CNN Shared A Glimpse Of Just How Bad Everything Has Become For Ukraine

The ideal solution for Kiev would be to reach a ceasefire for facilitating its voluntary withdrawal from part of Donbass (ex: Pokrovsk’s surroundings) in parallel with pulling out of Kursk, which are terms that Russia might entertain since they’d advance some of its political and military goals.
Andrew Korybko, Sep 09, 2024, https://korybko.substack.com/p/cnn-shared-a-glimpse-of-just-how
Outgunned and outnumbered, Ukraine’s military is struggling with low morale and desertion
By Ivana Kottasová and Kostya Gak, CNN, 8 Sept 24
The Ukrainian Armed Forces are in the midst of converging crises caused by the failed counteroffensive, the forcible conscription policy, and Zelensky’s Kursk blunder, which are leading to more desertions, defeats, and ultimately more desperation.
CNN carried out a rare act of journalistic service with their detailed report about how “Outgunned and outnumbered, Ukraine’s military is struggling with low morale and desertion”. It candidly describes the numerous problems afflicting the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) at this pivotal moment in the conflict as they continue to occupy part of Kursk but are still losing ground in Donbass. Their story begins by introducing a battalion commander who lost most of the around 800 men under his control.
This figure couldn’t take it anymore and thus transferred to a cushy military administrative job in Kiev. He and the five others who CNN spoke to when researching their report informed them that “desertion and insubordination are becoming a widespread problem, especially among newly recruited soldiers.” In the words of one commander, “Not all mobilized soldiers are leaving their positions, but the majority are…They either leave their positions, refuse to go into battle, or try to find a way to leave the army.”
The reader is then informed that these troops are forcibly conscripted, thus adding context to why they desert, but they also claimed that morale problems began to infect the armed forces’ ranks during the now-resolved impasse over more American aid to Ukraine. While that likely played a role, CNN conspicuously omits to mention last summer’s failed counteroffensive, which proved that Ukraine is unable to reconquer its lost lands despite all the hype and the aid that it received up until that point.
Moving along after having clarified the real reason behind the UAF’s plunging morale over the past year, drones have made the battlefield more unbearable than before, and the amount of time between rotations has grown since some troops simply can’t leave their positions without risking their lives. CNN then added that “In just the first four months of 2024, prosecutors launched criminal proceedings against almost 19,000 soldiers who either abandoned their posts or deserted”.
They also acknowledged that “It’s a staggering and – most likely – incomplete number. Several commanders told CNN that many officers would not report desertion and unauthorized absences, hoping instead to convince troops to return voluntarily, without facing punishment. This approach became so common that Ukraine changed the law to decriminalize desertion and absence without leave, if committed for the first time.”
The impending Battle of Pokrovsk, which could be a game-changer for Russia on the Donbass front, risks turning into a total disaster for the UAF since “some commanders estimate there are 10 Russian soldiers to each Ukrainian.” Just as alarming is the claim from one officer that “There have even been cases of troops not disclosing the full battlefield picture to other units out of fear it would make them look bad.” Communication problems are also reportedly rife between Kiev’s varied units there too.
The Kursk front isn’t as bad, but it might not have served its political purpose of boosting morale among the UAF unlike what Zelensky has claimed. CNN quoted some sappers who were unsure of the strategy involved, questioning why they were redeployed from defending Pokrovsk to invade Russia when the Donbass front is experiencing such difficulties as was already reported. The piece then ends with a psychological support expert declaring that he’s no longer going to be emotionally attached to anyone.
Reflecting on CNN’s surprisingly critical report, it’s clear that the UAF is in the midst of converging crises caused by the failed counteroffensive, the forcible conscription policy, and Zelensky’s Kursk blunder, which are leading to more desertions, defeats, and ultimately more desperation. In such circumstances, Ukraine can either stay the course by remaining in Kursk at the expense of losing more ground in Donbass, withdraw from Kursk to help hold Donbass, or asymmetrically escalate.
The first two scenarios are self-explanatory while the last could concern expanding the conflict into other Russian regions, Belarus, and/or Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria region, seriously damaging Russian nuclear power plants out of desperation to provoke a nuclear response, and/or assassinating top Russians. There are only a few months left before the winter impedes combat operations on both sides, after which the status quo will persist until spring, when one or both sides might go on the offensive.
This timeline adds urgency to the impending Battle of Pokrovsk, which Russia wants to win as soon as possible in order to push through the fields beyond, capture more territory, threaten the Kramatorsk-Slavyansk agglomeration from the south, and possibly prepare to make a move on Zaporozhye city from the northeast. If Ukraine can hold out into next year, then it could have more time to build more defenses beyond Pokrovsk, thus reducing the pace of Russia’s advance if it comes out on top there.
Even if Ukraine holds on for at least several months or perhaps as long as half a year longer there, the problems touched upon in CNN’s piece will likely only exacerbate seeing as how more forcibly conscripted troops will be thrown into what might by then become the next infamous meat grinder. Morale will probably continue plummeting while defections could spike, both of which could combine to cripple the UAF and create an opening for Russia to exploit in Pokrovsk or elsewhere along the front.
The ideal solution for Kiev would be to reach a ceasefire for facilitating its voluntary withdrawal from part of Donbass (ex: Pokrovsk’s surroundings) in parallel with pulling out of Kursk, which are terms that Russia might entertain since they’d advance some of its political and military goals. It’s better for Ukraine from the perspective of its regime’s interests to have an orderly withdrawal than a chaotic one if Russia achieves a breakthrough, but Zelensky and his ilk aren’t known for their rational decisions.
Nevertheless, those like India and Hungary who are want to help politically resolve this conflict could propose something of the sort, perhaps also suggesting the revival of last month’s reported Qatari-mediated partial ceasefire proposal for eschewing attacks against the other’s energy infrastructure. Zelensky is unlikely to agree, especially since he’s under the influence of uber-hawk Yermak, but it would still be best to informally circulate some variant of the aforementioned proposal sooner than later.
Regardless of well-intentioned third parties’ proposals, the conflict appears poised to continue raging into the next year absent a complete military and/or political breakdown in Ukraine, neither of which can be ruled out though considering how bad everything has become per CNN’s latest report. Ukraine and its Anglo-American “deep state” allies could also stage a major provocation aimed at desperately “escalating to de-escalate” on more of their terms, so observers shouldn’t rule that scenario out either.
Ukrainian Tipping Points: UPDATE 2
Russian and Eurasian Politics, by Gordonhahn, September 11, 2024
Outgoing US President Joe Biden has said his administration is working on approval of Ukrainian use of U.S. long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russia (https://www.ft.com/content/48289996-e1bf-4c3e-befb-031698e89e1b). The UK is pressuring the US to approve such use, and US Secretary of State and UK’s foreign minister have just arrived in Kiev (https://ctrana.news/news/471869-blinken-i-hlava-mid-britanii-pribyli-v-kiev.html).
UPDATE 1:
Reuters reports US is just about se to send long-range missiles to Ukraine for attacks deep inside Russia:
US close to agreeing on long-range missiles for Ukraine; delivery to take months.
Summary
-Stealthy JASSM weapons have range to hit targets inside Russia
-Decision expected in autumn, U.S. officials say
-Pentagon trying to integrate JASSMs on Soviet-era Ukrainian jets
WASHINGTON, Sept 3 (Reuters) – The U.S. is close to an agreement to give Ukraine long-range cruise missiles that could reach deep into Russia, but Kyiv would need to wait several months as the U.S. works through technical issues ahead of any shipment, U.S. officials said.The inclusion of Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM) in a weapons package is expected to be announced this autumn, three sources said, though a final decision has not been made (https://www.reuters.com/world/us-close-agreeing-long-range-missiles-ukraine-delivery-take-months-2024-09-03/).
ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
The NATO-Russia Ukrainian war is at a tipping point; one that leads to a Russian march to the Dniepr River and the relocation of what remains of pro-NATO Ukraine’s populace to right bank Ukraine and its Maidan government away from the western banks of the Diner and deeper into western Ukraine, likely Lvov. Not surprisingly, Kiev therefore is desperate and trying to escalate in ways that implicate or bring deeper, more direct NATO involvement, which has been deep and escalating on NATO’s part for years. For Kiev, ideal would be a full-scale NATO military intervention. The West’s previous strategy of gradual escalation – ‘boiling the frog’ by providing redlined air defense systems, then short-range missile/artillery systems, then tanks, then F-16s – hasd run its course.
The only options now are permitting Kiev to use Western missiles to hit deep inside Russia and target Russian President Vladimir Putin and other top leaders. Until now neither Kiev nor the West has crossed any Russian or ‘Putin red lines’ because there have not been any Russian-declared ‘red lines’ but Western MSM-set red lines. One would-be hard-pressed to cite even one clearly expressed Putin ‘red line.’
I fear the Western escalation will continue up to crossing an actual ‘red line’ that Russians have indirectly hinted at – Ukraine’s use of long-range Western missiles such as American ATACMs and British Storm Shadows to strike deep into Russia – will be crossed one way or another, likely after the U.S. presidential election on November 5th.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://gordonhahn.com/2024/09/11/ukrainian-tipping-points-update-2/—
Claims that UK’s Wylfa mega-nuclear site is ‘under-review’ with potential switch to mini-nuke plants
Previous UK Government named the Anglesey site as the next “preferred” location for the next large nuclear development.
Owen Hughes, Daily Post, Business correspondent, 9 Sept 24
There are reports that the UK’s nuclear plans are under review – with Wylfa’s status as the next potential site for a ‘mega-nuclear’ project under threat. Ahead of the General Election this year the previous UK Government named the Anglesey site as the “preferred” location for the next large nuclear development.
It followed the purchase by the government of the site and a nuclear location at Oldbury, Gloucestershire, for £160m from Hitachi. The news brought hope of a revival of a new major nuclear plant that would bring thousands of jobs. But after a number of false dawns there was also scepticism locally that the scheme would ever happen.
Now it is being reported the new UK energy secretary Ed Miliband has asked his department to review all nuclear plans over concerns that proposals set out by the last Conservative government were rushed out ahead of the general election, with insufficient due diligence.
There are reports that instead of a ‘mega-nuclear’ site the land next to the last Wylfa plant could instead host small nuclear reactors (SMRs). It is stated that officials believe they could be built and switched on more quickly (mid-2030s) and potentially provide the best value for money.
