Indonesia civil society groups raise concerns over proposed Borneo nuclear reactor

by Irfan Maulana on 14 May 2024, https://news.mongabay.com/2024/05/indonesia-civil-society-groups-raise-concerns-over-proposed-borneo-nuclear-reactor/

Indonesia’s largest environmental advocacy group, Walhi, staged demonstrations in Jakarta and West Kalimantan province to raise awareness about a proposed nuclear power plant in West Kalimantan’s Bengkayang district.
In 2021, a U.S. agency signed a partnership agreement with Indonesia’s state-owned power utility to explore possibilities for a reactor in the province. Survey work is currently being conducted to determine the project’s viability and safety.
Some environmental groups have questioned the merit of the plan on safety grounds and the availability of alternative renewable sources.

JAKARTA — Civil society organizations in Indonesia staged protests in late April to raise awareness of a planned nuclear plant near Pontianak, capital of West Kalimantan province on the island of Borneo.

“We are advocating that West Kalimantan be kept away from the threat of a nuclear radiation disaster. Indonesia is not Chernobyl,” said Hendrikus Adam, executive director of the West Kalimantan chapter of the Indonesia Forum for the Environment, a national NGO known as Walhi, referring to the site of a notorious 1986 nuclear meltdown in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

Indonesia’s first experimental nuclear reactor, the TRIGA Mark II, opened in the city of Bandung in February 1965. Since then, however, the world’s fourth-largest country has yet to open a full-fledged nuclear power station.

In March 2023, Indonesia and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) signed a partnership agreement to develop small modular reactor technology for the archipelago’s power network. The agreement included a $1 million grant to PLN, the state-owned power utility, to carry out feasibility studies on a nuclear reactor.

PLN has proposed a 462-megawatt facility in West Kalimantan, which would use technology supplied by NuScale Power OVS, a publicly traded company based in Oregon in the U.S.

In capacity terms, that represents almost one-tenth of the giant Paiton coal-fired complex in East Java province, a mainstay of the Java-Bali power grid.

NuScale says the modular design of its technology has additional resilience to earthquakes — a significant consideration for civil engineering projects in Indonesia, one of the most seismically active countries in the world.

However, the technology encountered controversy after John Ma, a senior structural engineer with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), questioned the commission’s approval of the design’s earthquake resistance. That “differing professional opinion” was subsequently dismissed on review.

In 2021, Indonesia’s national research agency, known as BRIN, carried out a seismic study on a prospective site in the West Kalimantan d istrict of Bengkayang.

That early work is part of research under the internationally agreed Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment, which is recommended by the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of its safety regimen.

Risk assessment

At Walhi’s demonstration on April 26 in Jakarta, volunteers with the environmental group unfurled banners stating “Indonesia is not Chernobyl.” Lessons from the Chernobyl incident, as well as the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant meltdown in Japan — the latter triggered by an earthquake — inform much of the civil society campaign in Indonesia.

“The number of human and environmental tragedies shows that human-created technology such as nuclear power plants cannot be completely controlled,” Adam said.

He also questioned the government’s choice of Indonesian Borneo, known locally as Kalimantan, on the basis that it isn’t as seismically active as islands like Java, Sumatra and Sulawesi.

“The assumption that Kalimantan is safe from this disaster is of course not true,” Adam said. “Kalimantan has earthquake sources, such as the Meratus Fault, Mangkabayar Fault, Tarakan Fault, Sampurna Fault and Paternoster Fault.”

Walhi also pointed to slow uptake of solar and other renewable energy sources in Indonesia, which haven’t received the kinds of subsidies seen in other countries transitioning to clean energy.

“We have so many choices for energy transition, why do we have to choose technology that is actually dangerous?” said Fanny Tri Jamboree Christianto, Walhi’s energy campaign lead.

May 15, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Indonesia, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

“Bouncing-back” and other resilience neologisms championed by the state are inherently at odds with the irreversibility of nuclear waste.

Rhetoric of resilience

Recovery of the state or recovery of the people?

Beyond Nuclear International By Mia Winther-Tamaki, 12 May 24

The Japanese people and landscapes still feel the unending impacts of a nuclear catastrophe that occurred a dozen years ago. Thousands of black bags litter the Fukushima exclusion zone enclosing radioactive earth and rubbish with nowhere to go. Japan has begun releasing millions of tons of radioactive wastewater into the sea. The death and destruction of the earthquake and tsunami — a tragedy in itself — was compounded by nuclear calamity…………………….

The Japanese government was responsible for not only creating the circumstance of neglect that caused the nuclear meltdown, but also for exacerbating the impacts of nuclear fallout through a delayed and opaque response that downplayed the severity of the catastrophe…………….

Following the nuclear disaster, Japan shifted to a necessary post-disaster survival and recovery strategy that can be characterized by the term “resilience,” defined by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction as the ability to “resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through…preservation and restoration…”………………………………………………………………………..

“Bouncing-back” and other resilience neologisms championed by the state are inherently at odds with the irreversibility of nuclear waste. The Japanese translation of resilience, “fukkō” (復興), was employed as a catchphrase in building “apparatuses of [capital] capture” out of crisis, according to Sabu Kohso in his 2020 book Radiation and Revolution. In what Kohso calls the “nuclear capitalist nation-state,” the government endeavored to “build back better” and rejuvenate the national economy amidst an unprecedented crisis by implementing a series of fukkō reforms. These reforms included cuts in public spending, tax incentives targeted at international investors and the procurement of construction contracts, all of which ultimately proved advantageous for nuclear corporations and other private actors in the “business of reconstruction.”

