nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Ukrainian counteroffensive ‘biggest debacle in modern military history’ – David Sacks

 https://www.rt.com/news/595214-sacks-ukraine-counteroffensive-fail/ 1 Apr 24

The former PayPal chief says US politicians such as Nancy Pelosi should be held accountable for encouraging the doomed operation.

The failure of Ukraine’s 2023 summer counteroffensive against Russia was “easily predictable,” according to US tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist David Sacks, who has suggested that the Washington elite should be held accountable for talking up the doomed operation. 

Sacks’ comments came in response to a post on Saturday by Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who condemned the unnecessary loss of life suffered by Kiev’s forces as they attempted to “attack a larger army” that had superior defenses.

The failed Ukrainian counteroffensive was “one of the biggest debacles in the history of modern warfare,” Sacks said in agreement, adding that Kiev’s soldiers and tanks had effectively run “headlong into minefields while Russian artillery rained down on them from heavily fortified positions.”  

“This should have been easily predictable,” the former PayPal COO and founder of the Yammer corporate social network stressed.  

According to estimates released in March by the Russian Defense Ministry, the Ukrainian military saw over 166,000 casualties during last year’s failed counteroffensive. Kiev’s overall casualties since the outbreak of the conflict with Russia stand at 444,000, the ministry has claimed.  

Sacks went on to suggest that US officials such as ex-CIA chief David Petraeus, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and current US Secretary of State Antony Blinken should all be held responsible for encouraging the doomed operation. 

“These people are fools who should have no credibility left. But of course the MSM never holds them accountable so we will get more of the same until Ukraine finally collapses,” Sacks surmised. 

Musk, meanwhile, has called the counteroffensive “a tragic waste of life for Ukraine,” suggesting that Kiev should not have attacked Russian forces – which had deployed vast minefields and had stronger artillery – while Ukrainian forces lacked armor or air superiority. 

“Any fool could have predicted that,” the billionaire said, recalling that one year ago he had recommended that Kiev’s forces entrench and apply all resources to defense. 

Musk stated that Kiev would continue to have difficulty holding on to territory, but suggested that Russia was unlikely try to take over the entire country, arguing that it would face “extreme” local resistance in western regions of Ukraine. 

He also warned that if the conflict “lasts long enough, Odessa will fall,” and advised Kiev to reach a negotiated settlement with Moscow as soon as possible, before Russia gains more territory and Ukraine loses all access to the Black Sea. 

Moscow has stressed that it remains open to meaningful talks with Kiev, and has blamed the lack of a diplomatic breakthrough on the Ukrainian authorities, who refuse to accept the “reality on the ground.”

April 2, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK’s ever more expensive nuclear submarines will torpedo spending plans for years to come.

Jasper Jolly and Alex Lawson,  https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/mar/31/uks-ever-more-expensive-nuclear-submarines-will-torpedo-spending-plans-for-years-to-come

Whoever wins the next election, a reckoning is overdue on the costs of Britain’s nuclear deterrent.

When Rishi Sunak visited Barrow-in-Furness on Monday he said the Cumbrian town was “mission critical for our country” because of its role building four new nuclear submarines to carry the UK’s nuclear weapons. If you believe Sunak’s erstwhile ally, Dominic Cummings, then that mission faces serious problems.

Cummings, once Boris Johnson’s most powerful adviser, said this month – in characteristically aggressive terms – that spiralling costs were making a mockery of the government’s budget plans. He wrote on X: “the nuclear enterprise is so fkd [sic] it’s further cannibalising the broken budgets and will for decades because it’s been highly classified to avoid MPs thinking about it.”

But the scale of the issue makes it hard to ignore. The government re­iterated last week that the four new Dreadnought class submarines would cost £31bn plus a £10bn “contingency”. But the Nuclear Information Service (NIS), a monitoring group, said in 2019 that the full cost of the nuclear weapons programme between 2019 and 2070 could be £172bn, when including new warheads and running costs.

Costs are also increasing rapidly, as the government has prioritised replacing the existing Vanguard submarines on time rather than on budget. (The Vanguard boats launch Trident nuclear missiles – like the one that crashed into the sea during a test last month.)

The Ministry of Defence puts the cost of the programme to replace the UK’s nuclear weapons at £118bn over the next decade. That is already £8bn more than the Treasury has forecast, suggesting something may have to give elsewhere.

The National Audit Office, a government watchdog, found in December that forecasts of costs of the MoD’s Defence Nuclear Organisation had risen by £38.2bn in the past year.

However it is counted, hugely costly delays and overruns, plus inflation, mean a reckoning is overdue on the costs of Britain’s nuclear submarines.

“They don’t have very many good options,” said David Cullen, director of the NIS. He said the problems appeared so intractable that it could affect the UK’s continuous at-sea deterrence – the longstanding policy of always having a nuclear-armed submarine gliding silently under the waves in case of attack.

“It would be much better for them to make a conscious decision to stop having constant patrols, rather than having it forced on them,” he said.

Nuclear submarines are among the most complicated machines ever built. They sustain 132 humans deep beneath the oceans,  needing to surface only when its crew runs out of food – or runs out of patience during months without daylight.

The Labour party, eyeing power in an imminent election, has a decision over whether to confront the problem head-on – and add billions to already constrained budgets – or to continue with the sticking-plaster approach.

One thing Labour has said it will not do – to the chagrin of campaigners particularly aligned with the left of the party – is accept the UK’s diminished role in world affairs by scrapping the nuclear deterrent. David Lammy and John Healey, shadow foreign secretary and defence secretary respectively, wrote in September that “with Keir Starmer, our commitment to Nato and the UK’s nuclear deterrent – maintained on behalf of Nato allies – is unshakeable”.

Some in the defence industry believe Labour could, if elected, choose to launch an inquiry into the entire nuclear defence enterprise – which might allow it to blame the current government and help ease the blow from a big hit to its budget. However, a Labour source said the lack of visibility into classified plans meant it was not yet able to work out a detailed strategy.

One way to help government finances might be to share costs. Under the new – and increasingly controversial – Aukus alliance, Australia will receive nuclear weapons technology from the UK (with the blessing of the US, which originally bestowed the city-destroying abilities on Britain).

The Aukus programme is split into two “pillars”. Pillar one is centred on helping Australia acquire conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines. The second part is more techy, focusing on speeding up cooperation of specific technologies – including artificial intelligence, cyber work, quantum computing and hypersonic weapons.)

In 2022, the second pillar of the pact was extended to allow the trilateral partners to develop hypersonic weapons in response to Russia’s use of the deadly high-speed missiles in airstrikes in Ukraine.

The French defence giant Thales, a supplier of sonar and light-sensing masts, is expected to pick up work as the “eyes and ears” of the submarines. Its UK boss, Alex Cresswell, told the Observer: “Pillar one of Aukus is a once-in-a-generation event that is extremely significant for the industry as a whole. I recruit graduates on the basis of it.”

Cresswell adds: “The rate of the submarine part is being driven by the design work on the submarine after Dreadnought … that early design work is being placed now and we’re involved in it.”


Yet it is unlikely that Aukus will help to fill the Dreadnought black hole. Immediate manufacturing problems appear to be the problem there, which will not be helped by the promise of future work for submarines built after Dreadnought, according to NIS’s Cullen.

Meg Hillier, a Labour MP who heads the public accounts committee, said that budgets have been blown because of the government’s “stop/start approach to defence procurement” and “a lot of optimism bias” in plans. She said the nuclear submarine budget is one of the “big nasties” lying in wait for a future government. It is an ominous threat lurking under the surface for the next prime minister.

April 1, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

TODAY. The nuclear lobby’s new “prime wheeze” – Community Interest Companies

The UK, famous for comedy, had a great character, Bertie Wooster, who kept thinking up wonderful (useless and silly) new ideas, that he called “Prime Wheezes”. In true Bertie Wooster tradition, the nuclear lobby does the same.

They usually go for “registered charities” – and there’s any number of these, that the industry creates, really nuclear front groups, that pose as genuinely working for the public good.

So why is the nuclear lobby now going for the non-profit Community Interest Companies (CICs)?

Some of the reasons:

  •  The nuclear industry can get approval and respectability,  “piggy-back” on a lot of genuinely positive and popular businesses in an existing CIC.
  •   The CIC business model can incorporate a wider range of social aims than are allowed for charities. This is because the definition of community interest within the test applied to a CIC is broader than the Public Benefit Test for charities. 
  • easier to set up than is a charity..   
  •  murkiness of funding – relatively easy from private donors, grants or community development finance  
  • can more easily buy and sell commercially.  
  •   It is a lightweight structure, it is unencumbered by bureaucracy. It can be set up in a couple of days
  • it  is  like a standard profit-making company then, but with social objectives supposedly built in.   
  • it avoids the accountability mechanisms that charities have, e.g a CIC can have just one director. It does have a (poorly funded) government regulator, Office of the Regulator of Community Interest Companies, but  there appears to be no pro-active monitoring of whether CICs are operating for community benefit.
  •  Directors and functioning can change overtime, not encumbered by  rules that ensure its social aims. The directors of a CIC can pay themselves whatever they can argue could reasonably be seen as necessary. 
  • any money in the organisation can very easily be siphoned out to profit-making enterprises. 
  • No legal requirement to have a democratic structure   

In Somerset UK, where there is community anxiety about the development of Hinkley Point C nuclear station, and its effect on the environment – what better prime wheeze for the nuclear lobby, than to join an existing reputable Community Interest Company?

Hinkley Point C, has teamed up with the CIC Passion for Somerset. as a principal partner.

April 1, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, Christina's notes, spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

EDF Names New Head of Nuclear Plant Projects Amid Cost Overruns

Francois de Beaupuy, Bloomberg News, 29 Mar 24,  https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/edf-names-new-head-of-nuclear-plant-projects-amid-cost-overruns-1.2053220

Bloomberg) — Electricite de France SA appointed a new head of nuclear plant projects as the utility struggles with the construction of new reactors in the UK and prepares plans to build at least six new atomic units in France.

Thierry Le Mouroux, a member of EDF’s executive committee, will become senior executive vice president with responsibility for the group’s Projects and Construction Directorate from April 1, the company said in a statement on Friday.

Xavier Ursat, the executive in charge of new nuclear projects and engineering, will become senior executive vice president with responsibility for the Strategy, Technologies, Innovation and Development Directorate. This will “act as project owner for nuclear construction projects” and drive nuclear development abroad, EDF said.

The appointments, part of a broader reshuffle at the executive committee, come as Chief Executive Officer Luc Remont is under pressure to boost the debt-laden company’s performance to cope with the ballooning cost of its Hinkley Point C nuclear project in the UK and the prospect of soaring capital expenditure to build new atomic plants in France.

“We are currently seeing an unprecedented recovery in nuclear power, which brings considerable challenges for EDF,” Remont said in the statement. “Our organization and the way we work is evolving to deliver further improvements in performance and ensure that our nuclear projects are successful.”

Earlier this year, EDF raised the budget of the two reactors it’s building at Hinkley Point in the UK to as much as £47.9 billion ($60.4 billion), citing labor shortages, supply chain issues, and longer-than-expected cable and pipe-fitting works.

It’s also working to complete the basic design of six new reactors to be built in France, which could cost about €67.4 billion ($72 billion), and is seeking to develop a so-called small modular reactor by the start of the next decade.

April 1, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

 Dounreay decommissioning date ‘never achievable’ says Caithness councillor

CAITHNESS has been misled for the past 20 years over the
timescale for the decommissioning of Dounreay. The work was due to be
completed by 2033 but that target was “never technically practicable” and
“never achievable”, according to Struan Mackie, the chairman of the
Dounreay Stakeholder Group (DSG).

Mr Mackie, a Thurso and Northwest
Caithness Highland councillor, said: “We all know that the publicised
dates, the milestones communicated to our community, to our politicians and
to our supply chain for the last two decades have not been founded in
reality.

John O’Groat Journal 28th March 2024

https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/dounreay-decommissioning-date-never-achievable-says-caithn-346428

April 1, 2024 Posted by | decommission reactor, UK | Leave a comment

 Famous UK seaside town ‘decimated’ by £46bn nuclear power station and huge Pontins change.

 Famous UK seaside town ‘decimated’ by £46bn nuclear power station and
huge Pontins change. This once-thriving seaside resort has seen its economy
dwindle following the arrival of 900 nuclear workers taking holiday
accommodation.

What was once a thriving seaside town is now a shell of its
former self. Brean Sands in Somerset used to be by-word for family fun but
following the take-over of the town’s Pontins resort by 900 nuclear
workers, the local economy has suffered significantly. EDF commandeered 900
rooms at the Pontins site for construction staff building Hinkley Point C.


The project will cost around £46billion, vastly more than the county’s
economic output. However, with the resort poised to re-open for the Easter
weekend, the BBC has spoken to local tradespeople who claim that far from
support the economy, the EDF project has savaged it.

 Express 29th March 2024

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1882931/famous-uk-seaside-town-pontins-brean-sands-hinkley-point-c

April 1, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

THE R.A.F’S NUCLEAR FLIGHTS OVER BRITAIN AND THE ATLANTIC

Although the chances of such an accident occurring may be low, the consequences would be high

emergency arrangements would be totally inadequate to protect members of the public.

Little-known to the public, the UK military regularly flies planes carrying highly radioactive material to the US in order to maintain its nuclear weapons system, Trident.

RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR, 27 MARCH 2024,  https://www.declassifieduk.org/the-r-a-fs-nuclear-flights-over-britain-and-the-atlantic/

  • These flights “pose a significant risk to communities across the UK should there be an accident, says Nukewatch
  • “How can we have an independent foreign policy if the cornerstone of Britain’s security relies so heavily on another state?”, asks CND

British military aircraft regularly carry highly radioactive material across the Atlantic to one of the RAF’s largest bases on flights vital to the Trident nuclear weapons system, according to new research, Declassified UK can reveal.

The little-known flights are a lifeline sustaining the ‘special relationship’ embodied in the secretive US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement due to be renewed later this year without the need for any parliamentary scrutiny or even approval.

At least ten of the special round trips between RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and US military bases, usually by large RAF C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft, take place every year, according to Nukewatch, which monitors traffic in nuclear weapons and their components.

In a joint report with Nukewatch, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) told Declassified: “The UK cannot claim to have an independent nuclear weapons system when it is so reliant on the US for technical information and nuclear materials, including these special nuclear flights. 

“By having such a direct involvement in Britain’s nuclear weapons technology, the US exercises significant leverage over the UK’s foreign and defence policy”, it added.

The RAF planes fly from Brize Norton either over the Cotswolds and the Bristol and Cardiff areas before crossing the Atlantic, or over Gloucestershire and the South Wales valleys, heading out to sea over Swansea and the Gower peninsular.

Their destinations include Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, a convenient location for access to US nuclear laboratories and manufacturing plants in New Mexico and northern Texas, and McGhee Tyson Airport, Knoxville, close to nuclear sites in Tennessee.

Radioactive

Although the MoD does not reveal the exact nature of the cargoes, Nukewatch says it can conclude on the basis of its investigations that material in RAF aircraft returning to Britain includes tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen which is used in nuclear warheads. 

Tritium has a relatively short half-life of twelve years, and thus requires constant replacement. Britain does not have facilities to produce tritium and needs to replenish supplies from the US.

The RAF cargo also includes highly enriched uranium (HEU) used for nuclear submarine reactor fuel and warhead components. Uranium fuel is burnt up in submarine reactors and cannot be reused. 

Britain does not have facilities to enrich uranium to the high levels used in submarine reactor fuel and so either HEU must be purchased from the US, or low enriched uranium must be sent to the US for further enrichment.

Plutonium for warhead components has been exchanged with the US in past decades, according to Nukewatch. The cargo is also likely to include security-classified non-nuclear warhead components such as arming, fusing and firing systems as well as radioactive materials and equipment used in nuclear security exercises.  

Refusing details

The US and Britain cooperate closely on security programmes and exercises designed to combat nuclear terrorism.

Some RAF cargoes are loaded on to convoys that transport radioactive and other nuclear weapon-related material loads to and from the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Aldermaston, Berkshire, and other sites involved in Britain’s nuclear weapons programme.

Ministers have refused to give details of the types and quantities of radioactive materials transported in special flights on national security grounds.  

Read more: THE R.A.F’S NUCLEAR FLIGHTS OVER BRITAIN AND THE ATLANTIC

The MoD says the transport of DNM (defence nuclear materials) is carried out in accordance with stringent safety regulations. In more than 50 years transporting DNM in Britain, there has never been an incident that has posed a radiation hazard to the public or to the environment, says Nukewatch quoting the MoD.

The MoD adds that the RAF Immediate Response Force, equipped and trained to identify radiological hazards, are “at a state of readiness” when the aircraft enter British airspace. Brize Norton has a nuclear accident response team equipped to monitor radiation in the event of an aircraft accident.

However, Nukewatch and CND argue that an objective assessment of the level of risk to people living under the flight path cannot be made in the absence of official information on the type of radioactive material the flights are carrying and tests. 

Such tests would determine how to respond to the impact of a high altitude or high velocity crash and any subsequent fire that would be likely to scatter radioactivity over a wide area.

‘Astral Bend’

Although the chances of such an accident occurring may be low, the consequences would be high, the report says. Plutonium and uranium are flammable metals which burn easily if exposed to heat, creating a plume of radioactive smoke that is easily ingested.  

Tritium is a radioactive gas which is also flammable and can easily be incorporated in water and organic compounds, in which form it may be ingested. All three materials are carcinogenic.

The MoD undertakes annual exercises, code-named ‘Astral Bend’, to test the emergency response to an accident involving an RAF aircraft transporting special nuclear materials. Emergency responses would be tightly controlled by the MoD, with the police in charge of civilian emergency services.

Separate assessment reports of Astral Bend exercises have been released under the Freedom of Information Act. They show that despite their preparations, the authorities are not always able to respond well because of the complex and hazardous nature of any such accident.

Following a 2006 exercise, a temporary ban was imposed on highly enriched uranium flights at Brize Norton. Shortfalls in radiation field monitoring, radiation safety procedures, and medical treatment of casualties were identified by the MoD’s internal nuclear watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR), as areas requiring improvement.

Risk of contamination

An Astral Bend exercise in 2010 rehearsed the response to an accident involving a US Air Force plane which had crashed and caught fire, damaging nuclear weapons on board and spreading radioactive contamination around the crash site. 

Assessors concluded that, had there been a real emergency, civilian personnel would have been at risk from explosions and radioactive contamination. This was because the MoD nuclear accident response organisation team “did not emphasise the hazards adequately” and gave “insufficient priority” to liaison with emergency services. 

Difficulties experienced with two subsequent exercises, in 2011 and 2012, were so severe that the MoD was forced to carry out “an overarching, fundamental review” of arrangements for handling nuclear weapons accidents. 

During an exercise at the Caerwent military training area in South Wales mistakes made by emergency services would have led to “avoidable deaths” in a real-life situation, according to exercise assessments.  

The fire service was heavily criticised by the DNSR for refusing to allow ambulance teams to take away seriously injured people until they had been decontaminated. 

The confusion and delays observed during Astral Bend exercises raise questions about whether the MoD’s nuclear safety arrangements are capable of keeping the public, emergency responders, and MoD personnel safe, the report says. 

Experience suggests that emergency arrangements would be totally inadequate to protect members of the public.

Maintaining Trident

The MoD has told Nukewatch in response to a Freedom of Information Act request that releasing the report on the most recent Astral Bend exercise would allow potential adversaries to gain a greater operational understanding of air transport involving defence nuclear materials and emergency response measures.

The release of operational details would make future air transport operations “vulnerable to the potential interception by hostile actors”, which would endanger the safety of the wider public, the MoD argued.

Significantly, it added that providing the information would prejudice its ability to maintain the UK’s Continuous At Sea Deterrence (CASD) – a reference to patrols by Britain’s Trident submarines. 

“There is no wider public interest in reducing the effectiveness of the nuclear deterrent which is the ultimate guarantee of our national security”, the MoD told Nukewatch.

Nigel Day of Nukewatch said: “Ministry of Defence nuclear flights pose a significant risk to communities across the UK should there be an accident. Far from keeping us safe, as the government claims, nuclear weapons actually make things far more dangerous for all of us.” 

Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), told Declassified: “Special nuclear flights are an underreported but critical aspect in maintaining Britain’s nuclear power status. How can we truly have an independent foreign and defence policy if what is vaunted as the cornerstone of our supposed security relies so heavily on another state? 

“It’s time to move away from the current wasteful and dangerous addiction to nuclear arms and to move towards a real defence policy which secures peace rather than deploying weapons of mass destruction.”

Hudson added: “We are also extremely concerned about the safety risks posed by these flights and the poor performance during exercises to prepare authorities for a nuclear accident. Of course, instead of acknowledging these risks and moving towards disarmament, the British government cuts down on transparency by blocking the release of reports on its most recent training exercises.”

March 31, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | 1 Comment

Nuclear waste clean-up company to be prosecuted over alleged cyber blunders

Sellafield Ltd accused of lax IT security at Europe’s largest nuclear facility

Jonathan Leake, 28 March 2024 ,  https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/03/28/sellafield-nuclear-waste-prosecuted-cybersecurity/

A state-owned company responsible for cleaning up decades of nuclear waste at the Sellafield site in Cumbria is being prosecuted over alleged cybersecurity blunders.

It follows an investigation prompted by fears that the business’s digital defences were breached by hackers acting for hostile states such as Russia and China.

Sellafield is Europe’s largest nuclear facility, serving as a testing ground and waste dump since 1947. It houses a massive range of highly radioactive wastes, including 140 tonnes of plutonium – a key ingredient for nuclear weapons.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has told Sellafield Ltd, the business tasked with clean-up, that it will be prosecuted under the Nuclear Industries Security Regulations 2003.

The charges relate to alleged information technology security offences during a four-year period between 2019 and early 2023.

The announcement coincides with reports today that Richard Meal, who is chief information security officer at the Cumbrian site, is to leave later this year.

It follows the departure of Mark Neate, the director responsible for safety and security, who announced in January that he intended to quit in a move that had been planned for some time.

Sellafield has denied claims the site had suffered serious security breaches and the ONR has supported this. The new charges are thought to relate to alleged failures in compliance – meaning they are more about lax security than actual breaches.

An ONR spokesman said there was no suggestion that public safety had been compromised. Details of the first court hearing will be announced when available.

Sellafield Ltd is owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, a quango overseen by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, which is tasked with cleaning 17 decaying nuclear sites across the UK. Sellafield is the most expensive, costing taxpayers £2.5bn last year.

Some government estimates suggest the total cost of the clean-up will reach £263bn, with Sellafield accounting for the largest portion. The site employs 11,000 people and comprises more than 1,000 buildings, many not designed to house the radioactive material now stored in them.

Sellafield is so expensive that the Office for Budget Responsibility, which monitors threats to the UK Government’s finances, has warned that it and other legacy sites pose a “material source of fiscal risk” to the country.

The ONR investigation is in addition to another by the National Audit Office, Britain’s public spending watchdog, which is probing risks and costs at Sellafield and is due to report this autumn.

A Sellafield spokesman said: “The ONR’s Civil Nuclear Security and Safeguards (CNSS) has notified us of its intention to prosecute the company relating to alleged past nuclear industry security regulations compliance. As the issue is now the subject of active court proceedings, we are unable to comment further.”

It follows separate reports by Radioactive Waste Management Ltd (RWM), another government-owned company, that hackers unsuccessfully attempted to breach its defences using LinkedIn.

RWM, now part of Nuclear Waste Services, is the company tasked with designing the long-awaited Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) project,  a vast underground nuclear waste store which would become the final destination for toxic waste now stored at Sellafield.

Nuclear Waste Services is currently seeking a site that would be geologically stable for the millions of years the waste would need to become safe – and which would be acceptable to the local communities hosting it.

Two sites remain in the running, one off the coast of Cumbria and the other off the coast of Lincolnshire, with the choice of site still surrounded in secrecy.

The development is expected to cost taxpayers up to £53bn.

A report filed at Companies House by Nuclear Waste Services said the attempted hacks had failed.

March 31, 2024 Posted by | legal, safety, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

 The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) will prosecute Sellafield Ltd on charges of security offences

 The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has notified Sellafield Ltd that
it will be prosecuted under the Nuclear Industries Security Regulations
2003. These charges relate to alleged information technology security
offences during a four year period between 2019 and early 2023. There is no
suggestion that public safety has been compromised as a result of these
issues. The decision to begin legal proceedings follows an investigation by
ONR, the UK’s independent nuclear regulator. Details of the first court
hearing will be announced when available. Given that some matters are now
subject to legal proceedings, we are unable to comment further.

 ONR 28th March 2024

https://onr.org.uk/news/all-news/2024/03/onr-notifies-sellafield-ltd-of-intention-to-prosecute

March 31, 2024 Posted by | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Sellafield nuclear waste dump to be prosecuted for alleged cybersecurity offences

Charges relate to four-year period between 2019 and early 2023, and follow Guardian investigation

Alex Lawson and Anna Isaac, Fri 29 Mar 2024 , https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/mar/28/sellafield-nuclear-waste-dump-to-be-prosecuted-for-alleged-it-security-offences


The Sellafield nuclear waste dump is to be prosecuted for alleged information technology security offences, the industry watchdog has said.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) said on Thursday that it had notified the state-owned Cumbrian nuclear company that it would be prosecuted under industry security regulations.

The prosecution follows the Guardian’s revelations last year of multiple cyber failings at the vast site, part of a year-long investigation into cyber hacking, radioactive contamination and an unhealthy workplace culture at Sellafield.

The ONR said: “These charges relate to alleged information technology security offences during a four-year period between 2019 and early 2023. There is no suggestion that public safety has been compromised as a result of these issues. The decision to begin legal proceedings follows an investigation by ONR, the UK’s independent nuclear regulator.”

Sellafield, which has more than 11,000 staff, was placed into a form of “special measures” for consistent failings on cybersecurity in 2022, according to sources at the ONR and the security services.

Among the Guardian’s revelations in December were that groups linked to Russia and China had penetrated its computer networks, embedding sleeper malware that could lurk and be used to spy or attack systems. At the time Sellafield said it did not have evidence of a successful cyber-attack.

The site has the largest store of plutonium in the world and is a sprawling rubbish dump for nuclear waste from weapons programmes and decades of atomic power generation.

Other findings in the Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation included concerns about external contractors being able to plug memory sticks into its computer system while unsupervised.

The Guardian also revealed that cyber problems have been known by senior figures at the nuclear site for at least a decade, according to a report dated from 2012, which warned there were “critical security vulnerabilities” that needed to be addressed urgently.

Sellafield’s computer servers were deemed so insecure that the problem was nicknamed Voldemort after the Harry Potter villain, according to a government official familiar with the ONR investigation and IT failings at the site, because it was so sensitive and dangerous.

At the time, Sellafield said that “all of our systems and servers have multiple layers of protection”. “Critical networks that enable us to operate safely are isolated from our general IT network, meaning an attack on our IT system would not penetrate these,” it said.

This week, the Guardian revealed that Richard Meal, Sellafield’s chief information security officer, is to leave the site after more than a decade. He will be the second senior leader to leave this year, after the top director responsible for safety and security, Mark Neate, announced in January that he planned to leave.

In January, Sellafield appointed Graeme Slater as its chief digital information officer, responsible for cybersecurity.

The ONR said details of the first court hearing would be announced “when available”.

Britain’s public spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, last month launched an investigation into risks and costs at Sellafield.

A spokesperson at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, which funds Sellafield, said: “Safety and security at our former nuclear sites is paramount and we fully support the Office for Nuclear Regulation in its independent role as regulator.

“The regulator has made clear that there is no suggestion that public safety has been compromised at Sellafield. Since the period of this prosecution, we have seen a change of leadership at Sellafield and the ONR has noted a clear commitment to address its concerns.”

Sellafield said: “The Office for Nuclear Regulation’s Civil Nuclear Security and Safeguards has notified us of its intention to prosecute the company relating to alleged past nuclear industry security regulations compliance.

“As the issue is now the subject of active court proceedings, we are unable to comment further.”

March 30, 2024 Posted by | Legal, safety, UK, wastes | 1 Comment

Sellafield’s head of information security to step down

Richard Meal is second senior leader to depart following Guardian investigation into failings at UK nuclear waste site

Guardian Alex Lawson and Anna Isaac, 28 Mar 24

A former Royal Air Force officer who has led Sellafield’s information security for more than a decade is to leave the vast nuclear waste site in north-west England, it can be revealed.

Richard Meal, who is chief information security officer at the Cumbrian site, is to leave later this year.

Meal will be the second senior leader to depart the organisation this year, after the top director responsible for safety and security – Mark Neate – announced in January that he planned to leave.

His imminent departure follows several safety and cybersecurity failings, as well as claims of a “toxic” working culture, that were revealed in Nuclear Leaks, a year-long Guardian investigation into Sellafield, late last year. Sellafield said no staff departures were linked to the revelations.

ellafield, which has more than 11,000 staff, was placed into a form of “special measures” in 2022 for consistent failings on cybersecurity, according to sources at the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and the security services.

Sellafield said it did not have evidence of a successful cyber-attack after the Guardian revealed that groups linked to Russia and China had penetrated its networks.

……………………………….. In response to the Guardian’s investigation, the energy secretary, Claire Coutinho, said the reports were “deeply concerning” and wrote to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the state-owned body that ultimately runs Sellafield, demanding a “full explanation”.

In his response, the NDA’s chief executive, David Peattie, said there had been “necessary changes to the leadership, governance, and risk management of cyber” and responsibility for its cyber function had been moved. A new head of cybersecurity took up the role in January. Sellafield declined to name the new appointee.

On announcing his departure, Neate said that he had decided last year “that 2024 was the right time for me to move on”. He will be replaced this week by the current head of the site’s “spent fuel management value stream”, James Millington, on an interim basis.

Separately, Nic Westcott, the former Openreach and Severn Trent executive, was seconded from Nuclear Waste Services in January as interim chief people officer.

In its latest annual report, the ONR stated that “improvements are required” from Sellafield and other sites in order to address cybersecurity risks. It also confirmed that the site was in “significantly enhanced attention” for this activity……………………………

Britain’s public spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, last month launched an investigation into risks and costs at Sellafield.

The Nuclear Leaks series detailed concerns over cracks in the concrete and asphalt skin of a toxic point known as the First Generation Magnox storage pond or informally as “Dirty 30”. This week, Sellafield said that the building had been “prioritised for cleanup” by the NDA and that the first “zeolite skip” – containers used to absorb radiation in the 1970s and 1980s – had been removed and placed in a shielded box.

Separately, Sellafield released its gender pay report for the year to 5 April 2023, which showed the median gender pay gap had risen to 13.7% from 11.3% a year earlier. The proportion of women in the upper quartile of its pay scale was static, at 18%………………… https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/mar/27/sellafields-head-of-information-security-to-step-down

March 30, 2024 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

New NATO member Finland admits US pact ‘restricts sovereignty’

The DCA gives the American military access to 15 bases in Finland and allows the deployment of military equipment and supplies on Finnish territory, as well as the free movement of US aircraft, ships, and vehicles. Members of the US military and the facilities they use would also get special legal protections.

29 Mar 2024  https://www.sott.net/article/490230-New-NATO-member-admits-US-pact-restricts-sovereignty

A military agreement with Washington comes at a cost, Helsinki has acknowledged

A new military cooperation deal agreed with Washington will limit Helsinki’s sovereignty, the Finnish Foreign Ministry said on Thursday, advising that its ratification will therefore require a two-thirds majority in the parliament.

Finland joined NATO in April 2023, abandoning a decades-long policy of neutrality. It began negotiating a Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with the US almost immediately, and signed it last December.

A working group led by the Foreign Ministry was set up to draft the ratification protocols which were formally sent to the country’s parliament for comments on Thursday, the ministry announced.

“The working group concludes that the DCA would restrict Finland’s sovereignty, which is why Parliament’s acceptance of the agreement would require a two-thirds majority of the votes cast,” the ministry press release said. The parliament has until May 12 to comment on the draft proposal.

The DCA gives the American military access to 15 bases in Finland and allows the deployment of military equipment and supplies on Finnish territory, as well as the free movement of US aircraft, ships, and vehicles. Members of the US military and the facilities they use would also get special legal protections.

When the DCA was signed, Finnish Defense Minister Antti Hakkanen said it was “a guarantee from the world’s largest military power that they will defend us.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin responded by saying that Helsinki previously enjoyed cordial relations with Moscow and had no disputes, territorial or otherwise, but chose to side with the US-led bloc anyway.

“There was no trouble. Now there will be,” Putin said in December. “We will now create the Leningrad Military District and concentrate certain military units there.”

Comment: As has happened before, the step from EU to NATO was a matter of time. The Finnish government managed to sell the concept of joining NATO, next is to improve on the level of subjugation, let the US do more of what it wants within Finland, thus moving from being a mere vassal to becoming a more fully occupied state. Finland is not alone, somewhat similar agreements have been concluded between the US and the other Nordic countries.

March 30, 2024 Posted by | Finland, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Special nuclear flights between the US and UK: the dangers involved

CND, March 24

Despite claiming to have an independent nuclear weapons system, for more than sixty years Britain and the United States have been transferring and sharing technical
information, nuclear materials, and warhead components for use in each other’s nuclear weapons programmes.

One important way in which transfers of nuclear materials and technology are carried out between Britain and the US is through special flights into and out of Royal Air Force (RAF) Brize Norton, near Carterton in Oxfordshire. Read more about these special nuclear flights in this briefing, written in association with Nukewatch.  https://cnduk.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Special-nuclear-flights-between-the-US-and-UK-1.pdf

March 30, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Assange Extradition Delayed Unless US Provides ‘Assurances’ He Won’t Be Executed for Revealing the Truth

By Diego Ramos ScheerPost, March 26, 2024,  https://scheerpost.com/2024/03/26/assange-extradition-delayed-unless-us-provides-assurances/

If the U.S. fails to file assurances in three weeks, Assange will be granted permission to appeal.

The British High Court has accepted three elements of Julian Assange’s appeal against his extradition to the U.S., delaying the process for some time. Unless the U.S. provides “assurances” for Assange’s appeals, including protection against the death penalty, the WikiLeaks founder will be granted a new appeal.

Despite U.S. officials promising Assange would not be subject to capital punishment, the court ruled “nothing in the existing assurance explicitly prevents the imposition of the death penalty.”

The U.S. government has until April 16 to file these assurances and if done so, Assange will have until April 30 to respond and the U.S. is to answer back by May 14, with a hearing considering the leave to appeal on May 20. If the U.S. fails to file assurances in three weeks, Assange will be granted permission to appeal.

Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson of the British High Court agreed with the following points in Assange’s appeal:

  • a) if extradited, the applicant might be prejudiced at his trial by reason of his nationality (contrary to section 81(b) of the 2003 Act), and 
  • b) as a consequence of a), but only as a consequence of a), extradition is incompatible with article 10 of the Convention. [In the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), article 10 protects the right to freedom of expression.]
  • The applicant has established an arguable case that the Secretary of State’s decision was wrong because extradition is barred by inadequate specialty/death penalty protection.

The judges dismissed appeal of Assange’s other points including:

  • The UK-US Extradition treaty (the Treaty) prohibits extradition for a political [offense] (and the [offenses] with which the applicant is charged fall within that category).
  • The extradition request was made for the purpose of prosecuting the applicant on account of his political opinions (contrary to section 81(a) of the 2003 Act).
  • Extradition is incompatible with article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) (which provides there should be no punishment without law).
  • Extradition is incompatible with article 6 of the Convention (right to a fair trial).
  • Extradition is incompatible with articles 2 and 3 of the Convention (right to life, and prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment).

The judges acknowledged that extradition for “political opinions” has been barred in English law, citing the Extradition Act 1870 and 1989. However, in examining the Extradition Act 2003, the judges separate “political [offense]” from “political opinions,” stating “[The Extradition Act 2003] says nothing, however, about preventing extradition for a political [offense]. Although there may be a degree of overlap, the two are separate concepts.”

Stella Assange, Julian Assange’s wife, spoke outside the court stating, “The Biden administration should not issue assurances. They should drop this shameful case, which should never have been brought.”

Significantly, the court also rejected “fresh evidence” from the Assange team with regards to the Yahoo News article written by Zach Dorfman, Sean D Naylor and Michael Isikoff that exposed a plot by former CIA Director Mike Pompeo and others to kidnap or assassinate Assange during his time at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

Despite the evidence exposed by the article, the judges ruled, “Extradition would result in him being lawfully in the custody of the United States authorities, and the reasons (if they can be called that) for rendition or kidnap or assassination then fall away.”

Assange enters his fifth year of imprisonment inside Belmarsh Prison, where his physical and mental health has significantly deteriorated.

March 29, 2024 Posted by | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Putin says Russia will not attack NATO, but F-16s will be shot down in Ukraine

By Reuters, March 28, 2024,  https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-tells-pilots-f16s-can-carry-nuclear-weapons-they-wont-change-things-2024-03-27/

  • Summary
  • Russia will not attack NATO, Putin says
  • Putin says Russia will not attack Poland, Baltic states
  • Putin says Western F-16s will be shot down in Ukraine

MOSCOW, March 28 (Reuters) – Russia has no designs on any NATO country and will not attack Poland, the Baltic states or the Czech Republic but if the West supplies F-16 fighters to Ukraine then they will be shot down by Russian forces, President Vladimir Putin said late on Wednesday.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has triggered the deepest crisis in Russia’s relations with the West since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Speaking to Russian air force pilots, Putin said the U.S.-led military alliance had expanded eastwards towards Russia since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union but that Moscow had no plans to attack a NATO state.

“We have no aggressive intentions towards these states,” Putin said, according to a Kremlin transcript released on Thursday.

“The idea that we will attack some other country – Poland, the Baltic States, and the Czechs are also being scared – is complete nonsense. It’s just drivel.”

The Kremlin, which accuses the U.S. of fighting against Russia by supporting Ukraine with money, weapons and intelligence, says relations with Washington have probably never been worse.

Asked about F-16 fighters which the West has promised to send to Ukraine, Putin said such aircraft would not change the situation in Ukraine.

“If they supply F-16s, and they are talking about this and are apparently training pilots, this will not change the situation on the battlefield,” Putin said.

“And we will destroy the aircraft just as we destroy today tanks, armoured vehicles and other equipment, including multiple rocket launchers.”

Putin said that F-16 could also carry nuclear weapons.

“Of course, if they will be used from airfields in third countries, they become for us legitimate targets, wherever they might be located,” Putin said.

Putin’s remarks followed comments earlier in the day by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba that the aircraft should arrive in Ukraine in the coming months.

Ukraine, now more than two years into a full-fledged war against Russia, has sought F-16s for many months.

Belgium, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands are among countries which have pledged to donate F-16s. A coalition of countries has promised to help train Ukrainian pilots in their use.

March 29, 2024 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »