nuclear-news

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

Can France rely on its nuclear fleet for a low-carbon 2050?

Map above refers to 2016 – many of the nuclear plants above are not currently in operation

Nuclear Engineering International, 14 Dec 22,

EDF has not shown its 900 MW units can be operated that far ahead, says ASN’s annual assessment of nuclear safety in France. Decisions have to be taken soon if nuclear is to play a big part in 2050 – and a ‘Marshall Plan’ is needed to rebuild the industry’s capability

France may have to go back to the drawing board with regard to options for decarbonising its economy, because assumptions it has made on the lifetime of the 900 MW reactors in its nuclear fleet may be unwarranted.

That was the warning in French nuclear safety authority ASN’s annual report on safety in the country’s nuclear industries.

The annual “ASN report on the state of nuclear safety and radiation protection in France in 2021”, published earlier this year, warned of “new energy policy prospects which must address safety concerns at once”. And it reminded operators that “quality and rigour in the design, manufacture and oversight of nuclear facilities, which were not up to the required level in the latest major nuclear projects conducted in France, constitute the first level of Defence in Depth in terms of safety.”

ASN noted that five of the six scenarios presented in a report by French system operator Re´seau de Transport d’Electricite´ (RTE) report on “Energies of the future”, which aims to achieve a decarbonised economy by 2050, are based on continued operation of the existing nuclear fleet. But with regard to the 900 MW fleet, ASN says, it cannot say that those plants can be operated beyond 50 years, based on information it received during the generic examination of the fourth periodic safety review of that reactor series. It added, “Due to the specific features of some reactors, it might not be possible, with the current methods, to demonstrate their ability to operate up to 60 years”.

EDF has 32 operating 900 MWe reactors commissioned between 1978 and 1987 and they are reaching their fourth periodic safety review. This safety review has “particular challenges”, ASN says. In particular:

Some items of equipment are reaching their design-basis lifetime……………………

Too optimistic on new-build?

The safety authority also noted that one RTE scenario had almost 50% nuclear in its electricity mix in 2050. It said, consultation with industry revealed that the rate of construction of new nuclear reactors in order to achieve such a level would be hard to sustain……………………………………

Broad concerns

More broadly, ASN said whatever France’s energy policy, it will “imply a considerable industrial effort, in order to tackle the industrial and safety challenges.

If nuclear power is needed for 2050, the nuclear sector will have to implement a ‘Marshall Plan’ to make it industrially sustainable and have the skills it needs.

It warned that “Quality and rigour in the design, manufacture and oversight of nuclear facilities… were not up to the required level in the latest major nuclear projects conducted in France”.

It also warned that more work was also needed in fuel chain facilities. It said a series of events “is currently weakening the entire fuel cycle chain and is a major strategic concern for ASN requiring particularly close attention”. Most urgent is a build-up of radioactive materials and delays in construction of a centralised spent fuel storage pool planned by EDF to address the risk of saturation of the existing pools by 2030. The need for the pool was identified back in 2010, but work has not begun.

ASN said the combination of shortcomings between fuel cycle and nuclear plants meant the electricity system “faces an unprecedented two-fold vulnerability in availability”. New vulnerabilities like the discovery of stress corrosion cracking mostly “stem from the lack of margins and inadequate anticipation,” ASN said, and “must serve as lessons for the entire nuclear sector and the public authorities.”……………….

An energy policy comprising a long-term nuclear component “must be accompanied by an exemplary policy for the management of waste and legacy nuclear facilities,” ASN said………………………………….. more https://www.neimagazine.com/features/featurecan-france-rely-on-its-nuclear-fleet-for-a-low-carbon-2050-10436984/

December 14, 2022 Posted by | France, politics | Leave a comment

For Heaven’s Sake – Examining the UK’s Militarisation of Space

December 13, 2022, By Dr. David Webb of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space

I have been working on behalf of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) with Peter Burt from Dronewars UK on a new joint publication called “For Heaven’s Sake: Examining the UK’s Militarisation of Space”. It was launched in June and looks at the UK’s emerging military space programme and considers the governance, environmental, and ethical issues involved.

The UK’s space programme began in 1952 and the first UK satellite, Ariel 1, was launched in 1962. Black Arrow, a British rocket for launching satellites, was developed during the 1960s and was used for four launches from the Woomera Range Complexin Australia between 1969 and 1971. The final launch was to launch Prospero, the only British satellite to be placed in orbit using a UK rocket in 1971, although the government had by then cancelled the UK space programme. Blue Streak, the UK ballistic missile programme, had been cancelled in 1960andspace projects were considered too expensive to continue. 50 years on and things have changed.

Space is now big business – the commercial space sector has expanded and the cost of launches has decreased. The UK is now treating space as an area of serious interest. The government has also recognised that space is now crucial for military operations. So, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) now has a Space Directorate, which works closely with the UK Space Agency and is responsible for the military space policy and international coordination. UK Space Command, established in April 2021 ,is in charge of the military space programme and is closely linked with US Space Command and US Space Force. While the UK typically frames military developments as being for defensive purposes, they are also capable of offensive use………………………………………………………..

Although many of these launches may be for commercial companies, space use has evolved into a fuzzy military/commercial collaboration and Alexandra Stickings, a space policy and security analyst at the Royal United Services Institute in London, believes that the Shetland and Sutherland spaceports will need military contracts to be viable. She said “I am of the opinion that the proposed spaceports would need the MoD as a customer to survive as well as securing contracts with companies such as Lockheed” and the military will want to diversify their launch capabilities“so the Scottish locations could provide an option for certain future missions.”  She also warned that: “There is also a possibility that if these sites become a reality, there will be pressure on the MoD to support them even if the cost is more than other providers.”………………………………..

Although many of these launches may be for commercial companies, space use has evolved into a fuzzy military/commercial collaboration and Alexandra Stickings, a space policy and security analyst at the Royal United Services Institute in London, believes that the Shetland and Sutherland spaceports will need military contracts to be viable. She said

“I am of the opinion that the proposed spaceports would need the MoD as a customer to survive as well as securing contracts with companies such as Lockheed” and the military will want to diversify their launch capabilities“so the Scottish locations could provide an option for certain future missions.”  She also warned that: “There is also a possibility that if these sites become a reality, there will be pressure on the MoD to support them even if the cost is more than other providers.”…………………….

……………………  https://safetechinternational.org/for-heavens-sake-examining-the-uks-militarisation-of-space/

December 14, 2022 Posted by | space travel, UK | Leave a comment

Paul Dorfman: Nuclear power is just a slow and expensive distraction.

 
Despite recent breakthroughs in nuclear fusion, renewables remain the most
important technology for reaching net zero. “Fissile fuel” is back –
or so say the UK’s policy teams and press.

Rishi Sunak and Emmanuel
Macron are about to strike a deal on nuclear cooperation, and recent
editorials across national newspapers all reckon everything in the garden
is nuclear. Where, however, is the evidence for its efficacy?

The British and French governments can sign any deal they like – if key financial
investors don’t take up the remaining 60 per cent of construction costs,
the planned Sizewell C plant in Suffolk is going nowhere. The omens
aren’t good.

Recently Sir Nigel Wilson, group CEO of Legal & General, one
of the UK’s largest real assets firms, told BBC Radio Four: “We are not
big fans of Sizewell C.” Sir David King, the UK’s former chief
scientific adviser and a long-standing nuclear supporter, told LBC that the
plant would be “very difficult to protect from flooding” due to rising
sea levels on the Suffolk coast.

 New Statesman 13th Dec 2022

https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/climate-energy-nature/2022/12/nuclear-power-slow-expensive-distraction

December 14, 2022 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Opinion is split on UK government plan for new nuclear and hydrogen projects

 Ministers are considering requiring that all new domestic boilers be
“hydrogen-ready” from 2026, as they announced £100m for nuclear and
hydrogen projects. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy (BEIS) has launched a consultation on improving boiler standards,
and has argued there is a strong case for introducing hydrogen-ready
boilers in the UK from 2026.

The government is examining options to replace
polluting fossil fuel gas in Britain’s energy system and has offered
grants for households to install heat pumps. A ban on gas boilers in new
homes comes into force in 2025, although uncertainty remains over the
timeframe for the phase-out of fossil gas in existing homes.

While hydrogen
is expected to play a significant role in the decarbonisation of heavy
industry and the transport network, opinion is split on the practicality of
using it in Britain’s gas network and the resulting cost to households.


Plans for a pilot to examine the effectiveness of using hydrogen have met
local opposition in Whitby, outside Ellesmere Port, where residents have
expressed concerns over becoming “lab rats”. The consultation, which
closes in late March, will also examine the cost of hydrogen-ready boilers.
“The government needs confidence that consumers will not face a premium
for their purchase,” it said.

 Guardian 13th Dec 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/13/uk-ministers-floats-plan-for-hydrogen-ready-domestic-boilers-from-2026

December 14, 2022 Posted by | ENERGY, UK | Leave a comment

A Tale of Two Nuclear Plants Reveals Europe’s Energy Divide

An upgraded power plant in Slovakia has angered neighboring Austria and fueled the debate over nuclear power and  independence from Russian gas.

Wired, MORGAN MEAKER, DEC 13, 2022

……………………………………….. Europe remains deeply divided on the use of nuclear power. Of the European Union’s 27 member states, 13 generate nuclear power, while 14 do not. “It’s still a very national debate,” says Bunsen. That means public attitudes can drastically change from one side of a border to the other. Surveys show that 60 percent of Slovakians believe nuclear power is safe, while 70 percent of their neighbors in Austria are against it being used at all—the country has no active nuclear plants.

……… workers are preparing a new reactor—where nuclear fission will take place—for launch in early 2023. 

…………..  Europe remains deeply divided on the use of nuclear power. Of the European Union’s 27 member states, 13 generate nuclear power, while 14 do not. “It’s still a very national debate,” says Bunsen. That means public attitudes can drastically change from one side of a border to the other. Surveys show that 60 percent of Slovakians believe nuclear power is safe, while 70 percent of their neighbors in Austria are against it being used at all—the country has no active nuclear plants.

For the two neighbors, Mochovce has become a focal point in the debate over how Europe should transition away from fossil fuels. To supporters in Slovakia, Mochovce’s expansion—the launch of Unit Three is expected to be followed two years later by Unit Four—demonstrates how even a small country can become an energy heavyweight. Unit Three will make Slovakia the second-largest producer of nuclear power in the EU, after France. But neighboring Austrians cannot ignore what they consider to be the drawbacks: the mammoth costs associated with building or improving aging facilities, the problems associated with disposing of nuclear waste, and the sector’s reliance on Moscow for uranium, the fuel which powers the reactor. Last year, the EU imported one fifth of its uranium from Russia. 

For years, politicians and activists in Austria have also alleged that Mochovce is not safe, with local newspapers using maps to illustrate how close Mochovce is to Vienna: just 150 kilometers. “It’s a Soviet design from the 1980s, without a proper containment,” claims Reinhard Uhrig, an antinuclear campaigner with Austrian environmental group GLOBAL 2000. The containment is one of a series of safety systems that prevents radioactive material being released into the environment in case of an accident. “Apart from these inherent design problems, there have been major issues with the quality control of the works,” he says, describing nuclear power as a dangerous distraction from real solutions to the climate crisis.  

Concerns in Austria about Mochovce’s safety were exacerbated by Mario Zadra, an engineer turned whistleblower who worked on Mochovce units Three and Four between 2009 and 2018. Zadra alleges the plant’s emergency diesel generators were suffering serious technical issues and cooling towers fundamental for safety were built with the wrong material. “Other components important for safety, like the main steam isolation valves, were in a shameful condition,” says Zadra, whose video and photo evidence have been verified by GLOBAL 2000. Since Zadra and other whistleblowers went public in 2018, Mochovce has been accused of corruption, raided by police, and inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency.  “I’m sure things have improved since the inspections,” Zadra says, but he still doesn’t believe the plant is safe due to what he calls the company’s “poor safety culture.”

………………………………….. Long-term, Austria is aiming to run 100 percent on renewables by 2030. Wind, solar, and hydro power currently account for 77 percent of the country’s power generation.

Austria is now agitating to spread its antinuclear message on an EU level. Officials have criticized nuclear power plants not just in Slovakia, but also in other neighboring countries, including the Czech Republic and Hungary. On New Year’s Eve 2021, the European Commission released a proposal which defined nuclear as well as natural gas as “green investments.” In response, Austria launched a legal challenge, calling for the inclusion of the two energy sources to be annulled. “Neither nuclear energy nor fossil gas are green investments,” says Gewesseler.

Zwentendorf and Mochovce demonstrate the extremes of Europe’s nuclear power debate. But between those extremes, it’s messy. The EU might have agreed to become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, but consensus on how that will happen remains elusive. Weish, the Austrian scientist, believes there’s a lot more debating to be done. “The EU needs to have the debate Austria had back in the 1970s,” he says.  https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-energy-europe/

December 14, 2022 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

Hungary’s risky bet on Russia’s nuclear power

By Nick Thorpe, BBC News, Hungary, 15 Dec 22,

“If this new power plant is built,”, says Janos, a tall, friendly nuclear engineer who works in Reactor block 2 of the existing nuclear power station at Paks, “it will be good for the town, and good for the country.”

It’s a big if.

Despite the Hungarian government’s unswerving commitment to the Paks 2 project, despite the Russian commitment to supply the finance and technology, the Russian war in Ukraine is making the new power station less likely by the day.

It is the biggest single investment in Hungarian history.

The government claims it will make the country less dependent on Russia, from which Hungary gets most of its oil and gas. Critics say it will make Hungary even more dependent on Russia for much of this century.

Paks 1 nuclear power station, on the shore of the Danube and an hour’s drive south of Budapest, was built by the Soviet Union in the 1980s, and its four reactors still supply around 40% of Hungary’s electricity needs.

Their working life is due to end in the 2030s. In 2014, Prime Minster Viktor Orban signed a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to build two new 1,200 MW reactors beside the old ones.

Russia will finance the plant with a €10bn loan, which Hungarian consumers should pay back in their electricity bills, starting in 2026, when the plant was due to come on line.

Years of delays with permits meant that ground-clearing work at the site only began last August.

While Hungary has pressed ahead with Paks 2, last May Finland cancelled a similar, Russian-built plant on the Hanhikivi peninsula in mid-construction, because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine is now hanging like a dark cloud over the Paks project, too.

Fighting in the early days of the war around Ukraine’s former nuclear plant at Chernobyl and artillery duels around the Zaporizhzhia plant, the biggest in Europe, have harmed the project.

Even those who believe in Paks 2 with an almost religious zeal sound worried.

“Isolation of Russia is not a solution, even in this war situation,” says Attila Aszodi, former government commissioner for Paks 2.

Died-in-the-wool opponents such as former Green MEP Benedek Javor are more blunt.

“Paks 2 is a purely political project,” he says, pointing to close relations established by Viktor Orban with Russian Vladimir Putin since 2009.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Hungarian leader has pushed back repeatedly against EU sanctions on Russia and its officials have maintained close diplomatic ties with Moscow.

“From an energy perspective it’s not necessary to build [Paks 2], and it’s definitely not necessary to build it with the Russians,” says Mr Javor.

Died-in-the-wool opponents such as former Green MEP Benedek Javor are more blunt.

“Paks 2 is a purely political project,” he says, pointing to close relations established by Viktor Orban with Russian Vladimir Putin since 2009.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Hungarian leader has pushed back repeatedly against EU sanctions on Russia and its officials have maintained close diplomatic ties with Moscow.

“From an energy perspective it’s not necessary to build [Paks 2], and it’s definitely not necessary to build it with the Russians,” says Mr Javor.

He argues the money would be better spent on renewables like solar, from which Hungary already gets 10% of its energy, and improving the electricity grid.

This autumn, the government abruptly ended subsidies for households installing solar panels, because the grid could not cope with the new inputs.

The Fidesz government has also made wind power practically impossible, by banning the construction of turbines within 10km (6.2 miles) of a settlement.

“We might arrive at a point where Paks 2 cannot be constructed but there is no alternative,” says Mr Javor. “Then Hungary will have a serious problem with the security of supply.”

The list of complications from the war in Ukraine is long.

Many major components of the plant are supposed to be built in Russia, and transported overland.

The original plan was to bring them through Ukraine and there are no obvious alternative routes.

Several thousand welders are supposed to be employed.

Back in 2014, everyone I asked said Ukrainian welders would be found. And the plant is not simply a Russian one.

Under EU pressure, it is now a hybrid, using Russian hardware and a control system to be built by the Siemens-led, French-German consortium Framatome.

The turbines are supposed to be built by GE Hungary, a subsidiary of US firm General Electric. It is hard to imagine US, German and French engineers working shoulder to shoulder with their Russian comrades, 400 km from the border of a country the Russians shell day and night.

There are other question marks, too. How will Russia supply nuclear fuel? How will Hungary send highly radioactive used fuel elements back to Russia?

And will the EU eventually extend sanctions to nuclear technology and employees of Russian state nuclear firm Rosatom?…………………….  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63964744

December 14, 2022 Posted by | EUROPE, politics | Leave a comment

Safety of Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant hangs in the balance

Guardian, Julian Borger 13 Dec 22,

Shelling near the six-reactor facility plus a shortage of workers and uncertain backup power could be making it the most dangerous place on Earth…….

The Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant’s silhouette – with its two fat cooling towers and the row of six squat blocks – has become globally familiar since it was dubbed the most dangerous place on Earth: six nuclear reactors on the frontline of a catastrophic war.

On a fairly typical night last week, the Russians on the left bank of the river fired 40 shells and rockets into Nikopol, a town on the Ukrainian-held right bank, falling on its rows of krushchevky, five-storey blocks of flats built for factory workers in the 1960s and named after the Soviet leader of the time.

After 10 months of war, the blocks are half empty, so there are fewer people to kill. The only reported casualty on this particular night was a 65-year-old man who was taken to hospital, and whose flat now afforded such a comprehensive view of the power plant.

By the next morning, the repairs had already begun. An electrician restored power to the rest of the building, and two men were in the remains of the apartment itself, sweeping up and putting chipboard in place of absent walls.

There were four loud bangs as the Ukrainian army guns on the nearby riverbank opened fire on Russian positions and, a few minutes later, Nikopol’s air sirens sounded in anticipation of a Russian response, though none was forthcoming that morning.

The basements of the krushchevky have been turned into shelters with beds and school desks but most of the remaining population are so inured to bombardment, they just carry on with their day.

The Ukrainians insist they are extremely careful about what they shoot at, even when they receive fire from the vicinity of the Zaporizhzhia plant. On Thursday, the Ukrainian nuclear power company, Energoatom, accused Russia of bringing Grad multiple launch rocket systems near reactor number 6, which is near the area of where spent nuclear fuel is kept. The likely aim, Energoatom alleged, was to shell Nikopol and the nearby town of Marzanets, using their position as cover.

The walls of the reactors are thick enough to withstand artillery fire, but a direct hit on the spent fuel containers could well lead to the release of radioactive material into the atmosphere. Since seizing control of the power station in March, the Russians have begun building a concrete shelter over the spent fuel, but Ukrainian officials say it is being done without following the normal international safety protocols.

Earlier in the week, Russia’s defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, accused Ukraine of “nuclear terrorism”, saying its armed forces had fired 33 large calibre shells at the Zaporizhzhia plant over the previous two weeks. The most recent report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has four inspectors at the Russian-occupied site, said last Friday there had been no shelling of the plant since 20 November, although artillery fire had landed in the vicinity………………………………………..

It was not possible to verify Kotin and Orlov’s accounts of the shelling, or the counter-claims from Moscow. Satellite imagery however, has confirmed that the Russian army is storing military equipment inside the plant.

The IAEA inspectors on site could theoretically determine the trajectory of incoming rockets or shells but such detective work is not within their mandate. The agency is negotiating the creation of a security no-fire zone around the reactors, but Kyiv is insisting Russia must first withdraw all its weapons and armour from the power station, something Moscow has not so far agreed to.

Meanwhile there is a parallel safety threat from within the plant itself: the steady attrition of its workforce over the 10 months of the conflict. Many key workers have left because of the danger to their families or because they refused to work for the Russians. Of the 11,000-strong workforce before the full-scale invasion, just 4,000 are left. In an attempt to stop the exodus, the Russians have circulated lists of plant staff to all military checkpoints in the region with orders they are not be allowed to leave, but it has been too late to stop a major outflow.

“In some cases, there’s only three people to cover a seven or eight-person shift,” Orlov said. “People don’t have enough rest. It causes exhaustion.”

Operating under armed occupation adds to the stress. The workers still at the plant are under constant pressure to sign contracts with Rosatom, the Russian energy company, signifying acceptance of Moscow’s control.

Melynchuk said there were just enough staff left to maintain the plant in its current state of suspended animation, with all the reactors shut down, and two of them deliberately kept hot, to provide heating for Enerhodar.

But keeping reactors in this hot standby mode is a difficult and delicate process, adding to the burden on the operators. The situation could get worse still. The Zaporizhzhia plant is currently connected to the Ukrainian grid, but there have been times the transmission lines have been brought down by shelling, forcing the power station to fall back on diesel generators to keep the cooling system running and prevent the reactor vessel from meltdown.

If the connection to the grid was severed again, it would add to the pressure on the overstretched workforce and on the generators, which were only designed as a temporary backup. They will need maintenance and no one knows how much diesel fuel the plant has left. Once the diesel generators failed, meltdown would begin in a matter of hours………  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/12/safety-of-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-hangs-in-the-balance

December 13, 2022 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | 1 Comment

UK government ‘s announcement was NOT yet a funding decision for Sizewell C nuclear, just an exclusion of China from the project

 Steve Thomas: The UK government’s announcement of November 29, 2022 on
funding the Sizewell C nuclear power project was widely reported as a
decision to invest in the plant and to complete the exit of China General
Nuclear (CGN) from the project.3

However, close examination of the press
releases by the Government4 and by EDF5 suggest it was no more than the
long-anticipated buying out of China General Nuclear from the project and
funds to allow the development of the project to the point of a Final
Investment Decision (FID).

The budget set up by EDF and CGN to fund this
phase of the project appears to be spent and new funds were needed if the
project was not to stall. Nevertheless, this announcement has important
implications not only for the Sizewell C project but also for the Hinkley
Point C and Bradwell B projects and for the nuclear stations expected to
follow Sizewell C.

 Stop Sizewell C 12th Dec 2022

Click to access Implications-of-the-Government-Announcement-on-Sizewell-C.docx.pdf

December 13, 2022 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

France wants to cut its electricity exports to UK as its aging nuclear reactors are limited, with maintenance issues

 France requests electricity exports to UK are cut as Europe’s energy
crisis deepens. France and Britain exchange energy across the Channel via
interconnections, but France’s nuclear power output has taken a hit in
recent months. France’s electricity network operator RTE has reportedly
asked the National Grid if it could slash its scheduled exports to Britain
in half between 8am and 9am this morning. It is said it struggled to cope
with surging demand amid its own power issues, and cold temperatures. The
power output issues were reportedly brought on by a lethal combination of
the plunging mercury, strikes across its nuclear sector and delayed
maintenance on its fleet of ageing nuclear reactors.

 Express 12th Dec 2022

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1708509/France-electricity-exports-cut-UK-Europe-energy-crisis

December 13, 2022 Posted by | ENERGY, France | Leave a comment

Mini nuclear reactor firms battle it out in UK for approval and government support

Rolls-Royce rivals gear up for mini-nuke race as power system creaks.
Nuclear power is seen as essential to protect Britain from future energy
shocks. Rolls Royce has long been at the vanguard of Britain’s nuclear
industry, with more than half of the UK’s £385m fund to support advanced
projects in the field allocated to Rolls’s mini-nukes programme.

But the
company’s dominance is now being challenged by a new breed of scrappy
start-ups who believe their technology could make Britain a world leader in
nuclear power. “You should have another viable alternative that you’re
supporting,” says Rick Springman, an executive at US mini-nuke company
Holtec. “When you invest in stocks, do you put all your money in one
company?”

Nuclear power is seen as central to the UK’s goal of meeting
its Net Zero targets, improving energy security and reducing its reliance
on Russian oil. Last month, Rolls said its small modular reactors (SMRs),
or so-called mini-nukes, could supply a fifth of the UK’s total
electricity capacity to homes across England and Wales by the end of the
decade. The reactors use existing nuclear technology on a smaller scale
than traditional power plants. Each can generate about 470MW of power and
last at least 60 years. The Government has picked eight sites for new
nuclear projects including Sellafield in Cumbria and Bradwell, Essex, to
place new projects. Other sites such as Trawsfynydd in the Snowdonia
national park are also being considered. Rolls-Royce has chosen four it
would like to build on, earmarked for their existing infrastructure and
connections to the grid.

Rivals want access to these initial sites to prove
their power stations work. Proof that they can power the grid in the UK
could open up opportunities to launch projects abroad. They believe their
technology offers advantages.

London-based Newcleo, for instance, wants to
use some of the UK’s plutonium stockpile for fuel and Last Energy’s
design aims to use more off-the-shelf components, offering a speedier
build. Meanwhile, Holtec is developing a reactor which can be cooled in an
emergency without external power. While Rolls is planning 470MW reactors,
equivalent to more than 150 onshore wind turbines, Holtec plans 160MW
units. Holtec’s reactor could share a site with Rolls-Royce or another
contender.

The forthcoming Hinkley Point C, with power of 3.2GW, is on a
160 hectare site. By comparison, a single Holtec reactor will occupy six
hectares, or about 10 football pitches. The push for approvals comes as
deals elsewhere are signed elsewhere. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy signed a
deal last year with Canada’s Ontario Power Generation to deliver one of
its BWRX-300 units which could be online as early as 2028. Deals for GE to
build 10 more in Poland followed weeks later. In February, French President
Emmanuel Macron agreed €1bn of funding for EDF’s Nuward SMR which could
be generating electricity by 2030.

Last Energy wrote to the Parliamentary
committee to say that “excessive Government funding for early stage
development activities” can crowd out “entrants and innovation,” and
that having a preferred supplier – a status Rolls-Royce enjoys in the UK –
may limit the field.

 Telegraph 12th Dec 2022

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/12/12/rolls-royce-rivals-gear-mini-nuke-race-power-system-creaks/

December 13, 2022 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

NATO Chief Voices Fear Of War With Russia While US Greenlights Drone Strikes On Russian Territory

Ukraine launched its most brazen attack into Russian territory yet, with drone strikes on bases which killed multiple Russian soldiers and damaged two nuclear-capable bombers. Not too long ago the US waging a proxy war that features direct attacks on Russia’s nuclear forces would have been an unthinkably terrifying prospect, yet that’s where we’re at now, and it only seems to be escalating.

The real issue is the danger of provoking a hot war between nuclear superpowers, which even the NATO Secretary-General is becoming increasingly nervous about.

Caitlin Johnstone  https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/nato-chief-voices-fear-of-war-with-russia-while-us-greenlights-drone-strikes-on-russian-territory-165a38b84669 12 Dec 22

In what Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp describes as “a rare acknowledgment of the dangers of backing Ukraine,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg acknowledged a fear of something going “horribly wrong” and leading to a hot war between the nuclear-armed alliance and Russia.

In an article titled “‘I fear a full-blown war between the West and Russia’, Nato chief warns,” The Telegraph writes the following:

“I fear that the war in Ukraine will get out of control, and spread into a major war between Nato and Russia,” said Nato secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg, responding to a question about his greatest fears for the winter in an interview.

He told Norwegian broadcaster NRK on Friday that he was confident such a scenario could be avoided but that the threat was there.

“If things go wrong, they can go horribly wrong,” he added.

We got a taste of this horror once again last month in the long minutes following erroneous reports that Russia had launched missiles at NATO member Poland. The fact that cooler heads have prevailed up until this point does not mean that nuclear brinkmanship is safe, anymore than a game of Russian roulette not ending after the first couple of trigger pulls would mean that Russian roulette is safe to play.

So Stoltenberg is correct to be afraid. There absolutely are too many things that can go horribly wrong in such a standoff, and there are simply too many unpredictable moving parts for anyone to feel confident that this will not happen.

And it’s pretty crazy to hear Stoltenberg voice these concerns even while the Pentagon gives the go-ahead for Ukraine to begin launching long-range attacks on targets inside Russia in its war that is being backed by the United States, because those two positions would seem to be pretty strongly at odds with each other.

In an article titled “Pentagon gives Ukraine green light for drone strikes inside Russia,” The Times reports as follows:

The Pentagon has given a tacit endorsement of Ukraine’s long-range attacks on targets inside Russia after President Putin’s multiple missile strikes against Kyiv’s critical infrastructure.

Since daily assaults on civilians began in October, the Pentagon has revised its threat assessment of the war in Ukraine. Crucially, this includes new judgments about whether arms shipments to Kyiv might lead to a military confrontation between Russia and Nato.

This represents a significant development in the nine-month war between Ukraine and Russia, with Washington now likelier to supply Kyiv with longer-range weapons.

The Times quotes a “US defence source” as saying the following: “We’re not saying to Kyiv, ‘Don’t strike the Russians [in Russia or Crimea]’. We can’t tell them what to do. It’s up to them how they use their weapons. But when they use the weapons we have supplied, the only thing we insist on is that the Ukrainian military conform to the international laws of war and to the Geneva conventions.”

“They are the only limitations but that includes no targeting of Russian families and no assassinations. As far as we’re concerned, Ukraine has been in compliance,” the source says, which is a strange assertion given that US intelligence has reportedly concluded Ukraine was behind the assassination of the daughter of Aleksandr Dugin.

“Ukraine has been careful to use its own drones, not US-supplied weapons, to carry out the strikes,” The Times reports, while also noting that “Pentagon officials have made it clear that requests from Kyiv for longer-range US weapons, including rockets and fighter bombers which could be used for even more effective strikes inside Russia or occupied Crimea, are being seriously considered.”

This revelation comes days after Ukraine launched its most brazen attack into Russian territory yet, with drone strikes on bases which killed multiple Russian soldiers and damaged two nuclear-capable bombers. Not too long ago the US waging a proxy war that features direct attacks on Russia’s nuclear forces would have been an unthinkably terrifying prospect, yet that’s where we’re at now, and it only seems to be escalating.

Empire apologists will try to make this a conversation about whether Ukraine has a “right” to attack Russian territory, which is a red herring from the real issue at hand. Obviously Ukraine has a right to attack a nation that is attacking it; that’s not the point. The real issue is the danger of provoking a hot war between nuclear superpowers, which even the NATO Secretary-General is becoming increasingly nervous about.

The western power alliance continually ramping up aggressions to test how far it could provoke Russia is what led to this conflict in the first place. Now we’re at a point where there isn’t much space for Russia to back up before it’s against the ropes and potentially pressed to do something nobody wants. These people should not be talking about escalation, they should be talking about de-escalation. We need diplomacy, de-escalation and detente, and we need them yesterday.

_________________

December 12, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Are the bombs are back in town? US atomic weapons in Britain would make nuclear war more likely

Are the bombs are back in town? — Beyond Nuclear International

Is the US about to station nuclear weapons in Britain again or are they already here?

From Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND UK) h

Editor’s Note:  A mass demonstration organized by CND was held at Lakenheath, Suffolk, United Kingdom on November 19. “It’s extraordinary that a foreign power can place weapons of mass destruction on our soil with no oversight from our elected representatives,” said Sue Wright from Norwich CND (Norwich is 40 miles from the base). For more background, see our May 15, 2022 article by CND General Secretary, Kate Hudson, CND’s special page on the Lakenheath campaign, and this article by Hans Kristensen for Federation of American Scientists.

Beyond Nuclear, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Peace Action and Nuclear Resister, sent a joint statement of solidarity that was read out at the November 19 protest.

CND condemns any return of United States nuclear weapons to RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk. 110 nuclear bombs were stored at the airbase until they were removed in 2008 following persistent popular protest, and they must not be allowed back.

Response to war

Tensions are rising across Europe amidst the ongoing war in Ukraine. In response to the Russian invasion, reports are circulating that the US is preparing to store some of its nuclear weapons in the UK. This originated with the fact that the US Department of Defense has added the UK to a list of NATO nuclear weapons storage locations in Europe being upgraded under a multimillion-dollar infrastructure programme. The UK was not on the comparable list for the previous year, so this looks like a very recent decision.

Experts now believe the base in question is RAF Lakenheath, located just 100 km from London.

History repeats itself

While it is not yet known if nuclear weapons have already been returned to the base, or if NATO is in the process of preparing the base to be ready to receive them, this development marks a change in the nuclear status of RAF Lakenheath.

RAF Lakenheath hosted US nuclear weapons for more than five decades, first arriving in September 1954. CND arranged protests at the base alongside the Lakenheath Action Group, including days of action where hundreds of people descended on the base. Direct action activists broke into the base and locked on to the gates of the ammunition depot, preventing access for hours. 

Messages of support were shared between campaigners at other US bases in Europe, and from Faslane, where Britain’s nuclear weapons are stationed. Plays were presented outside the base, and letters handed in to the Commander.

Following years of protesting, the nuclear weapons were eventually removed in 2008, but not before nuclear accidents endangered the safety of the local community.

Nuclear accidents

At least two major incidents involving nuclear weapons are known to have occurred at RAF Lakenheath.

In 1956 a B-47 bomber on a routine training mission crashed into a storage unit containing nuclear weapons, killing four servicemen. Official US documents declared it was a ‘miracle’ that none of the bombs detonated, and that ‘it is possible that a part of Eastern England would have become a desert’. Five years later, an airplane loaded with a nuclear bomb caught fire following pilot error. 

The bomb was ‘scorched and blistered’, and scientists later discovered it could have detonated in slightly different circumstances.

Both incidents were covered up by the US and British governments, only being admitted in 1979 and 2003 respectively.

Nuclear-sharing

By the time of the weapons’ removal in 2008, the Lakenheath site had 33 underground storage vaults and stored around 110 B-61 gravity bombs that could be dropped from F-15E warplanes based there.

Lakenheath received the latest nuclear-capable fighter – the F-35A – in 2021 and a total of 24 F-35As are expected to be based there eventually. Training with the latest B61-12 guided nuclear bomb will commence within the year.

Despite being called an RAF station, Lakenheath is run by the United States Air Force (USAF) and currently only hosts USAF units and personnel, leading many campaigners to describe it as USAF Lakenheath. The host wing is the 48th Fighter Wing (48 FW), also known as the Liberty Wing, assigned to United States Air Forces in Europe – Air Forces Africa (USAFE-AFAFRICA). The wing operates the F-15C/D Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle and F-35A Lightning II. With around 6,000 personnel on the base, it is the largest deployment of USAF personnel in Britain.

US nuclear weapons based here would make the UK once again a forward nuclear base for the US. Approximately 150 American B-61 nuclear gravity bombs are already currently stationed in five countries in Europe: Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey.

The nuclear sharing arrangement is part of NATO defence policy. In peace time, the nuclear weapons stored in non-nuclear countries are guarded by US forces, with a dual code system activated in a time of war. Both host country and the US would then need to approve the use of the weapons, which would be launched on the former’s airplanes.

There is strong opposition to these weapons being sited in Europe, including from some of the host nation governments. Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands have all, unsuccessfully, called for the removal of US nuclear weapons from their countries.

Dangerous and destabilising

Should the UK be hosting or preparing to host US nuclear weapons, this would constitute a further undermining of our safety, and prospects for global peace. The US is the only country to locate its nuclear weapons outside its own borders and this major increase in NATO’s capacity to wage nuclear war in Europe is dangerously destabilising. Their return will increase global tensions and put Britain on the front line in a NATO/Russia war.

Resist

The big question is whether the nuclear bombs have already been returned to Britain, or if their delivery is still in preparation. Either way this is a huge challenge for the peace movement and CND will do everything we can to prevent these weapons being sited here. Millions mobilised across Europe against the imposition of cruise and Pershing missiles in the 1980s. We got rid of all those weapons then, and we have to have the energy, the commitment and the confidence to do that again.

The US should scrap plans to base nuclear weapons in the UK, and withdraw all their other nuclear weapons from Europe at the same time. A withdrawal of all US/NATO nuclear weapons from Europe would help reduce tensions at this very dangerous time, and would ultimately help advance international disarmament.

For more information, visit the CND website

December 12, 2022 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

PETER HITCHENS: The arrogance and folly in Ukraine that could yet send us hurtling towards nuclear catastrophe

Daily Mail, By PETER HITCHENS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY, 12 December 2022

“………………………………………………………………….. let me quote the opening words of a frightening new book by Ben Abelow, How The West Brought War To Ukraine.

He says: ‘For almost 200 years, starting with the framing of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, the United States has asserted security claims over virtually the whole Western hemisphere. Any foreign power that places military forces near US territory knows it is crossing a red line. US policy thus embodies a conviction that where a potential opponent places its forces is crucially important.

‘In fact, this conviction is the cornerstone of American foreign and military policy, and its violation is considered reason for war.’

Because, you see, what I have described in my thriller is pretty much the mirror image of what the USA and Nato have been doing in Europe for some years. For Canada and the USA, read Russia. For Quebec, read Ukraine and the Baltic states. There are, in fact, Nato troops stationed now in Estonia.

They have been known to hold tank parades just yards from the border with Russia. That puts them 81 miles (about the distance from London to Coventry) from St Petersburg, Russia’s second city. Ben Abelow notes that ‘in 2020, Nato conducted a live-fire training exercise inside Estonia, 70 miles from Russia’s border, using tactical missiles with ranges up to 185 miles. These weapons can strike Russian territory with minimal warning. In 2021, again in Estonia, Nato fired 24 rockets to simulate an attack on air defence targets inside Russia’.

Again, can you begin to imagine the USA’s response to such action close to its borders, or Britain’s if (say) Ireland decided to join and host a foreign military alliance, hostile to us?

All kinds of slime will now be hurled at me, saying I am trying to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. I’m not. I continue to think it stupid, barbaric and wrong.

I think the best response to provocation is not to react in such ways. But not everyone is like me. And if nobody in the White House, the Pentagon or Nato thought that their policy towards Russia might be risking such an outcome, then I’d be amazed. As I’ve noted before, even the American anti-Russian superhawk Robert Kagan has said publicly that Russia was provoked. The worst bit of this is the nuclear element. In December 1987, I travelled to Washington to witness one of the most momentous and happy events of the age. This was the summit between Kremlin leader Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Ronald Reagan, which culminated in the signing of a treaty banning medium-range nuclear missiles.

The danger from such weapons was that they were far more likely to be launched than long-range rockets. Experts calculated that using them might possibly not result in a total nuclear wipeout. Hence the need to get rid of them.

Well, Donald Trump repudiated that treaty in 2018, blaming Russia, not very convincingly, for his decision. This was the second major nuclear arms treaty the USA has torn up. Gorbachev snapped that this was ‘not the work of a great mind’. More frighteningly, he warned that ‘a new arms race has been announced’.

And now we have actual war in Ukraine, which no powerful person seems to want to end. In fact, anyone who urges serious peace talks is denounced as a traitor and appeaser. That filthy, cruel war is now slowly spreading into Russia itself, with consequences I daren’t guess at.

During the whole Cold War I never really believed we were in danger. The Cuban crisis, which slightly overshadowed preparations for my 11th birthday, persuaded me that everyone would have more sense. I thought and think that TV dramas about a nuclear Armageddon, such as the BBC’s The War Game and the American The Day After, were unconvincing. They couldn’t come up with a believable reason for a war to start.

But now it seems entirely plausible. And I’ve been watching the American TV series Jericho with grim fascination – not because its explanation of nuclear disaster is likely, but because its portrayal of a small, friendly town in a post-nuclear world slowly descending into savagery is convincing. Thanks to arrogance and folly, this could happen, and this is what it would be like if it did.

So I shall carry on saying that we need peace in Ukraine, and soon.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11524385/PETER-HITCHENS-arrogance-folly-Ukraine-send-nuclear-catastrophe.html

December 12, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK policy changes: windfalls and renewables

The government is getting side-tracked by its nuclear obsession, with its newly created development outfit ‘Great British Nuclear’ expected to triple UK nuclear capacity by 2050 – getting to 24GW, with 20-30 SMRs and 4-6 new large reactors. Hard to believe. But so is backing a new coal mine. Let’s hope 2023 makes more sense

It’s been a wild year politically in the UK. After a period when
windfall taxes were resisted, we ended up with a government which bowed to
them- as did most of the EU. And they even got extended to cover power.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt hit electricity generation companies with a 45%
Energy Electricity Generator Levy, on their ‘excess returns’ as he
attempted to fund measures to ease the cost of living crisis.

That was in addition to the existing windfall tax on North Sea oil & gas operators
which is to be raised from 25% to 35% and extended by 2 years until 2028.


Renewable energy suppliers that operate under the Contracts for Difference
system are exempted from the new electricity tax, but not those who are
operating under the Renewables Obligation (RO). So they will be hit quite
hard- they had after all enjoyed a significant wind fall since the RO
subsidy level was high, based on the assumption that gas was cheap. It no
longer is.

There will now be an incentive to shift from RO support to CfDs,
but this may not be easy for some companies. Chris Hewett, Chief Executive
of Solar Energy UK, said: ‘The Chancellor should be taking every
opportunity to encourage investment in clean energy.

Yet, there will be no tax relief for companies investing in meeting the government’s target of
70GW of solar capacity by 2035 – unlike investments in oil and gas
production, which will be taxed less than fossil-free generators.’ A
swifter move to decarbonised energy would have avoided the dire
consequences we are seeing now.’ Fair enough.

But that doesn’t mean opting for costly and slow to deploy nuclear decarbonisation. It means
getting on with lower cost renewables fast and adjusting the wind fall
taxes and CfD system to that end. And of course cutting back on energy
wastage where ever possible.

The government is getting side-tracked by its
nuclear obsession, with its newly created development outfit ‘Great
British Nuclear’ expected to triple UK nuclear capacity by 2050 – getting
to 24GW, with 20-30 SMRs and 4-6 new large reactors. Hard to believe. But
so is backing a new coal mine. Let’s hope 2023 makes more sense

 Renew Extra 10th Dec 2022

https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2022/12/uk-policy-changes-windfalls-and.html

December 12, 2022 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Maligned in Western Media, Donbass Forces are Defending their Future from Ukrainian Shelling and Fascism

Covert Action Magazine, By Eva Bartlett, – November 19, 2022 

America is widely understood to be a key instigator behind conflict in Ukraine that has pitted brother against brother

meared, stigmatized, and lied about in Western media propaganda, the mostly Russian-speaking people of the Donbass region were being slaughtered by the thousands in a brutal war of “ethnic cleansing” launched against them by the neo-Nazi regime in Kyiv, which the U.S. installed after the CIA overthrew Ukraine’s legally elected president in a 2014 coup.

Although the Donbass people had been pleading for Russian military aid to defend them against the increasingly murderous military assaults by the Ukraine government forces, which killed more than 14,000 of their people, Russian President Vladimir Putin declined to intervene. Instead, he tried to broker a peace agreement between the warring parties.

But the U.S. and Britain secretly colluded to sabotage peace negotiations, persuading president Zelenksy to ignore the Minsk 2 peace agreement that the Ukraine government had previously signed, and which had been countersigned by Russia, France and Germany.

Realizing that the U.S. and its NATO allies would never permit peace negotiations to succeed, Putin finally sent troops into Ukraine on February 24. Russian troops went in to support and reinforce the outnumbered and outgunned Donbass Special Forces who had been defending their land against attacks by the Kyiv government for nearly eight years.

Voices From the Frontlines of Former Eastern Ukraine Republics

In the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) in October, I went to a frontline outpost 70 meters from Ukrainian forces in Avdeevka (north and west of Donetsk), according to the Donbas commanders I spoke with there.

To reach that position, I went with two other journalists to a meeting point with two commanders of Pyatnashka—volunteer fighters, including Abkhazi, Slovak, Russian, Ossetian and other nationalities, including locals from Donbas.

From there, they drove us to a point as far as they could drive before walking the rest of the way, several minutes through brush and trenches, eventually coming to their sandbagged wood and cement fortified outpost.

It has changed hands over the years, Ukrainian forces sometimes occupying it, Donbas forces now controlling it.

One soldier, a unit commander who goes by the call sign “Vydra” (Otter), was formerly a miner from the DPR who had been living in Russia with his family. In 2014, he returned to the Donbas to defend his mother and relatives still there. He spoke of the outpost.

“We dug and built this with our hands. Several times over the years, the Ukrainians have taken these positions. We pushed them back, they stormed us…Well, we have been fighting each other for eight years.”

There, artillery fire is the biggest danger they face. “You can hide from a sniper, but not from artillery, and they’re using large caliber.”

His living quarters is a dank, cramped, room with a tiny improvised bed, with another small room and bed for others at the outpost.

A sign reads: “If shelling occurs, go to the shelter.” The kind of sign you see all over Donetsk and cities of the Donbas, due to Ukraine’s incessant shelling of civilian, residential areas. In a frontline outpost where incoming artillery is the norm, the sign is slightly absurd, clearly a joke.

An Orthodox icon sits atop the sign. Ukrainian nationalists hang and spray Nazi graffiti and slogans of death; these fighters revere their faith.

A poster, with the DPR flag, reads: “We have never known defeat, and it’s clear that this has been decided from above. Donbas has never been forced to its knees, and no one will ever be allowed to.”

The only things decorating the space are tins of tuna and canned meat, instant noodles, and washing powder. Their existence is bare minimum, nothing glamorous about it; they volunteer because, as they told me, this is their land and they will protect it.

Perhaps surprising to some, when Vydra was asked whether he hates Ukrainians, he replied emphatically no, he has friends and relatives in Ukraine.

“We have no hatred for Ukraine. We hate those nationalists who came to power. But ordinary Ukrainians? Why? Many of us speak Ukrainian. We understand them, they understand us. Many of them speak Russian………………………..

And I’m on the Myrotvorets [kill list] website.” [As is the author, see this article.]

He spoke of Ukraine’s shelling from 2014, when the people of the Donbass were unarmed and not expecting to be bombed by their own country…………………………………..

I asked how he felt to be treated and described as sub-human, to be called dehumanizing names, a part of the Ukrainian nationalists’ brainwashing propaganda. As I wrote previously:

“Ukrainian nationalists openly declare they view Russians as sub-human. School books teach this warped ideology. Videos show the extent of this mentality: Teaching children not only to also hate Russians and see them as not humans, but also brainwashing them to believe killing Donbas residents is acceptable. The Ukrainian government itself funds neo-Nazi-run indoctrination camps for youths.”

“It’s offensive,” Vydra said, “We are saddened: There are sick people. We need to heal them, slowly.”……………………………….

Commanders Speak of Geopolitical Reasons for Ukraine’s War

Outside, sitting in front of an Orthodox banner and a collection of collected munitions—including Western ones—two platoon commanders, “Kabar” and “Kamaz,” spoke of the bigger geopolitical picture. [See video]

“America is running the show here,” Kabar said. “It builds foreign policy on the basis of how its domestic policy is built, which is through conflicts with external countries. They are accustomed to proving their power to their people through terrorism around the world, inciting fires in Syria, in the east. They played the card of radical Islam there……………………

And now they are playing the card of fascism. They do not see themselves on the other side of good. They need wars, blood, cruelty, and they signed Europe up for this.

However, they’ve missed one point: Russia, since the days of the Soviet Union, has never retreated in large scale wars. ………………………………………

Western Media Inverted Reality, Lauding Nazis and Demonizing Defenders

While many in the West think that this conflict started in February 2022, those following events since 2014 are aware that, following the Maidan coup and Odessa massacre, and the rise of fascism in Ukraine against the Ukrainian people, the Donbas republics wanted to distance themselves from Ukraine’s Nazis and fascism.

The sacrifices which the people of the Donbas republics have endured, particularly those fighting to protect their families and loved ones, have been and continue to be immense………..

These defenders, many living in dank trench conditions didn’t choose war, they responded to it, to protect their loved ones and their future. In spite of more than eight years of being warred upon by Ukraine, they retain their humanity.  https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/11/19/maligned-in-western-media-donbass-forces-are-defending-their-future-from-ukrainian-shelling-and-fascism/

December 9, 2022 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »