessen the waste volume simultaneously.”

July 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Fukushima continuing, Reference, wastes | Leave a comment

Plan to Bring Failed Japanese Fast Breeder Reactor’s Contaminated Sodium to Workington

Marianne Birkby, Jul 24, 2026, https://radiationfreelakeland.substack.com/p/plan-to-bring-failed-japanese-fast

Japan is looking to get shot of nuclear waste from its failed experimental “fast breeder” Monju reactor and Workington’s MP along with Cumberland Council is only too happy to help. “Subject to the necessary planning and regulatory permissions, Cavendish Nuclear, together with its delivery partner Amentum, will be constructing a new facility at the port. This development is part of their wider project to support the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) with decommissioning of the Monju Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR), in Fukui Prefecture, Japan.”

Monju Fast Breeder Reactor was a failed £7.2bn experiment in creating a nuclear plant that would burn its own spent fuel (this is what George Monbiot and others have been advocating in their much vaunted nuclear enthusiasm).

It was only operational for 250 days before it was decommissioned. Japan has long since pulled the plug on Monju, an experimental fast breeder nuclear reactor that was plagued by accidents, cover-ups and cost overruns.

Now our nuclear obsessed Cumberland Council and MP are fizzingly saying that Japan’s failure will be Workington’s gain as they scramble to accept the unacceptable, radioactively contaminated sodium coolant aka nuclear waste from yet another failed nuclear experiment and this time its not even our own. Have they stopped to ask why Japan does not want to have the wonderful opportunity of cleaning up this radioactive mess? It has been sitting around long enough as construction started on Monju in 1986 with the reactor achieving criticality in April 1994. The reactor has been inoperative for most of the time since it was originally built. The main product – an expensive toxic mess.

Below is a description of just one of the accidents at Monju in its short operating life

On December 8, 1995, a prototype fast breeder reactor, Monju, located in Tsuruga City, 350km west of Tokyo, was operating at 40% power Refer to JNC’s detailed technical explanation in English of Monju and the accident at http://www.jnc.go.jp/zmonju/mjweb/index.htm.. The Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp (PNC), a government controlled organization, operated this reactor. At 19:47 high temperature liquid sodium coolant at one of the three secondary heat exchangers started leaking through a broken thermometer sheath (designed by IH Company, OD: 10mm, ID: 4mm, Length: 150mm) on the piping and it ignited on contact with air. As shown in Fig. 1, the primary heat exchangers are designed to take heat out of the core of the reactor to the secondary heat exchangers, which then transfer the heat to steam generators for power. Because of this design, it was a simple fire caused by the leakage of chemically reactive but non-radioactive sodium coolant. But due to the delay in shutting down of the reactor, 640kg of the sodium leaked in 3 hours and caused some unexpected damage by the fire and chemical reactions to the surrounding structure

Here on original – excellent diagrams and explanation of the accident

The PNC had been always asked by neighbors as well as anti-nuclear organizations whether their nuclear reactors are absolutely safe. They felt constrained to reply “yes” under the circumstances. Under these conditions, the initial cover up of hiding the videotapes taken at the site and of showing them after editing and the PNC’s delay (of about one hour) in informing the neighboring community agencies of the accident ignited a fierce protest by the public.

This example teaches the students following lessons:

Influence of quality of engineering works

The small design errors in the cheap component which may come from lack of competence and care of designers in the IH Company and JNC as the user, caused the accident.

The cover up of the video tapes and delay in informing others of the accident

The cover up decision was made by managers including ex-engineers. When I asked our students in the class if they do the same under the situations, one-third of them said they might although they think it is a very stupid act. The delay of informing the accidents is mainly due to lack of the system oversight and to the bureaucracy within the JNC organization. These caused loss of public trust in general and have delayed the several tens of billion dollar project at least 6 years, although the government wants to resume the project as soon as possible.

Importance of professional work in accidents

The manuals to handle this kind of the accident were not made although they had some for other types of sodium coolant leakage. Manuals are necessary and useful especially in simple operation. But in accidents like this, which no one had expected and which are generally much more complex than those anticipated in manuals, professional judgments are much more important and necessary. In this case, the air conditioners, which had not been shut down, continued to supply fresh air to the fire.

Learning from past experience
The earlier experimental fast breeder reactor, Joyo, which was designed based on practical experiences by the engineers of previous generation, had not had any serious sodium leak accident for 18 years since its start of the operation in 1977. Most of these engineers, however, were retired or moved to other job as time passed. New generation of engineers might have thought it easy to handle. This is the problem of transferring and learning engineering experience and skills between generations.

Responsibility of managers (ex-engineers) to the public

Engineers know “nothing is absolutely safe”. But sometimes political pressure forces managers to say yes to the public on the absolute safety question. But the more realistic question form the public is that the engineers make a maximum professional effort to eliminate the safety hazard. Engineers should have realized the responsibility of clarifying the situation. After a long discussion on the safety including the following two accidents, the Committee of the Nuclear Safety Commission in Japan formally declared in “The White Paper 2000 on Safety of Nuclear Energy (in Japanese)” approved on March 27, 2001 that “none can say nuclear energy is absolutely safe”.

July 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Demolition of Germany’s Stade reactor building progresses

Thursday, 23 July 2026, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/in-pictures-demolition-of-stade-reactor-building-progresses

The demolition of the reactor building at the decommissioned Stade nuclear power plant in Lower Saxony, Germany, has been under way since the end of March this year and is expected to be completed by the end of the year.

Stade was the first power plant in Germany to be decommissioned after the country announced a nuclear phase-out policy in 2003. The 640 MWe pressurised water reactor began operating in 1972. The plant operated at a reduced capacity from 2003 until the end of 2005, prior to its shutdown. Dismantling of the power plant began in October 2005. Conventional demolition of individual buildings on the power plant site started in 2023.

The first phase of the building dismantling was completed in spring 2024. It involved the demolition of 17 buildings with a total volume of about 177,000 cubic metres – including the administration building, the workshop and operations building, the emergency diesel generator building, the switchgear building, and finally the engine house. This work laid the foundation for the dismantling of the remaining central building complex. Aspects such as safety, environmental protection, and sustainability through material recycling were given top priority.

The demolition of the reactor building is part of Phase II of the conventional dismantling process and simultaneously marks the beginning of the crucial final phase of the overall project.

On 31 March this year, the demolition of the reactor building began. To weaken the material, a steel ball weighing about four tonnes was first be used to strike the approximately 80-centimetre-thick concrete shell. Following this, the auxiliary buildings were completely demolished before the further demolition of the reactor building began at the beginning of June. This involved the use of, among other things, a 16-tonne hydraulic shear and a 180-tonne cable excavator. The plan is to completely dismantle the reactor building by the end of this year.

In preparation for the demolition, extensive hazardous material remediation of the auxiliary building began in May 2025. This was followed in December by the remediation of the reactor building and the containment vessel within it. For this, the necessary infrastructure was first established both inside and outside the reactor building. This included, in particular, the erection of a complex facade scaffold with stair towers and elevators. As the first externally visible measure immediately before the impending demolition of the reactor building, the external lifting platform, which previously also served for the removal of CASTOR used fuel storage casks and steam generators, was demolished on 6 March.

“With the start of demolition work on the reactor building, we have reached the final technical milestone we have been working towards for a long time,” plant manager Marco Albers said in March. “The entire team has put enormous care into preparing the necessary documentation, and I am very pleased that the review by the independent expert and the approval of the Lower Saxony Ministry for the Environment have now been granted. Now, with the help of our partner, the Freimuth company, we can implement what is probably the most demanding step in the conventional demolition of the Stade plant in a technically sound and safe manner.”

Phases II (involving five building complexes) and III (ten building complexes) have been running in parallel since 2023. The site is scheduled to be released from nuclear regulatory oversight in autumn 2027. This will make the Stade nuclear power plant the first commercially operated pressurised water reactor in Germany to be completely dismantled.

Germany’s nuclear phase-out

Following the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in Japan in March 2011, the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel decided it would phase out its use of nuclear power by the end of 2022 at the latest. Prior to the accident, Germany was obtaining around one-quarter of its electricity from nuclear power.

In August 2011, the 13th amendment of the Nuclear Power Act came into effect, which underlined the political will to phase out nuclear power in Germany. As a result, eight units were closed down immediately: Biblis A and B, Brunsbüttel, Isar 1, Krümmel, Neckarwestheim 1, Phillipsburg 1 and Unterweser.

The Brokdorf, Grohnde and Gundremmingen C plants were permanently shut down at the end of December 2021. The country’s final three units – Emsland, Isar 2 and Neckarwestheim 2 – shut down in April 2023. All the units are now at various stages of decommissioning.

July 27, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | decommission reactor, Germany | Leave a comment

Uncertainty over West Cumbria nuclear waste plan continues

22nd July, By Gareth Cavanagh, Data Reporter

CLARITY on the future of nuclear waste currently stored at Sellafield is eagerly awaited from West Cumbria to Westminster.

The cost of the Geological Disposal
Facility could soar to £54bn and the timeline for depositing legacy waste
into the GDF could be 2150. The UK’s grand ambition to deploy fleets of
SMRs is critically undermined by the uncertainty over disposal of nuclear
waste.

Carlisle News & Star 22nd July 2026, https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/26289564.uncertainty-west-cumbria-nuclear-waste-plan-continues/

July 26, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Uranium-Chomping Bacteria Found In Bowels Of Mine That Once Supplied Soviet Nuclear Weapons

Could these mine-dwelling microbes be used to clear up radioactive junk?

Tom Hale, IFL SCIENCE, 15 July 26

In the heady days of the Cold War, the USSR extracted vast amounts of uranium from a mine in East Germany, much of it destined for nuclear warheads. Unbeknownst to the bigwigs back in Moscow, strange and potentially useful microbes were quietly lurking in the mine’s backwaters.

Those microbes were discovered in untreated water flowing from the Wismut GmbH Schlema-Alberoda mine in Saxony, Germany. Between 1946 and 1990, when Germany reunified, around 80,000 tons of uranium were extracted from the site, one of the largest uranium ore deposits in the world.

Strange things live in the mine

Microbiologists at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf (HZDR) recently collected water samples from an inlet trail from the mine and found that they were teeming with anaerobic bacteria.

Among them were some that can break down metals, like Geobacter and Shewanella, others that run on sulfur, like Desulfovibrio, and a supporting cast of microbes that ferment and break down nitrogen compounds, including Clostridium and Pseudomonas.

Just as their previous experiments had hinted, the team found this gang of bacteria was able to utilize the highly radioactive uranium, as long as they had glycerol, a basic building block of plant and animal fats, to feed on.

“There are bacteria that can metabolically utilize the heavy metal, uranium, which is toxic for humans,” Evelyn Krawczyk-Bärsch at HZDR’s Terrestrial Microbiology research group, and co-author of the study, said in a statement.

“Our group’s investigations had already revealed that bacteria can use uranium dissolved in water for their metabolism when they have access to glycerol as a food source,” she added.

The researchers decided to dig deeper into how this was happening and whether the bacteria could be used as a handy tool to clear up radioactive contamination.

They set up an experiment in the lab in which the bacteria were placed in conditions very similar to their natural low-oxygen environment deep below the uranium mine. After being left for 130 days, just 5 percent of the uranium dissolved in the water remained in the samples.

A really weird chemical state

Using advanced microscopic and spectroscopic techniques, the researchers found the bacteria had incorporated the uranium into their cell walls. …………………………………………………………………………………………..

Clean up Chornobyl?

All of this raises the tantalizing possibility of using these bacteria to clean up uranium and other radioactive junk. Could they, for instance, be introduced into the contaminated waters of Chornobyl to lock its loose uranium into a stable, harmless form?

Whether that’s a genuine possibility or just wishful thinking remains to be seen, but it’s a pretty intriguing idea either way.

The new study is published in the journal Nature Communications. https://www.iflscience.com/uranium-chomping-bacteria-found-in-bowels-of-mine-that-once-supplied-soviet-nuclear-weapons-84123

July 22, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Germany, wastes | Leave a comment

Ukraine draft law on Chernobyl decommissioning to 2036 approved

World Nuclear News 10th July 2026, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/ukraine-draft-law-extends-chernobyl-decommissioning

The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine has approved a draft law which extends to 2036 the funding for the State Programme for the Decommissioning of the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant and the Transformation of the Shelter Object into an Environmentally Safe System.

The funding allocated for the programme to 2036 amounts to UAH50.8 billion (USD1.1 billion), of which UAH45.6 billion is to be financed via the state budget and UAH5.2 billion from “international technical assistance”.

According to the Ministry of Energy, the programme required updating following the completion of the shutdown and preparatory phases of the Chernobyl decommissioning process “to reflect current challenges” including additional measures to tackle the damage caused during the war by the month-long Russian occupation in 2022 and by a drone strike last year to the New Safe Confinement protective arch, “and the actual progress of projects” at the site.

“The next stage involves the direct decommissioning of the plant and the continued transformation of the Shelter Object into an environmentally safe system,” a ministry statement said.

“Extending the programme will ensure the uninterrupted continuation of the Chornobyl NPP decommissioning process, support Ukraine’s international commitments in the field of nuclear safety, and facilitate the mobilisation of international technical and financial assistance for projects at the plant,” the ministry said. (Chornobyl is Ukraine’s preferred spelling). The draft law will now go to the Ukrainian parliament for consideration.

July 17, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | decommission reactor, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Canada’s Federal Government in Disarray Over Nuclear Waste Project Assessment .

We the Nuclear Free North is an alliance of people and groups opposing a Deep Geological Repository for nuclear waste in Northern Ontario. We oppose the transport, burial and abandonment of this radioactive waste in our northern watersheds.

Thunder Bay – Intervenors in the federal assessment of a nuclear waste transportation and burial plan are saying that the federal government is in disarray over the assessment of nuclear projects. This follows the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada’s release, last week, of the Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines for the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO’s) proposed deep geological repository for nuclear fuel waste. The NWMO plan incudes the transportation, processing, burial and abandonment of all of Canada’s high-level nuclear waste in an underground repository proposed for a site between Ignace and Dryden in northwestern Ontario.

The Impact Assessment Agency posted the Guidelines to a public registry on July 3^rd, following a 30-day comment period in April. The same day, a Notice of Commencement was issued, signaling the start of the assessment statement phase of the multi-year process. In this phase, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization must prepare an Impact Statement and supporting documents to meet the requirements set out in the Guidelines.

“Overall, the guidelines set out a reasonable set of requirements. We were pleased to see that the Agency rejected NWMO’s pitch that long-distance transportation and long-term safety of the project should be excluded – those are fundamentally important issues – but we are disappointed that NWMO will not be required to present alternatives to the project,” commented Wendy O’Connor, a volunteer with We the Nuclear Free North.

The assertion that the federal government is in disarray stems from the series of overlapping and – in some respects – contradictory messages and announcements issued by them in recent months related to the assessment of nuclear projects.

In May, the federal government released a discussion paper proposing that the impact assessment of nuclear projects be handed over to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), rather than conducted by the independent Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. The CNSC is the licensing body for nuclear facilities and is described by both academics and industry observers as a “captured regulator”. CNSC is led by nuclear industry insiders and has never refused a licence application since its inception.

In June, the federal government announced that it would potentially designate the NWMO’s Deep Geological Repository (DGR) as a “Project of National Interest” under the Building Canada Act. Such a designation would mean guaranteed approval of the DGR, even in the absence of evidence to support the safety of the project. The announcement defined the implications for the DGR project as including “streamlining” of the review and “issuing a document outlining the conditions under which the project may proceed.” According to the federal government, listing the DGR as a “Project of National Interest” would result in “shifting Canada’s regulatory focus from ‘whether’ the project should proceed to ‘how’ it will proceed.”

In July, the federal Impact Assessment Agency issued a Notice of Commencement of a full impact assessment of the NWMO’s proposed deep geological repository to be delivered by the Impact Assessment Agency.

“While the Guidelines are imperfect, they do provide at least a fighting chance of the public and Indigenous peoples being able to contribute to a thorough assessment of the NWMO’s project, and to have the NWMO’s proposal tested in front of a (hopefully) impartial hearing panel”, said Brennain Lloyd, project coordinator with Northwatch.

“This is a massive and unprecedented project. The risks will be widespread – along the transportation route, in the vicinity of the repository, and downstream from the site – and long-lasting. These radioactive wastes remain significantly dangerous for a million years. Let’s not rush to any unsupported conclusions about the project’s safety”, added Charles Faust, speaking on behalf of Nuclear Free Thunder Bay.

The comment period on the May discussion paper closes on July 22^nd. The federal government is expected to decide by this fall whether the NWMO project is to be designated as a “Project of National Interest”, which would circumvent the impact assessment process. The NWMO is required to provide the Impact Assessment Agency with a workplan for the development of their Impact Statement by the first week of October.

Contacts:
Brennain Lloyd, 705-493-9650, brennain@northwatch.org
Charles Faust, 807-633-0202, cfaust@tbaytel.net
Wendy O’Connor, 807-358-6711, wendywoodswalker@rocketmail.com

July 15, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan begins 21st release of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater into ocean

TOKYO, July 6 (Xinhua) Zhang Kaiwei, Liang Jun)– https://en.people.cn/n3/2026/0706/c90000-20474742.html

Japan on Monday began a new round of discharge of nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea, marking the 21st such release since the controversial operation began in 2023.

The discharge started at 11:41 a.m. local time. According to the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO), the latest round, scheduled to continue through July 24, will release about 7,800 tonnes of wastewater into the ocean, containing approximately 1.3 trillion becquerels of radioactive tritium.

Struck by a 9-magnitude earthquake and the ensuing tsunami on March 11, 2011, the Fukushima nuclear plant suffered core meltdowns that released radiation, resulting in a level-7 nuclear accident, the highest on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale.

Despite concerns and opposition from the international community, Japan unilaterally launched the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi plant into the ocean in August 2023. So far, TEPCO has completed 20 rounds of discharges, and around 157,000 tonnes of wastewater have been released into the sea.

July 8, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Fukushima continuing, wastes | Leave a comment

Nuclear Waste Transportation and Burial Plan Could be “Pre-Approved

3 July 26, https://nuclearwastewatch.weebly.com/

NUCLEAR WASTE ACTION ALERT! On June 24th three federal Ministers lined up to announce that it had referred three projects to the Major Project Office to consider the potential “listing” of the NWMO DGR under the Build Canada Act (aka Bill C-5). That’s a bit cryptic, but what it means is that these projects – if listed – would in essence be pre-approved. As the Minsters’ statement put it, this would mean “shifting Canada’s regulatory focus from ‘whether’ … to ‘how.”

Shockingly, one of these projects is the extremely controversial plan to transport, process, bury and abandon all of Canada’s high-level nuclear waste at the Revell site in northwestern Ontario. The project is the subject of broad opposition and is in the early stage of an impact assessment. It’s unprecedented – there are no other operating deep geological repositories for nuclear fuel waste anywhere in the world – and the plan is still largely conceptual, with many parts of the operation not yet designed. If ever there was a project that needs a rigorous review it is this one. The plan includes 2-3 trucks per day hauling the waste for thousands of kilometres and radioactive waste that will remain hazardous for one million years. Does this sound like a project that should be handed over to the rubber-stamp department?

The federal government is not inviting public comment. Take one minute to send your message today. Go to tinyurl.com/MessageMPs.

The Nuclear Fist: Five Federal Initiatives Pushing and Promoting Nuclear Power
There are currently five federal nuclear related initiatives / announcements: “Getting Major Projects Built in Canada – Discussion Paper on Proposed Legislative, Regulatory, and Policy Reforms” announced May 8th with the deadline now extended to July 22; the electricity strategy “Powering Canada Strong: A National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy” which was announced May 14 with comment invited but no deadline; the Standing Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment electrification study with the deadline – and the study – now extended to mid-September; the Nuclear Energy Strategy for Canada announced June 22 with no comment invited and so no deadline for comment, and the June 24 announcement of the potential “listing” of the NWMO DGR under the Build Canada Act (aka Bill C-5), also no public comment period.

The federal government has unleashed a “discussion paper” outlining the next rush to dismantle what remains of environmental assessment. Top target: independent assessment of nuclear projects, which the paper proposes would be handed over to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The deadline for comment has been extended to July 22. It’s expected that new legislation will follow quickly. Read more HERE.

July 7, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment

Anishinabek Nation stands united in unequivocal opposition to the transportation of nuclear waste through the entire Anishinabek Nation territory.

ANISHINABEK NATION TERRITORY (July 1, 2026) – The Anishinabek Nation Grand Council Chief shares a statement as the Nation prepares to celebrate Canada Day.

“We wish you a Happy Canada Day!

