Is fishmeal from Fukushima-affected fish the source of Indonesian shrimp’s radioactive contamination?

J. P. Unger, 8 Sept 25
It just hit me earlier, while thinking about the recently exposed case of radioactive shrimp being recalled in the US, and in particular why one Indonesian shrimp farming business’s harvests would be contaminated with radioactive Cesium and not those from other Indonesian shrimp farms: it’s probably the feed they used!
Cheap, radioactive fishmeal, perhaps made from fish impacted by contamination from Fukushima, I suspect could well be the source. This is why:
Shrimp farming has traditionally used fishmeal as a high-protein source to feed the shrimp -with fishmeal normally consisting of smaller fish, fishing “by-catch” and fish-processing byproducts, all shredded and ground to a texture like coarse sand or pellets to feed farm animals and aquaculture operations.
As ocean fish populations become increasingly strained and global demand for fish keeps increasing, fishmeal has become increasingly expensive and in shorter supply
Therefore, it’s quite likely that fishmeal from contaminated fisheries -for example, with high levels of radioactive pollution- would be offered at a comparatively low price. That would be quite attractive for a business that’s more concerned with profit margins than with what happens to consumers down the line.
If this was the case, and given that many businesses around the world likely prioritize profit margins over long-term effects in far-removed consumers (or might not even be aware of the contamination of the feed), this case could be the tip of a very worrisome iceberg and open up a big can of worms….
It certainly demands a careful inspection of food imports AND of food “precursors”, in particular imported fishmeal and food from animals raised on it. Also, international cooperation and vigilance, to know who might be selling contaminated fishmeal and where, who has been buying and using it, and what land- or water-farmed meat production it might be affecting.
Unless I hear concerns or suggestions to the contrary, I’ll prepare and send a slightly different articulation of these thoughts to a handful of government officials and media here and in the US who might be interested in investigating, as precautions should probably be ramped up for a variety of food products…
This would not be the first time radioactively contaminated foodstuff circulates at bargain prices… When I was starting as a science and environment journalist in Peru in the 1980’s I wrote about the post-Chernobyl arrival of radioactive powdered milk from Europe (a “generous” 12,000 ton donation from the European Community…), and radioactive meat from Germany (sold at a bargain price!). I received brush-offs, threats and warnings from corrupt government officials profiting from it, as well as ignorance and disinterest among other journalists and the general population, all with other “more immediate concerns” at the time, as the country faced five-digit inflation and the expansion of a brutally violent Maoist insurgency -nobody wanted to hear about yet more dangers then, and everywhere I was met by a frustrating fatalistic denial or avoidance mantra along the lines of “one has to die from something anyway.” Anyways… JPU
Japan shocks the world — Solar panels as strong as 20 nuclear reactors unveiled.

by Beatriz T., September 6, 2025.EcoNews,
Imagine a country with limited space, a large population, and an urgent need for clean energy. That’s Japan, a nation that, since the Fukushima disaster in 2011, has been burdened with rethinking its entire energy system. This is because the catastrophe not only shook confidence in nuclear energy but also accelerated the race for sustainable and safe alternatives. More than a decade later, Japan surprises the world again with revolutionary perovskite solar cells, a light, thin, and flexible material that can be installed in places unimaginable until recently, like windows, walls, and even car roofs.
There are several important advantages
of these cells, and some of these are: Superior efficiency; application
flexibility; strategic security; export potential. Japanese companies like
Sekisui Chemical are already investing heavily in research (and other
companies are investing in the first typhoon turbine).
Internationally, Swedish company Exeger has successfully applied flexible panels to consumer products like headphones and keyboards, demonstrating that the future may be closer than we imagine. The dilemma lies in Japan seeking not only clean energy but also economic security. Essentially, the question remains: invest billions in a still-immature technology or risk losing its global leadership once again?
For a country dependent on energy imports and
vulnerable to international crises, investing in perovskites is both a
necessity and a strategic move. The country’s plan is clear: by 2040,
Japan aims to generate 20 gigawatts of power with perovskites, the
equivalent of 20 nuclear power plants.