The government used the disaster conveniently for profit-making, further transferring the nation’s wealth to the elites, while further immiserating the people. TEPCO exempted itself from responsibility for the nuclear meltdown when it referred to radiation as a “masterless object” (無主物), therefore absolving any self-accountability for cleaning up the radiation emitted from TEPCO’s own nuclear reactors.

Strategic documents such as the government’s 2012 white paper titled, “Toward a Robust and Resilient Society” were published with the intention of “nurturing the dreams and hopes of the people,” ………………………………………………………………….

While enlisting idealistic language and visions of a future, the Japanese state failed to provide basic amenities, housing, resources and support for the Japanese people who had essentially become nuclear refugees. The state divisively categorized evacuees as either “mandatory” or “voluntary,” based on the proximity of their homes to the site of the nuclear meltdown, though it has been shown that deadly levels of radioactivity persisted far outside mandatory zoned areas.

……………………………………………………………..The media ignored the resistance movement, dismissing the public’s widespread anticipation and anxiety about future nuclear accidents, and instead toed the government’s line about nuclear energy as safe.

Community-driven resilience led by activists focused on a diverse range of concerns, including anti-capitalism, feminism and environmentalism. Spearheading this resistance were mothers and those who work to provide everyday needs, tirelessly organizing networks of information-sharing and support. For the sake of their children and loved ones, those in caregiving roles questioned the government’s opaque reports of radiation levels, though they were often denigrated as “hysterical” and “paranoid” by authorities and other family members, according to Kohso. Within the confines of Japan’s patriarchal society, which frequently undermines the value of womens’ knowledge, female activists subverted norms that “freed them from a degree of social control, giving them greater freedom to mobilize.”

Author Nicole Frieiner documents how women mobilized resistance in informal digital spaces, such as a Facebook group named “Fukushima Network for Saving Children from Radiation,” and a blog titled “Connecting Mother’s Blog.” They created safe and accessible spaces that supported alternative points of connection for people across the world. Artists were also crucial to the Fukushima nuclear resistance.

………………………………………………………………… Survivors of Fukushima must live not only with the trauma caused by the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown, but also that which followed in the ambiguous aftermath — years of a violent lack of acknowledgement, dignity and respect from public authorities………………………………………………………. more https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/05/12/rhetoric-of-resilience/

May 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Fukushima continuing, spinbuster | Leave a comment

China and the U.S. Are Numb to the Real Risk of War.

Like China, the United States is mired in jingoism and confusion. Like China, it has no idea what it would do if things go wrong.

With the 2024 U.S. presidential election heating up, the one thing every candidate, Democrat or Republican, has done is to show how tough they could get on China.

The pair are dangerously close to the edge of nuclear war over Taiwan—again.

May 12, 2024, By Sulmaan Wasif Khan, the Denison chair of international history and diplomacy at Tufts University’s Fletcher School. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/12/china-us-taiwan-strait-war-nuclear-weapons-military-biden-xi-history/

On the morning of April 5, 2023, Taiwan’s president, Tsai Ing-wen, met with then-U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in Simi Valley, California. This was a meeting Beijing had warned against in the strictest of terms. It was therefore a meeting that both sides found necessary to have. China had to be shown that it could not dictate whom either Taiwan or the United States met with. On this, both Taipei and Washington were agreed.

China delivered on its promised forceful response by engaging in military drills and sending warships and planes scudding around Taiwan. The median line and Taiwan’s air defense identification zone were breached. One aircraft carrier, the Shandong, entered the waters just south of Japan. Violations of the “One China” principle, Beijing had to make clear, were not going to be taken quietly. And in seeking to make that clear, it deepened the risk of war.

This article is adapted from The Struggle for Taiwan: A History of America, China, and the Island Caught Between by Sulmaan Wasif Khan,

Commentators dismissed Beijing’s response to the Tsai-McCarthy meeting as less intense than the one that had attended then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in 2022. But the dismissal itself highlighted the gravity of the problem. A certain level of military activity had become normalized. It was as though the world now took for granted the presence of missiles and aircraft carriers, the shows of force that demanded a response in kind. The week after the meeting in California, the United States and the Philippines launched their largest joint military exercise to date. It was a way of showing China that there were other militaries that could operate in the region. The new normal meant more ships and planes operating in close proximity to one another, mutual recrimination, and mutual suspicion.

Beijing and Washington have become desensitized to the risk these circumstances pose. But in the militarization of foreign policy and the failure to grasp the full significance of that militarization, the pair are one accident and a bad decision removed from a catastrophic war. Mathematicians speak of the “edge of chaos”: the final point separating order from doom. A system operating at this edge has no room for error. This is where the accumulated weight of the past has brought the United States, China, and Taiwan. They walked right up to the edge of a war that could go nuclear several times in the past: in 1954-55, 1958, and 1996. Now, they seem to be living on that edge permanently.

In recent years, China’s policy has alienated Taiwan completely. As China has bullied, threatened, and displayed force at home and abroad, it has made unification unacceptable to much of the Taiwanese electorate. And it has enjoyed only mixed success in trying to isolate Taiwan diplomatically. It has managed to buy off many of Taiwan’s erstwhile allies, but its conduct over COVID-19 and support for Russia despite the invasion of Ukraine have cost it friends, too—and those former friends have turned to the island across the strait.

Since at least 2021, Taiwan has had a seemingly endless parade of visitors, from Germany’s education minister to Liz Truss, the former U.K. prime minister. In November 2021, the European Parliament sent its first official delegation to the island; the head of the delegation, Raphaël Glucksmann, told Tsai, “We in Europe are also confronted with interference from authoritarian regimes and we came here to learn from you.” In October 2022, Tsai received lawmakers from Lithuania and Ukraine; the former had recently established a representative office in Taiwan despite Beijing’s anger, while the latter was making a gesture of solidarity with a country that, unlike China, had been sharp in its criticism of Moscow. A Japanese parliamentary delegation that arrived in December 2022spoke glowingly of Tsai’s defense plans and emphasized Japan’s own determination to keep the status quo in the region from being “changed by force or unilaterally.” China has warned against or condemned many of these visits.

Beijing has only itself to blame for Taiwan’s strengthened diplomatic position. Its wolf warrior nationalism and reluctance to break with Moscow have cost it European support. If visits from foreign politicians were to translate into condemnation of China at the United Nations, Beijing could veto a Security Council resolution. In this case, like Russia, China would find itself a pariah state—and unlike Russia, China cares about how it is seen by the world. China’s own corrosive nationalism has eaten into its body politic, too It has not torn itself apart in a bout of political bloodletting, but it has certainly let loose the kind of jingoism that would allow that to happen. What it will decide to do in a crisis is uncertain. Beijing itself does not know.

The United States, meanwhile, seems intent on reviving a defense treaty with Taipei that it once spent more than a decade trying to break. Taiwan has become a means of showing China just how tough the United States can get. Washington is not clear on how getting tough will alter Beijing’s conduct, but “deterrence” is the concept invoked most often. A show of force, the thinking goes, will deter China from aggression. But what if deterrence fails? What if the show of force backs China into a corner from which it feels it has no option but to lash out? To this, Washington has few answers beyond preparing for war.

Some U.S. pundits have waxed lyrical about how they would fight a war with China. Taiwan, they opined, will be turned into a “porcupine” with hardened defenses. One former defense official suggested the use of “low-yield tactical nuclear weapons” in the event of a conflict with China. (The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki qualify as low yield.) The possibility of Russian President Vladimir Putin using such weapons sent shock waves of horror through the world, but the idea of employing them in a war with China became normal in some circles. There was no guarantee that, once the nuclear taboo was breached, the weapons would stay “low yield.” But the question of what would happen if the two powers escalated to higher-yield arms and plunged the world into nuclear holocaust has been left unresolved.

It is as though the United States is being haunted by all the ghosts of its long past with China and Taiwan, forcing it to relive questions it had once thought resolved. U.S. military leader Douglas MacArthur wanted to wage war against China in 1950. President Dwight D. Eisenhower considered using nuclear weapons against China in 1955 and 1958. Today, Washington abides by the “One China” principle, but it wants Taiwan to enjoy “self-determination.” It vows that it does not dispute the formulation that Taiwan is a part of China, but it will help Taiwan resist Chinese coercion. It wishes to promote Taiwan’s presence in international organizations, but it remains unwilling to recognize Taiwan itself. The United States has shifted from pure ambiguity to ambiguity with a tilt in favor of Taiwan—and it has done so because it decided China is an enemy.

Like China, the United States is mired in jingoism and confusion. Like China, it has no idea what it would do if things go wrong. With the 2024 U.S. presidential election heating up, the one thing every candidate, Democrat or Republican, has done is to show how tough they could get on China. Republicans vying for the nomination got in on the act early; former President Donald Trump has denounced French President Emmanuel Macron for “kissing Xi’s ass,” referring to Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Joe Biden, with the power of the incumbent, has not stopped at rhetoric. Whether supporting a TikTok ban unless the app is sold or calling for increased tariffs on Chinese goods, his policies are calibrated to demonstrate toughness on China.

Taiwan’s own presidential elections, held on Jan. 13, showed just how deeply the island’s electorate had turned against unification. At first, William Lai, the candidate from Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), vowed not to alter the status quo, though he accused Beijing of doing so. Taiwan, he argued, was already sovereign. There was no need to change what worked. But his caution soon vanished. While campaigning, Lai defined success for Taiwan as its leaders being able to visit the White House. This was a gauntlet thrown down—Taiwanese officials are blocked from visiting Washington. The Biden administration immediately demanded an explanation. This was not, U.S. officials made clear, how the relationship worked. Where Tsai had been prudent, Lai was willing to push his luck.

The Kuomintang (KMT), the main opposition party, was not leaning toward Beijing, either. Its nominee, Hou You-yi, the mayor of New Taipei City, said that he would reject both “one country, two systems” and a formal move for independence, but that if Taiwan were attacked, he would face the challenge. Taiwan, according to Hou, needed to be ready to defend itself. On the crucial question of how to deal with China, there was little difference between the policies Lai and Hou espoused.

A third candidate, Ko Wen-je of the Taiwan People’s Party, was calculatedly vague on China policy. His campaign made clear that he was depending on votes from traditional KMT supporters: those who would have favored a closer relationship with China. He claimed that he would find the middle ground between the KMT’s appeasement of China and the DPP’s provocation of it; he would make Taiwan a bridge for Sino-American communication rather than a front in a Sino-American war. How he proposed to do all this was left undefined.

Lai eventually won the presidency, but it was not the ringing triumph Tsai had won four years earlier. Lai scraped through with a mere 40 percent of the vote, his victory made easier by the fact that Hou and Ko had failed to join forces. As he prepares to take office on May 20, Lai faces a deeply divided, volatile populace and a legislature in which the DPP is bereft of a majority.

