nuclear-news

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

Nuclear regulator raps EDF over safety flaws

The nuclear industry regulator has demanded improvements are made in at Dungeness B power station after a maintenance worker suffered an electric shock.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has served an improvement notice on Energy Nuclear Generation Ltd (EDF Energy) following an incident at Dungeness B power station in Kent.

An employee suffered an electric shock from a portable heater while undertaking maintenance work at the site. The worker suffered injuries on 5th November 2023, which required medical treatment.

The ONR stressed that there was no risk to nuclear safety, the public or the environment as a result of the incident.

Mike Webb, ONR’s superintending inspector for operating reactors, said: “Our investigation found that EDF had failed to ensure the electrical systems involved in the incident were constructed and maintained in a way that prevented danger to their workers, so far as is reasonably practicable. We will engage with EDF during the period of the improvement notice to ensure positive progress is made to address the shortfall.”……………………………….

 Construction Index 12th Feb 2024

https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/nuclear-regulator-raps-edf-over-safety-flaws

February 13, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Call to withdrawal from Holderness nuclear waste site talks amid tourism and farming ‘fears’

South East Holderness’ Cllr Lyn Healing and Cllr Sean McMaster said the area had already experienced creeping industrialisation in recent years

Hull Live,   Joseph Gerrard, Local Democracy Reporter, 10 Feb 24

Local politicians have called for East Riding Council to walk away from talks on proposals for a site to house radioactive nuclear waste deep beneath south Holderness.

South East Holderness’ Cllr Lyn Healing and Cllr Sean McMaster said most Holderness people did not want a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) amid fears for tourism and of creeping industrialisation. Beverley and Holderness MP Graham Stuart said he was backing the councillors’ call after he previously said a local referendum should be held on the proposals.

The call follows the unveiling of the proposals in January and the announcement that the council had joined the South Holderness Working Group to explore the proposals. East Riding Council Leader Cllr Anne Handley said it was the first stage in seeing whether a GDF would be right for the area……………………………. more https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/call-withdrawal-holderness-nuclear-waste-9087294

February 13, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK steps up war on whistleblower journalism with new National Security Act

KIT KLARENBERG, ·FEBRUARY 9, 2024, The GrayZone

Under a repressive new act, British nationals could face prison for undermining London’s national security line. Intended to destroy WikiLeaks and others exposing war crimes, the law is a direct threat to critical national security journalism.

It was the afternoon of May 17 2023 and I had just arrived at London’s Luton Airport. I was on my way to the city of my birth to visit my family. Before landing, the pilot instructed all passengers to have their passports ready for inspection immediately upon disembarking the plane. Just then, I noticed a six-strong squad of stone-faced plainclothes British counter-terror officers waited on the tarmac, intensely studying the identification documents of all travelers.

As soon as the cops identified me, I was ordered to accompany them into the airport terminal without explanation. There, I was introduced to two officials whose names I could not learn, who subsequently referred to each other using nondescript callsigns. I was invited to be digitally strip searched, and subjected to an interrogation in which I had no right to silence, no right to refuse to answer questions, and no right to withhold pin numbers for my digital devices or sim cards. If I asserted any rights to privacy, I faced arrest and up to 48 hours in police custody. 

I chose to comply. And so it was that over the next five hours, I sat with a couple of anonymous counter-terror cops in an airless, windowless, excruciatingly hot back room. They fingerprinted me, took invasive DNA swabs, and probed every conceivable aspect of my private and professional life, friend and family connections, and educational background. They wanted to know why I write, say and think the things I do, the specifics of how I’m paid for my investigative journalism, and to which bank account.

I had been detained under Britain’s 2019 Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act, which the UN has branded draconian and repressive. Under its Schedule 3 powers, anyone entering British territory suspected of “hostile activity” on behalf of a foreign power can be detained, interrogated for six hours, and have the contents of their digital devices seized and stored. “Hostile acts” are defined as any behavior deemed threatening to Britain’s “national security” or its “economic well-being.”

More disturbingly, Schedule 3 is suspicionless. Under its terms, “it is immaterial whether a person is aware that activity in which they are or have been engaged is hostile activity, or whether a state for or on behalf of which, or in the interests of which, a hostile act is carried out has instigated, sanctioned, or is otherwise aware of, the carrying out of the act.” It must be quite an elaborate conspiracy when conspirators do not even know they’re conspiring.

It turns out the British state wrongly believed The Grayzone had a relationship with Russia’s notorious FSB security service. They based their assumption not on any evidence, but on our knack for producing factual investigative journalism based on documents passed to this outlet anonymously, via burner email accounts. Such activity is common practice for Western media outlets, rights groups, and much venerated “open source” investigative outfits like the US-government sponsored Bellingcat. If I and the rest of The Grayzone made any mistake, it was in publishing material the US-UK national security state does not want in the public domain.

Now, the British government is taking its war on investigative journalism to a new level through its little-known National Security Act. Under this law, authorities in London have granted themselves the power to surveil, harass, and ultimately imprison any British citizens they wish on similarly suspicionless grounds. Dissidents of every stripe must now worry that everything they do or say could land them in jail for lengthy terms, simply for failing to toe London’s rigid national security line.

Among the top lobbyists for these authoritarian measures is Paul Mason, the celebrity journalist who posed as a leader of the British left until The Grayzone unmasked him as a security state collaborator hellbent on destroying the antiwar movement from within.

Inspired by the US Espionage Act, designed to criminalize whistleblowing

In December 2023, after processing for 18 months through parliamentary procedures, the British National Security Act came into force. Under the aegis of protecting Britain from the threat of espionage and sabotage by hostile actors at home and abroad, the law introduces a number of completely new criminal offenses with severe penalties — and wide-ranging consequences for freedom of speech. Indeed, the law’s terms are so broad, individuals will almost inevitably break the law without wanting to, intending to, or even knowing they have.

Because no one has been prosecuted under the Act to date, its full ramifications remain unclear. However, London’s security and intelligence apparatus now enjoy far-reaching powers to police what can be said about the British government’s activities abroad.

Given the frightening implications of the Act, UK  journalists, press rights groups, and civil liberties organizations should be up in arms. Yet serious criticism of the law was largely absent from mainstream publications throughout various phases of debate in parliament.

Scrutiny of the anti-free press Act has been left almost entirely to independent journalists like Mohamed Elmaazi. Writing for Consortium News in July 2022, Elmaazi noted that it “shares many elements” with Washington’s “draconian 1917 Espionage Act,” which is currently being used to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange…………………………………………

Act specifically intended to criminalize WikiLeaks threatens whistleblowers

During the 2022 House of Commons debate, knighted Conservative MP Sir Robert Buckland led the charge against WikiLeaks. Buckland, who was responsible in his former role as Secretary of State for Justice for “upholding the rule of law and protecting judicial independence,” argued that the National Security Act was a vital tool to prosecute “those such as Julian Assange who dump data in a way that has no regard for the safety of operatives and other affected people.” He later remarked, “none of us [in Parliament] wants to see Julian Assange and his type carry sway here.” 

The UK Supreme Court expressed a very different view when, in 2018, it held in a unanimous decision that cables published by WikiLeaks are admissible as evidence in court proceedings…………………………………………………………………………

Should authorities in London merely suspect someone might in some way benefit from possessing “information” provided to them by an unknown “foreign” power, that they may have stumbled across on the internet or been provided one way or another without their express request or consent, they could be branded as a criminal and locked away.

British journalists more compliant to authoritarian measures than ever

The British state’s campaign to muzzle dissenting voices draws on London’s operation of a little-known but devastatingly effective censorship mechanism known as the Defense and Security Media Advisory (DSMA) Committee.

Comprised of representatives of the security and intelligence services, military veterans, high-ranking government officials, press association chiefs, editors and journalists, the committee determines behind closed doors which national security related-issues can be covered by the press, and in what fashion.

On occasion, the Committee issues what are known as “D-notices.” Theoretically, these are voluntary requests for news outlets to not broadcast particular pieces of information, or to omit details deemed harmful to national security. While recipients are not legally obliged to comply, they are fully aware that a refusal could mean prosecution under the Official Secrets Act 1989, especially if the information in question results from an “unauthorised disclosure.” Alternatively, an offending journalist might simply be blacklisted, losing access to on and off-the-record briefings and privileged information from officials, which would then threaten their employment. As a result, examples of outlets ignoring “D-notices” are few and far between…………………………………………………………………………………….

Paul Mason suggests The Grayzone be prosecuted for exposing him

In June 2022, The Grayzone exposed British reporter Paul Mason for his collusion with a senior British Foreign Office intelligence officer in a clandestine campaign to brand the British antiwar left as a vehicle for the Russian and Chinese governments. The publication of the material, which was sent to this outlet via anonymous burner accounts, was clearly in the public interest………………………………… more https://thegrayzone.com/2024/02/09/uk-national-security-act-wikileaks/

February 12, 2024 Posted by | civil liberties, politics, UK | Leave a comment

France’s Flamanville EPR has numerous technical problems which mean that its safety issues are not “now closed”

Response from GLOBAL CHANCE to the ASN consultation on the request for
authorization to commission the Flamanville EPR reactor.

Contrary to what the President of the ASN stated on January 30, 2024 in his conference press
and the presentation of one’s wishes, numerous technical subjects which are
as much potential problems for the proper functioning of the EPR and which
call into question the reactor safety, cannot be considered “now closed”.


The problems that hamper the operation and safety of the EPR are numerous.
Most serious are presented in the following chapters in two parts: severe
and persistent then severe and whose solutions are risky. They lead to
asking questions including the answers do not appear in any of the
documents which constitute the file released made available to the public
by the ASN

 Global Chance 9th Feb 2024

February 12, 2024 Posted by | France, safety | Leave a comment

Why Biden’s $61 billion in weapons for Ukraine won’t prevent inevitable defeat

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 11 Feb 24

For 4 months President Biden has been beseeching Congress to grant another $61 billion in aid to Ukraine to continue their 2 year war with Russia. This is on top of $113 billion that has made no dent in Ukraine’s efforts to prevail against overwhelming Russian forces.

Biden could give Ukraine a trillion dollars in aid but it’s essentially worthless because Ukraine is running out of soldiers to use US weapons.

A dozen Ukrainian soldiers and commanders told the Washington Post that personnel deficits are at their lowest point ever.

One mechanized brigade battalion commander advised he’s down to 40 soldiers from a normal 200 to hold off the Russian advance. Another mentioned the same shortage in his unit.

Replacements are scares since August when Zelensky fired all recruitment office heads due to corruption. That’s caused a dramatic decline in replacements still not solved.

But if Biden gets his $61 billion he’d be better off tossing it into a bonfire instead of squandering it on more weapons for Ukraine. That will only prolong a war that was lost on Day One, 717 days ago. Had Biden not torpedoed a peace deal nearly inked in the first month, over 400,000 Ukrainian soldiers would still be alive, the Ukraine economy would not be devastated, and Ukraine may not have lost a single square mile of territory.

Biden knows the $61 billion more will not turn the tide. But as Pete Seeger sang about LBJ continuing to fight a lost war in Vietnam 57 years ago, in today’s White House…’The Big Fool says to push on.’

February 12, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France’s EDF shuts down two nuclear reactors after fire at Chinon plant

Reuters, February 11, 2024,  https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/frances-edf-shuts-down-two-nuclear-reactors-after-fire-chinon-plant-2024-02-10/

Nuclear energy operator EDF has shut down two reactors at Chinon in western France after a fire in a non-nuclear sector of the plant in the early hours of Saturday, the company said.

The fire has been extinguished, it said.

“Production unit number 3 at the Chinon nuclear power plant has shut down automatically, in accordance with the reactor’s safety and protection systems,” EDF said in a statement, adding it also shut down reactor number 4, which is coupled to number 3.

France’s nuclear safety watchdog said in a separate statement the fire had led to an electricity cut at the plant that triggered the automatic shutdown.

Chinon is one of France’s oldest nuclear plants.

Reporting by Tassilo Hummel; editing by Barbara L

February 12, 2024 Posted by | France, incidents | Leave a comment

European Union now promoting the lie that nuclear power is “green”

Nuclear power officially labelled as ‘strategic’ for EU’s decarbonisation, By Paul Messad | EURACTIV.fr | translated by Anne-Sophie Gayet, 7 Feb 24

The Council of EU member states and the European Parliament agreed on Tuesday (6 February) to label nuclear power as a strategic technology for the EU’s decarbonisation, following months of intense negotiations in Brussels over the Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA).

…………….. The agreement encompasses tried and tested nuclear technologies as well as future third and fourth generation ones, i.e. small modular reactors (SMRs) and advanced nuclear reactors (AMRs). Their fuel cycles are also included in the text.

“The message is clear: the EU recognises that we need nuclear power to achieve the objectives of the Green Deal,” the French MEP told Euractiv.  https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/nuclear-power-officially-labelled-as-strategic-for-eus-decarbonisation/

February 11, 2024 Posted by | climate change, EUROPE, secrets,lies and civil liberties | 1 Comment

EDF’s nuclear struggles dampen EU nuclear prospects – the industry “on a slow descent to hell”.

MURIEL BOSELLI, Paris, France, 08 Feb 2024 19:48

(Montel) The latest setbacks at the UK’s new Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant have cast a shadow over Europe’s nuclear revival, experts told Montel, with one former EDF executive saying France’s nuclear industry was “on a slow descent to hell”.


A feud between Paris and London over who should fork out an extra EUR 6-8bn for Hinkley Point C’s (HPC) cost overruns was tarnishing the nuclear industry’s image as pro-nuclear nations try to promote atomic power in the battle against climate change, experts said.

HPC faces a new four-year delay and may not be commissioned until 2031, with completion costs now forecast at between GBP 31-34bn,… (Subscribers only)

Montel 8th Feb 2024

https://www.montelnews.com/news/1537139/edfs-nuclear-struggles-dampen-eu-nuclear-prospects

February 11, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Rolls-Royce snubbed for UK’s first private small nuclear reactor plant

Proactive, Philip Whiterow,  08 Feb 2024

Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (LSE:RR.)‘s mini-nuclear plans have seemingly suffered a setback with the UK’s first privately funded station to use reactors built by Westinghouse.

The US group said it signed an agreement with Community Nuclear Power to install four AP300 small modular reactors (SMRs) at the North Teesside project to generate up to 1.5 gigawatts of power or enough for up to two million homes.

Westinghouse added it hopes to have the first AP300 operating unit available in “the early 2030s”…………………………………..

Mini-reactors or SMRs were a key plank of former prime minister Boris Johnson’s plans to rejuvenate Britain’s nuclear industry and hit his green energy targets.

…………………………………….

Lord Houchen, the mayor of Tees Valley, said one of the major issues it faced was the lack of policy clarity in the UK over SMRs.

Although reportedly ahead of the competition, Rolls-Royce’s SMR is still said to be only mid-way through the UK approval process.

The new power station is being entirely privately funded and will be sited at Seal Sands, a former chemical works.  https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1040531/rolls-royce-snubbed-for-uk-s-first-private-nuclear-plant-1040531.html

February 11, 2024 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Another $61 billion to kill more Ukrainians in an unnecessary and losing war

The $61 billion will make no difference on the battlefield except to prolong the war, the tens of thousands of deaths, and the physical destruction of Ukraine.

The Biden-Schumer Plan to Kill More Ukrainians  JEFFREY D. SACHS, Feb 08, 2024, Common Dreams,  https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/the-biden-schumer-plan-to-kill-more-ukrainians

President Joe Biden is refusing to fold a losing hand as he bets with Ukrainian lives and U.S. taxpayer money. Biden and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer propose to squander the lives of tens of thousands more Ukrainians and $61 billions of federal funds to keep Biden’s disastrous foreign policy failure hidden from view until after the November election.

The $61 billion will make no difference on the battlefield except to prolong the war, the tens of thousands of deaths, and the physical destruction of Ukraine. It will not “save” Ukraine. Ukraine’s security can only be achieved at the negotiating table, not by some fantasized military triumph over Russia.

$61 billion is not nothing. This worse-than-useless outlay would exceed the combined budgets of the U.S. Department of Labor, Environmental Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, and the Women, Infant, and Children nutrition program.

Almost exactly 10 years ago this month, Biden did much to put Ukraine on the path to disaster. This is well known to those who have looked carefully at the facts but is kept hidden from view by the White House, the Senate Democrats, and the mainstream media that back Biden. I have previously provided a detailed chronology, with hyperlinks, here.

Ukraine’s security can only be achieved at the negotiating table, not by some fantasized military triumph over Russia.

In 1990, President George H. W. Bush, Sr. and his German counterpart Chancellor Helmut Kohl promised Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand eastward if the Soviet Union accepted German reunification. When the Soviet Union disbanded in December 1991, with Russia as the successor state, American leaders decided to renege.

President Bill Clinton began NATO expansion over the vociferous opposition of top diplomats like George Kennan and the opposition of his own Secretary of Defense, William Perry. In 1997 Zbigniew Brzezinski upped the ante, with a plan for NATO to expand all the way to Ukraine. He famously wrote that without Ukraine, Russia would cease to be a great power.

Russian leaders have repeatedly made clear that NATO expansion to Ukraine is understandably the reddest of Russian redlines.

 In 2007, President Vladmir Putin stated that NATO enlargement to that date was a cheat on the 1990 promise, and that it must go no further. Despite these clear warnings, including by his own diplomats, George W. Bush Jr. committed in 2008 to expand NATO to Ukraine and Georgia in order to surround Russia in the Black Sea.

William Burns, now CIA director, and then the U.S. Ambassador to Russia, wrote a famous memo entitled “Nyet means Nyet,” explaining that Russia’s opposition to NATO enlargement was across Russia’s political spectrum. Most Ukrainians themselves were also firmly against the plan, favoring neutrality over NATO membership. The Ukrainian Rada declared Ukraine’s state sovereignty in 1990 on the basis of becoming “a permanently neutral state.” In 2009, the people of Ukraine elected Viktor Yanukovych, who ran on a platform of neutrality.

In early 2014, the U.S. decided to help bring down Yanukovych in a coup. This was standard U.S. deep-state operating procedure, one used on dozens of occasions around the world. he CIA, National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and NGOs like the Open Society Foundation went to work in Ukraine. The point person was Victoria Nuland, who was first Richard Cheney’s principal deputy foreign policy advisor, then George Bush Jr.’s ambassador to NATO, then Hillary Clinton’s spokesperson, and by 2014 Assistant Secretary of State.

This time, the Russians caught the conspiracy on tape, in an intercepted call between Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt (now Assistant Secretary of State). Nuland explains to Pyatt that Vice President Joe Biden will help choose and cement the post-coup government. The 2014 Ukraine team, including Biden, Nuland, Jake Sullivan (then and now Biden’s national security advisor), Geoffrey Pyatt, and Antony Blinken (then the deputy national security advisor), remains the Ukraine team today.

It is a team of bunglers. They thought that Yanukovych’s overthrow would quickly usher in NATO expansion. Instead, ethnic Russians in Ukraine virulently rejected the Russophobic post-coup government that was installed by Nuland, and called for autonomy of the ethnically Russian regions. In a referendum, Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia.

Obama, Biden, and their team armed the post-coup government to attack the ethnically Russian regions, thinking this would be the end of it. Yet the regions resisted. Ukraine and the breakaway regions signed the Minsk Agreements to bring an end to the fighting and give constitutional autonomy to the ethnically Russian Donbas. The Minsk II agreement was backed by the UN Security Council, but the U.S. privately agreed with the Ukrainian government that it was okay to ignore it.

In 2021, after 7 years of fighting and more than 14,000 deaths in the Donbas, Putin called on newly elected President Biden to stop NATO enlargement and engage in negotiations with Russia over mutual security arrangements. Biden rejected Putin’s call to end the gambit of NATO enlargement to Ukraine.

Biden and team had still more failed tricks up their sleeve. They firmly believed that U.S. financial sanctions—freezing Russia’s assets and cutting it out of the SWIFT banking system—would cripple the Russian economy and cause Putin to relent. In fact, they expected that the ensuing economic crisis would topple him. Of course, nothing of the sort happened.

Then they expected that NATO weaponry would trounce Russia on the battlefield. That too did not happen. Then they expected that Ukraine’s “counter-offensive” in the summer of 2023, backed by Pentagon and CIA planners, would defeat Russia. Instead, Ukraine lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers dead and wounded—its military hardware destroyed.

Now, Biden and Schumer want to throw more Ukrainian lives and more tens of billions of dollars at this glaring failure. They want to do this in a rushed vote, without any Congressional let alone public oversight, without hearings, and without any strategy. The fact is they want to save Biden from the embarrassment of a decade of puerile and failed plotting, at least until the November election.

There remains one answer for Ukraine’s security: diplomacy and neutrality. That solution doesn’t cost lives or money. It was Ukraine’s choice before the 2014 coup and again in 2022 until stopped by Biden. It is the path that Biden and the Senate Democrats still refuse to take.

February 10, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

EU Policy. Commission invites industry to join support platform for mini nuclear

euronews, By Robert Hodgson, 09/02/2024 

The European Commission has invited interested companies to help “to facilitate and speed up the development, demonstration, and deployment” of small modular nuclear reactors, a fledgling technology it hopes will help the EU achieve its goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………… The inclusion of nuclear power in Europe’s climate mitigation policy has been divisive, with France leading a group of EU members in favour promoting it as a low-carbon solution and Germany against …………………..

Internal market commissioner Thierry Breton said SMRs would play a “central role” in Europe’s climate action. “In a context of increasing business competition on SMRs at global level, Europe is promptly responding, capitalising on its strong nuclear competence, innovation, and manufacturing capability,” he said in a statement.

……………………………….. Environmental groups have criticised the Commission’s reliance on technologies, including SMRs and carbon capture and storage, that have yet to be proved at scale for meeting EU climate targets, rather than focusing resources on promoting existing solutions such as solar and wind power…………. https://www.euronews.com/green/2024/02/09/commission-invites-industry-to-join-support-platform-for-mini-nuclear

February 10, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

Small Modular Reactors do not solve the many problems of nuclear, NGOs say

 https://www.eureporter.co/energy/nuclear-energy/2024/02/05/small-modular-reactors-do-not-solve-the-many-problems-of-nuclear-ngos-say/

As the European Commission prepares to launch its industry alliance for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) on 6 February, civil society organisations stress the high costs and slow progress, making this technology a risky distraction for the climate.

The European Union (EU) should concentrate its efforts on climate solutions that are already working to reduce emissions quickly, rather than costly experiments.

Davide Sabbadin, Deputy Manager for Climate and Energy at the EEB, said:

In its desperate fight for survival, the European nuclear industry is pleading for public support for SMRs, but smaller-scale nuclear won’t change the poor economics of investments in atomic energy. We don’t even know how long it would take to build SMRs, as all previous attempts have been scrapped. Why should the EU invest in costly alternatives over existing climate solutions? Every euro wasted on nuclear projects could help replace fossil fuels faster and cheaper if invested in renewables, grids, and energy storage instead.”

Like other industry alliances fostered by the Commission, the purpose of the new SMR alliance is to bring together governments, industry players, and stakeholders who seek to accelerate the development of the SMR industry. However, the launch of this alliance signals a dangerous shift of direction for the EU institutions prompted by the nuclear industry’s increasing calls for public funding and administrative support.

Despite the hype, SMRs do not currently answer any of the industry’s fundamental problems:

  • Too expensive: In relative terms, the construction costs for SMRs are higher than for large nuclear power plants due to their low electricity output.
  • Unproven technology: Even the simplest designs used today in submarines will not be available at scale until late next decade, if at all. Taking into account the learning curve of the nuclear industry, an average of 3,000 SMRs would have to be constructed in order to be financially viable.
  • Ineffective climate solution: According to the latest IPCC report published in March 2023, nuclear power is one of the two least effective mitigation options (alongside Carbon Capture and Storage).
  • Waste problem: Current SMR designs would create 2-30 times more radioactive waste in need of management and disposal than
  •  conventional nuclear plants.
  • Geostrategic interests: Several EU countries rely on technology and nuclear fuel supplied by Russia’s state-owned Rosatom. Switching from importing Russian fossil fuels to Russian nuclear energy tech does not serve the EU’s energy security interests in the slightest. 

New nuclear ventures take time and resources that we simply don’t have to tackle the climate crisis. Diverting attention from energy efficiency and faster-to-deploy renewables to costly and experimental technologies risks pushing Europe further away from meeting its climate commitments under the Paris Agreement. 

The science is clear and must guide EU climate policy. In the 20 pages of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change’s report dedicated to the various “levers” the EU can use to curb carbon emissions in the energy sector, there is not a single reference to nuclear or SMRs. 

February 9, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | 1 Comment

Over $1 Billion in Weapons Missing In Ukraine

Real Clear Wire, By Adam Andrzejewski, February 07, 2024

Topline: The Department of Defense has failed to properly track $1 billion worth of weapons provided to Ukraine, according to an internal audit released on Jan. 10 by the DOD Inspector General.

Key facts: The DOD is supposed to use special “enhanced end-use monitoring” techniques” to “safeguard” key weapons such as smaller, high-tech weaponry provided to Ukraine, which are likely targets for theft.

The audit says these monitoring procedures are not properly being followed in Ukraine, due to staffing shortages, poor internal logistics and more.

The audit found that $1 billion of the $1.7 billion — or 59% — in enhanced end-use monitoring designated weapons provided to Ukraine as of June 2023 are “delinquent,” meaning they can’t be accounted for in inventory reports.

Maybe the weapons are being used properly; maybe they have been stolen by Russian forces. No one can be completely sure…………………………….

The report also found that inventory databases were not regularly updated and that the Ukrainian Armed Forces failed to properly report missing weapons……………….

Background: The Biden administration has sent over $75 billion to Ukraine since February 2022, including $44 billion in military aid.

Some Republican leaders are already trying to block Biden’s request for additional funds for Ukraine. The missing weapons could strengthen their arguments.

This is not the first time weapons have gone missing during Biden’s administration……………………………………………………

Summary: While there is no direct evidence that weapons in Ukraine have actually been misused, the $1 billion inventory error calls into question the White House’s constant assurances that any aid would be carefully tracked.

https://www.realclearwire.com/articles/2024/02/07/waste_of_the_day_over_1_billion_in_weapons_missing_in_ukraine_1008519.html

February 9, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Zelensky military purge to extend beyond top general – media

Rt.com 7 Feb 24

Together with General Valery Zaluzhny, the Ukrainian leader allegedly plans to let go of Chief of the General Staff Sergey Shaptala

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky is reportedly considering letting go not only of Armed Forces Commander-in-Chief Valery Zaluzhny, but also of the Chief of the General Staff, according to the news outlet Ukrainskaya Pravda.

The report comes after Zelensky admitted last week that he intends to fire the top commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The two have had a major falling out following Kiev’s failed summer counteroffensive. Zaluzhny has described the battlefield situation as a “stalemate,” while Zelensky has vehemently rejected this assessment, especially in light of waning support from Kiev’s Western backers.

In an interview with Italy’s RAI TG1 news channel on Sunday, Zelensky announced that he is planning a “serious” overhaul of the country’s leadership, noting that these changes will not be “about a single person.” He did not, however, list any specific names.

Citing sources within the Ukrainian government, Ukrainskaya Pravda reported on Monday that Zaluzhny may indeed not be the only one getting canned amid Zelensky’s purge and suggested that Sergey Shaptala, who currently serves as the Chief of the General Staff, will also be leaving his position as early as this week.

“[The fate of] everyone else has not yet been decided,” the source told the outlet.

Rumors of Shapatala’s resignation appear to be partially confirmed by a post from Zaluzhny, who posted a picture with his colleague on Monday, wishing him a happy birthday and writing: “It will still be difficult for us, but we will never be ashamed.”………………………………………………………………… more https://www.rt.com/russia/591911-ukraine-zelensky-shapatala-firing/

February 9, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine | Leave a comment

The dangerous craze for SMRs

This is going too far in trivializing risk. And this is not limited to “acceptability” which seems to be ASN’s major concern, but to the risks of such “mixed” installations.

a serious accident situation (AZF, Lubrizol) could damage the SMR unit and transform the accident into a disaster.

Bernard Laponche,  Doctor of Science in Nuclear Reactor Physics, President of the Global Chance association,Le Club Mediapart, 5th Feb 2024 https://blogs.mediapart.fr/bernard-laponche/blog/050224/le-dangereux-engouement-pour-les-smr

The development of small modular nuclear reactors (SMR) is the subject of spectacular announcements.Based on the declarations of the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) on this
subject, we launch an appeal for reason on the realities and difficulties of such projects, on the technical, safety and security levels .

During his press conference on January 31, 2024, the president of the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) addressed the issue of small modular nuclear reactors, known as SMRs, and answered some questions on this subject.
In his presentation, the president highlights the technical and societal questions posed by these new reactors, as well as the safety, security and non-proliferation issues “to be integrated upstream of the projects”.

These are the usual concerns when we are interested in nuclear reactors, which produce heat and possibly electricity from fission and chain reactions of fissile elements (uranium, plutonium), but also products fission and transuranium elements found in irradiated fuels currently intended for reprocessing, leading to the accumulation of radioactive waste in addition to that from the dismantling of reactors. These are the problems that will have to be analyzed for candidate SMR reactors, as for any nuclear reactor and with the same rigor as for conventional reactors.

In the same way that a conventional industrial installation cannot claim to be free from all risk of accident, no nuclear installation can claim to be free of any risk of accident. The declaration “a nuclear accident is possible in France” by successive ASN officials is valid for SMRs, even if, as its current president says, certain innovative SMRs “present potentially promising intrinsic safety characteristics” .

The first “prototype” examples of candidate reactors under the title of SMR, that is to say intended to be mass-produced in a factory before installation on site, will therefore have to be built on nuclear sites, probably those housing research reactors.

As ASN points out, the use of SMR in France would not be of great interest for the production of electricity given the importance of the current fleet of EDF power plants and the announced projects. But, on the other hand, SMRs could be very useful for the production of heat or steam for the process industries (paper, food, chemical industries, etc.) of which there are very many.

It would then be necessary to install the SMR reactor very close to the industrial installation or even, according to ASN, inside this installation.

This is going too far in trivializing risk. And this is not limited to “acceptability” which seems to be ASN’s major concern, but to the risks of such “mixed” installations.

Indeed, we cannot admit the presence of a basic nuclear installation, containing highly radioactive materials within a classic industrial installation, of the ICPE type in which a serious accident situation (AZF, Lubrizol) could damage the SMR unit and transform the accident into a disaster.

Furthermore, it is clear that each promoter of an SMR candidate aims for a large order in the number of copies (of the order of a hundred say some) which will allow the “modular” manufacturing of reactors in a dedicated factory, this allowing the supposed reduction in unit cost.

In this case, by eliminating the solution of an SMR in the plant itself, we would have the creation of a large number of INB-ICPE couples. Even if we admit that the probability of an accident on the SMR is lower than for a conventional reactor (which remains to be demonstrated for each case), this probability is multiplied by the number of reactors, all identical.

In examining the safety files for EDF’s large power reactors and nuclear fuel plants, ASN and IRSN pay very close attention to “external attacks” of natural or malicious origin. What happens to these concerns for SMS located almost everywhere on the territory, on locations which are those of the industrial installation which they must supply with heat and whose location was chosen without any concern for nuclear safety and security? ? How would specific protection be organized which, to be effective, would certainly be expensive, especially since the SMRs concerned would be of low power?

The profusion of candidate projects for SMR, some of which are financially supported by the Government, leads to each being examined by the IRSN and the ASN, as announced by the latter. This examination can be postponed over time depending on the maturity of the projects, all of which currently only exist on file, more or less elaborate.

If this examination is done correctly, that is to say with as much care as for a power reactor, the examination of the technical and safety files of each SMR prototype is a considerable task. We can fear that the “craze” for SMRs that ASN speaks of will exert dangerous pressure on the quality of studies and safety and security injunctions.

Finally, but this is not the problem of the IRSN and the ASN, we would still need to have serious information on the costs. Not only that of the construction of a prototype (the example of NuScale in the United States is edifying) but also that of its exploitation and especially that of the fuel, from its manufacture to its treatment after use, dismantling and management garbage.

When we examine in the light of what we know of the climatic upheavals which are already affecting our territory and will intensify considerably, we can really ask ourselves the question of the fragility and the risk of installing a little small nuclear reactors everywhere which will obviously be subject, depending on the period and their site, to floods, droughts, storms, tornadoes, earthquakes, etc.

All those who today say they want to welcome an SMR on their territory should really think about it seriously.


February 8, 2024 Posted by | France, safety | Leave a comment