Achieving this goal will not only be
a technological victory but a historic milestone in the global energy
transition. Essentially, this advancement could transform Japan into an
exporter of energy technology, offering the world a more efficient
alternative that’s less dependent on large areas. For densely populated
countries like South Korea, Singapore, or even parts of Europe, the
Japanese experience could serve as a model.
Eco News 6th Sept 2025,
https://www.ecoticias.com/en/japan-shocks-the-world-solar-panels/19817/
Russian engineer-physicist Ozharovsky spoke about deportation from Mongolia.
Andrey Ozharovsky was detained in Mongolia while exploring the Gobi Desert. He was trying to find out if there was radiation contamination where the French were mining uranium. Metro asked the Russian nuclear scientist what happened to him.
Metro Moscow 27th Aug 2025, https://www.gazetametro.ru/articles/rossijskij-inzhener-fizik-ozharovskij-rasskazal-chto-proizoshlo-s-nim-v-mongolii-27-08-2025
The media reported on the detention of the Russian activist on August 19. As Ozharovsky himself said, in Mongolia he was deprived of his freedom, passport and the opportunity to talk to his relatives. At the same time, Mongolian security forces behaved correctly with him.
Why Russian Researcher Deported from Mongolia
“I came to help local activists figure out whether there is radioactive contamination in the part of the Gobi Desert where the French company Orano mines uranium using the underground solution method,” Ozharovsky told Metro.
According to him, Mongolian activists invited him to participate in the research of the area because the scientist’s equipment had previously detected similar contamination in Russia. During three days of research in Mongolia, Ozharovsky found deviations – the consequences of uranium mining by the French.
“Apparently, those who mine uranium in the Gobi did not like this. And perhaps the French nuclear scientists are behind my deportation,” the scientist concluded.
Suddenly a jeep with three security officers and a female employee of the migration service arrives. After that they take my passport for inspection and give it back only a week later.— deported nuclear physicist Andrei Ozharovsky
Ozharovsky believes that the circumstances of his arrest were extremely strange.
“We finished taking measurements in the desert, then moved to a new location, the Maradai mine. That’s where the immigration service detained me. Before that, we had only met one shepherd the previous day,” he explained.
According to the researcher, he was first taken under guard for interrogation to the provincial capital, the city of Choibalsan. And only after that was he sent to Ulaanbaatar.
“Russian spy” and “Rosatom saboteur”
As Ozharovsky says, shortly before his arrest, an active campaign against him began in the local media. The scientist emphasizes that in their materials, Mongolian journalists called him a spy and intelligence officer who was in Mongolia “in the interests of Rosatom.”
— After completing the measurements in Gobi, we traveled for more than a day to a new location. And during this time, as if on command, several articles were published in which journalists called on the Mongolian authorities to take decisive action, because “a Russian spy is driving around the country’s uranium mines,” the nuclear physicist explains.
At the same time, after his arrest, representatives of Mongolian intelligence stated that they had no claims against Ozharovsky. And his case was forwarded to the police.
However, the nuclear physicist emphasizes that Mongolia is now allegedly trying to hide a major environmental problem that he and local activists managed to discover.
“I found three areas in Mongolia where the usual Gobi dose rate of 0.1 microsievert per hour was exceeded by 20-50 times. In problem areas, the pollution level reached 5 microsievert per hour,” he said.
Microsieverta unit of measurement that can be used to determine how much radiation a person has received
According to the researcher, such indicators can already have serious consequences for humans. And the nomads living in the region can make specific assumptions about what caused the increase in cancer cases.
“One nomad we spoke to had a father who died of cancer. And his young wife was diagnosed with breast cancer,” the scientist said.
Deportation and its consequences
The nuclear physicist fully admits that he could have violated Mongolian law. But he emphasizes that this happened due to ignorance of its subtleties.
— In Mongolia, it is prohibited to measure the radiation environment with devices that have not been accredited in the country. That is, even if you have proof of the functionality of the equipment in other countries, you must bring your device to the authorities, pay money for the inspection, and only then receive the right to conduct research, he explained.
In addition, the country has very specific restrictions for Russians. And Ozharovsky could have accidentally violated one of them.
— According to Mongolian law, Russians can stay in the country without a visa only if they are tourists. After the dosimeter was turned on, according to the law enforcement officers who deported me, I ceased to be one, — the nuclear scientist added.