Anishinabek Nation statement on Canada Day

ANISHINABEK NATION TERRITORY (July 1, 2026) – The Anishinabek Nation Grand Council Chief shares a statement as the Nation prepares to celebrate Canada Day. https://anishinabeknews.ca/2026/07/anishinabek-nation-statement-on-canada-day/

“We wish you a Happy Canada Day! We celebrate the diversity, cultures, and contributions of this Nation with pride and encourage others to join in celebration. However, we also encourage citizens of this Nation to take the time to understand that this land you have come to know as Canada has a colourful past with a legacy that continues to negatively affect the Original People of this land. While some parts of the country are celebrating, First Nations people are contemplating the Government of Canada’s plans for a toxic nuclear waste dump in a small town in Northwestern Ontario within the Treaty 3 territory.

The Anishinabek Nation stands united in unequivocal opposition to the transportation of nuclear waste through the entire Anishinabek Nation territory from southern Ontario to the proposed burial of nuclear waste in the Township of Ignace, Ontario, and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation. While Prime Minister Carney claims, ‘We are defending and building together, the true North, strong and free’, there is a stark contrast between words and actions, and rightsholders and citizens of this land are taking note. Instead of protecting our homeland, the plan is to pollute it with toxic nuclear waste, far from the populations that utilize and benefit from nuclear energy produced in the south.

Imagine for a moment that the federal and provincial governments proposed nuclear waste in a DGR in Southern Ontario, the most densely populated heart of the country. Would you be so eager to impose such a dangerous burden on those communities that have no choice but to live with the risk? Would there be silence or dismissiveness? Or would Canadians stand up and demand meaningful engagement, transparency, and respect for their health and environment?

magine for a moment that the federal and provincial governments proposed nuclear waste in a DGR in Southern Ontario, the most densely populated heart of the country. Would you be so eager to impose such a dangerous burden on those communities that have no choice but to live with the risk? Would there be silence or dismissiveness? Or would Canadians stand up and demand meaningful engagement, transparency, and respect for their health and environment?

As stated in Article 29 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, “States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of Indigenous Peoples without their free, prior and informed consent,” and we do not consent to the transportation of this nuclear waste in our territory and member First Nations.

We call on the federal government to reconsider its pursuit of a dangerous, toxic nuclear waste dump that threatens our future generations, and to cease these reckless plans immediately. We ask that you respect the treaty relationship, our inherent rights, and our sovereignty. Listen to our voices and prioritize safe and environmentally sound solutions that do not put any communities or the environment at risk. It is painfully clear that the transportation and disposal of hazardous nuclear waste bring risks, uncertainty, and consequences for all.

July 4, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, indigenous issues, wastes | Leave a comment

National interest in nuclear site gets mixed reaction

Organizations opposing the waste site say they’re worried, should the repository be deemed a project of national interest, that oversight would weaken.

“Our major concern would be the approval process being fast-tracked,”

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization says such a designation would not weaken oversight, opponents of the deep geological repository don’t agree

Matt Prokopchuk, Jun 24, 2026

IGNACE — The potential for changing how a proposed nuclear waste facility is studied has set off a flurry of reactions across the region.

On Wednesday, the federal government announced three initiatives were being referred to its Major Projects Office, which will consider whether to name them projects of national interest under the Building Canada Act. That designation is designed to alter the processes that determine whether projects get approved, with the goal of speeding up that decision.

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s proposed deep geological repository for high-level used fuel near Revell Lake was one of the initiatives Ottawa announced was up for consideration.

“The deep geological repository for used nuclear fuel is nationally significant infrastructure that supports clean growth, advances reconciliation, delivers long term economic benefits and strengthens Canada’s energy security and resilience,” the Nuclear Waste Management Organization said in an emailed statement.

The NWMO is a government-mandated not-for-profit funded by the nuclear industry tasked with the long-term management of the country’s nuclear waste. It selected the Revell Lake-area site in 2024.

The project is currently undergoing a multi-phase environmental impact assessment and regulatory review by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. They have been tasked with deciding whether to green-light the proposed facility through a scheduled years-long study.

Organizations opposing the waste site say they’re worried, should the repository be deemed a project of national interest, that oversight would weaken.

“Our major concern would be the approval process being fast-tracked,” said Wendy O’Connor, a volunteer with We the Nuclear Free North, a coalition of organizations and residents opposing the transportation and storing of nuclear waste in northern Ontario. “What we’ve been relying on so far is the impact assessment office and an impact assessment. And we’ve been assured that it was going to be a full impact assessment, which was a win for us.”

“Now, that is all potentially taken apart if this referral to the major projects office actually does go through.”

According to a federal government media release, consultations about whether to list the project will “begin over the coming weeks,” with a decision expected in the fall.

Newswatch has requested comment from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada about what listing the deep geological repository under the Building Canada Act would mean to the ongoing review the agency is doing.

Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation Chief Clayton Wetelainen told Newswatch, should the project receive the “national interest” designation from the Major Projects Office, the First Nation’s independent parallel approvals process won’t be affected. Wabigoon Lake is one of two host communities for the repository, along with Ignace.

“That’s why we, in our agreement to host it, to look at it, is that we have our own independent sovereign regulatory approval process that will mitigate if there’s anything that Wabigoon Lake sees that is going to be problematic,” he said.

The NWMO, in its statement, argued making the project one of national significance “would not reduce the scope, rigour or independence of the regulatory decision-making process.”

Opponents say they’re not convinced, adding that the public consultation phases of the ongoing impact assessment have garnered hundreds of comments, with many expressing concern or outright opposition.

“The risks are monumental and Canadians deserve a thorough examination of the risks in a full impact assessment,” O’Connor said.

“That is what we continue to press for and we were sure that was going to happen and now this (announcement) puts it in question again.”

The Northwestern Ontario Municipal Association, which represents 37 municipalities across the region, including Ignace, said in a media release that it and its sister organization in the northeast “welcome” the referral, but “stress that the project must continue through a rigorous regulatory, environmental, scientific, and Indigenous consultation process before any final decisions are made.”

The organizations added that similar consideration should also be given to the Trans-Canada Highway through the north — particularly with the prospect of hundreds of trucks of nuclear waste travelling each year on Highways 11 and 17.

“Should the deep geological repository ultimately proceed, transportation associated with the project could occur on northern Ontario highways within the coming decades,” NOMA’s media release said.

“Preparing for that future requires a highway system that is safe, reliable, resilient and capable of supporting nationally significant projects.”

In Wabigoon Lake, Wetelainen said the time to make a decision on a nuclear waste site is now.

“It’s a problem today and it’s been a problem yesterday,” he said. “The critical voices and the people who are supportive of it, are going through some times.”

July 4, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment

CORWM visits Sizewell A and Sizewell B, -92% of pond low level waste is diverted to landfill

Members of CoRWM visited Sizewell A and Sizewell B to examine interim
storage arrangements for intermediate level waste and spent nuclear fuel.

The visit, held on Thursday 26 February, was arranged to inform a study on
interim storage being undertaken by CoRWM Sub-Group 6 (Waste, Spent Fuel
and Nuclear Materials Inventory Management).

Sub-Group 6 members Pete
Bryant, Derek Lacey, Barry Lennox, and Simon Webb were joined by CoRWM
member Mark Kirkbride. The study will report on current and future interim
storage requirements for spent nuclear fuel and intermediate level waste
(ILW), considering the UK nuclear legacy, the existing operational fleet
and new build.

At Sizewell A, now in the early stages of decommissioning
following de-fuelling between 2006 and 2014, members reviewed progress in
the retrieval and conditioning of ILW, including material from the ponds.
They discussed arrangements for transferring ILW, including by rail, to the
Bradwell Interim Store, which is designed to accommodate waste from
Bradwell, Sizewell A and Dungeness until reactor dismantling begins.

Members noted the achievement of diverting approximately 92% of pond low
level waste from the Low-Level Waste Repository (LLWR) to permitted
landfill sites. This helps preserve capacity at the LLWR.

CoRWM 26th June 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/corwm-visits-sizewell-a-and-sizewell-b

June 29, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Finland buried nuclear waste in copper canisters 430 meters down, but the metal may not survive as long as the promise.

Every nuclear country has the same uncomfortable problem. ……………………….. spent fuel remains dangerous for time periods that are hard to grasp…….its most important results will arrive long after today’s engineers, regulators, and politicians are gone. That is not comforting, exactly, but it is the truth.

By Indux, June 23, 2026, https://www.vozpopuli.com/indux/en/finland-buried-nuclear-waste-in-copper-canisters-430-meters-down-but-the-metal-may-not-survive-as-long-as-the-promise/6314/

Finland is close to doing something no country has fully done before. At Olkiluoto island, Posiva Oy has built Onkalo, a deep underground repository meant to hold spent nuclear fuel far below everyday life, traffic, homes, schools, and the electric bills that come with nuclear power.

The bold part is not just the depth, it is the bet. The fuel will be sealed in copper-and-iron canisters, wrapped in bentonite clay, and placed about 1,300 to 1,400 feet underground in bedrock that is roughly 1.9 billion years old.

Some scientists still question how long the copper canisters will really last, but Finland’s plan leans on a bigger idea: no single barrier is supposed to carry eternity alone.

A world-first nuclear waste plan

Posiva submitted its operating license application at the end of 2021 for an encapsulation plant and final disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel. The Finnish government said the planned license period runs from March 2024 to the end of 2070, with the repository located in bedrock at a depth of about 400 to 430 meters.

That timeline has not gone as smoothly as planned. Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, known as STUK, says its review has been extended and that it now has additional time until the end of June 2026, if possible, to submit its statement. The government can only grant the operating license if STUK supports it.

What goes inside the rock

The waste is not simply lowered into a tunnel and forgotten. Posiva’s disposal canister has a cast iron inner structure that holds the fuel elements, while the copper shell works mainly as a corrosion barrier. The copper shell is about 2 inches thick, and the lid is welded shut to keep groundwater away from the fuel.

In practical terms, it is a layered defense. First comes the fuel itself, then the iron insert, then copper, then clay, then rock, then the deep groundwater conditions around it. That is why the project is not just a story about a metal container, it is a geology story.

Why copper is controversial

Copper was chosen because it is expected to corrode very slowly in the oxygen-poor conditions deep underground. For the most part, that remains the basis of the KBS-3 concept used by Posiva and Sweden’s SKB.

Not everyone is convinced, however. A long-running scientific debate has focused on whether copper can corrode even in oxygen-free water. A 2023 assessment of canister degradation noted that anoxic copper corrosion and localized sulphide corrosion were among the most debated mechanisms reviewed by Swedish safety experts.

That does not mean the canisters are expected to fail tomorrow. It means the safety case has to survive tough questions. And with nuclear waste, “tough” means thinking beyond normal human planning, past elections, past companies, and past the lifespan of every building we know.

The rock is doing the heavy lifting

So why keep building if the copper debate is still alive? Because the Finnish design does not rely only on copper.

Posiva says geological disposal in Finland means placing the waste in crystalline bedrock, which makes up most of Finnish bedrock and is among the oldest in the world. The company also says deposition holes are drilled in solid rock zones where water seepage through cracks is as small as possible.

That ancient rock is the quiet star of the whole project. It has already been through immense geological time, ice sheets, and environmental change. The logic is simple enough to understand, even if the engineering is anything but simple: put the waste where the world changes slowly.

Licensing is still the near-term test

Onkalo may be physically close to operation, but the paperwork still matters. STUK says the review is close to completion, but it has been delayed by deficiencies in Posiva’s application documentation, updates tied to plant changes, and remaining uncertainties in the long-term safety case.

That is not a minor detail. The first real loading of spent fuel would mark a historic moment for nuclear energy, but regulators are still checking whether the full system is ready. Empty and test runs can prove a lot, but radioactive waste proves more.

Why this matters beyond Finland

Every nuclear country has the same uncomfortable problem. Reactors can produce large amounts of steady electricity with low carbon emissions, but spent fuel remains dangerous for time periods that are hard to grasp.

Finland’s answer may not fit everywhere. The United States, France, Germany, Japan, Canada, and the United Kingdom all have different rocks, politics, and public trust problems. You cannot just copy and paste a 1.9-billion-year-old Finnish bedrock system into another country.

Still, Onkalo is being watched closely because it turns decades of theory into a real facility. If it works as intended, it gives nuclear nations a serious example. If unexpected corrosion or groundwater behavior shows up later, that will matter, too.

A bet measured in centuries

The strange thing about Onkalo is that its most important results will arrive long after today’s engineers, regulators, and politicians are gone. That is not comforting, exactly, but it is the truth.

For now, Finland’s bet is clear. Copper may be debated, clay may shift, and regulators may keep asking questions, but the rock beneath Olkiluoto is the anchor of the plan. In the end, the country is asking ancient stone to help solve one of the most modern problems humans have created.

The official statement was published on STUK.

June 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Finland, wastes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »