Russian news reports NATO to open base in Moldova near Transnistria
Подробнее https://tverskaya13.ru/politika/nato-postoit-v-moldove-novuyu-voennuyu-bazu/
NATO to build new military base in Moldova According to Defense Minister Anatoly Nosaty, a new military base will be built in Chisinau, where the Moldovan army will be trained. It is important to note that the facility will be built according to NATO standards
NATO will provide the necessary funds. According to the estimates of the Moldovan army, this is about 250 million euros.
“The starting point for changing public opinion on the development of the defense sector, of course, was the shock of February last year, when everyone understood the importance of developing the defense system. In other words, the period of romanticism with the dream of “eternal peace” has ended, and a different approach is needed, ” said State Secretary of the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Moldova Valery Mizha.
Also, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Dorin Rechan, said that the reason for the decision to strengthen the country’s defense was precisely Russia, because only it ” poses an immediate threat to Moldova’s security.”
“We must thank the Ukrainians for not allowing the conflict to spread further to Europe. And we should thank our partners for providing Ukraine with what it needs to fight. Russia is an open threat to Moldova’s security. Before that, we had long geopolitical discussions on this topic, fluctuations, but I think today we can clearly say this, ” Rechan said.
Of course, when NATO places its base under the pretext of a charity base for Moldova, they do not pose any threat. Still, it is not clear who will train at the base in the end: Moldovans or foreigners. In any case, as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, it is immediately clear that NATO is preparing a second Ukraine from the country, since its president Maia Sandu is ready for almost anything.
Ciaron says he was arrested for trying to give ‘the key to Julian Assange’s cell’ to Joe Biden
Ciaron O’Reilly says he was attempting to deliver “the key to Julian Assange’s cell” to US President Joe Biden, who is facing calls to drop extradition proceedings against the Wikileaks co-founder.
15 April 2023 By David Aidone, SBS News
KEY POINTS
- An Australian activist says he was arrested for protesting outside Dublin Castle during US President Joe Biden’s visit.
- Ciaron O’Reilly held a key-shaped placard demanding freedom for Julian Assange.
- Mr Assange, co-founder of WikiLeaks, is fighting extradition to the US.
An Australian anti-war activist and former bodyguard to Julian Assange claims he was arrested after staging a protest outside Dublin Castle in Ireland where United States President Joe Biden was attending an event this week.
Ciaron O’Reilly posted pictures of himself on social media holding a novelty-sized key-shaped placard emblazoned with the words “President Biden, Free Julian Assange“.
Mr O’Reilly said he was attempting to deliver the key to Mr Biden, who was on a four-day trip to Northern Ireland and Ireland honouring the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement.
He said he was arrested by officers of Garda Siochana, the national police service of Ireland, after protesting outside Dublin Castle while a banquet was being held for Mr Biden.
“Joe seemed to have dropped his key to #JulianAssange’s cell, I was merely returning it!,” Mr O’Reilly wrote on Twitter.
“We need to #FreeAssangeNOW! O’Reilly was wrestled to the ground by members of the GardaiSiochana outside #Dublin Castle where a banquet was underway during the #Biden visit,” the post read…………………………………… more https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/ciaron-says-he-was-arrested-for-trying-to-give-the-key-to-julian-assanges-cell-to-joe-biden/d4rc1q76w
Media falsely blames Russia, as Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) target Donbass towns with illegal “butterfly” cluster mines.
Protest rally against Kiev’s cluster mines, Donetsk August 2022
Undermining Ukraine. April 16, 2023, By Dimaq https://1489.is/undermining-ukraine/
the BBC's James Waterhouse reports from Balakliya: "It’s hard to describe this as anything other than.. random. This is a patch of land, in the middle of Balakliya, it’s not a place - unlike other areas - that was once contested, where there was heavy fighting." "- but what these minesweepers are looking for, are so-called Butterfly mines. They’re banned by international law, they don’t look much, but the damage they can cause, is severe. They’re scattered from a flying rocket. They’re illegal because of the indiscriminate way they kill and injure civilians. In the area around Izyum, Russia and Ukraine have both been accused of using Butterfly mines; the latter denies it." To my knowledge, no Western media has ever reported on the AFU's shelling of Donetsk and Gorlovka and other towns under Russia's control, with Butterfly cluster mines. If there were any such reports, the question of who fired the rockets would have been fogged, such as by saying that "both sides possess these anti-personnel mines". Attempts to enlighten media or government ministers on the existence and use of these nasty and insidious little devices, such as I recorded here last July - have fallen on deaf ears. This is despite the fact that their use is now forbidden under all circumstances, and Ukraine is the only country that still has stocks of the Soviet-era weapon, following the destruction of the last of those remaining in Belarus several years ago. It is also despite the proven fact that the AFU has been using the cluster munitions, and using them against purely civilian targets with no possible military objective. (as noted by James Waterhouse above, unwittingly accusing the AFU of this war crime) Against this background, it is astonishing that the BBC should now act as a vehicle for Kiev's criminal actions by spreading a misleading story about de-mining operations in Izyum. The story, broadcast on the 6 O'Clock BBC news on April 11th, was also presented more or less word for word in an illustrated article, which I copy below [on original] . I also copy the video, which demonstrates the depth of deceit in the whole report - the deceit being that Russia never used Lepestok Petal mines near Izyum or anywhere else in Ukraine, and the BBC and Human Rights Watch know this perfectly well. What we see here is actually Ukrainian army sappers searching out the petal mines that they themselves fired at Izyum while it was under Russian "occupation", in the same way that they fired them into other areas of Lugansk and Donetsk further East at around the same time. Russian sappers have spent thousands of hours de-mining around Donetsk, finding and destroying the thousands of "little rippers" before they blow the legs off more innocent civilians. This is quite unlike most de-mining operations, where forces taking control of new territory must remove all the mines left by their opponents as barriers to slow enemy progress. The use of Lepestok cluster munitions by the AFU has more in common with Israel's use of cluster bombs in Southern Lebanon at the end of the 2006 war - an act of pure vindictive vandalism given the ceasefire agreement had already been made. Before presenting the BBC's article and video about this incredible exercise, where Ukrainian soldiers are doing the job that they should be performing as part of a punishment for the crime they committed six months earlier, it is important to add some more context to the situation. At the time the AFU made a move in the North East, Russian forces were pre-occupied with protecting the Zaporyzhe Nuclear power plant from Ukrainian incursions and shelling, as well as trying to prevent the forced evacuation of Kherson. With reported help from MI6 and other NATO special forces, Ukraine launched a surprise offensive towards Lugansk oblast, forcing a strategic retreat by Russia from Izyum. Many of the locals accompanied them, to avoid retribution and torture as "Russian collaborators" from the invading Nationalist army. As soon as the town was "liberated" by Kiev, work began to frame Russia for supposed war crimes, including a grotesque exhumation of hundreds of bodies from a wood near the town. Those buried were mostly civilians killed by either side when Russian forces took over the town, as well as those killed by Ukrainian shelling since. While they may have lacked coffins, all the graves were identified, at least by a number, with the inventory of burials available at the local mortuary. In some cases where local people had fled East or North to Russia, they had no say in the exhumation and examination of their dead relatives. Human Rights Watch and other International bodies were closely involved in this fraud, and the claims that Russia was responsible for burying soldiers in "mass graves" in Izyum rapidly assumed a prominent status in Western media, aided by a visit from Mr Zelensky. Fittingly, as indicated in this photo [0n original], one of his guards wore a Totenkopf skull symbol on his backpack. Below [on original] is James Waterhouse’s article, with this leading illustration, and quote falsely attributing the mines to Russia. The Russian army may have laid some mines on roads West of Izyum, but scattering APM clusters would have served no purpose whatsoever. If Russia subsequently manages to retake this territory, they will surely thank the AFU for removing their butterfly mines. The AFU in its turn may think better of showering territory it intends to capture with its “little rippers”.
German protests against Framatome’s nuclear fuel production in Lingen.
Stratera Media Group 25 Apr 23
Shortly before the shutdown of the Emsland nuclear power plant, anti-nuclear activists in Lingen held a protest for the final rejection of nuclear power in Germany. At noon on Saturday, opponents of nuclear power gathered in front of the ANF fuel cell plant, which is owned by the French Framatome group. A representative of the AgiEL – AtomkraftgegnerInnen im Emsland alliance spoke about about 300 demonstrators gathered. A police official gave a preliminary estimate of about 100 participants………………..
The protest of opponents of nuclear energy is held under the motto: “Anyone who talks about abandoning nuclear power should also close the fuel cell production plant!” A joint venture between Framatome and the Russian state-owned Rosatom, which wants to produce fuel rods for Eastern European nuclear power plants in Lingen, was recently criticized. The relevant application is currently being reviewed by the Lower Saxony Nuclear Supervision Authority.
“Such cooperation is scandalous and politically irresponsible,” Susanna Gerstner, chairman of the Bundestag of Germany (Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, BUND) from the state of Lower Saxony, said in a statement. “We urgently call on the responsible Minister of Environment and Energy, Christian Mayer, to reject the current application of the operating company to expand production!” According to her, the federal and state governments should commit to a consistent phase-out of nuclear power, which also includes shutting down the Lingen fuel cell plant.
The fuel cell plant’s operator, ANF, has rejected calls for the plant to close. “Framatome Advanced Nuclear Fuels (ANF) has an unlimited operating license. The plant has been producing fuel elements with a high level of safety for more than 45 years and always complies with all legal requirements and procedures, ” the company explained to Deutsche Presse-Agentur.
‘It’s time to pump the brakes on reintroduction of nuclear energy to Trawsfynydd’
By Patrick O’Brien | Columnist |Sunday 16th April 2023
‘It’s time to pump the brakes on reintroduction of nuclear energy to
Trawsfynydd’. Giving SMRs a clean bill of health in advance of any
researched-based demonstration that such is justified is bad enough, but en
route there is a sweeping assertion about the utter desirability of all
nuclear power – past and present.
For any deniers of the proposition, this
is a meltdown moment. SMRs, which can generate up to 300 megawatts, or
about two-thirds less than traditional nuclear power reactors. They are
claimed to be safer because of increased use of smart innovative technology
and inherent safety features.
So how solid is the SMR safety case? The
jury’s out. In 2021, the intergovernmental Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA)
established an expert group on SMRs “to handle safety challenges and
develop a solid scientific basis which supports safety demonstration of the
advanced and innovative technologies used for SMRs”.
But the NEA is clear
that much research on safety remains to be done. The Welsh Government,
meanwhile, is brimming over with enthusiasm, insisting its proposed project
will become essential for the diagnosis and treatment of a number of
diseases, and that its north Wales facility would be a global centre of
excellence in nuclear medicine, making Wales the leading location for
medical radioisotope production in the UK, leading to the creation of
highly skilled jobs over several decades.
But it’s time to slow down. The
NEA’s reticence on safety means it’s necessary for the government – and
Patrick Loxdale – to take a deep breath and, no doubt with difficulty,
reserve judgment.
Cambrian News 15th April 2023
A new era’: Germany quits nuclear power, closing its final three plants
“There will be a moment of decision as to whether nuclear really has a future”
By Laura Paddison, Nadine Schmidt and Inke Kappeler, CNN, 15 Apr 23
Germany’s final three nuclear power plants close their doors on Saturday, marking the end of the country’s nuclear era that has spanned more than six decades.
Nuclear power has long been contentious in Germany.
There are those who want to end reliance on a technology they view as unsustainable, dangerous and a distraction from speeding up renewable energy.
But for others, closing down nuclear plants is short-sighted. They see it as turning off the tap on a reliable source of low-carbon energy at a time when drastic cuts to planet-heating pollution are needed.
Even as these debates rumble on, and despite last-minute calls to keep the plants online amid an energy crisis, the German government has been steadfast.
“The position of the German government is clear: nuclear power is not green. Nor is it sustainable,” Steffi Lemke, Germany’s Federal Minister for the Environment and Consumer Protection and a Green Party member, told CNN.
“We are embarking on a new era of energy production,” she said.
A plan decades in the making
The closure of the three plants – Emsland, Isar 2 and Neckarwestheim – represents the culmination of a plan set in motion more than 20 years ago. But its roots are even older.
In the 1970s, a strong anti-nuclear movement in Germany emerged. Disparate groups came together to protest new power plants, concerned about the risks posed by the technology and, for some, the link to nuclear weapons. The movement gave birth to the Green Party, which is now part of the governing coalition.
Nuclear accidents fueled the opposition: The partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania in 1979 and the 1986 catastrophe at Chernobyl that created a cloud of radioactive waste which reached parts of Germany.
In 2000, the German government pledged to phase out nuclear power and start shutting down plants. But when a new government came to power in 2009, it seemed – briefly – as if nuclear would get a reprieve as a bridging technology to help the country move to renewable energy.
Then Fukushima happened.
In March 2011, an earthquake and tsunami caused three reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant to melt down. For many in Germany, Japan’s worst nuclear disaster was confirmation “that assurances that a nuclear accident of a large scale can’t happen are not credible,” Miranda Schreurs, professor of environment and climate policy at the Technical University of Munich, told CNN.
Three days later then-Chancellor Angela Merkel – a physicist who was previously pro-nuclear – made a speech called it an “inconceivable catastrophe for Japan” and a “turning point” for the world. She announced Germany would accelerate a nuclear phase-out, with older plants shuttered immediately.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, however, provided another plot twist.
Fearful of its energy security without Russian gas, the German government delayed its plan to close the final three plants in December 2022. Some urged a rethink.
But the government declined, agreeing to keep them running only until April 15.
For those in the anti-nuclear movement, it’s a moment of victory.
“It is a great achievement for millions of people who have been protesting nuclear in Germany and worldwide for decades,” Paul-Marie Manière, a spokesperson for Greenpeace, told CNN
A polarizing energy
For critics of Germany’s policy, however, it’s irrational to turn off a low-carbon source of energy as the impacts of the climate crisis intensify……………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………..supporters of the nuclear shutdown argue it will ultimately hasten the end of fossil fuels.
Germany has pledged to close its last coal-fired power station no later than 2038, with a 2030 deadline in some areas. It’s aiming for 80% of electricity to come from renewables by the end of this decade.
While more coal was added in the months following Fukushima, Schreurs said, nuclear shutdowns have seen a big push on clean energy. “That urgency and demand can be what it takes to push forward on the growth of renewables,” she said.
Representatives for Germany’s renewable energy industry said the shutdown will open the door for more investment into clean energy……….
Representatives for Germany’s renewable energy industry said the shutdown will open the door for more investment into clean energy.
“Germany’s phase-out of nuclear power is a historic event and an overdue step in energy terms,” Simone Peter, president of the German Renewable Energy Federation (BEE), told CNN. “It is high time that we leave the nuclear age behind and consistently organize the renewable age.”
The impacts of nuclear power shouldn’t be overlooked either, Schreurs said, pointing to the carbon pollution created by uranium mining as well as the risk of health complications for miners. Plus, it creates a dependency on Russia, which supplies uranium for nuclear plants, she added.
Nuclear has also shown itself to have vulnerabilities to the climate crisis. France was forced to reduce nuclear power generation last year as the rivers used to cool reactors became too hot during Europe’s blistering heatwave.
A million-year problem
Now Germany must work out what do with the deadly, high-level radioactive waste, which can remain dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years.
Currently, the nuclear waste is kept in interim storage next to the nuclear plants being decommissioned. But the search is on to find a permanent location where the waste can be stored safely for a million years.
The site needs to be deep – hundreds of meters underground. Only certain types of rock will do: Crystalline granite, rock salt or clay rock. It must be geologically stable with no risks of earthquakes or signs of underground rivers.
The process is likely to be fraught, complex and breathtakingly long – potentially lasting more than 100 years.
BGE, the Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal, estimates a final site won’t be chosen until between 2046 and 2064. After that, it will take decades more to build the repository, fill it with the waste and seal it.
What are other countries doing?
Plenty of other countries are treading paths similar to Germany’s. Denmark passed a resolution in the 1980s not to construct nuclear power plants, Switzerland voted in 2017 to phase out nuclear power, Italy closed its last reactors in 1990 and Austria’s one nuclear plant has never been used.
But, in the context of the war in Ukraine, soaring energy prices and pressure to reduce carbon pollution, others still want nuclear in the mix.
The UK, in the process of building a nuclear power plant, said in its recent climate strategy that energy nuclear power has a “crucial” role in “creating secure, affordable and clean energy.”
France, which gets about 70% of its power from nuclear, is planning six new reactors, and Finland opened a new nuclear plant last year. Even Japan, still dealing with the aftermath of Fukushima, is considering restarting reactors.
The US, the world’s biggest nuclear power, is also investing in nuclear energy and, in March, started up a new nuclear reactor, Vogtle 3 in Georgia – the first in years.
But experts suggest this doesn’t mark the start of a nuclear ramp up. Vogtle 3 came online six years late and at a cost of $30 billion, twice the initial budget.
It encapsulates the big problem that afflicts the whole nuclear industry: making the economics add up. New plants are expensive and can take more than a decade to build. “Even the countries that are talking pro-nuclear are having big trouble developing nuclear power,” Schreurs said.
Many nuclear power plants in Europe, the US and elsewhere are aging – plants have an operating life of around 40 to 60 years. As Germany puts an end to its nuclear era, it’s coming up to crunch time for others, Schreurs said.
“There will be a moment of decision as to whether nuclear really has a future”
CNN’s Chris Stern contributed reporting.
UN’s nuclear chief warns ‘we are living on borrowed time’ after two landmine explosions near Europe’s largest atomic power station in Ukraine
- UN has often expressed fears over the safety of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia plant
- Two landmine explosions took place outside plant’s perimeter this month
- Russian forces took control of the six-reactor plant in Ukraine in March last year
Daily Mail, By ARTHUR PARASHAR, 14 April 2023
A UN nuclear chief has warned ‘we are living on borrowed time’ after two landmine explosions near Europe’s largest atomic power station in Ukraine.
Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has repeatedly expressed fears over the safety of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia plant.
……….. We are living on borrowed time when it comes to nuclear safety and security at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant,’ Mr Grossi said yesterday.
‘Unless we take action to protect the plant, our luck will sooner or later run out, with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment,’ he added.
Two landmines exploded outside the plant’s perimeter fence – the first on April 8, and another four days later on Wednesday, according to the statement.
It was not immediately clear what caused the blasts, it said.
Grossi met senior Russian officials in Kaliningrad last week and prior to this with Zelensky in Zaporizhzhia to discuss a safety plan.
He also warned yesterday that the plant continued to depend on a single still-functioning power line, posing ‘a major risk to nuclear safety and security’.
A back-up power line damaged on March 1 has still not been repaired, the IAEA said.
It added that the staffing situation at the plant remained ‘complex and challenging’, in part because of staff shortages.
Last month, Grossi warned that a nuclear disaster was very possible due to the ‘perilous’ situation at the plant.
‘The plant’s lack of access to the grid and necessary repair work on its last emergency power line could cause a complete loss of power, making it reliant on diesel generators for the seventh time since Russia captured it,’ Grossi said at the time.
I once again call for a commitment from all sides to secure nuclear safety and security protection at the plant,’ he added.
Emergency diesel generators had been activated to power the plant’s safety systems, according to Ukrainian nuclear energy agency Energoatom, which has warned of the risk of an accident.
Without the electricity produced by these generators, the overheating of the reactor fuel could cause a nuclear accident, as in Japan’s Fukushima in 2011……………………………………..more https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11972139/UNs-nuclear-chief-warns-living-borrowed-time-two-explosions-near-Zaporizhzhia.html
Nuclear storage dump opponents sweep into Theddlethorpe parish council
Residents have organised against storage plans
The Lincolnite, By Daniel Jaines Local Democracy Reporter 13 Apr 23
Candidates opposing a nuclear storage dump have surged to power in Theddlethorpe in a demonstration of local opposition.
Eight of the ten seats on two Theddlethorpe Parish Councils – St Helen’s and All Saints – have been filled uncontested by people against to Nuclear Waste Service’s plans for a Geological Disposal Facility in the village.
Nearby residents were in uproar after it was announced last year that the Theddlethorpe Gas Terminal could become the entry point for a nuclear storage facility to dispose of around 10% of the UK’s nuclear waste.
The new councillors, who will automatically become councillors after the May 4 local elections, are all part of Theddlethorpe Residents Association.
Members Brian Swift and Andrew Spink formed it after their application to join the parish councils were rejected in 2021.
Mr Swift said: “We were both turned down, but shortly after this we got together with a few neighbours and formed the Theddlethorpe Residents Association with the aim to give the parish a collective voice and to counter the PC’s negative stance.”
Since its inception, the residents association has garnered more than 120 members and holds regular events.
However, Mr Swift said the anti-GDF sentiment of the members would not mean other views would be unwelcome.
“Despite the fact that the majority of the councillors are now anti-GDF ,we are keen to stress that all points of view are welcome. Our priorities are to carry out the parish council’s functions to the best of our ability and to do our utmost to see that the village thrives and continues to be the friendly, united place we all call home,” he said………………………. more https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2023/04/nuclear-storage-dump-opponents-sweep-into-theddlethorpe-parish-council/—
Nuclear is not the solution to our energy troubles.
France pays a price for its energy security. President Macron has announced plans to build 6 new reactors by 2050 – and they’re much needed to replace the country’s ageing fleet of power stations – but he was warned very publicly just two months ago that he needs to have a credible programme to deal with the fourth issue: nuclear waste and both from the new planned plants and from the new ones. Right now, France’s nuclear waste facilities are close to over-flowing. In reality, if you’re worried about reactor safety, you should really be a lot more worried about nuclear waste. The full decommissioning process for a nuclear plant takes between 20 and 30 years. ……………….Furthermore, those small, modular nuclear power stations on which the Tory position relies? According to research published last year by Stanford University and the University of British Columbia, they produce more waste than conventional nuclear power plants.
Reaction Giga Watt, April 13, 2023
Both the current UK government and the likely next government want to embrace nuclear power.
Rishi Sunak has commissioned an energy review that will focus on “carbon capture and storage, small modular reactors and the like”. Keir Starmer’s proposed “Great British Energy” would invest in nuclear energy alongside wind, solar, tidal and other emerging technologies. There’s nothing new about nuclear power and if it was the solution to all our problems – and on the face of it, it should be – the world would have already fully embraced nuclear, risks and all. So why haven’t we?
………… burning fossil fuels is very much not consequence free and we’re only just starting to get serious about those consequences and no amount of “clean” coal, unleaded fuel, catalytic converters, wonderful though they are, can make up for this.
Secondly, nuclear power is scary: the world’s first public demonstrations of nuclear power were at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Roughly once a decade since then, the world has provided us with reminders of just how frightening nuclear power can be: the Cuban Missile Crisis, Three Mile Island, Exercise Able Archer, Chernobyl, Fukushima and Zaporizhzhia are all examples from the past 60 years where the perils of a nuclear world have been brought home to us.
………………………………………………………………….. It’s also true that the rise of more sophisticated terrorist organisations made the public and thereby politicians wary of the nuclear industry especially from 9/11 onwards. If terrorists can fly two large aeroplanes into the heart of the biggest financial centre in the world then surely an isolated power station would be a much easier target………….. At Zaporizhzhia in Ukraine during the current conflict, the issue is less about the impact on the reactors themselves from Russian shelling but the impact on waste storage facilities and power supplies to cooling and safety systems
……….As the Zaporizhzhia reactors were being switched off, they still needed to be continuously cooled with water from the Dnieper to ensure safe shutdown because they produce so much heat. Uranium-filled fuel rods, the source of nuclear fission within the reactor, are immersed in water for around 10 years after they are used before they reach a temperature at which they can be safely handled. It’s this efficiency that makes nuclear power an unusual part of the energy mix as, unlike gas or coal, you can’t easily turn the output up or down. Nuclear energy just is.
This means that in a system that requires flexibility, and remembering that UK electricity demand can swing between 40 GWs and 20 GWs in just one day, nuclear power is unsuited to modern demands. ………………….
France pays a price for its energy security. President Macron has announced plans to build 6 new reactors by 2050 – and they’re much needed to replace the country’s ageing fleet of power stations – but he was warned very publicly just two months ago that he needs to have a credible programme to deal with the fourth issue: nuclear waste and both from the new planned plants and from the new ones. Right now, France’s nuclear waste facilities are close to over-flowing. In reality, if you’re worried about reactor safety, you should really be a lot more worried about nuclear waste. The full decommissioning process for a nuclear plant takes between 20 and 30 years. ……………….Furthermore, those small, modular nuclear power stations on which the Tory position relies? According to research published last year by Stanford University and the University of British Columbia, they produce more waste than conventional nuclear power plants.
Part of the problem with waste is that, even as we approach the 70th anniversary of the first nuclear power stations, there is still no global consensus on how best to handle high level nuclear waste because the timeframes are so immense. What seems like an obvious solution today – for example, storing waste in deep geological repositories hundreds of metres below the ground – may end up being a total disaster in 500 or even 5,000 years’ time. What do those timescales mean? It means asking Henry VIII, King of England in 1523, to make decisions about the country we live in today. Unsurprisingly we have ended up with a halfway house: everyone agrees that toxic waste can be treated and converted into less dangerous (but still very dangerous) forms; everyone also agrees that it’s probably best if it’s stored underground but no one can yet agree what underground means and what the risks will be over the centuries to come.
And if the timescales are immense, then so are the costs: the Sellafield facility in Cumbria is being decommissioned with a current cost estimate of £121 billion which does not included the placing of the waste from the site into a geological disposal facility, the location and timing of which are to be determined, which will cost another £53 billion.
At least Henry VIII would not have had to deal with our fifth hurdle: the British planning system and an island cluttered with around 65 million people and it’s this, perhaps above all, that makes new nuclear projects vanishingly unlikely. I don’t want to live next to a nuclear power station of any size and I doubt many Reaction subscribers would either but because we live in an age of Nimbyism, it’s doubtful that any of us will be asked to do so anyway. Even if we are, and if the project is approved, investment is found and if construction starts, you can look forward to the project, counting from today, delivering power in roughly 2035 and that’s being very optimistic.
……………………. over the past ten years, the UK has done so much to change its energy mix that investing in nuclear now, with all the cost, time and controversy involved, would be a significant mistake. It seems unlikely that it will take Sunak and Starmer, arch-pragmatists that they both are, very long to work this out. https://reaction.life/nuclear-is-not-the-solution-to-our-energy-troubles/
Ukraine-Russia war – live: Damning Pentagon leak has not affected relations, Kyiv says
Sravasti Dasgupta,Liam James,Vishwam Sankaran, Independent UK, 15 Apr 23
Documents hinted Ukraine faced challenges in massing troops, equipment, and ammunition
Top officials in Kyiv said that information on Ukraine’s war efforts against Russia — that was part of leaked US Pentagon documents — was already known and not surprising.
The leaked documents hinted that Ukraine faced challenges in massing troops, equipment, and ammunition and that Kyiv may fall short of counter-offensive goals.
A senior Ukrainian official told BBC that the problems faced by the country were already known, adding that the leaks would not affect relations between the two countries.
Meanwhile, Moscow’s defence ministry has claimed that military pilots from Belarus have completed training to use Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons.
Belarusian defence minister Viktor Khrenin threatened the West that “it could be the next step” to also host part of Moscow’s strategic arsenal, claiming: “We are already preparing the sites that we have.”
On the battlefield in Ukraine, Kyiv has been forced to concede ground in the bloody battle for Bakhmut after being bombarded with “particularly intense” Russian artillery fire over the past 48 hours, Britain’s Ministry of Defence said.
It suggested Ukraine may fall short of its goals to launch a counter-offensive against Russia.
Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council head Oleksiy Danilov said the leaks did not affect the military’s plans, adding that “everything will be decided at the last moment”.
Russia warns of Ukraine weapons spillover
Western arms meant for Kiev are also falling into the hands of organized crime and terrorists, Moscow’s UN envoy has said. https://www.rt.com/russia/574516-ukraine-west-weapons-spillover-criminals/ 12 Apr 23
Weapons being sent to Ukraine by its Western backers often end up benefitting malicious actors across the globe, Moscow’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said on Monday.
Speaking at a UN Security Council meeting on risks associated with weapons exports, Moscow’s envoy claimed that while Western countries had been trying to promote “responsible behavior” over arms trafficking, the Ukraine conflict proved “how insincere their claims” on the matter actually were.
Nebenzia recalled that Russia has “long been stressing that pumping up of the Kiev regime with weapons would bring those weapons in black markets and also in the hands of organized crime and terrorists.”
He said that it “can be confirmed by facts,” noting that law enforcement agencies across Europe had already observed the arms in question starting to surface in various countries.
Such weapons also spread throughout the world, in particular, [they find their] way to the militants in Africa. All of us heard African leaders say so,” he added.
Last November, Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari said that “weapons being used for the war in Ukraine and Russia are equally beginning to filter” to the Sahel region in Northern Africa and the Lake Chad Region, where they bolster local terrorists.
In autumn 2022, a similar alarm was sounded by Finnish law enforcement. Christer Ahlgren, a senior police official, said at the time that arms originally sent to Ukraine, including assault rifles, grenades, and combat drones, had been found in multiple European countries, such as Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Finland itself.
Earlier this month, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Ukraine’s Western allies had sent Kiev military aid to the tune of €65 billion ($71 billion). Russia has repeatedly warned that such actions make the West a direct participant to the conflict.
Moreover, in February, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that NATO security assistance to Kiev makes the bloc an accomplice to “the crimes committed by the Kiev regime,” which he said consistently targeted civilians with artillery and missile strikes.
16% of France’s power supply blocked amid protest – as nuclear reactor maintenance disrupted
16% of France’s power supply blocked amid protest – as nuclear reactor
maintenance disrupted. Around 16% of the country’s total power production
was disrupted, according to data from grid operator RTE, as thousands
continue to protest against President Macron’s pension reforms.
Sky News 11th April 2023
Zelensky losing control of intelligence agents – media
Rt.com 12 Apr 23,
The US believes that the Ukrainian intelligence service attacked a Russian plane in Belarus without Kiev’s permission, Breaking Points reported.
The US believes that elements of Ukraine’s intelligence service carried out a cross-border attack on a Russian spy plane in Belarus without approval from the Ukrainian government, Breaking Points journalist Saagar Enjeti reported on Monday, citing leaked documents.
The attack saw a drone inflict minor damage to a Russian A-50 early warning and control aircraft stationed at the Machulishchy air base in Belarus last month. Belarusian authorities arrested a number of suspects, one allegedly linked to the Ukrainian secret police organization, the SBU, which Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko accused of orchestrating the attack with help from the CIA.
The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry “categorically” denied any involvement by Kiev, while Ukrainian presidential adviser Mikhail Podoliak blamed the attack solely on “local partisans.”
The Pentagon, however, assessed that the SBU carried out the attack without seeking the approval of President Vladimir Zelensky or his officials, Enjeti said in a video report on Tuesday. The alleged Pentagon documents containing the assessment were leaked on social media last week, and have since received considerable media attention.
The report on the plane attack raises the question of “how much control does Zelensky actually have” over his own intelligence apparatus, Enjeti said. “Perhaps this lends credence to the idea that there are a bunch of rogue elements inside the [Ukrainian] government that are basically doing whatever they want,” he continued, citing a string of terrorist attacks within Russia as potential SBU operations.
The Kremlin has repeatedly blamed Ukraine and its intelligence services for these attacks, which include the bombing of the Crimean Bridge and the assassinations of journalist Daria Dugina and military blogger Vladlen Tatarsky.
……………….. Other files in the leak detail the US’ war plans in Ukraine, its surveillance of its allies, Kiev’s rapidly depleting ammunition situation, and other “sensitive” material related to Ukraine, China, the Middle East, and terrorism. https://www.rt.com/russia/574502-ukraine-attacked-plane-belarus/
Corruption in the Ukraine government, as Zelensky skims $millions from USA for diesel, while buying cheap diesel from Russia
“Zelensky’s been buying discount diesel from the Russians,” one knowledgeable American intelligence official told me. “And who’s paying for the gas and oil? We are. Putin and his oligarchs are making millions” on it.
Many government ministries in Kiev have been literally “competing,” I was told, to set up front companies for export contracts for weapons and ammunition with private arms dealers around the world, all of which provide kickbacks.
TRADING WITH THE ENEMY Amid rampant corruption in Kiev and as US troops gather at the Ukrainian border, does the Biden administration have an endgame to the conflict? Seymour Hersh, Substack, Apr 12
The Ukraine government, headed by Volodymyr Zelensky, has been using American taxpayers’ funds to pay dearly for the vitally needed diesel fuel that is keeping the Ukrainian army on the move in its war with Russia. It is unknown how much the Zelensky government is paying per gallon for the fuel, but the Pentagon was paying as much as $400 per gallon to transport gasoline from a port in Pakistan, via truck or parachute, into Afghanistan during the decades-long American war there.
What also is unknown is that Zelensky has been buying the fuel from Russia, the country with which it, and Washington, are at war, and the Ukrainian president and many in his entourage have been skimming untold millions from the American dollars earmarked for diesel fuel payments. One estimate by analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency put the embezzled funds at $400 million last year, at least; another expert compared the level of corruption in Kiev as approaching that of the Afghan war, “although there will be no professional audit reports emerging from the Ukraine.”
“Zelensky’s been buying discount diesel from the Russians,” one knowledgeable American intelligence official told me. “And who’s paying for the gas and oil? We are. Putin and his oligarchs are making millions” on it.
Many government ministries in Kiev have been literally “competing,” I was told, to set up front companies for export contracts for weapons and ammunition with private arms dealers around the world, all of which provide kickbacks. Many of those companies are in Poland and Czechia, but others are thought to exist in the Persian Gulf and Israel. “I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that there are others in places like the Cayman Islands and Panama, and there are lots of Americans involved,” an American expert on international trade told me.
The issue of corruption was directly raised with Zelensky in a meeting last January in Kiev with CIA Director William Burns. His message to the Ukrainian president, I was told by an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the meeting, was out of a 1950s mob movie. The senior generals and government officials in Kiev were angry at what they saw as Zelensky’s greed, so Burns told the Ukrainian president, because “he was taking a larger share of the skim money than was going to the generals.”
Burns also presented Zelensky with a list of thirty-five generals and senior officials whose corruption was known to the CIA and others in the American government. Zelensky responded to the American pressure ten days later by publicly dismissing ten of the most ostentatious officials on the list and doing little else. “The ten he got rid of were brazenly bragging about the money they had—driving around Kiev in their new Mercedes,” the intelligence official told me………………………………………………………………………….. https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/trading-with-the-enemy?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1377040&post_id=114123549&isFreemail=false&utm_medium=email
An operational domain’: Fear UK nuclear power plan for moon may lead to militarisation of space
Rolls-Royce’s director of future programmes Abi Clayton tellingly said: ‘The technology will deliver the capability to support commercial and defence use cases.’
These activities are all completely contrary to the legal commitments the UK made a half century ago to preserve space for peace.
It may mirror the plot of classic ‘70s British sci-fi series, Space 1999, which also features a moon base and the threat posed by radioactive waste, but the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities also have real concerns that the development of a future British moon base powered by nuclear fission could represent a further unwanted development along the road to the militarisation of space.
Today is the UN International Day of Human Space Flight. On April 12, 2011, the UN General Assembly established the day on the 40th anniversary of Major Yuri Gagarin becoming the first human being to circle the Earth in his spacecraft ‘Vostok’. UN delegates reaffirmed ‘the important contribution of space science and technology in achieving sustainable development goals and increasing the well-being of States and peoples, as well as ensuring the realization of their aspiration to maintain outer space for peaceful purposes’.
Last week, the UK Space Agency announced a £2.9 million grant is to be awarded to Rolls-Royce SMR to collaborate with academic institutions to develop mini-reactors for deployment in space, with most media reports focusing on its potential to power a future moon base as part of the UK’s commitment to an international project to colonise the Earth’s near neighbour (Project Artemis). However, in welcoming the new funding, Rolls-Royce’s director of future programmes Abi Clayton tellingly said: ‘The technology will deliver the capability to support commercial and defence use cases.’
Whilst projects in outer space can be both benign and beneficial, the UK Space Strategy and UK Space Defence Strategy both identify that ‘NATO has made space one of five operational domains’,[1] and the UK Space Defence Strategy is subtitled ‘Operationalising the Space Domain’.[2] To make this a reality, the UK Government is intent upon investing £6.4 billion in a ‘Defence Space Portfolio’[3] for defence ‘in and through space’.[4]
For these purposes, the UK has joined the US and France in developing its own Space Command, and a nuclear moon base could in time become a part of the ‘portfolio’ from which UK Space Command operates,[5] in line with the government and military’s desire to ‘assure our access to, and operational independence in, space’.[6]
These activities are all completely contrary to the legal commitments the UK made a half century ago to preserve space for peace.
“Ironically the UK was in 1967 one of the first three co-signatories of the Outer Space Treaty which pledged the sponsors to ensure ‘that the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes’”,[7] said Councillor Lawrence O’Neill, Chair of the NFLA Steering Committee.
“Our fear is that any future nuclear-powered moon-base could be ultimately crewed by military personnel from Space Command conducting operations that would be far from benign and beneficial, whether this be the permanent surveillance of perceived hostile states on Earth or more sinisterly as a platform for offensive weapons systems to project military power ‘through space’.
“And of course, once one major power establishes such a base, then the others, all not wishing to be outdone, will seek to do the same.”
The NFLA also has real practical concerns about the environmental impact of such a nuclear-powered base.
Councillor O’Neill added: “We have worries about the transfer of nuclear materials into space. It is not unknown for rockets to malfunction and explode on take-off or in early flight, indeed sadly this has led to the loss of human life, nor for radioactive material to be distributed across the surface of the Earth by exploding space vehicles, witness the accident involving Soviet satellite Kosmos 954.[8] And the UK Government’s own Committee on Radioactive Waste Management dismissed the idea of blasting radioactive waste into space on the grounds of both risk and cost.
“And in turn, a nuclear-powered moon base would generate radioactive waste. Where would this be put? If it came back to Earth, there would remain the risk of an accident on re-entry and states parties to the Outer Space Treaty also pledge to ‘avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies’ so burial in situ below the lunar surface or blasting it into space would be unlawful”.
Lastly there is also a latent threat posed from outer space itself to the facility.
n 2016, NASA announced the findings of their Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) mission. Observing the lunar surface since launch in 2009, NASA scientists reported that ‘200 impact craters (had) formed during the LRO mission, ranging in size from about 10 to 140 feet (approximately 3 to 43 meters) in diameter’. Consequently, NASA recommended that ‘equipment placed on the moon for long durations – such as a lunar base – may have to be made sturdier. While a direct hit from a meteoroid is still unlikely, a more intense rain of secondary debris thrown out by nearby impacts may pose a risk to surface assets.’
In concluding Councillor O’Neill said: “We have all been concerned recently with the potential damage that could be caused on Earth to Ukrainian nuclear facilities from shelling and missile strikes so what happens if a meteoroid, or a fragment thereof, with massive kinetic energy hits a nuclear reactor based on the surface of the moon?[9]
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (102)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 