A government spokesman said: “No decisions have yet been taken on the projects and technologies to be deployed at sites and any decision will be made in due course.”
Ynys Môn MP Llinos Medi last week called on the UK Government to provide clear commitments and timelines regarding the future of the Wylfa site and the broader energy strategy for Wales. Speaking during a debate on the Great British Energy Bill on Thursday, Ms Medi highlighted the island’s rich natural energy potential and criticised the ongoing political uncertainty surrounding the Wylfa nuclear site.
She criticised the previous Conservative government for playing a “political game” and offering local communities a “false dawn” regarding the future of the nuclear site……………………………….. https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/claims-wylfa-mega-nuclear-site-29895174
Flamanville EPR shutdown prompts fresh questions over reactor design

The first attempt to start up the process of nuclear reaction in the European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) at the Flamanville nuclear power plant, situated on France’s Channel Coast close to Jersey and Guernsey, was aborted by an automatic shutdown last week. The process was finally successfully re-engaged four days later, but the failure was just the latest in a catalogue of incidents and delays at the site, now 12 years overdue. For one specialist, the flaws in the design of the reactor, which is the same design as that planned for Hinkley Point in England, are such that it ‘will never function properly’. Jade Lindgaard reports.
Jade Lindgaard, 9 September 2024, Mediapart
French utility giant EDF was an official sponsor of the Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games in Paris, and it’s management knows only too well how embarrassing a false start can be. For that was the case with its initial announcement last week about the starting up of the European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) at Flamanville, northern France – the most awaited event in the French nuclear energy industry in recent history……………………………………..(Subscribers only) https://www.mediapart.fr/en/journal/france/090924/flamanville-epr-shutdown-prompts-fresh-questions-over-reactor-design
Blackwater – a land in transition

4 September 2024, https://www.banng.info/news/regional-life/blackwater-in-transition/
The Blackwater is a land where earth, water and sky intermingle in an eternal process of transition and transformation. In our time Climate Change and the Energy Transition are creating fundamental changes in the relationship between land, sea and air that will utterly transform our environment in the years to come.
The Blackwater is not an iconic landscape, unlike, say, Constables Country, with its charms set in a romantic afterglow and its appeal as the idealised English landscape. The Blackwater is more a concept with specific meanings and specific environments for farmers, sailors, fishermen, holidaymakers, birders and residents enjoying its waters, marshes, seaside, farmland and settlements. It is a precious region with many national and international conservation designations. Some of its landscapes are ecological treasure chests, especially the dwindling marshes taken from the sea by progressive dyking and draining to produce the so-called ‘meadows of the sea’.
Today, a reversal is in train as coastal squeeze erodes the fragile waterlands in a battle that only the sea can win. Gradually, though inexorably, the land yields as seal levels rise and storm surges, flooding and erosion intensify with global warming.
Global warming is already at critical levels and further increases in temperatures are already baked in. We will have to adapt to inevitable consequences while trying to prevent runaway Climate Change by making a rapid shift from fossil fuels to renewable forms of energy – in other words to achieve an Energy Transition.
While this is a global challenge it must be achieved through local measures already under way and impacting on our landscape. Out to sea in vast arrays of turbines are turning contributing to the UK’s 30GW of offshore wind power capacity. Onshore the windmills on the Dengie represent a tiny part of the 15GW onshore wind, two-thirds comes from Scotland. The government has committed to increasing wind capacity by 2030, to 30GW onshore and 60GW offshore.
This is a herculean ambition and major constraints lie in the way. One of these is transmission as the National Grid confronts local communities with its planned Norwich to Tilbury Great Grid Upgrade. The line of tall pylons will not impact the Blackwater landscape and a landfall at Bradwell is unlikely.
Even more unlikely is the possibility of new nuclear at Bradwell. Climate Change will put paid to the idea of building on a floodable coast today and a vanishing one in the far future. For the present there remains the forlorn hulk of the former Bradwell nuclear power station, once at the forefront of an energy transition now an isolated relic of a bygone age.
Somerset campaigners celebrate as EDF Energy U-turns on planned Hinkley Point C saltmarshes
More than 800 acres have been saved
By Daniel Mumby, Local Democracy Reporter, Somerset Live 11th Sept 2024
Environmental campaigners in Somerset are celebrating after plans to create new saltmarshes to offset the county’s new nuclear power station were scrapped. EDF Energy held a public consultation in January and February over its proposals for new saltmarshes on the Pawlett Hams, which lie on the right bank of the River Parrett near the villages of Combwich and Pawlett.
The plans envisioned more than 800 acres of saltmarsh being created as part of the wider mitigation for the new Hinkley Point C nuclear power station, which is currently under construction. EDF argued that the new marshes would provide safe habitats for fish and animals, improve water quality and reduce the risk of localised flooding – complementing the creation of the Bridgwater tidal barrier immediately upstream.
But following a substantial local backlash, the energy giant has U-turned and promised that any saltmarshes created to offset the power station will be created outside of the Somerset Council area. EDF released a statement confirming the change of heart on Monday evening (September 9), stating that it would be seeing alternative locations “within the wider Severn estuary” before any formal planning application is submitted to the Planning Inspectorate ahead of a public inquiry, which is currently expected to be held in the autumn of 2025.
The company has confirmed that none of the other sites being considered as “within the Somerset Council boundary” and that further rounds of public consultation will take place in the chosen locations. In addition, the company will be looking to upgrade an existing weir on the River Wye at Osbaston near Monmouth, in order to support migrating fish like salmon and shad in their journeys upstream………………………………………………………….. https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/somerset-campaigners-celebrate-edf-energy-9542744
World’s largest uranium miner warns Ukraine war makes it harder to supply west
Kazatomprom’s chief executive has warned that Russia’s war on
Ukraine is making it harder for the world’s largest uranium producer.
Kazatomprom’s chief executive has warned that Russia’s war on Ukraine
is making it harder for the world’s largest uranium producer to keep
supplying the west as the gravitational pull towards Moscow and Beijing
grows stronger.
Meirzhan Yussupov, chief of the Kazakh state miner, said
that sanctions caused by the war had created obstacles to supplying western
utilities. “It is much easier for us to sell most, if not all, of our
production to our Asian partners — I wouldn’t call [out] the specific
country . . . They can eat up almost all of our production, or our
partners to the north,” he told the FT.
FT 10th Sept 2024
https://www.ft.com/content/b8b34ec4-20ca-4c00-937b-fc620ae7503e
Which rural area will take the UK’s nuclear waste?

each community being considered for a geological disposal facility (GDF) now receives about £1m a year in investment
If a GDF is built here, Mr Moore says, there will be billions of pounds invested in the area
Victoria Gill and Kate Stephens, Science correspondent and senior science producer, BBC News, 9 Sept 24

“………………………………………………………………………..Sellafield is filling up – and experts say we have no choice but to find somewhere new to keep this material safe.
Nuclear power is also part of the government’s stated mission for ”clean power by 2030”. More nuclear power means more nuclear waste.
…………………….. Sellafield runs 24 hours a day with 11,000 staff. It costs more than £2bn per year to keep the site going, and it comprises more than 1,000 buildings, connected by 25 miles of road.
However, in recent years, doubts have been raised about the site’s security and physical integrity.
One of its oldest waste storage silos is currently leaking radioactive liquid into the ground. That is a “recurrence of a historic leak” that Sellafield Ltd, the company that operates the site, says first started in the 1970s.
Sellafield has also faced questions about its working culture and adherence to safety rules. The company is currently awaiting sentencing after it pleaded guilty, in June, to charges related to cyber-security failings.
An investigation by the Guardian revealed that the site’s systems had been hacked, although the Office for Nuclear Regulation said there was “no evidence that any vulnerabilities had been exploited” by the hackers.
All of this has cast a shadow over an operation that, as well as taking in newly created nuclear waste, also houses several decades worth of much older radioactive material.
The site no longer produces or reprocesses any nuclear material, but this is where the race began to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons at the height of the Cold War.
“It was the dawn of the nuclear age,” says Roddy Miller, Sellafield’s operations director. “But because it was a race, not a lot of thought was given to the long-term safe storage of the waste materials that were produced.”
The leaking storage silo, which was built in the 1960s, is just one of the buildings that now has to be emptied so the material inside can go into more modern silos. The building was only ever designed to be filled, and Sellafield says its plans to clear the site and demolish the building are the safest option.
The site’s head of retrievals, Alyson Armett, points out that without a “permanent solution” for the nuclear waste, the plans to decommission could be delayed.
The current plan for that permanent solution is to bury the waste deep underground.
A complicated search – both scientifically and politically – is currently on for somewhere to lock it away from humanity permanently.
“We need to isolate it from future populations or even civilisations, that’s the timescale we’re looking at,” says Prof Corkhill…………………………………………………..
The plan for permanent, underground storage is to contain that solid waste in a Russian doll-like series of barriers. The glass, encased in steel, will be shielded in concrete, then buried beneath the Earth‘s own barriers – layers of solid rock.
The question is, where will that facility be?
‘The waste is already here’
Six years ago, communities in England and Wales were asked to come forward if they were willing to consider having a disposal facility built near their town or village.
Potential sites will need the ideal geology – enough solid rock to create that permanent barrier. However, they also need something that might be more difficult – a willing community.
There are financial incentives for communities to take part in this discussion. So far, five have come forward. Two have already been ruled out. Allerdale in Cumbria was deemed unsuitable because there was not enough solid bedrock. Then, in September, councillors in South Holderness, in Yorkshire, withdrew after a series of local protests.
Government scientists are assessing the remaining three communities that are currently in the running. Geologists have been carrying out seismic testing – looking for that all-important impermeable rock.
One of the communities being considered is very close to the Sellafield site in West Cumbria, at Seascale.
It is not yet clear if Mid Copeland, the area under consideration that includes Seascale, will have the right rock. The survey and consultation here – and in the other locations being considered – are in their early stages and scheduled to last at least a decade.
In the meantime, the conversation goes on and each community being considered for a geological disposal facility (GDF) now receives about £1m a year in investment while initial scientific tests are carried out.
Mr Moore is part of a committee called a GDF partnership. It includes local residents, local government and representatives of Nuclear Waste Services, which is the government body behind this project.
These partnerships aim to keep the process transparent and ensure local people are well-informed. They also decide how the money is spent.
If a GDF is built here, Mr Moore says, there will be billions of pounds invested in the area. “If we’re going to host this on behalf of the UK, the community should benefit,” he says.
Also still on the shortlist are South Copeland, again on the Cumbrian coast, and a site on the east coast in Lincolnshire, where there have been a number of peaceful, but angry, protests.
On Halloween 2021 in Theddlethorpe, one of the local villages, several residents used their gardens to put up garish anti-nuclear dump scarecrows, inspired by an idea from pressure group the Guardians of the East Coast, which is campaigning against the disposal facility.
Ken Smith, from nearby Mablethorpe, is a member of both the campaign group and the local GDF partnership.
He thinks the government’s approach to finding a nuclear waste disposal site “stinks”.
Mr Smith is concerned that the voices of those most affected might not be heard and says it is unclear how local opinion will be measured at the end of the consultation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czx6e2x0kdyo
Victoria Nuland, former US deputy secretary of state, confirms West told Zelensky to abandon peace deal

Comment: Nuland confirms what was already known. The reason the conflict is ongoing is because the US wanted it to be so.
https://www.rt.com/news/603708-ukraine-istanbul-us-nuland/ 9 Sept 24
Ukraine-Russia talks fell apart after Kiev asked foreign backers for advice, the former US deputy secretary of state has said.
The US, UK and other backers of Ukraine told Kiev to reject the deal reached at the 2022 Istanbul peace talks with Russia, former US under secretary of state Victoria Nuland has said.
In an interview with Russian journalist Mikhail Zygar, former editor-in-chief of the liberal news channel Dozhd, which aired on Thursday, Nuland was asked to comment on reports that the peace process between Moscow and Kiev in late March and early April 2022 collapsed after then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to Ukraine and told Vladimir Zelensky to keep fighting.
“Relatively late in the game the Ukrainians began asking for advice on where this thing was going and it became clear to us, clear to the Brits, clear to others that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s main condition was buried in an annex to this document that they were working on,” she said of the deal being discussed by the Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Türkiye’s largest city.
The proposed agreement included limits on the kinds of weapons that Kiev could possess, as a result of which Ukraine “would basically be neutered as a military force,” while there were no similar constraints on Russia, the former diplomat explained.
“People inside Ukraine and people outside Ukraine started asking questions about whether this was a good deal and it was at that point that it fell apart,” Nuland said.
The veteran diplomatic hawk, who during her time in the State Department was renowned for her hostility towards Russia, quit the post of under secretary of state for political affairs in March this year. Nuland played a key role in the violent Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014, which toppled Ukraine’s democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovich.
During the escalation between Moscow and Kiev in February 2022, she called for deeper US involvement in the conflict and advocated for Ukraine to be armed with increasingly sophisticated weapons. However, in February, the 63-year-old essentially acknowledged the failure of her longstanding policy of containing Moscow, telling the CNN that modern Russia had turned out to be “not the Russia we wanted”
During her conversation with Zygar, Nuland confirmed that both Moscow and Kiev were eager to seek a diplomatic solution a month after the outbreak of the fighting.
“Russia had an interest at that time in at least seeing what it could get. Ukraine, obviously, had an interest if they could stop the war and get and get Russia out,” she said.
US officials “were not in the room” during the talks in Istanbul, only offering Kiev “support” in case it were needed, she claimed.
Putin said last week that the only reason the Istanbul deal failed was because of “the wish of the elites in the US and some European nations to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia,” adding that Boris Johnson served as the messenger to quash the peace process.
The negotiations in Türkiye yielded a draft agreement, which would have ended the hostilities, Putin recalled. Kiev was willing to declare military neutrality, limit its armed forces, and vow not to discriminate against ethnic Russians. In return, Moscow would have joined other leading powers in offering Ukraine security guarantees, he stressed.
According to the Russian leader, talks with Kiev are still possible, but can only happen “not on the basis of some ephemeral demands but on the basis of the documents that were agreed and actually initialized in Istanbul.”
Renewables beat nuclear – even with full balancing included

RENEW EXTRA WEEKLY, 9 Sept 24
A new Danish study comparing nuclear and renewable energy systems (RES) concludes that, although nuclear systems require less flexibility capacity than renewable-only systems, a renewable energy system is cheaper than a nuclear based system, even with full backup: it says ‘lower flexibility costs do not offset the high investment costs in nuclear energy’.
It’s based on a zero-carbon 2045 smart energy scenario for Denmark, although it says its conclusions are valid elsewhere given suitable adjustments for local conditions. ‘The high investment costs in nuclear power alongside cost for fuel and operation and maintenance more than tip the scale in favour of the Only Renewables scenario. The costs of investing in and operating the nuclear power plants are simply too high compared to Only Renewables scenario, even though more investment must be put into flexibility measures in the latter’.
In the Danish case, it says that ‘the scenario with high nuclear implementation is 1.2 billion EUR more expensive annually compared to a scenario only based on renewables, with all systems completely balancing supply and demand across all energy sectors in every hour.’ It goes on ‘to achieve a more cost-efficient system based predominantly on nuclear power- the investment costs would have to drop to 1.55 MEU/MW. This is significantly below any current or future cost projection for nuclear power. Such a high cost-margin indicates that a combination of low-cost RES and sector coupling presents a cost-effective energy transition making it very hard for nuclear power to deliver a competitive alternative’…………………………………………………………………………….
Interestingly, in the UK context, Lord Turner, Chair of the UK Energy Transitions Commission, has also said that costly new nuclear plants may not be needed for net zero, since there are cheaper, low-carbon alternatives that could back up intermittent renewables. Hydrogen fuel or gas power plants fitted with CCS could fill the gap when wind or solar was not enough to keep the lights on. ‘I don’t think it is the case that you need new nuclear to balance the system. The systems of the future don’t absolutely need a base load.’ The power system ‘can work on a combination of intermittent variable renewables, wind & solar plus some hydro. I think the challenge for new nuclear is that it is just expensive. Bluntly, new nuclear can play very little role in a 2030 target.’
Well maybe that’s why there seems to have been some second thoughts about the new EPR reactor proposed for Sizewell in the UK, with the final investment decision for the Sizewell C nuclear plant evidently facing delays. Initially, EDF, the project’s developer, aimed to secure funding by the end of this year, but the timeline may now extend into 2025.
The prospect for nuclear do seem a bit uncertain, with the case for it these day relying in part on the claim that it can back up renewables and help avoid climate change. But that also seems to be uncertain, as is argued in a new comprehensive review of nuclear issues by academics from Germany and Finland, arguing that it has no role to play in responding to climate change. It says that it is ‘not a sustainable and affordable source of energy for the low-carbon energy transformation’ given its ‘cost-intensive nature, coupled with safety considerations’. And crucially it says that it is ‘characterized by very long construction times, and even longer developments of new technical generations, too far away and uncertain to contribute to climate change mitigation anytime soon’.
In addition ‘from an energy system perspective, nuclear power is not compatible with a system based on renewables, but rather hinders its expansion. Last but not least, nuclear power is particularly unfavorable in a future with higher temperatures and weather extremes and more military threats’.
That sounds pretty damning, even leaving aside radioactive waste handing, and also weapons proliferation and terrorism-related issues, with, as Prof. Ramana discusses in his recent powerful overview book ‘Nuclear is not the solution’, in addition to its other problems, reliance on civil nuclear power making ‘catastrophic nuclear war more likely’. Even if, hopefully, we can avoid that, there are still concerns about nuclear blackmail. And all this just to generate expensive energy.
Yes, going for renewables does mean we have invest in flexible balancing technology and energy storage, but that is cheaper overall and it also getting even cheaper, with many new options emerging. As Ramana says, to balance the variability of renewables, ‘we must invest in a mix of renewable energy technologies across various regions, and in battery and other storage technologies to store excess energy. In addition, we need to shape electricity demand to more closely match supply.’ In common with the German and Finnish researchers, he too sees that as the way ahead. https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2024/09/renewables-beat-nuclear-even-with-full.html
Will new UK nuclear power station plan be scrapped?
The Energy Secretary has reportedly directed officials to review the nation’s nuclear plans, including the proposed plant at Wylfa in Anglesey
Dimitris Mavrokefalidis, 09/08/2024, https://www.energylivenews.com/2024/09/08/will-new-uk-nuclear-power-station-plans-be-scrapped/
The government’s plan to build a new nuclear power station in Wales is reportedly under review.
According to The Telegraph, the Energy Secretary has asked officials to reassess future nuclear projects, which puts the planned plant at Wylfa, Anglesey, in question.
The review will also examine the previous target to reach 24 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050, set under Boris Johnson.
There are concerns that these plans were rushed before the last general election.
Minister for Nuclear Lord Hunt wrote on X (formerly known as Twitter): “Great British Nuclear has recently acquired the Wylfa site in Anglesey along with the Oldbury site in Gloucestershire.
“No decisions have yet been taken on the projects and technologies to be deployed at sites and any decision will be made in due course.”
Energy Live News has contacted the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero for comment.
Earlier this week, Ynys Môn MP Llinos Medi urged the UK Government to give definitive commitments and timelines for the Wylfa site and Wales’ overall energy strategy.
During a debate on the Great British Energy Bill on 5th September, Ms Medi emphasised the region’s significant natural energy resources and expressed frustration with the continued political uncertainty around the Wylfa nuclear project.
Ed Miliband considers scrapping planned nuclear plant

Move will fuel concerns that Britain’s ambitions for industry are being scaled back
Telegraph UK, Matt Oliver, Industry Editor7 September 2024
Plans to build a large nuclear power station in Wales are at risk of being scrapped as Ed Miliband seeks to accelerate Britain’s switch to a net zero electricity grid.
The Energy Secretary has told officials to review future nuclear plans in a move that has thrown into doubt plans for a third new gigawatt-scale plant to be built at Wylfa, in Anglesey.
The review will also reconsider the official target, announced under Boris Johnson, to deploy at least 24 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050, The Telegraph understands.
It comes amid concerns that the plans set out under the Conservatives were rushed out ahead of the general election and not properly thought through.
On Friday, Whitehall sources stressed no final decisions had been made and that Mr Miliband remained strongly supportive of expanding British nuclear capacity.
However, the move will fuel concerns that Britain’s ambitions are being scaled back, with the Conservatives accusing him of turning his back on the industry.
Wylfa was only confirmed in May by the previous Conservative government to follow similar projects at Hinkley Point, in Somerset, and Sizewell, in Suffolk.
The Welsh site is capable of hosting up to four large reactors and has attracted keen interest from major international firms including US-based Westinghouse and South Korea’s Kepco.
It is understood that ministers remain committed to making a final investment decision on the £20bn Sizewell C power plant before the end of this year, as well as to the programme to develop the first mini nuclear power stations known as small modular reactors (SMRs).
But sources said that the Government’s future commitments were being reviewed in the round as part of wider plans to transition to a net zero energy system.
Possible revisions could still include building multiple SMRs at Wylfa instead of a large power station. Another large plant could still also be built elsewhere.
Great British Nuclear (GBN), the government agency tasked with preparing nuclear sites, is carrying out the review for Mr Miliband and is said to favour building SMRs at Wylfa because officials believe they could be built and switched on more quickly, by the mid-2030s. They are also considering which option provides the best value for money.
Because preparatory work on any large plant would need to begin soon, Whitehall sources said the question of what to do at Wylfa must be resolved as part of the upcoming Easter spending review, which will see departments agree multi-year settlements with the Treasury.
GBN acquired both the Wylfa site and another in Oldbury-on-Severn, Gloucestershire, in a £160m deal in March. Both sites are seen as good options for the first generation of SMRs.
A government spokesman said: “No decisions have yet been taken on the projects and technologies to be deployed at sites and any decision will be made in due course.”
However, the revelation that ministers may scrap plans for a large plant at Wylfa – seen as one of the most promising undeveloped nuclear sites in Europe – will raise fresh concerns that Britain’s promised “nuclear renaissance” is being scaled back.
Claire Coutinho, the shadow energy secretary, said: “Ed Miliband is shutting down the North Sea and now it seems he’s turning his back on nuclear. …………………..
Industry insiders also warned that basing plans for future expansion after Sizewell on SMRs alone could be risky, with the technology still unproven commercially. This contrasts with existing, proven large reactor technologies.
Talks about the future of Wylfa come as GBN prepares for the final stages of the UK’s SMR design competition. The current shortlist of five companies – Rolls-Royce, GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse, Holtec and NuScale – is expected to be reduced to four later this month. …………………………………………………………………. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/07/ed-miliband-considers-scrapping-planned-nuclear-plant/
Boris Johnson faces ‘serious questions’ over new business with uranium entrepreneur

Former prime minister also under fire for hiring ex-aide Charlotte Owen as VP despite her lack of energy sector experience
Guardian, Carole Cadwalladr, 8 Sept 24
Boris Johnson failed to disclose that he met a uranium lobbyist while prime minister before entering into a new business with a controversial Iranian-Canadian uranium entrepreneur, the Observer can reveal.
Johnson’s new company Better Earth Limited also employs Charlotte Owen, a junior aide with just a few years work experience whom he elevated to the House of Lords last year at the age of 29, sparking intense controversy.
Transparency campaigners say there appear to be “serious public interest questions to be answered” over the nature and timeline of Johnson’s relationship with his co-director, Amir Adnani, the founder, president and CEO of Uranium Energy Corp, a US-based mining and exploration company, championed by former Trump adviser Steve Bannon.
Amir Adnani, a Canadian citizen who is the director of a network of offshore companies based in the British Virgin Islands, incorporated Better Earth in December last year. On 1 May, Companies House filings reveal, “The Rt Hon Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson” was added as a director and co-chairman. And this summer, Charlotte Owen – now Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge – joined the company to work alongside him as its vice-president.
The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba), which oversees ex-ministerial appointments, explicitly warned Johnson in April 2024 that the “broad overlap” between his roles in office and at Better Earth may entail “unknown risks” because of the lack of transparency over the firm’s clients. A statement from the Cabinet Office noted the potential for a conflict of interests particularly because of “the unknown nature of Better Earth’s clients – specifically that there is a risk of a client engaging in lobbying the UK government.” The committee also told the former prime minister it feared “that you could offer Better Earth unfair access and influence across government”.
Acoba was reassured that Johnson “did not meet with, nor did you make any decisions specific to Better Earth during your time in office”. But the Observer can reveal that Johnson met Scott Melbye, the executive vice-president of Uranium Energy Corp – Adnani’s company – in the House of Commons in May 2022 when he was still prime minister.
Adnani’s social media post about the event claimed that Melbye and Johnson spoke about “nuclear power and uranium”.
Neither Johnson or Adnani have responded to press inquiries about this encounter or when they first met. The encounter was not recorded in the prime minister’s official diary.…………………………………………………………………………………………
Baroness Margaret Hodge, the former Labour MP who led parliament’s Public Accounts Committee from 2010-2015 said there were “at least four very serious public interest questions” to be answered about the appointment.skip past newsletter promotion
“What on earth is an ex-prime minister of the United Kingdom doing, working for a company with an opaque structure? In my experience those who choose to have a UK company owned by a foreign entity only do that because they may have something to hide. What is it in this case? Given the sensitivities around nuclear capabilities we should know who he is in business with, where the money is coming from and why he is using a financial structure that appears to hide the beneficial ownership of the company.”
Better Earth, Amir Adnani and Boris Johnson declined to respond to the Observer’s inquiries about Better Earth’s line of work, funding or any other matters…………………………………………………. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/sep/07/boris-johnson-faces-questions-uranium-business-charlotte-owen-aide
New images raise concerns over state of UK nuclear submarines

The National By Xander Elliards 8th September 24
CONCERNS have been raised that the deteriorating state of the UK’s nuclear submarines is “potentially putting the vessel and her crew at risk”.
Alarm bells were rung after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) announced last week that Defence Secretary John Healey had joined one of the UK’s four Vanguard-class submarines as it returned to dock at Faslane.
An image shared by the MoD showed Healey looking at the submarine, which appeared covered in algae, slime and rust along its entire length.
Further photos taken by locals living near the HM Naval Base Clyde showed the submarine was missing numerous patches of anechoic tiles – which line the exterior to help hide the submarine from sonar.
The submarine is thought to have been on patrol since mid-March, meaning it had spent around 160 days underwater.
In March, HMS Vengeance returned to Faslane after 201 days underwater – reported to be the second-longest patrol ever – directly following a mission which lasted 195 days. Patrols on the previous Polaris generation of nuclear submarines averaged 60-70 days, according to the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)
HMS Vengeance is one of four Vanguard-class submarines, which were each built with a 25-year lifespan – a limit imposed by the lifespan of major components – and either commenced sea trials or saw their reactor go critical in 1992, 1994, 1996, and 1999. The UK Government noted in 2007 that it “should be possible” to extend these lifespans by five years to a total of 30.
At least one submarine is meant to be patrolling the oceans at any time in order to deliver a nuclear strike if the UK Government orders it. However, the ageing fleet meant that essential works had to be carried out to keep the submarines seaworthy, placing higher pressure on the remaining boats.
In January, alarm bells had been rung after Dominic Cummings, a key adviser during Boris Johnson’s time in Downing Street, said there was a hidden “scandal of nuclear weapons infrastructure” which he called a “dangerous disaster and a budget nightmare of hard-to-believe and highly classified proportions”.
Issues with ageing equipment nearly led to a major disaster in 2022 after a broken depth gauge meant one nuclear submarine was continuing to descend despite unknowingly approaching “crush depth”.
On Saturday, the Daily Mail reported that none of the UK’s attack submarines are currently at sea, and the majority (16 out of 25) of the country’s warships are broken down, being modified, or undergoing trials. Retired rear admiral Chris Parry called the situation “utterly dire”.
In May 2023, HMS Vanguard finally completed a seven-and-a-half-year refit, and in March 2024, work on HMS Victorious was also completed. The final boat in the fleet is called HMS Vigilant, but it is not clear which of the four were greeted by Defence Secretary Healey at Faslane last week.
Responding to the nuclear-armed submarine returning to Faslane, Chris McEleny, Alba Party’s general secretary and a former MoD employee, said: “The latest sight of a Vanguard-class submarine returning to base caked in algae is very concerning. And, yet again we see anechoic tiles are missing, potentially putting the vessel and her crew at risk.
“The lengthy patrols should also spark concerns as to whether or not subs are going out on patrol with increased payloads due to concern over the half-life.
“The MoD have, as usual, failed to provide basic guarantees in regards to the safety-critical implications of these prolonged patrols.”…………………………..
Lynn Jamieson, the chair of the Scottish CND, claimed that the “UK’s nuclear weapons system is a shambles but that does not capture the absurdity and seriousness of its dangers”.
“The longer at sea, the more mental and physical stress on the crew and the more chance of accidents,” she went on. “The older the submarine the more the risks of unplanned radioactive leaks and other such incidents.
“The cost of keeping the ageing nuclear weapon system going and simultaneously building a replacement grows while public services are drastically cut. In 2023 alone, it cost £6.5 billion [according to a report from the independent Nuclear Information Service] and it will be even more this year.”……….
Jamieson said the UK Government should show “true leadership [and] scrap the old system and its replacement rather than continuing to valorise a capacity for genocide that puts the world in peril, a target on our backs and risks in our backyard”.
SNP MSP Bill Kidd, the co-president of Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (PNND), said Scotland was the “dumping ground for nuclear leaks and discharges into our waters and coasts and we are the target for any potential nukes an enemy would fire at”.
“Nothing is planned to change in all this as far as Westminster is concerned – and that means Labour every single bit as much as Tories”, he said……………………………….. https://www.thenational.scot/news/24568990.new-images-raise-concerns-state-uk-nuclear-submarines/
Ynys Môn MP calls for UK Government clarity on Wylfa site
Ynys Môn MP Llinos Medi has called on the UK Government to provide clear
commitments and timelines regarding the future of the Wylfa site and the
broader energy strategy for Wales.
Speaking during a debate on the Great
British Energy (GBE) Bill on Thursday (5 September), Ms Medi highlighted
the island’s rich natural energy potential and criticised the ongoing
political uncertainty surrounding the future of the Wylfa nuclear site.
She also accused the previous Conservative government of playing a “political
game” and offering local communities a “false dawn” regarding the
future of the site. In May, the Conservative Government had confirmed Wylfa
as the preferred site for a major new nuclear power development.
Nation Cymru 6th Sept 2024,
https://nation.cymru/news/ynys-mon-mp-calls-for-uk-government-clarity-on-wylfa-site/
-
Archives
- April 2026 (346)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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