According to the researcher, he plans to contact lawyers to assess the legality of the punishment. He also emphasized that he does not plan to abandon his research in Mongolia, but will now conduct it in other ways.
Japan exploring whether AI could help inspect its nuclear power plants.
Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority has requested extra funds to
experiment with AI-powered nuclear plant inspectors. Japanese media report
that the authority wants to explore AI inspection because many nuclear
plants operated by Japanese energy companies are already old and will
likely need more oversight as they continue operating. Decommissioning
those plants will also create a need for extra supervision. The regulator
reportedly said it doesn’t have sufficient staff to handle the
inspections needed for extended operations and decommissioning of old
plants.
The Register 28th Aug 2025, https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/28/japan_ai_for_nuclear_inspectiona/
Indonesia Bets On Thorcon’s Molten Salt Reactor, But History Suggests Trouble Ahead.
Indonesia has none of the ingredients that historically led to nuclear success. It has no prior nuclear fleet, no experience operating reactors, no large-scale nuclear workforce, no plans to build nuclear weapons and no tradition of standardized reactor builds.
Michael Barnard, Clean Technica, 27 Aug 25
Indonesia has taken a bold and likely problematic step with the announcement of its first, early stage regulatory approval for a nuclear power project. Thorcon International, a Singapore-based developer of molten salt reactors, has received permission from Indonesia’s regulator to evaluate a site for a demonstration plant on Kelasa Island. For a country of more than 270 million people with electricity demand that is still growing rapidly, this might appear to be a turning point. Yet if one examines history, technology, and the context in which this project is being launched, the chances of it succeeding look vanishingly small.
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago, stretching across more than 17,000 islands, with only about 6,000 of them inhabited. This geography creates enormous challenges for the national grid, which is fragmented into multiple regional systems rather than a single interconnected backbone. Java and Sumatra host most of the country’s transmission infrastructure, while many outlying islands depend on small isolated grids. Remote communities often rely on diesel generators for electricity, which are expensive to operate and create significant local pollution…………………………………………………………….
the government has announced a target of 10 GW of nuclear capacity by 2040, marking its first commitment to nuclear power.
If delivered, these additions would lift renewables to roughly 35% of the national mix while also introducing nuclear into the system for the first time. Looking further ahead, Indonesia targets 75 GW of new renewable capacity by 2035, supported by more than 10 GW of storage, reflecting the scale of investment needed to diversify away from coal and meet climate commitments.
Nuclear power has only succeeded when certain conditions were in place. In the mid-twentieth century, large economies aligned nuclear energy programs with nuclear weapons programs. They standardized on one design, built dozens of gigawatt-scale plants in sequence, trained workforces through government-led programs, and maintained focus for decades. Those programs were not efficient by today’s standards, but they were coherent and well-resourced.
Countries that did not follow that formula, such as Canada’s stop-start approach with CANDUs or the the last couple of decades of western nuclear reactor builds, ended up with mixed results and rising costs. Even China, which has mastered megaproject delivery, is struggling with nuclear because it has spread effort across too many designs and has not locked into the necessary standardization. While nuclear advocates in the west point to China’s build out as impressive, it is years behind on targets and falling further behind. It only achieved its 2020 target in 2024, is still well under its 2% of grid capacity target for 2025 and its scheduled construction through 2030 will leave it tens of GW off that target.
Indonesia has none of the ingredients that historically led to nuclear success. It has no prior nuclear fleet, no experience operating reactors, no large-scale nuclear workforce, no plans to build nuclear weapons and no tradition of standardized reactor builds. It’s not building dozens of standard and proven GW-scale reactors, but only 10 GW in total, starting with a 500 MW unproven design, and not necessarily repeating that one solution multiple times. So far they appear to have little political opposition to nuclear, but that doesn’t mean the bipartisan support required for a two to four decade strategic national construction program. The country is signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has eliminated highly enriched uranium that might be transferable to nuclear weapons from the countyr, so there is military strategic alignment and discipline to call upon.
The choice of a molten salt reactor adds another layer of difficulty. Molten salt designs were first tested at Oak Ridge in the 1960s. They worked in the lab but ran into issues with corrosion, material embrittlement, plugging of salt lines, and complex chemistry that had to be actively managed. They never scaled beyond a few megawatts of thermal output. In recent years, startups from North America to Scandinavia have revived the concept, promising walk-away safety and lower costs. Yet not a single one has delivered a commercial plant. Thorcon itself has never built or operated a reactor, anywhere. It is proposing to build large sealed modules in shipyards and tow them to Indonesia, an approach that exists only on paper.

……………………………..Germany tried thorium in its pebble-bed reactor, and India built an entire nuclear strategy around its domestic thorium reserves, planning a three-stage cycle that would eventually rely on advanced heavy water reactors fueled with uranium-233 bred from thorium. Yet in every case, thorium stopped short of commercial deployment. The complexity of fuel handling, the need for an initial fissile inventory of uranium or plutonium, and the sheer momentum of the uranium-fueled reactor fleet kept thorium in the category of “promising but not delivered.”
Thorcon’s original vision was built on thorium’s promise. Its very name, short for “Thorium Concept,” signaled an intention to commercialize molten salt reactors running on a thorium cycle. Early designs envisioned dissolving thorium in molten fluoride salt, breeding uranium-233 in situ, and demonstrating the fuel’s long-touted advantages. But as the company moved from concept to trying to build an actual plant in Indonesia, pragmatism set in. For a first-of-a-kind power reactor, relying on thorium would mean untested chemistry, uncertain licensing pathways, and even greater risk.
Indonesia’s proposed demonstration plant is therefore designed to run on conventional low-enriched uranium fuel dissolved in molten salt, not thorium. Thorium remains a potential long-term option in the design, but the Indonesian reactor will take the easier, more familiar path to get the project off the ground. In other words, while Thorcon began as a bet on thorium, its first potential real-world deployment has been scaled back to uranium, underscoring how thorium continues to hover at the edge of nuclear power rather than forming its core.
Bent Flyvbjerg’s work on megaprojects should be a warning. He has shown repeatedly that nine out of ten large projects go over budget and over schedule, and nuclear projects are consistently among the very worst. The average nuclear build is more than 100% over budget and about a decade late. Add in the fact that this is a first-of-a-kind reactor by a company with no track record, in a country with no nuclear infrastructure, and the probability of delivering on time, on budget, and at promised cost of electricity falls close to zero. Even if the project is eventually completed, it will almost certainly take much longer and cost much more than advertised, and the benefits to Indonesia will not match the rhetoric.
The alternative paths are clearer and less risky. Indonesia sits on some of the world’s richest geothermal resources and has significant hydro potential. Solar costs continue to fall and the archipelago has ample land and rooftops for deployment. With investment in storage, interconnections, and grid modernization, these resources could supply reliable and cheap electricity without the risks of nuclear. International partnerships like the Just Energy Transition Partnership are already funneling billions into renewables and grid upgrades. Building out this system is not trivial, but it does not carry the weight of unproven technologies, uncertain regulation, and the specter of megaproject failure that Thorcon does.
……………………..A better bet would be to double down on renewables, expand storage, and build the transmission backbone to connect islands and balance supply. That path has its own challenges but rests on proven technologies already delivering results worldwide. Indonesia has made a bold gesture toward nuclear. The sober assessment is that it will not pay off. https://cleantechnica.com/2025/08/26/indonesia-bets-on-thorcons-molten-salt-reactor-but-history-suggests-trouble-ahead/
Wastewater release from Fukushima nuclear plant enters third year.

By Ian Stark, Aug. 25 (UPI) —
The Japanese utility that keeps the nuclear fuel inside the damaged Fukushima plant cool reports its release of treated wastewater has entered its third year.
The Tokyo Electric Power Company announced Monday that it has completed its third discharge of Advanced Liquid Processing System treated water into the sea on Monday…………………
According to TEPCO, the ALPS is designed to remove 62 types of radioactive materials from the affected sea and dilute the water to lower the tritium levels. The water is considered “treated” to distinguish it from water yet to be decontaminated…………………………..
Around 70 tons of radioactive wastewater is produced daily at the plant, which cools the nuclear fuel that melted inside the reactor buildings at the Fukushima nuclear power plant. As of the first week of August, around 102,000 tons of treated water have been released. https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2025/08/25/Japan-Fukushima-nuclear-wastewater-TEPCO-radioactive/9871756140747/
German experience shows transition to renewables possible for Taiwan and the world.
https://tcan2050.org.tw/en/nonuke-2/ 2025-08-19, Dr. Ortwin Renn |Professor emeritus of Environmental Sociology and Technology Assessment, Stuttgart University; Scientific Director emeritus, Research Institute for Sustainability at GFZ, Potsdam , Germany (RIFS)
I am writing to express my full support for your initiative to keep Taiwan’s nuclear power reactors permanently shut down and to accelerate the transition toward renewable energy. This position is not only grounded in scientific evidence but also in practical experience from countries such as my home country Germany that have successfully advanced toward a sustainable energy future.
In 2011, I served as a member of the German Federal Government’s Ethics Committee on a Safe Energy Supply, established after the Fukushima disaster. Our task was to assess the future role of nuclear energy in Germany. After extensive consultations with leading scientists, economic stakeholders, and civil society organizations, the Committee reached a consensual recommendation: to phase out nuclear energy within ten years while investing heavily in renewable energy sources. This decision was not only an ethical imperative but also based on sound economic and technological reasoning.
The results speak for themselves. Between 2011 and 2025, Germany’s share of renewable energy in electricity generation rose from 23% to over 54%—an increase of 230%. Nuclear power, which contributed less than 18% in 2011, was more than compensated for by renewables. In addition, the expansion of renewables significantly reduced reliance on fossil fuels, thereby contributing to climate protection and energy sovereignty.
Today, renewable energy is not only clean but also cost-competitive. The production of electricity from wind and solar power is now cheaper than generating electricity from coal or gas and even cheaper than nuclear power when comparing the costs of building new facilities. It is true that the transition requires substantial upfront investment in grid upgrades, storage systems, and backup solutions. However, once this infrastructure is in place, the long-term costs of renewable energy generation are lower than those of fossil or nuclear alternatives.
Germany’s relatively high electricity prices are not a consequence of renewables, but largely due to global gas price spikes and the cost of imported electricity. The long-term trend is clear: renewable energy is becoming the most economical, environmentally sound, and politically stable source of power.
The lessons for Taiwan are evident. A transition to renewable energy is possible, economically viable, and ultimately beneficial for society. It contributes to climate protection, environmental quality, and public health. It reduces dependence on imported fuels and avoids the long-term risks and costs associated with nuclear energy, including waste management and potential catastrophic accidents. Most importantly, it enables a decentralized and resilient energy system that benefits local communities.
Achieving this transformation requires significant investment and strong political will, but the German experience demonstrates that it is both feasible and advantageous. I strongly encourage Taiwan to seize this opportunity and prioritize a renewable-based energy future over a return to nuclear power.
https://tcan2050.org.tw/en/nonuke-2/
Older reactors more susceptible to accidents; Nuclear is not a viable climate solution.

TCAN 19th Aug 2025, Statements of support from international energy scholars for Taiwan’s nuclear phase-out, Dr. M.V. Ramana | Professor; Simons Chair in Disarmament, Global and Human Security, School of Public Policy and Global Affairs (SPPGA), University of British Columbia
There is a debate in Taiwan about possibly extending operations of its nuclear reactors that have been shut down. Doing so poses risks and will not help with mitigating climate change.
Risks Associated with Nuclear Power Plant Extensions
As they age, nuclear plants become more susceptible to accidents. The likelihood of failures at reactors is often described by something called the bathtub curve. The failure rate is initially high due to manufacturing problems and operator errors associated with new technology. Then curving like a tub, the failure rate declines with experience. But then eventually it starts rising again as aging related wear and tear starts increasing. So, after some point in time, the dangers of continuing operations at nuclear reactors start increasing. As the examples of Chernobyl, Ukraine in 1986 and Fukushima, Japan in 2011 show, the consequences of a nuclear accident can be catastrophic with long-lasting and financially expensive impacts.
Nuclear Power is not a Solution to Climate Change
Nuclear energy is one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity. This is the reason the share of the world’s electricity produced by nuclear power plants has been declining consistently since the mid 1990s. If one were to think about nuclear power as a solution to climate change, that share should be increasing while the share of fossil fuels must be decreasing. That is simply not happening. Investing in cheaper low-carbon sources of energy will provide more emission reductions per dollar. Second, it takes about a decade to build a nuclear plant. If you add the time needed for all the necessary preparatory steps—obtaining environmental and safety clearances, getting consent from a community that has to live near a hazardous facility for decades, and raising the huge amounts of funding necessary—you’re looking at 15-20 years. This timeline is incompatible with the urgent demands of climate science. Thus, nuclear power fails on two key metrics for evaluating any technology claiming to deal with climate change.
https://tcan2050.org.tw/en/nonuke-2/
Taiwan nuclear plant re-opening vote fails as approval threshold missed

By Ben Blanchard, August 23, 2025
TAIPEI, Aug 23 (Reuters) – A referendum to push for the re-opening of Taiwan’s last nuclear plant failed on Saturday to reach the legal threshold to be valid, though the president said the island could return to the technology in the future if safety standards improve.
The plebiscite, backed by the opposition, asked whether the Maanshan power plant should be re-opened if it was “confirmed” there were no safety issues. The plant was closed in May as the government shifts to renewables and liquefied natural gas.
The small Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) proposed the referendum earlier this year, and with the backing of the much larger Kuomintang (KMT) passed the legislation for the vote, saying Taiwan needs reliable power supplies and not to be so reliant on imports.
Around 4.3 million people voted in favour of the plant’s re-opening in the referendum, a clear majority over the 1.5 million who voted against, figures from the Central Election Commission showed.
But the motion needed the backing of one quarter of all registered electors – around 5 million people – to get through under electoral law, meaning the plant on Taiwan’s southern tip will not re-open.
Taiwan’s government says there are major safety concerns around generating nuclear power in earthquake-prone Taiwan and handling nuclear waste………………………..https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/taiwan-nuclear-plant-re-opening-vote-fails-approval-threshold-missed-2025-08-23/
Taiwan Must Not Turn Back: A Message of Solidarity for a Post-Nuclear Future
TCAN, Statements of support from international energy scholars for Taiwan’s nuclear phase-out, 2025-08-19 Dr. Sun-Jin Yun | Professor and Dean, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University
Taiwan has made history as the first country in Asia to phase out nuclear power. Even before its formal policy decision, Taiwan had already halted construction of two nearly completed reactors at the Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant. Then, following its bold commitment to denuclearization in 2016, Taiwan laid out a clear roadmap and proceeded to permanently shut down all six of its operating nuclear reactors by 2025. In total, eight reactors were removed from Taiwan’s energy future. This achievement stands as a global milestone—one that not only reflects the wisdom and determination of the Taiwanese people, but also shows what democratic leadership and civic engagement can accomplish in energy policy.
As a Korean educator and researcher who has supported Taiwan’s anti-nuclear movement—traveling across the island to share the experience of Seoul’s “One Less Nuclear Power Plant” initiative—I have seen firsthand the strength of Taiwan’s civil society. I was deeply inspired by how communities organized, informed, and mobilized to ensure that energy decisions would be made not by technocrats or corporations alone, but by the people. Taiwan’s experience became a source of hope and pride for many of us in Asia, proving that an energy transition rooted in justice and public engagement is indeed possible—even in societies with high electricity demand and heavy dependence on imported fossil fuels, where renewables are still being developed.
Taiwan’s nuclear phase-out was not just a policy—it was a people-powered choice for the future. Let’s not turn back. Let Taiwan lead again.
But today, that progress is under threat. Taiwan’s opposition parties have proposed a national referendum to restart the final two reactors that were recently shut down. On August 23, Taiwanese citizens will be asked to vote on whether to undo what they have so carefully and courageously accomplished. That is why I write this statement—not only to express concern, but to offer international solidarity.
While nuclear energy is often framed as a low-carbon tool for addressing climate change, the reality is more paradoxical: the worsening climate crisis itself is undermining the viability of nuclear power. As the crisis worsens, rising ocean temperatures reduce reactor cooling efficiency, while extreme weather events—such as typhoons and wildfires—and jellyfish blooms, fueled by ocean warming, increasingly threaten plant operations. And in a region prone to typhoons and earthquakes, the risk of catastrophe is never far away. Above all, nuclear energy produces radioactive waste for which no nation on Earth has found a safe, long-term solution.
Meanwhile, Taiwan has made remarkable strides in expanding solar and offshore wind. Your country is already charting a path toward a resilient, renewable energy future. To reverse course now would not only be scientifically and economically unwise—it would undermine the very civic spirit that brought you this far. The world is watching. Taiwan has led before, and you can lead again.
Please stay the course. A nuclear-free Taiwan is not only possible—it is already underway. Let us not go backward, but forward together.
https://tcan2050.org.tw/en/nonuke-2/
KHNP And Westinghouse ‘Holding Talks’ Over Nuclear JV For US And Europe
By David Dalton, 22 August 2025, https://www.nucnet.org/news/khnp-and-westinghouse-holding-talks-over-nuclear-jv-for-us-and-europe-8-5-2025
Companies may cooperate on new build as they try to put legal dispute behind them.
Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) and Westinghouse are holding talks to set up a joint venture for US and European projects as they try to move on from a legal settlement that has been criticised by politicians in Seoul, multiple press reports have said.
The UK daily Financial Times (subscription required) reported that KHNP’s chief executive will travel to Washington on Saturday to meet executives from Pennsylvania-based Westinghouse.
The proposed joint venture could pave the way for South Korean groups to expand in the US, where president Donald Trump has pledged to quadruple nuclear energy capacity by 2050.
“The two countries are expected to discuss ways to cooperate on nuclear power, including building nuclear power plants in the US,” a South Korean Democratic Party lawmaker told The Korea Economic
The move comes after KHNP was awarded a 26 trillion won (€16bn, $18.6bn) contract in June to build two nuclear power plants at Dukovany in the Czech Republic, following the resolution in January of a long-running dispute over nuclear technology rights with Westinghouse.
Unconfirmed reports have said KHNP ceded leadership of nuclear projects in Europe to Westinghouse when it settled the dispute in order to secure the Dukovany contract.
As a result, KHNP is said to be barred from entering the nuclear markets of European Union member states – except the Czech Republic – the US, the UK, Japan and Ukraine.
Thi means it is restricted to pursuing projects in Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, South America and Turkey, reports said.
According to press reports, KHNP and its parent company Korea Electric Power Corporation also agreed to pay Westinghouse $825m in goods, services and royalties per exported reactor over the next 50 years.
Westinghouse had accused the South Korean company of infringing on its intellectual property, claiming KHNP’s APR1000 and APR1400 plant designs use its licensed technology.
The January settlement removed a major hurdle for a KHNP-led consortium to sign the final Dukovany contract in June.
KHNP has withdrawn from bidding for nuclear deals in the Netherlands, Slovenia and Sweden in the past year. The company also said this week it had pulled out of a potential Polish project.
Fukushima nuclear plant decommissioning seen overrunning estimate
Fukushima nuclear plant decommissioning seen overrunning estimate. $35bn
already committed, with debris removal price ‘difficult’ to guess. The
amount spent or budgeted so far to decommission the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear power plant has reached 5.2 trillion yen ($35.4 billion), it was
learned Friday, making it highly likely that the grand total will exceed
the government’s estimate of 8 trillion yen.
Nikkei Asian Review 22nd Aug 2025, https://asia.nikkei.com/business/energy/fukushima-nuclear-plant-decommissioning-seen-overrunning-estimate
How did cs137, a fission product get into the Indonesian shipping container?

Dennis LENEVEU, 22 Aug 25,
Re: [Nuclear Waste Watch] US FDA guidance on health impacts of cesium exposure.
Indonesia has only research reactors. If the cs137 contamination came from these small reactors what about all the large reactors such as CANDUs that have continual measured stack releases of beta gamma particulate that would contain cs137 that is volatile?
CANDUs emit large amounts of carbon 14 that has been measured at elevated levels in tree rings around Pickering. Cs137 would also be expected to be in tree rings wood. Wood is used as shipping containers and many other uses such as furniture and interior housing lumber and wood.
Both carbon 14 and cs147 are known to off gass. C14 is particularly a problem being a beta emitter that would never be measured. Cs137 is a gamma emitter that is easily measured with a Geiger counter. Carbon 14 off gassing has been documented in the Bruce low and intermediate level waste facility but is not routinely measured.
Huge amounts of carbon 14 has been deposited around reactors for years. Carbon14 accumulates in the biosphere. With a half life of 5730 years it’s all still around gradually building up in the environment. The stack releases allowed for reactors are based on airborne exposure only. The carbon 14 is greatly dispersed in the air but settles out and deposits in the environment. Gradual bioaccumulation is ignored in regulations for emission standards.
North Korea has ‘undeclared’ ICBM base near China border, according to new report.
ABC News, 23 Aug 25
In short:
A missile base near North Korea’s border with China poses a nuclear threat to Australia, East Asia and the US, a new report and an expert say.
There are likely up to nine nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles and launchers at the secret site.
A retired South Korean Army Lieutenant General says it is a “world problem”.
North Korea has built a secret military base near its border with China which may house Pyongyang’s newest long-range ballistic missiles, according to new research.
The Sinpung-dong Missile Operating Base lies about 27 kilometres from the Chinese frontier, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said in a report published on Wednesday.
The facility in North Pyongan Province likely houses six to nine nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and their launchers, the study said.
It said the weapons “pose a potential nuclear threat to East Asia and the continental United States”.
North Korea has ramped up its nuclear weapons programme since a failed summit with the US in 2019, and leader Kim Jong Un recently called for the “rapid expansion” of the diplomatically isolated nation’s nuclear capability.
The report — which CSIS called the first in-depth, open-source confirmation of Sinpung-dong — says the base is one of about “15-20 ballistic missile bases, maintenance, support, missile storage, and warhead storage facilities which North Korea has never declared”.
The facility is “not known to have been the subject of any denuclearisation negotiations previously conducted between the United States and North Korea”, the study said.
Citing their analysts’ current assessments, CSIS said the launchers and missiles could leave the base in times of crisis or war, link up with special units and conduct harder-to-detect launches from other parts of the country.
The base, along with others, “represent the primary components of what is presumed to be North Korea’s evolving ballistic missile strategy, and its expanding strategic-level nuclear deterrence and strike capabilities”, the report said.
Site built near China to deter attacks
In-Bum Chun, a retired South Korean Army Lieutenant General, told ABC’s Radio National that North Korea believed it could scare the US out of its alliance with South Korea by building these kind of missile bases…………………………………………….https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-22/north-korea-secret-missile-base/105684760
South Korea’s state-run nuclear power firm barred from North America, Europe over intellectual property dispute: Report
Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power president confirms South Korean company closed its operations in Poland
Berk Kutay Gokmen |19.08.2025 https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/south-koreas-state-run-nuclear-power-firm-barred-from-north-america-europe-over-intellectual-property-dispute-report/3663824
South Korea’s state-run nuclear power firm has been banned from bidding for new power plant projects in North America and Europe over an intellectual property (IP) dispute, the Seoul-based Yonhap News reported on Tuesday.
Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) faces the IP dispute under its agreement with the US energy firm Westinghouse, signed in January, according to industry sources.
The sources mentioned that the KHNP cannot sign for new nuclear power plant deals in North America and the UK, Japan, Ukraine, and EU nations, excluding the Czech Republic.
The agreement was signed after Westinghouse accused the KHNP of infringing on its IP, claiming that the plant designs of the South Korean company utilize its licensed technology.
The deal had cleared a major obstacle for the KHNP-led Korean consortium to finalize a 26 trillion won ($18.7 billion) contract in June to build two nuclear power units in the Czech Republic.
The report came as the KHNP President Whang Joo-ho confirmed on Tuesday that the company had closed operations in Poland.
“After the new Polish administration took office … the country decided to drop the state-owned enterprise projects (in the nuclear power sector),” Whang said.
Poland became the fourth European country where the KHNP confirmed its business closure, following Sweden, Slovenia, and the Netherlands.
-
Archives
- September 2026 (194)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
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