This is a point China has been quick to underline. The DPP, it huffed after the election, is not representative of “majority public opinion.” What is lost on Beijing is that the other candidates made clear that unification was not something they were willing to countenance either. Hou had made a point of not inviting Ma Ying-jeou, the last KMT member to serve as Taiwan’s president, to his rallies; he knew that to associate himself with Ma’s embrace of China would have doomed his candidacy. Beijing still does not understand Taiwan. Meanwhile, the United States continues to disavow support for Taiwanese independence while making plans for further delegations to the island. With the U.S. presidential election going into fifth gear, the risk of miscalculation will only rise.

At the edge of chaos, a single choice can make the difference between order and catastrophe. More than 80 years on from the Cairo Declaration, which held that Taiwan would be “restored to the Republic of China” at the end of World War II, we can see that there were myriad moments that could have yielded different outcomes, for better or for worse. If President Franklin D. Roosevelt had insisted on self-determination for Taiwan after World War II, if the Korean War had not happened, if Beijing had made “one country, two systems” work, if Taiwan had developed a nuclear weapon, if Pelosi’s plane had indeed been shot at—if someone had made a different decision at any of those moments, the world would be a radically different place.

When deterrence, toughness, and pride drive policy, the room for error diminishes to virtually nil. China, Taiwan, and the United States are at a point where the choices they make could spell the difference between peace and nuclear holocaust. Those choices are best made with the historical record—and all its unrealized possibilities—firmly in mind.

May 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, politics, USA | Leave a comment

South Korean state energy monopoly in talks to build new UK nuclear plant.

Kepco has held early-stage discussions with British officials over
mothballed Wylfa site. South Korea’s state energy monopoly is in talks
with the UK government about building a new nuclear power station off the
coast of Wales, in what could be a big boost to Britain’s plans for a new
nuclear fleet.

Kepco has held early-stage discussions with British
officials about a new facility at the Wylfa site in Anglesey, and a
ministerial meeting is expected this coming week, according to people
briefed on the matter.

In his March Budget, chancellor Jeremy Hunt
announced the government would buy the mothballed site and another from
Hitachi for £160mn. In 2019, the Japanese industrial group scrapped its
plans to develop a nuclear project at Wylfa, writing off £2.1bn in the
process.

Hunt’s move was designed to facilitate a fresh deal with a new
private sector partner to build a power station at Wylfa, which could boost
the government’s plans to replace Britain’s current ageing fleet of
nuclear power stations.

A consortium including US construction group
Bechtel and US nuclear company Westinghouse has already proposed building a
new plant on the Wylfa site using Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactor
technology.

Another industry figure said Wylfa’s future would depend on a
decision by GB Nuclear, the government quango which now owns the site. GBN
could give the go-ahead for a large reactor or reactors at Wylfa or judge
that it is a suitable site for building a cluster of new “small modular
reactors”.

Supporters of SMRs claim their modular design would make them
relatively quick and cheap to build. “Wylfa is now the next priority site
for the UK so it makes sense that Kepco are interested, but they just need
GBN to make a decision soon about whether they do want a traditional
nuclear power station there,” the figure said.

One senior Korean
government official struck a cautious note about the prospect of Kepco
buying the site, saying that building nuclear power stations in the UK was
“difficult”.

FT 12th May 2024

https://www.ft.com/content/3404a203-158e-4fe1-9f5d-f5fb64032ffc

May 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, South Korea, UK | Leave a comment

Government asks Genkai mayor to accept site survey to host nuclear waste

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/05/08/japan/government-asks-town-to-accept-nuclear-waste-site-survey/—

Industry minister Ken Saito has asked the mayor of the town of Genkai in Saga Prefecture to accept a so-called literature survey, as part of the process for selecting a final disposal site for high-level radioactive waste from nuclear plants.

Saito sought understanding from Genkai Mayor Shintaro Wakiyama at a meeting in Tokyo on Tuesday, saying that “the literature survey is not directly connected to the selection.”

Last month, the Genkai town assembly approved a petition submitted by local business groups asking for the literature survey request to be accepted.

“I’m torn between the town assembly’s decision and my thinking,” Wakiyama told reporters after the meeting with Saito. The mayor said that he will make a decision by the end of this month.

A literature survey is the first of three stages in the selection process for disposal sites, and involves the condition of geological strata being examined on paper, based on maps and other data.

So far, a literature survey has been accepted only by the town of Suttsu and the village of Kamoenai, both in Hokkaido.

For a literature survey to be conducted, a local government must apply for or accept a central government request.

May 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, wastes | Leave a comment

Inside abandoned ghost town at Fukushima after nuclear power plant meltdown

Tokyo Matilda from Sheffield is one of the few to visit the nuclear ghost town of Fukushima in Japan

Mirror UK, Cecilia Adamou, 5 May 24

Tokyo Matilda, a 20-year-old from Sheffield, England, embarked on a mission to delve into this deserted ghost town of Fukushima in Japan. The area was subject to disaster when the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant nearby went into meltdown following the 2011 earthquake and subsequent tsunami, leaking toxic nuclear waste into the environment and deeming it uninhabitable due to radiation.

As residents evacuated the town, never to return, it is now frozen in time and has been left subject to the elements for the 13 years since the catastrophe. What remains is an abandoned, apocalyptic wasteland similar to the setting of the Fallout games and TV series. The only people that remain are those trying to bring it back from extinction.

While visiting the disaster site, Tokyo explored a theme park, a school and even a ramen café that have all been empty since 2011. She said: “It reminded me of Fallout as it had such a heavy apocalyptic feeling. The only people who were walking around were the workers who try everyday to get rid of the radiated soil and to make it safe once again.”

The danger of radiation poisoning was a very real risk for Tokyo as she explored the many sights. She explained: “The hospital was the highest radiated place we explored located in the Red Zone. We had the fear of staying too long and having radiation sickness, I have never been as scared as I was in there.”…………………. more https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/inside-abandoned-ghost-town-fukushima-32696396

May 8, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Fukushima continuing | Leave a comment

Brutal 48C heatwave takes its toll on east Asia

East Asia is in the throes of an intense heatwave that is causing deadly
heatstroke, damaging crops, and has exposed an old town at the bottom of a
dried-up reservoir in the Philippines. The record temperatures are the
result of climate change, made worse by the El Niño weather phenomenon.
The town of Chauk in Myanmar recorded a temperature on Monday of 48.2C —
the highest ever measured there, and one of numerous records set across the
region. In the capital of the Philippines, Manila, a new high of 38.8C was
recorded. Some 48,000 state schools across the Philippines were closed all
week, as the authorities advised people to avoid going outside. The
increased use of air conditioning is putting pressure on the electricity
grid in the nation’s largest island, Luzon.

Times 3rd May 2024

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brutal-48c-heatwave-takes-its-toll-on-east-asia-ct70rrg0p

May 7, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ASIA, climate change | Leave a comment

A Closer Look at Two Operational Small Modular Reactor Designs

There are literally dozens of small modular reactor (SMR) and microreactor designs being developed by different companies around the world, and some of the work has been going on for decades. Yet, only two designs have actually been built and put into commercial operation. POWER takes a closer look at both of them.

Power, by Aaron Larson 1 May 24

Many nuclear power supporters have long thought small modular reactors (SMRs) would revolutionize the industry. Advocates expect SMRs to shorten construction schedules and bring costs down through modularization and factory construction. They often cite numerous other benefits that make SMRs seem like no-brainers, and yet, only two SMR designs have ever been built and placed in commercial operation.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) publishes booklets biennially on the status of SMR technology. In the IAEA’s most recent booklet, it notes 25 land-based water-cooled SMRs and another eight marine-based water-cooled designs are under development globally. It also lists 17 high-temperature gas-cooled SMRs, eight liquid-metal-cooled fast-neutron-spectrum SMRs, 13 molten-salt SMRs, and 12 microreactors. If you do the math, that’s 83 SMR designs under development, but only the KLT-40S and HTR-PM are actually operational.

KLT-40S

The KLT-40S is a pressurized water reactor (PWR) that was developed in Russia. It is an advanced version of the KLT-40 reactor, which has been used in nuclear-powered icebreakers. The first KLT-40S units, and, to date, the only two of these units to enter commercial operation, were deployed in the Akademik Lomonosov—the world’s first purpose-built floating nuclear power plant (FNPP, Figure 1 on original).

Main Design Features.………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Deployment Details.…………………………….

Construction and testing of the FPU was completed in 2017 at the Baltic shipyard. In May 2018, the vessel was towed 4,000 kilometers (km), around Finland and Sweden, to Murmansk, completing the first leg of its journey to Pevek. Fuel loading was completed in Murmansk in October 2018. First criticality was achieved in November 2018, then in August 2019, the vessel embarked on the second leg of its journey—a distance of 4,700 km—towed by two tugboats to the Arctic port town of Pevek, where it was connected to the grid on Dec. 19, 2019. Akademik Lomonosov was fully commissioned on May 22, 2020, and it currently provides heat to the town of Pevek and supplies electricity to the regional Chaun-Bilibino power system.

HTR-PM

On Dec. 6, 2023, China National Nuclear Corp. announced it had commenced commercial operation of the high-temperature gas-cooled modular pebble bed (HTR-PM) reactor demonstrator. The HTR-PM project was constructed at a site in Rongcheng, Shandong Province, roughly midway between Beijing and Shanghai in eastern China…………………………………

Main Design Features.…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Deployment Details.……………………………………………………………………. The civil work for the nuclear island buildings was completed in 2016 with the first of two reactor pressure vessels installed in March that year. The fuel plant reached its expected production capacity in 2017. Startup commissioning and testing of the primary circuit were finished by the end of 2020. The HTR-PM achieved first criticality in September 2021, and was ultimately grid connected on Dec. 20, 2021.

Spotty Results at Best

While it is laudable that these SMRs—the KLT-40S and HTR-PM—have been placed in commercial operation, their performance since entering service has come under fire. In The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2023 (WNISR), a Mycle Schneider Consulting Project, co-funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety, and Consumer Protection, it says both designs have operated at low capacity factors recently.

Concerning the Chinese HTR-PM, the WNISR says, “Between January and December 2022, the reactors operated for only 27 hours out of a possible maximum of 8,760 hours. In the subsequent three months, they seem to have operated at a load factor of around 10 percent.” The Russian units’ performance has been nearly as dismal. “The operating records of the two KLT-40S reactors have been quite poor. According to the IAEA’s PRIS [Power Reactor Information System] database, the two reactors had load factors of just 26.4 and 30.5 percent respectively in 2022, and lifetime load factors of just 34 and 22.4 percent. The reasons for the mediocre power-generation performance remain unclear,” the report says.

Meanwhile, the promises of shortened timelines and lower costs were not borne out by these projects. “The experience so far in constructing these two SMRs as well as estimates for reactor designs like NuScale’s SMR show that these designs are also subject to the historical pattern of cost escalations and time overruns. Those cost escalations do make it even less likely that SMRs will become commercialized, as the collapse of the Carbon Free Power Project involving NuScale reactors in the United States illustrated,” the WNISR says………….. https://www.powermag.com/a-closer-look-at-two-operational-small-modular-reactor-designs/

May 4, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, Russia, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

The Fight Over THAAD in Korea

An anti-ballistic missile system can easily be overwhelmed by a full-scale enemy attack. The system’s primary purpose is to support a first-strike capability, in which the United States takes out as many of the enemy’s missiles as possible, leaving the anti-ballistic missile system to counter the few surviving missiles.

In essence, that makes the radar in the THAAD system a first-strike weapon

The effect is to enlist South Korea, willingly or not, in U.S. war plans against China. When residents in Seongju argue that THAAD makes them a target, they are not mistaken.

CounterPunch, BY GREGORY ELICH, 1 May 24

Since the U.S. military brought its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system to South Korea in 2017, it has met with sustained local resistance. THAAD is the centerpiece of the numerous actions the United States has undertaken to enmesh South Korea in its hostile anti-China campaign, a course that Korean peace activists are fighting to reverse.

In a unanimous decision at the end of March, South Korea’s Constitutional Court dismissed two challenges lodged by residents of Seongju County against the deployment of THAAD. [1] Since its arrival, the THAAD system has met with recurring demonstrations in the nearby village of Soseong-ri. The hope in the Yoon and Biden administrations is that the court’s decision will dishearten opponents of THAAD. In this expectation, they are already disappointed, as anti-THAAD activists responded to the court’s decision by vowing to “fight to the end.” [2]

Although protestors have regularly held rallies on the road leading to the THAAD site, swarms of Korean police cleared them away to allow free passage for U.S. military supply trucks. Opposition to THAAD has angered U.S. officials, leading the Biden administration to dispatch Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to Seoul to deliver the message that it deemed the situation “unacceptable” and progress on establishing the base needed to accelerate. Austin also raised objections to protests by residents in Pohang over noise from U.S. Apache attack helicopters conducting live-fire exercises. [3] Predictably, the Yoon administration responded by prioritizing U.S. demands over the welfare of the Korean people and promised “close cooperation for normalizing routine and unfettered access to the THAAD site” and “improvement of the combined training conditions.” [4]

THAAD is billed as an anti-missile defense system consisting of an interceptor missile battery, a fire control and communications unit, and an AN/TPY-2 X-band radar. The ostensible purpose of THAAD in Seongju is to counter incoming North Korean missiles, but serious doubts exist about its efficacy in that role. In terms of coverage, THAAD’s position in Seongju puts it in range to cover the main U.S. military base in South Korea, Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, but out of range to protect Seoul, which at any rate is indefensible due to its proximity to the border. Even so, it is questionable how much utility the system offers even for Pyeongtaek.

THAAD’s missiles are designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles at an altitude of 40 to 150 kilometers. The THAAD battery would have less than three and a half minutes to detect and counter-launch against a high-altitude ballistic missile fired from the farthestpoint in North Korea. By then, the incoming missile would have fallen below the lower-end altitude range of 40 kilometers, leaving it invulnerable to interception. [5] That would be the best-case scenario, as in the event of a war, the North Koreans are not likely to be so accommodating as to launch ballistic missiles from as far away as possible.

Furthermore, the THAAD battery in Seongju is equipped with six launchers and 48 interceptor missiles. With a thirty-minute THAAD battery launcher reload time, incoming missiles would not take long to deplete THAAD’s ability to respond, even under the most accommodating circumstances.

An upgrade was recently made to integrate THAAD with Patriot PAC-3 defense to intercept ballistic missiles at a lower altitude. This enhancement is of doubtful utility, as the radar’s response would still be constrained by the short flight time of an incoming missile. For all the hype about the successful interception of Iranian missiles fired at Israel, the Patriot’s showing in a more suitable scenario was less than stellar. It had an advantage there, as Iranian and Yemeni launch sites were situated much farther away from their target than in the Korean case. Yet, out of 120 Iranian ballistic missiles, the Patriot system shot down only one. The others were intercepted primarily by U.S. warplanes. [6]

North Korea’s development of a solid-fuel hypersonic intermediate-range missile has added another unmeetable challenge for THAAD. Because of its proximity, it is doubtful that North Korea would target US forces with high-altitude ballistic missiles in case of war. Instead, it would likely rely on its long-range artillery, cruise missiles, and short-range ballistic missiles, flying well below the lower limit of THAAD’s altitude coverage.

Despite its doubtful defensive effectiveness on the Korean Peninsula, the United States attaches enormous importance to THAAD’s deployment in South Korea, which suggests an unstated motivation. A clue is provided by the stationing in Japan of two stand-alone AN/TPY-2 radars without an accompanying THAAD system. [7] In other words, it is the radar that matters to the U.S. military, and the linkage to THAAD interceptors is primarily a pretense made necessary by popular feeling in Korea.

