90% of Sellafield’s Discharged Plutonium Wastes are on the “Cumbrian Mud Patch” Below which Lies the Coal Mine Plan —
Graphic from New Report Published in Science of the Total Environment “Controls on anthropogenic radionuclide distribution in the Sellafield-impacted Eastern Irish Sea”? Daisy Ray et al.??https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720342893 This information has been sent out to press on numerous occasions. So far it has not been picked up.
“our concerns are that no-one is taking
adequate notice of, or responsibility for the impact this mine would have
both on the wastes at Sellafield and also on the reprocessing wastes that
have been discharged over many decades and are now sitting on the Irish Sea
bed directly under the area that West Cumbria Mining propose mine out.A massive void the size of Wastwater lake is proposed under the Cumbrian Mud
Patch, this would lead to likely collapse of the Irish Sea bed. Our own
commissioned report by Tim Deere-Jones has been vindicated with another
report published more recently in Science of the Total Environment which
includes findings from the Centre for Radiochemistry Research -The
University of Manchester and Radiochemistry Unit -The University of
Helsinki, Finland.Findings are that up to 90% of the plutonium discharged
90% of Sellafield’s Discharged Plutonium Wastes are on the “Cumbrian Mud Patch” Below which Lies the Coal Mine Plan —
from Sellafield are likely to be sitting in the silts on the Cumbrian Mud
patch along with a cocktail of other radionuclides. To mine underneath this
area for any reason, let alone for unneeded coal, knowing that this is the
case, is an act of premeditated murder no less than letting off a series of
nuclear bombs.” New Report Published under Creative Commons in Science of
the Total Environment “Controls on anthropogenic radionuclide
distribution in the Sellafield-impacted Eastern Irish Sea” Daisy Ray et
al. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720342893
EDF trucks enriched uranium to the unfinished Flamanville nuclear reactor. Why so much in advance of the need for it?
Reuters 26th Oct 2020, A first truck responsible for transporting enriched uranium to the EPR
reactor in Flamanville (Manche) left Monday morning from the Framatome
plant in Romans-sur-Isère (Drôme), according to anti-nuclear associations
who denounce an EDF “maneuver” to “make it impossible to question”
the project.
Associations, including Greenpeace, France Nature
Environnement and several anti-nuclear collectives, believe in a press
release that “nothing guarantees” that the EPR “can work one day”
and therefore consider that the fact of storing fuel there now is “an
aberration”. They also consider that “the arrival of fuel in Flamanville
also questions the security of the site” and stress that this first
delivery opens “a ballet of trucks which will last several months”.
https://fr.reuters.com/article/idFRL8N2HH2HL
Greenpeace 26th Oct 2020, EDF has just obtained the authorization to transport new fuel to the
Flamanville EPR nuclear reactor site. A first truck left at 8 am Monday,
October 26 from Romans-sur-Isère, in Drôme, and arrived in the evening at
Flamanville, in Manche. In the coming weeks, these nuclear road convoys
will therefore multiply… As if the EPR were ready to start. Yet this is
far, very far from being the case. Why such a rush, when the EPR is
accumulating delays? EDF once again adopts the strategy of a fait accompli,
despite common sense.
https://www.greenpeace.fr/epr-de-flamanville-du-combustible-pour-un-projet-obsolete/
Finland, stuck with increasingly costly Olkiluouti nuclear nightmare, plans and even worse expense, with small nucler reactors!
Taz 26th Oct 2020, The European pressurized water reactor Olkiluoto 3 has long since developed into a Finnish BER – at least twelve years too late, three times as expensive as planned. And it’s far from being online. The same goes for the
new Hanhikivi project: years behind before construction began .
But the Finnish nuclear lobby is already planning another nuclear energy adventure: the construction of so-called Small Modular Reactors (SMR). Paul Dorfman of the UK UCL Energy Institute and co-author of an SMR study by the Nuclear
Consulting Group estimates that small reactors would provide increasingly expensive energy due to the cost of materials and personnel : the massive investments that would be required to create a supply chain so that replacing the economies of scale of large reactors with the advantage of series production would make the investment risk for SMR even higher than for standard reactors.
Britain to lose protection of the environment – as a result of Brexit
behalf of citizens is being undermined by the UK government. Ministers
promised that after Brexit, laws on air, water and waste would be policed
by an independent Office for Environmental Protection (OEP).
these laws were enforced by European courts, which prosecuted EU
governments that breached green rules. Ministers promised the OEP would be
similarly independent. But they now want to grant themselves powers to
“advise” the new body. These plans were revealed in a tabled amendment
to the Environment Bill. Critics fear ministers may counsel the OEP against
taking the government to court if it breaches laws.
Pressure on UK Prime Minister to show strong climate leadership
Business Green 28th Oct 2020, Pressure is mounting on Boris Johnson to come up with an ambitious
decarbonisation plan ahead of COP26 next year, with a major coalition of
health professionals, academics, faith and youth leaders today joining
calls from Conservative MPs and former world leaders for UK to demonstrate
strong climate leadership in the run up to the critical UN summit.
In a
series of letters to the Prime Minister today, various groups representing
millions of people in the UK and overseas urge the government to deliver a
“world-leading” climate plan to the UN in support of the Paris Agreement
“as early as possible this year” or well ahead of COP26 in November 2021.
Such a plan – or Nationally-Determined Contribution (NDC) in UN jargon –
should “at the very least” aligned with limiting global warming to 1.5C by
the end of the century and the UK’s 2050 net zero target, and should be
achieved entirely through domestic action without the use of international
carbon credits, according to the letter from faith groups.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4022373/pressure-mounts-pm-ambitious-uk-climate-plan-soon
Lithuania protests Belarus’plan for nuclear power station close to their border
Daily Mail 27th Oct 2020, The Baltic nation of Lithuania sent a protest note Tuesday to Belarus over
a planned nuclear power plant close to their border that is scheduled to
start operating in early November. The Astravyets nuclear power plant, 40
kilometers (25 miles) south of Vilnius, Lithuania´s capital, is to start
production between Nov. 1-10, Belarusian operator Belenergo told
Lithuania´s power transmission system operator Litgrid on Monday.
France trying to market nuclear reactors to Romania
World Nuclear News 27th Oct 2020, France and Romania have signed a declaration of intent on cooperation inthe civil nuclear field, which aims, among other things, to work “with
strategic partners” to build units 3 and 4 of the Cernavoda nuclear power
plant and to upgrade unit 1. The document was signed yesterday by French
Prime Minister Jean Castex and his Romanian counterpart Ludovic Orban, who
led a delegation of his ministers to Paris.
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/France-and-Romania-plan-joint-work-on-Cernavoda-pr
Using a robot to map the highly radioactive area of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant
University of Bristol and Spot on October 22, and the team intended to use
the robot to create a three-dimensional map of the distribution of nuclear
radiation.
1986 nuclear accident and, as a result, the robot adds new surveying
capabilities to the teams involved. Other robots were also implemented to
inspect and survey the area.
https://www.unilad.co.uk/technology/boston-dynamics-sent-spot-into-chernobyl-nuclear-plant/
Britain, and other countries, got nuclear weapons for reasons of status and pride
|
We’re nuclear because of the kudos, https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18818883.letters-nuclear-kudos/ Ian W Thomson, Lenzie. 23 Oct 20 DAVID Crawford asks a question about why the UK Government allows a large element of UK tax revenue to be spent with the US facilities to support the UK nuclear weapon submarine resource. He answers his question by saying “money”, because the UK itself is a substantial supplier of weapons
I believe that there is more to it than he suggests. The Labour Government at the end of the Second World War could have decided not to have nuclear weapons. It initially took the option to have them largely because of status and pride. Ernest Bevin, then the Foreign Secretary, stated: “We’ve got to have the bloody Union Jack on top of it.” The costs of maintaining that status have become more and more expensive over the years, which has led to the UK becoming more and more reliant upon the US for technical support at a cost. The theory must be that it is better to have a nuclear deterrent sort of independent rather than not have such deterrent at all. I also believe that status still has a large part to play in the UK’s position today, albeit we are far removed from the circumstances prevailing at the end of the Second World War. It is interesting that all five permanent members of the UN Security Council are nuclear powers: China, France, Russia, the UK and the US. The UK, no doubt, places great value upon that status and is likely to regard being a nuclear power as helping to sustain it. The original idea was that the five would progressively disarm in exchange for other states not acquiring nuclear weapon facilities. That idea has gone well, hasn’t it? Look at India and Pakistan and the likelihood of some others. |
|
Hope for nuclear arms control with Russia?
|
Hope for nuclear arms control with Russia? Brookings Steven Pifer, Monday, October 26, 2020 Editor’s Note: The U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty, New START, is set to expire in February 2021. Little progress was made during the summer and it was unclear if the two countries would reach an agreement. However, a breakthrough has given the arms control treaty a new lease on life, albeit with a lot of questions, writes Steven Pifer. This piece originally published by the Freeman Spogli Institute’s Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University.
While concern had grown over the past several weeks about a breakdown in U.S.-Russian arms control, it appears the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and nuclear arms control more broadly may have a new lease on life, albeit with lots of questions. Washington’s negotiation with Moscow on New START hit a roadblock on October 16. President Putin said Russia would agree to a one-year extension, which U.S. negotiators had proposed instead of five years, but without the conditions sought by the American side. National Security Advisor O’Brien summarily rejected the Russian position because it ignored the U.S. demand for a freeze on all nuclear warhead numbers.
Things changed recently. The Russians announced that they would agree to a one-year extension of New START and said they are “ready to assume a political obligation together with the United States to freeze the sides’ existing arsenals of nuclear warheads during this period.” The Russian statement added that this presumed no additional U.S. conditions. The Department of State spokesperson quickly and positively reacted, saying U.S. negotiators are “prepared to meet immediately to finalize a verifiable agreement.” New START constrains U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces to their lowest levels since the 1960s. However, when it comes to nuclear warheads as opposed to delivery systems, the treaty limits only “deployed” strategic warheads—that is, warheads on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) or submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The treaty does not cover reserve strategic warheads or any non-strategic (tactical) nuclear weapons. If Russian acceptance of a one-year freeze means that the Trump administration has succeeded in persuading Moscow to negotiate a treaty limiting all U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons, that is a commendable breakthrough. Indeed, a treaty covering all the two sides’ nuclear arms has long seemed the logical next step after New START (President Obama proposed such a negotiation in 2010). Questions remain, however. The Russian statement indicates that Moscow is ready to undertake, as a political obligation, a one-year freeze on nuclear warhead numbers. It remains unclear whether Russian officials, beyond that freeze, are prepared to negotiate a legally-binding and verifiable treaty constraining all nuclear warheads that would be in effect for a number of years (New START is in force for 10 years, with the possibility of its extension for an additional five years). ……
it appears that U.S. and Russian negotiators still have issues to resolve. Irrespective of the freeze, New START is worth saving and extending to 2026 (the treaty’s terms provide that there could be multiple extensions). Extension to 2026 would mean five more years of limits on Russian strategic nuclear forces. It would mean five more years of information about those forces provided by the treaty’s verification measures, including data exchanges, notifications and on-site inspections. And extending the treaty would require no change in U.S. strategic modernization plans, as those plans were designed to fit within the treaty’s limits. One last observation: New START requires that, if a side wishes to withdraw from the treaty, it must give the other three months’ notice before doing so. It is now October 21, which means that, if negotiations with the Russians do not go well and the Trump administration were to give notice, the United States could not actually withdraw from the treaty until after January 20, 2021—when Donald Trump will be starting his second term or Joe Biden will have become the 46th U.S. president. Mr. Biden is on record as supporting New START’s extension for five years, with no conditions. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/10/26/hope-for-nuclear-arms-control/ |
|
Legal fight to stop Sizewell nuclear project destroying an historic Suffolk woodland
East Anglian Daily Times 24th Oct 2020, Campaigners have agreed to continue their battle to stop an historicSuffolk woodland from being felled – and are taking the fight to the
Court of Appeal.
Wood in order to use the land and Pillbox Field to relocate some Sizewell B
buildings ready for a start on Sizewell C.
Sizewell C) says the project is premature because the twin reactor nuclear
power station has yet to receive planning permission. TASC has now applied
to Court of Appeal following the High Court’s dismissal of supporter Joan
Girling’s bid for a judicial review application of the planning consent
earlier this month. Joan Girling said, ‘‘The Planning Inspectorate has
now accepted EdF’s recently submitted Sizewell C DCO application.
foregone conclusion. “There is no certainty that it will be given
approval. Until such time that the Sizewell C application is determined, it
is the view of many people that the needless destruction of Coronation Wood
should not go ahead.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/legal-fight-goes-on-to-save-coronation-wood-1-6898954
Not only Fukushima – UK nuclear reactors also empty radioactive water into the sea
 Ian Fairlie’s Blog 22nd Oct 2020, Concerns over proposed tritium discharges from Fukushima – why no apparent concern about the larger tritium releases from Hunterston B and Torness? Recent newspaper reports have expressed concern about the apparent decision by the Japanese Government and TEPCO to discharge large volumes of radioactive tritiated water from the stricken Fukukshima nuclear power station in Japan into the Pacific Ocean.I have expressed concern myself about this proposed decision -see here. Instead I recommend that TEPCO and the Japanese Government should build more storage tanks to allow for the decay of the radioactive tritium. Some readers have commented that all nuclear power stations world-wide discharge tritium into the sea (sometimes via rivers) and into the atmosphere. This is true and TEPCO used this fact to try to justify its proposed dumping of tritium into the sea.
My reply as that two wrongs do not make a right: it is in fact quite worrying that all nuclear facilities routinely dump large volumes of tritium into the sea and the air. This applies to all UK nuclear power stations as well – including Hunterston B and Torness in Scotland. Recent reports have expressed concern about the restarts of the ancient dilapidated reactors at Hunterston B which are well past their sell-by dates.
These fears largely centre on the risks of a nuclear accident at these oldunsafe reactors. But shouldn’t we also be concerned about their tritium discharges? In 2018, annual tritium releases to the sea from Hunterston B were 148 terabecquerels (TBq) and the even more dangerous tritium emissions to the atmosphere totalled 0.96 TBq.
The situation is similar at all other UK nuclear power stations. For example, at Torness, the tritium discharges in 2018 were 295 TBq into the sea and 1.32 TBq into the air. In most cases, these annual amounts are larger than the annual amounts being proposed to
be released at Fukushima. So shouldn’t we be equally be concerned at these releases, as we are at the Japanese ones? |
|
European Commission commits to retainng Iran nuclear deal
European Commission reassures Iran of commitment to nuclear deal https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/European-Commission-reassures-Iran-of-commitment-t23 October 2020 The lifting of economic sanctions against Iran remains an essential part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA) and its signatories are committed to expanding the special purpose vehicle that enables European businesses to maintain trade with the country, according to the European Commission’s foreign affairs spokesperson Peter Stano.
In an interview with the Tehran Times published on 20 October, Stano referred to remarks Josep Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, had made to the European Parliament on 7 October. Borrell said Iran had “legitimate expectations that the nuclear deal would result in more concrete economic benefits”.
The E3 – France, Germany and the UK – triggered the JCPoA’s dispute resolution mechanism in January, following Iran’s further steps away from its commitments. In June, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted a resolution calling on Iran to cooperate fully in implementing its NPT Safeguards Agreement and Additional Protocol.
In August, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi held talks with Iranian officials on access for IAEA inspectors to the country’s nuclear sites. His visit to Tehran followed the US Administration’s request to the UN Security Council to initiate the ‘snapback’ mechanism of the Iran nuclear deal. This mechanism allows a party to the agreement to seek the re-imposition against Iran of the multilateral sanctions lifted in 2015 in accordance with resolution 2231. The USA withdrew from the JCPoA in May 2018.
Stano told the Tehran Times that the EU considers the extraterritorial application of unilateral restrictive measures to be contrary to international law.
“The lifting of sanctions is an essential part of the JCPoA agreement,” he said. “In this regard, the EU fulfilled its commitments and lifted all its economic and financial sanctions in connection with the Iranian nuclear programme. Furthermore, the EU member states sitting in the UN Security Council prevented the US efforts to use the so-called ‘snapback’ and re-introduce UN sanctions that were lifted as a result of the JCPoA.”
The EU had taken “a series of concrete actions”, he said, including updating its Blocking Statute in August 2018 and, the following year, setting up INSTEX (Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges). In addition, the European Commission recently launched two online platforms to support European economic operators “to engage in legitimate trade with Iran”.
“This underscores the continued EU commitment to the full and effective implementation of the JCPoA,” Stano said, adding that the first transactions under INSTEX are being processed. “The number of participants of INSTEX is not shrinking; quite to the contrary, there are more European countries joining, with more to follow.”
Russian hacking group Energetic Bear have hacked nuclear stations, now threaten USA election
Russians Who Pose Election Threat Have Hacked Nuclear Plants and Power Grid . The hacking group, Energetic Bear, is among Russia’s stealthiest. It appears to be casting a wide net to find useful targets ahead of the election, experts said. NYT, By Nicole Perlroth, Oct. 23, 2020
Cybersecurity officials watched with growing alarm in September as Russian state hackers started prowling around dozens of American state and local government computer systems just two months before the election.
The act itself did not worry them so much — officials anticipated that the Russians who interfered in the 2016 election would be back — but the actor did. The group, known to researchers as “Dragonfly” or “Energetic Bear” for its hackings of the energy sector, was not involved in 2016 election hacking. But it has in the past five years breached the power grid, water treatment facilities and even nuclear power plants, including one in Kansas………
Energetic Bear typically casts a wide net, then zeros in on a few high-value targets. In Germany and the United States, the group has infected websites popular in the energy sector, downloading malware onto the machines of anyone who visited the sites, then searching for employees with access to industrial systems.
In other attacks, it has hijacked the software updates for computers attached to industrial control systems. It has also blasted targets with phishing emails in search of employees, or co-workers, who might have access to critical systems at water, power and nuclear plants.
And it has done so with remarkable success. A disturbing screenshot in a 2018 Department of Homeland Security advisory showed the groups’ hackers with their fingers on the switches of the computers that controlled the industrial systems at a power plant.
The group has thus far stopped short of sabotage, but appears to be preparing for some future attack. The hackings so unnerved officials that starting in 2018, the United States Cyber Command, the arm of the Pentagon that conducts offensive cyberattacks, hit back with retaliatory strikes on the Russian grid…………… https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/23/us/politics/energetic-bear-russian-hackers.html
Study finds that bees are harmed by quite low levels of ionising radiation
Current Chernobyl-level radiation harmful to bees: study https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/current-chernobyl-level-radiation-harmful-to-bees-study/article32908484.eceAFPPARIS, FRANCE, OCTOBER 21, 2020
Researchers exposed bee colonies in a laboratory setting to a range of radiation levels found in areas of the exclusion zone around the ruined Chernobyl site
Bumblebees exposed to levels of radiation found within the Chernobyl exclusion zone suffered a “significant” drop in reproduction, in new research published Wednesday that scientists say should prompt a rethink of international calculations of nuclear environmental risk.
The study, published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, set out to discover how ionising radiation affects insects, which are often thought to be more resilient than other species.
“We found that at radiation levels detectable in Chernobyl, the number of new queen bees produced from the colony was significantly reduced and colony growth was delayed — meaning colonies reached their peak weight at a week later,” said the paper’s lead author Katherine Raines.
The lecturer in environmental pollution at the University of Stirling told AFP by email that researchers “anticipate that this may have an effect on pollination/ecosystem services in contaminated areas”.
The authors said they chose bumblebees both because of a lack of lab-based research into bees and because of their crucial role in pollination.
Ionising radiation can occur either from nuclear sites or medical procedures, although the levels tested were higher than those that would likely be found in the environment from normal releases, Raines said.
But she added that the researchers were “very surprised that we could detect effects as low as we did”.
“Our research suggests insects living in the most contaminated areas at Chernobyl may suffer adverse effects, with subsequent consequences for ecosystem services such as pollination,” she added.
The authors said if their findings could be generalised “they suggest insects suffer significant negative consequences at dose rates previously thought safe” and called revisions to the international framework for radiological protection of the environment.
People are not allowed to live near the Chernobyl power station and the abandoned settlements within the exclusion zone are surrounded by forests hosting birds, wolves, elks and lynxes. A giant protective dome was put in place over the destroyed fourth reactor in 2016.
1 This Month
1 June Webinar – The High Cost of Nuclear Power – Register
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (225)
- 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 