UK government pours yet another lot of tax-payer £millions into Sizewell C nuclear project
The UK Government has announced a further £170 million investment in
Sizewell C, with hopes that it will speed up preparations to enable
construction on the new nuclear power station.
Late last year it was rumoured that Sizewell C could be on the chopping block as the UK
Government scrambled to find cost savings, however now the Government is
looking to spend a further £170 million to ensure construction can begin
as soon as possible. That’s on top of the £700 million that’s already
been pledged towards the construction of Sizewell C by the UK Government.
The additional £170 million is set to be used to prepare the Sizewell C
site for future construction, procure key components from the project’s
supply chain, and expand its workforce.
Electrical Review 3rd Aug 2023
Together Against Sizewell environmental group angry at the coming destruction of marine life, as acoustic fish deterrent will not be installed at Hinkley Point C nuclear
A notification from the Environment Agency distributed on the first of
August, starts with an encouraging statement reminding us that it is
responsible for regulating environmental protection at nuclear sites,
ensuring that people and the environment are properly protected.
But behind the corporate speak of ‘permit variation’, the addition of ‘new
limits and conditions’ and ‘discharge activity’ within the Water
Activity Discharge permit for Sizewell C’s so-called sister plant at
Hinkley Point C in Somerset, lies the cold, stark fact that the Environment
Agency, which claims to ‘protect and improve the environment’, has
removed the requirement to install an acoustic fish deterrent (AFD) at the
head of its seawater intake in the Bristol Channel.
In doing so the EA has condemned millions of fish and other marine creatures to their fate of
impingement, injury and death adding to the many millions of fish fry, fish
eggs, small fish and other marine biota that will be killed when entrained
in the cooling system of the plant.
Moreover, this situation is due to be repeated at Sizewell, meaning that Sizewell Bay fish stocks and marine creatures will likewise face decimation should the plant ever be built. A
spokesperson for Together Against Sizewell C (TASC), said today, ‘Our
spineless environmental regulator has simply rolled over to do the nuclear
industry’s dirty work, directly contradicting its promise to protect and
improve the environment and making itself complicit with the ceaseless
attack on this country’s biodiversity.
It is shocking that our young
people have to witness such shameless sacrifice of millions of creatures on
the altar of wildly misplaced government policy which is recognised by its
own Science and Technology Committee as fantasy. When will we have a
regulatory system in the UK which is capable of demonstrating enough spine
to put the environment above corporate greed and the arm lock of government
policy? The Environment Agency should be ashamed of itself.’
Together Against Sizewell C 2nd Aug 2023
Environment Agency allows Hinkley Point C permit variation to remove fish deterrent system
EA allows Hinkley Point C permit variation to remove fish deterrent
system. The Environment Agency has allowed an amendment to a permit linked
to the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset, allowing the firm
to remove previous plans for an acoustic fish deterrent (AFD) system from
the development, despite warnings that the move could result in the death
of millions of fish each year.
ENDS 1st Aug 2023
Ministers diverted £136m from electric car fund to Sizewell C nuclear project despite infrastructure concerns
i’s revelation comes as Rishi Sunak faces criticism for watering down some of the Government’s green policies
inews UK By Ben Gartside, August 2, 2023
The Government diverted £136m away from its electric vehicle (EV) supply chain fund to the UK’s main nuclear reactor project Sizewell C, i can reveal.
The Automotive Transformation Fund, a Government initiative designed to make it easier for car manufacturers to build and develop electric vehicles in the UK, spent just 5 per cent of its initially allocated funding in the year to March 2023, according to Government documents seen by i.
Given an initial budget of £191m, just £7m was spent and 76 per cent of the funding arrangement was transferred to the Sizewell C project, the construction of the UK’s first new nuclear power station in more than 30 years.
i‘s revelation comes amid mounting concerns about whether the UK has sufficient infrastructure for electric cars and as Rishi Sunak has faced criticism for watering down some of the Government’s green policies…….
The documents, published by the now defunct Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, show that £136m was moved for “investment in Sizewell C”, while another £10m was surrendered back to the Government altogether.
A later document from the replacement Department for Business and Trade said the money was reallocated “for a number of reasons” but did not specify why.
……………………………………An energy department spokesperson did not respond to i‘s questions about whether the money went towards buying out the Chinese government stake on the project.
Details on Sizewell C’s spending are closely guarded, but the project is expected to spend £912m this financial year, with construction yet to start.
…………………… some environmental groups argue that the UK’s nuclear projects have been plagued by delays and ballooning costs, and that there are better, less expensive options for delivering electricity more sustainably, including renewables.
The revelation that the Government diverted funding away from its electric vehicle supply fund towards the Sizewell C project may further alarm carmakers, who are already concerned about targets that are being imposed on the industry for the making of EVs and the readiness of Britain’s infrastructure.
………………………….There is concern that there will not be enough EV chargers to meet demand by this deadline unless capacity is significantly ramped up…………………………. more https://inews.co.uk/news/ministers-electric-car-fund-sizewell-c-nuclear-project-infrastructure-concerns-2520848
UK government must come clean, to tax-payers and consumers, on the financial figures before signing up to new nuclear programme
Full report. See in particular paras 41 -44. “The Government should show
how this offers value for money to taxpayers … So far, the Government has
not published financial figures which allow the cost of this risk transfer
to be known. The Government must publish figures, before signing contracts
for new gigawatt-scale nuclear, which allow a proper assessment of value
for money to be made, including setting out the level and potential cost of
construction risk to be borne by the consumer or taxpayer …
The Government should publish details of how the estimated savings from using
the RAB model for funding Sizewell C were calculated, and provide clarity
for the funding structure, by publishing the Heads of Terms for the agreed
RAB funding model for that project.”
Science, Innovation, Technology Committee 31st July 2023
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/41092/documents/200069/default/
Campaigners against Sizewell C nuclear plan welcome call for financial clarity from Science, Innovation and Technology Committee
Campaigners against the Sizewell C nuclear power plant project in Suffolk
welcomed the committee’s call for Government clarity on the financing of
gigawatt-scale nuclear projects. A spokesperson for the Stop Sizewell C
campaign said:
“We’re appalled that the committee has ignored
legitimate concerns about whether nuclear can deliver reliable, affordable
electricity.” The group said it supported “the committee calling for
the Government to publish Sizewell C’s cost and value for money, as doing
so will expose just how unjustifiable this slow, risky, expensive project
is”.
A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said:
“We have already made clear we will publish a nuclear roadmap and consult
on alternative routes to market by the end of the year.
Nation Cymru 31st July 2023
Another kick in the teeth for UK taxpayers as EDF pockets another £170m of public money for their Sizewell C White Elephant.
In another lame attempt to prop up French adventurism into the UK’s energy sector, the UK
government has handed a further £170m from the public purse (note 1) to
EDF. With the CGN buy-out costing UK plc close to £700m and subsequent
‘encouragements’ to tempt reluctant investors to part with funding for
the doomed development at Sizewell, this brings the total amount of public
money handed over to EDF close to £1bn. East Suffolk residents could be
forgiven for thinking that Sizewell C is ‘shovel ready’: it is not. It
is, in fact, a long way from the Final Investment Decision (FID), the point
at which construction can begin. Even if the UK government and EDF can each
stump up £6bn the project will still be 60% short of the estimated £30bn
– a matter of £18bn to find. But that’s not all: dozens of licences
and permits have yet to be issued by the regulatory authorities, including
the site licence from the Office of Nuclear Regulation, and there is the
small matter of finding 2.2 million litres of mains water every day for 60
years of operation here in the driest county in the country, already
experiencing drought conditions.
TASC 31st July 2023
As UK’s Hinkley nuclear plants costs rise to £32 billion ($41.5 billion) EDF Sees Higher Risk of Delays.
Electricite de France SA said the risk of further delay to two nuclear reactors in southwest England has risen because of construction setbacks.
Author of the article:
Bloomberg News, Francois de Beaupuy, https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/edf-sees-increased-risk-of-delay-to-new-uk-atomic-reactors
EDF flagged last year that the plants may start 15 months late. The reactors at Hinkley Point have been touted by the UK government as sparking a nuclear renaissance, boosting energy independence and reducing reliance on fossil fuels. But the work has been plagued by multiple holdups and cost overruns.
The increased risk of a 15-month delay is due to “performances on civil works and challenges on mechanical, electrical, heating, ventilation and air conditioning,” EDF said Thursday in an earnings presentation. “Progress is below the planned trajectory and action plans have been set.”
The reactors, costing as much as £32 billion ($41.5 billion), are due to start operating in 2027 and 2028. The ballooning budget has fueled controversy over the vast sums needed for new nuclear developments, even as other low-carbon technologies such as offshore wind have also faced inflationary pressures.
Hinkley Point’s setbacks come as EDF seeks to arrange financing for a second pair of atomic plants — at Sizewell in eastern England — that would use the same design. Delays and cost overruns may deter investors who also face increasing demands for capital from renewables, which provide swifter returns.
The debt-laden French utility has a 66.5% stake in Hinkley Point, while China General Nuclear Power Corp. owns the rest. As funding requirements now exceed contractual commitments, shareholders will be asked to provide additional equity voluntarily starting in the fourth quarter.
“The probability that CGN will not fund the project beyond its committed equity cap is high,” EDF said Thursday. “Financing solutions are being investigated, in the event that CGN does not allocate its voluntary equity.
UK has no coherent plan to develop nuclear energy
In a major report, the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee calls
on the Government to develop and publish a Nuclear Strategic Plan to turn
high level aspirations into concrete steps to deliver new nuclear. The
Committee says that the Government is right to look to nuclear power to
meet our future electricity needs and that this requires a substantial
programme of nuclear new build.
But the Report warns that the Government
target of 24 GW of nuclear generating capacity by 2050 and the aspiration
to deploy a new nuclear reactor every year are more of a ‘wish list’
than the comprehensive detailed and specific strategy that is required to
ensure such capacity is built.
The Government’s stated aim of 24 GW of
nuclear capacity is ambitious: it is almost double the highest installed
nuclear capacity the UK has ever achieved. It could involve new
gigawatt-scale nuclear power, small modular reactors (SMRs) and advanced
modular reactors (AMRs), and further development of nuclear fusion. It
would require substantial progress on technologies, financing, skills,
regulation, decommissioning and waste management.
Science, Innovation, Technology Committee 31st July 2023
Ambition alone will not build UK nuclear power
Greg Clark, former energy minister, writes that the absence of policy continuity has undermined strategy on this issue. The current government claims to be all-in for new
nuclear. Its Energy Security Strategy, published last year, set a target of
24 gigawatts of nuclear energy generating capacity by 2050.
That is highly ambitious. To put it in context, it is three times our current capacity and
nearly twice the highest nuclear capacity that the UK has ever achieved,
even before Magnox plants were retired from service.
Today the cross-party House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Select Committee, which I chair, will publish a report endorsing the government’s decision to
look to nuclear power to meet our future electricity needs — especially
if we are to achieve the legal requirement of net zero carbon emissions by
2050. At a time when imported supplies of energy leave us vulnerable to
price spikes at best, and shortages at worst, there is an energy security
case for nuclear power under our own control.
However, we will also warn
that expansive ambition will not get nuclear power built. Much more than
with other energy technologies, the scale, financial demands, workforce
planning and — in the case of advanced nuclear technologies — research
and development needed for new nuclear requires a dependable strategic plan
if hopes are to have any chance of being turned into reality.
Witness after witness who appeared before our inquiry told us that such a strategic plan
for nuclear is missing. For example, there is no indication from the
government on what proportion of the 24GW is intended to be met by
gigawatt-scale plants like Hinkley Point C, or smaller, more distributed
nuclear reactors such as small modular reactors.
The government’s stated
aim to deploy a nuclear reactor a year is not grounded in any explanatory
detail. The role of the new organisation, Great British Nuclear, is obscure
beyond running a competition between potential developers of small modular
reactors. Britain has an opportunity to break out of 70 years of on-off
policy towards nuclear power, with the twin imperatives of energy security
and net zero favouring a substantial future contribution of nuclear to our
electricity needs. But this will not happen without a clear and deliberate
plan on which very long-term investors can rely. If Britain is to have
substantial new nuclear capacity, there is an urgent need to turn hopes
into action.
FT 31st July 2023
https://www.ft.com/content/7499350a-2a4c-430d-a23f-415f3780e0aa
Government must back Rolls-Royce on nuclear, says ex-boss Sir John Rose
Sir John Rose, the former chief executive of Rolls-Royce, is calling on
the Government to back British nuclear technology developed by the
engineering giant. Rolls is spearheading a project to design a fleet of
mini power plants – known as SMRs or small modular reactors – which
have become a key part of the UK’s long-term energy strategy. Ministers
have already put more than £200 million of public money into the project.
But, rather than backing Rolls, the Government has launched a competition
to select a provider, which will pit the FTSE 100 flagship against foreign
rivals. Sir John, who led the company from 1996 to 2011, has described the
move as ‘depressing’. He warned that by not throwing its support behind
Rolls-Royce, Ministers risked killing off a potentially valuable stream of
export income and missing out on highly skilled jobs. Rolls has previously
said that if it won the contract, it could create 40,000 UK jobs by 2050
and boost the economy by £52 billion. A deal would also benefit suppliers
and potentially turn the country into a global hub for nuclear technology.
Rose described the competition as ‘a good example’ of Government failure to
provide the support British business needs. ‘The probability of achieving
export success is vanishingly small if the producer is not supported by its
Government,’ he said.
Daily Mail 29th July 2023
Trident nuclear project can’t be delivered, says watchdog.
“The veil of secrecy surrounding nuclear spending is a desperate attempt by the UK Government to hide how outrageously unaffordable these weapons have become”
The Ferret, Rob Edwards, 27 Jul 23
Delivery of nuclear reactors to power a new fleet of Trident submarines on the Clyde has been branded as “unachievable” for the second year running by a UK Government watchdog.
The Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) has given a £3.7 billion reactor-building project run by Rolls Royce for the Ministry of Defence (MoD) a “red” rating for 2022-23. The project was also assessed as red in 2021-22, as reported by The Ferret.
According to the IPA, red means that “successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable”. This is because of “major issues” that do not appear to be “manageable or resolvable”.
The 2022-23 rating for another scheme crucial to renewing the Trident nuclear weapons system — a £1.9bn construction project at the Faslane and Coulport nuclear bases near Helensburgh — has been kept secret. In 2021-22 it was assessed as red.
The planned date for the final delivery to the Clyde of the new Dreadnought-class submarines, armed with Trident nuclear warheads, has also been classified as confidential by the MoD “for the purpose of safeguarding national security”.
The Scottish National Party (SNP) accused the UK Government of desperately trying to hide how “outrageously unaffordable” the Trident programme had become. The Scottish Greens described the programme as “a grotesque money pit”.
Campaigners criticised the MoD for “rewarding failure” by throwing money at nuclear projects, and for concealing the truth about the problems and delays. They warned of “everyday harms” from the risks of radiation leaks, as well as “catastrophic accidents”.
………………………………………The IPA’s latest annual report for 2022-23 assessed the feasibility of 52 military projects costing a total of £255.4bn. Eleven were related to the UK’s nuclear weapons programme and together cost more than £57bn, though the overall costs for three of them were kept secret.
The manufacture of nuclear reactors at a Rolls-Royce factory in Derby was the only project to be publicly rated as red. The reactors are to drive four new Trident-armed Dreadnought submarines due to start replacing existing Vanguard submarines at Faslane “in the early 2030s”.
…………………………………………………………….. Another previously mysterious project called Aurora was rated as amber. It is to make the plutonium components for new nuclear bombs at Aldermaston in Berkshire and is reckoned to cost between £2bn and £2.5bn.
The planned completion date for Aurora has been kept secret, along with the end dates for four other nuclear projects, including the Dreadnought and Astute submarine programmes. The dates were withheld under a freedom of information law exemption meant to protect national security.
2022-23 assessments for two other nuclear projects have also been classified as confidential so as not to prejudice international relations and the defence of the UK. One, Teutates, is a collaboration on nuclear weapon safety with France and the other is called “Clyde Infrastructure”.
The Clyde project is to build a series of new facilities at Faslane and Coulport to support nuclear submarine operations. It was rated as red by the IPA in 2021-22, and amber in 2020-21 and 2019-20.
The cost of the Clyde project has increased 19 per cent from £1.6bn to £1.9bn in the last year. According to the IPA, this is because of “challenges in delivering in a nuclear and operational environment”.
Trident ‘a moral abomination’
The SNP lambasted the UK Government for writing “blank cheques” to maintain the Trident programme. “The veil of secrecy surrounding nuclear spending is a desperate attempt by the UK Government to hide how outrageously unaffordable these weapons have become,” said the party’s Westminster defence spokesperson, Dave Doogan MP.
“The hollowing-out of the armed forces to pay for the ever-expanding nuclear vanity-weapons budget has led the UK to possess just 0.1 per cent of the world’s nuclear warheads — but at eye-watering cost while conventional capabilities atrophy.”
The Green MSP Ross Greer described nuclear weapons as a “moral abomination” that had no place in Scotland. “As these figures show, they are also a grotesque money pit that is swallowing up billions of pounds and giving huge handouts to international arms dealers,” he said.
“The Scottish Greens are proud to have secured the Scottish Government’s support for the international treaty banning nuclear weapons, already signed by 92 other countries.”
MoD ‘trying to hide’ Trident delays
The Nuclear Information Service, which researches and criticises nuclear weapons, pointed out that the MoD had been repeatedly given additional billions for its nuclear programme. “But there’s no sign that throwing money at the problem is having any effect beyond rewarding failure,” the group’s director, David Cullen, told The Ferret.
The Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament attacked the nuclear industry for its “big back catalogues” of cost escalations and time over-runs. “The nuclear propulsion of the nuclear weapon system only adds to the repertoire of everyday harms from radiation leaks and opportunities of catastrophic accidents,” said campaign chair, Lynn Jamieson……………………………………………………………….. https://theferret.scot/trident-nuclear-project-watchdog/
UK Government’s infrastructure advisors cast doubt over uks biggest energy projects including nuclear clearup
The UK Government’s infrastructure advisors have warned that it is unlikely
that work to efficiently categorise hazardous waste at the Sellafield site
will be a success.
The Infrastructure and Project Authority (IPA) has also
raised concerns about the majority of the Government’s other key energy
infrastructure programmes, including the Low-Cost Nuclear Programme funding
R&D for small modular reactors.
These warnings are contained within the
Authority’s new annual assessment. Published late last week, it assesses
whether 244 Government-backed projects with a total whole-life cost
exceeding £805bn are progressing well. Projects are given a ‘green’
rating if delivery if on time, there are no significant quality issues and
no other issues that could threaten delivery. Those that are unlikely to be
delivered without a major change of direction are ranked as ‘red’. Those
with delays, quality issues or other problems which may yet be resolved
receive an ‘amber’ rating.
Of the 19 projects covered that are overseen
by the Department for Energy Security and Net-Zero (DESNZ), only three get
the ‘green’ rating. These are the Local Authority Delivery scheme, which
funds councils to upgrade homes and reduce carbon; the SIXEP effluent
treatment plant and the storage plant at Sellafield.
But efforts to improve
analytical services at Sellafield, the former centre of nuclear
reprocessing in the UK, received a ‘red’ ranking. The Authority believes
that the successful delivery of the project “appears to be
unachievable”. The project concerts assessing and categorizing waste on
site.
The Authority has also downgraded the UK Government’s plans for a
major geological nuclear waste storage facility to ‘amber’, from
‘green’ in 2021. This facility is being built both to deal with waste
from new nuclear sites, but also to consolidate existing waste storage; at
present, more than 20 above-ground facilities across the UK are used, each
with a maximum design life of 100 years.
Two DESNZ Projects – Sizewell C
and the development of carbon capture and storage – are exempt from
assessment due to commercial sensitivities. Besides the analytical services
at Sellafield, the others are all ranked as ‘amber’. These include the
national rollout of smart meters to homes; the Net-Zero Hydrogen fund; the
Homes Upgrade Grant (HUG) for home retrofitting; the Public Sector
Decarbonisation Scheme; the Industrial Decarbonisation and Hydrogen Revenue
Support scheme and the Green Homes Grant.
Edie 24th July 2023
Cumbria set for more nuclear reactors as questions are raised over why land isn’t being used for renewable energy
Cumberland Council are set to discuss small modular reactors and nuclear
power in Cumbria. Councillor Jill Parry for Bothel and Wharrels, Green
Party will ask her question to leader of Cumberland Council Councillor Mark
Fryer, who represents St Johns and Great Clifton, Labour.
“Can the leader please ask the Solway Community Power Company for more detail of the
proposal, including an outline what investigations, surveys and other
preparatory work are needed at this very early stage, and share the
response with council? “
“Would it not be more appropriate for the council
to push that the land is used for renewable energy technologies, such as
solar, in the meantime, which could generate real-time useable electricity
for residents now and could stay in place if SMRs don’t happen?”
Lancashire Live 24th July 2023
https://www.lancs.live/news/cumbria-news/cumbria-set-more-nuclear-reactors-27375167
UK govt to pour another £170million of taxpayers’ cash into planned Sizewell C nuclear plant: is it value for money?
The government is to plough another £170million of taxpayers’ cash into the
proposed Sizewell C nuclear plant. The Department for Energy Security and
Net Zero said the cash was in addition to the £679 million the government
invested in the Suffolk power station late last year, when it took joint
control of the project with EDF, of France.
Last year’s investment included about £100 million to buy China General Nuclear out of its 20 per cent stake. EDF said: “This is another big endorsement and will put us in an
even stronger position to begin full construction.” The government said
the money would be used “to prepare the Sizewell C site for future
construction, procure key components from the project’s supply chain and
expand its workforce”. It said it was “previously allocated funding for
development work”.
The government pledged in the budget in 2021 to
provide up to £1.7 billion “to enable a final investment decision in a
large-scale nuclear project this parliament”.
Stop Sizewell C, a campaign group, said: “It sticks in the throat to see ministers splashing more taxpayers’ cash months before a final investment decision, while maintaining total secrecy about whether Sizewell C can achieve value for money.”
Times 25th July 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cash-boost-for-construction-of-sizewell-c-nuclear-plant-rg6rr5slv
1 This Month
of the week – THE ONENESS of HUMANITY
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
1st July – Webinar Waste of Space: The Environmental Harm of Military and Civil Space Activity st July, 7 pm
Report Launch Online: We are seeing an increasing exploitation of space for military and commercial purposes. This must change.
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (251)
- May 2026 (306)
- 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)
-
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 