What makes the AN/TPY-2 special is its ability to operate in two modes. In terminal mode, it feeds tracking data to the THAAD missile battery, allowing it to target an incoming ballistic missile as it descends toward its target. In forward-based mode, the THAAD missile battery is not involved, and the role of the radar is to detect a ballistic missile as it ascends from its launching pad, even from deep into China. In this mode, the radar is integrated into the U.S. missile defense system and sends tracking data to interceptor missiles stationed on U.S. territory and Pacific bases. [8] As a U.S. Army publication points out, when in forward-based mode, a field commander may use the radar system “to concurrently support both regional and strategic missile defense operations.” [9]

There are hints that preparations may already be underway to establish the conditions necessary for THAAD to operate in forward-based mode. Last year, South Korea and Japan agreed to link their radars to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii. [10] The ostensible purpose is to enhance the tracking accuracy of missiles fired from North Korea, but the concept applies equally well to Chinese missiles. It is not a stretch to imagine that if South Korean and Japanese radars have been linked to the United States, the same may be true with the THAAD’s AN/TPY-2. Certainly, if the U.S. Army switches the mode, it will not be informing South Korean authorities, so sure are the Americans that they can freely treat Korean sovereignty with contempt. Switching an AN/TPY-2 radar from one mode to the other takes only eight hours, a quick process that is opaque to outsiders. [11]

The closer the radar is stationed to an adversary’s ballistic missile launch, the more precise the tracking provided to the U.S.-based anti-missile system. South Korea is ideally located for the AN/TPY-2, where its radar can cover much of eastern China. [12] The effect is to enlist South Korea, willingly or not, in U.S. war plans against China. When residents in Seongju argue that THAAD makes them a target, they are not mistaken.

The Yoon administration is taking integration with the U.S. missile defense system one step further in planning to spend an estimated $584 million to procure American SM-3 interceptor missiles, suitable for protecting the United States and its bases in the Pacific.[13] The SM-3 interceptors are to be deployed on South Korean Aegis destroyers, which will need to be upgraded at additional cost to handle them. [14]

Residents in Seongju are also concerned about potential health risks associated with living adjacent to the THAAD installation.

Continue reading →

May 4, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | South Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US vs China, Israel vs Iran, India vs Pakistan: Asia plays with fire as nuclear war safety net frays

From the Korean peninsula to the Middle East, a string of nuclear flashpoints has emerged with the unravelling of the global post-Cold War detente
Amid arms races, sky-high tensions – and the removal of guardrails to avert danger – proliferation ‘threatens to destabilise everywhere’, experts warn

A high-stakes game of geopolitical brinkmanship is playing out across the Middle East and Asia, with Israel and Iran trading missile strikes; India and Pakistan locked in a multi-headed rocket arms race; and power struggles on the Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea combining to create a perilous chain of potential nuclear-conflict zones.

In the past couple of weeks alone, Iran and Israel’s tit-for-tat exchanges amid the war in Gaza have highlighted their ability to target each other’s uranium-enrichment facilities, while the US has deployed mid-range ballistic missiles to the Philippines for the first time since the Cold War…………………………………………………. https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3260551/us-vs-china-israel-vs-iran-india-vs-pakistan-asia-plays-fire-nuclear-war-safety-net-frays?campaign=3260551&module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article

May 1, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ASIA, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

IAEA clears Japanese reactor for 60-year lifetime

Following a review, unit 3 at the Mihama nuclear power plant (NPP) has been deemed fit for further operation.

Alfie Shaw, April 26, 2024

Ateam of experts from the International Atomic Agency (IAEA) has found that Japanese utility Kansai Electric Power Company is implementing timely measures for the safe long-term operation of unit 3 at its Mihama NPP.

Under regulations that came into force in July 2013, Japanese reactors have a nominal operating period of 40 years; 20-year extensions can be granted once, but this is contingent on exacting safety requirements.

Kansai’s Mihama unit 3, a 780MW pressurised water reactor that entered commercial operation in 1976, was granted an extension by Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) in November 2016, giving the unit a licence to operate until 2036. Unit 3 at Mihama was the third Japanese unit to be granted a licence extension enabling it to operate beyond 40 years under the revised regulations, following Takahama units 1 and 2, which received NRA approval in June 2016.

Following the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in 2011, Mihama shut down, lying idle until restarting in June 2021. It became the first Japanese reactor to operate beyond 40 years…………………………………………….

Power Technology 26th April 2024 https://www.power-technology.com/news/mihama-nuclear-unit-sees-extension-to-60-year-lifetime/

April 30, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, safety | Leave a comment

Blinken threatens China over Russia ties (VIDEO)

https://www.sott.net/article/490922-Blinken-threatens-China-over-Russia-ties-VIDEO 26 Apr 24

The US Secretary of State says Washington is prepared to impose more sanctions on Beijing over the alleged transfer of military components.

Washington is ready to introduce more sanctions against China over its alleged transfer of dual-use goods and components, which can supposedly be used by the Russian military industrial complex, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Friday.

Speaking at a press conference in Beijing following his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the US official recalled that Washington has already imposed sanctions against more than 100 Chinese entities and is “fully prepared to act” and “take additional measures.”

Blinken claimed that China’s alleged support for the Russian defense industry raises concerns not only about the situation in Ukraine, but also about a “medium to long-term threat that many Europeans feel viscerally that Russia poses to them.”

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal had also reported that the US was drafting sanctions that could cut off some Chinese banks from the global financial system unless Beijing severs its economic ties with Russia.

The outlet claimed that US officials believe trade with China has allowed Russia to rebuild its military industrial capacity and could help it defeat Ukraine in a war of attrition.

Beijing has vehemently rejected accusations of “fueling” the Ukraine conflict and has instead blamed NATO for instigating the crisis by continuing its expansion in Europe and refusing to respect Russia’s national security concerns.

Following his meeting with Blinken, President Xi suggested that the US and China “should be partners, not rivals” and should strive towards achieving “mutual success and not harm each other.”

“I proposed three major principles: mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation. They are not only a summary of past experience, but also a guide to the future,” the Chinese leader was quoted as saying.

Beijing has maintained a policy of neutrality on the Ukraine conflict, with Chinese officials repeatedly stating that the country is not selling weapons to either Russia or Ukraine. Earlier this month, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Mao Ning insisted that China “regulates the export of dual-use articles in accordance with laws and regulations,” urging “relevant countries” not to “smear or attack the normal relations between China and Russia.”

In December last year, US President Joe Biden issued a decree which enabled sanctions on foreign financial institutions that continue to deal with Russia. It targeted lenders outside US and EU jurisdictions that help Russia source sensitive items, which reportedly include semiconductors, machine tools, chemical precursors, ball bearings, and optical systems.

April 28, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, politics international | Leave a comment

Nuclear-waste dams threaten Central Asia heartland

Dams holding large amounts of nuclear waste can be found in Kyrgyzstan’s
scenic hills. However, following a 2017 landslide they have become
unstable, threatening a possible Chernobyl-scale nuclear disaster if they
collapse.

Reuters 24th April 2024

April 27, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | ASIA, safety, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan city assembly OKs request for nuclear waste site survey

If the mayor gives the green light, the Saga Prefecture town that hosts Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s four-reactor Genkai Nuclear Power Station will receive up to 2 billion yen ($12.9 million) in state subsidies for allowing the survey,

Three local associations in the construction, restaurant and accommodation sectors submitted separate requests for the survey to the assembly, with some hoping the subsidies and survey activity will prop up the local economy.

April 26, 2024 (Mainichi Japan) https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20240426/p2g/00m/0na/027000c

SAGA, Japan (Kyodo) — The municipal assembly of Genkai in southwestern Japan gave the go-ahead Friday for the town to request a preliminary survey by the state to gauge its suitability to host an underground disposal site for highly radioactive waste.

The Genkai assembly is the first in the country hosting a nuclear plant to approve such a survey request. Mayor Shintaro Wakiyama said he plans to make the final decision in May regarding whether to request the survey, the first part of a three-stage, 20-year process to select a permanent storage site for waste from nuclear power generation.

After the nine-member assembly adopted the request by a majority vote, Wakiyama told reporters the decision “reflects the will of the people. I take it seriously.”

Saga Gov. Yoshinori Yamaguchi, meanwhile, expressed reluctance about locating a waste disposal site in Genkai. With the prefecture already hosting a nuclear plant, he told a press conference, “It would be unbalanced for (Saga) to shoulder such a burden.”

The associations called on the town, as a host of a nuclear power plant, to proactively cooperate with the central government.

Japan, like other countries, is struggling to find permanent disposal sites for nuclear waste. Only two municipalities — Suttsu and Kamoenai in Hokkaido in northern Japan — have approved preliminary site surveys, which commenced in 2020.

But the surveys have taken longer than the scheduled two years, and it remains unclear whether either process will move to the second stage as local opposition remains strong.

High-level radioactive waste, produced when extracting uranium and plutonium from spent fuel, must be stored in bedrock at least 300 meters underground for tens of thousands of years until radioactivity declines to levels that are not harmful to human health or the environment.

The waste, solidified by mixing with glass, is currently housed in metal containers stored at the Vitrified Waste Storage Center operated by Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture.

April 27, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, politics | Leave a comment

Indian Nuclear Sites Impact South Tibetan Plateau Radioactivity

Chinese Academy of Sciences, 24 Apr 24 https://www.miragenews.com/indian-nuclear-sites-impact-south-tibetan-1222069/

A recent study published in Environmental Science & Technology Letter has shed light on the long-range transboundary transport of radioactive iodine-129 (¹²⁹I) from the Indian nuclear fuel reprocessing plants (NFRPs) to the Southern Tibetan Plateau (STP).

This study, conducted by researchers from the Institute of Earth Environment of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), provides a new understanding of the transport of airborne radioactive pollutants from low to high altitudes, and may have implications for environmental protection on the Tibetan Plateau.

The Tibetan Plateau, known as the “Third Pole of the Earth” and the “Roof of the World,” is a remote, isolated, and presumably pristine region. Previous studies of radioactive contamination have focused primarily on the northern TP, leaving little knowledge of the STP. Primarily originating from human nuclear activities, iodine-129, with its properties of high volatility and radiation risk of short-lived radioiodine, serves as a key radionuclide for nuclear environmental safety monitoring.

In this study, the researchers have meticulously investigated the spatial variation of ¹²⁹I in the bioindicators, moss and lichen, from the STP.

They found that ¹²⁹I in the STP was significantly higher than the pre-nuclear levels and those in Chinese inland cities, but two-four orders of magnitude lower than those in the vicinity of the Indian and European NFRPs.

Analysis of the ¹²⁹I discharge history in conjunction with the wind field indicates that the Indian NFRPs are the primary sources of ¹²⁹I in the STP. The prevailing ISM plays a crucial role in the transport of ¹²⁹I from the lowland to the high-altitude STP. The transport process is further enhanced by the summertime overlying heat pump, but is weakened by topographic blocking, forest adsorption, and cold trapping.

The spatial distribution of ¹²⁹I and ¹²⁷I in lichens distributed on Mt. Galongla shows that the Yarlung Zangbo Grand Canyon serves as a key transport channel.

“It is much beyond our expectation that Indian NFRPs have such a significant impact on the Tibetan Plateau. Since there are many nuclear facilities in operation and under construction in India, the radiation risk is just there. So we still need more data to find out the extent and scope of such impacts,” said Dr. ZHANG Luyuan, corresponding author of this study.

This work was supported by the second comprehensive scientific expedition to the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, CAS and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

April 25, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, India | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries