Luck Is Not a Strategy for the Ukraine, The Germans Take the “Evidence-based” Path.
We Chat with Nuclear Expert Dr. Paul Dorfman
Hot Globe, STEVE CHAPPLE, JUL 20, 2023
“………………………………………………………………………………. HOT GLOBE: It’s always bothered me that Saudi Arabia because of the Trump administration has now got access to the beginnings of nuclear power, and to a future nuclear bomb. The idea of selling small nuclear reactors around the world raises a pretty problematic point.
DORFMAN: That’s absolutely true. Saudi has made no bones about its nuclear ambitions and I mean its military nuclear ambitions. Saudi diplomats have said quite clearly that they’re looking towards Iran and that they’re seriously thinking about both civil and military nuclear. So there’s a potential for an arms race, a military nuclear arms race in the Middle East region. It’s actually even more bad news for the Middle East because in a proxy war if say, for example, Russian and America wanted to have a bit of a go and they didn’t want to absolutely destroy each other’s country where would they be fighting their proxy nuclear war? The first region that comes to mind is the Middle East and Saudi and Iran.
The economies of small nuclear reactors depend absolutely on production to scale. It’s been proven time and time again that in order to make any money at all, to break even on small nuclear production, you need to sell them abroad. Now, selling them abroad to whom, for what reasons? You’d be selling them to developing nations who may or may not have the capacity to regulate, to protect, to defend in depth, and so therefore you would be significantly expanding the potential for military nuclear risk whether that means a dirty bomb or further nuclear development.
HOT GLOBE: A slightly different question here, but Germany had ongoing nuclear plants and even though they were still producing electricity, they’ve shut those down. That may be a little puzzling to some Americans. Can you explain that?
DORFMAN: First of all, what Germany does is evidence-based policy. Germany puts out its scientific, technological questions, its energy questions, to well-funded high level research units. They go away and do their research. They come back with their research. They give it to the government departments and then the government makes a decision. So it’s evidence-based policy making. Over the years Germany has said well, we want to get to net-zero and we’re kind of worried about nuclear. Now around 2011 when Fukushima happened–remember Chancellor Merkel is a PhD chemist. She realized like many of us that even in an advanced society things could go badly wrong since accidents are by definition accidental.
HOT GLOBE: Good line
DORFMAN: Yeah, who knew? [laughs] So when Fukushima happened, Merkel and many others in Germany said well, look, we can’t stand the pain of this. I was having supper with Naoto Kan, the premier of Japan at the time of Fukushima after we both spoke in Westminster. Even then I was shocked when he turned to me and said that if the wind had been in the wrong direction, they would have lost Tokyo. The majority of the pollution went out into the Pacific Ocean. Now to the point about Germany. It’s landlocked so the Germans looked at the possibility of an accident and they came up with the numbers. It would cost trillions and trillions and trillions of Euros if they had a nuclear accident and they said look, we really can’t be doing this. This is just crazy, basically, and so we’re going to do “the German energy transition.” We’re going to try to lead the world on this and we’re going to move stepwise into renewables-plus, that’s renewables solar wind energy storage, interconnection, demand site management, energy management, distributed grids and a significant centralized upgrade of grids, too.
Now clearly Germany has a core problem, a fossil fuel problem, but they didn’t want to go down the fissile fuel route so Germany has said well OK for the time being we’re going to rely on gas but then we’re going to move to a full renewable economy. Well, the war has speeded that up. Since the war Germany has burnt less coal and Germany has shuttered all its nuclear power plants. It’s done this because what Germany says it will do, it does, unlike many other states. It set upon a route to go renewables. Now there is no such thing as a free lunch. Everything costs and there’s no perfect solution to the energy crisis, but what Germany is trying to do is to lead the world in this so-called energy transition, and I won’t spout numbers but basically what has happened is you’ve just seen significant renewable deployment, significant storage and a water storage as it were deployment which is sort of integrated into the power system and also integrated into the democratic system whereby by local communities also own the local renewable aspects of the local renewable power generation. It’s basically saying well look yes we can do this rather like Americans, you know, we have a dream, we will try to do this, it will be difficult but we will do our best to get there since the costs and the risks of nuclear are far too great. Let’s find a realistic, sustainable, positive, constructive way through……..
more https://hotglobe.substack.com/p/nuclear-power-is-already-a-climate
Corruption In Ukraine & The U.S. Mutually Rewarding
The Pentagon failed its 5th consecutive audit last year, appearing to lose track of 61% of its $3.5 trillion in assets.
Substack, LISA SAVAGE, JUL 20, 2023
“…………………………………………………………………………………………. Ukraine’s leaders are so over the top that it’s becoming impossible to ignore. Add in the fact that they have been enriched by U.S. taxpayers more or less directly despite crumbling infrastructure, catastrophic homelessness, apartheid healthcare, and a host of other problems that the U.S. could address with adequate funding.
From RT (whose editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan, just survived a second assassination attempt):
On July 7, US Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl spoke about a new package of aid from the US which includes cluster munitions – which are banned in 120 countries. The cost was $800 million.This is the 42nd delivery of aid that Ukraine has received from the US in the past year and a half.[emphasis mine] Since the beginning of Russia’s offensive, the US Congress has approved military and economic assistance to Ukraine amounting to over $70 billion – and that’s only counting direct expenses..
“Ukraine needs only one thing… To have someone come to power who won’t steal. Someone who won’t do it himself and won’t allow others to do so. Unfortunately, so far we haven’t been lucky,” [Aleksey Arestovich, former advisor to President Zelensky] said.
Ok, so Arestovich has a motive for trashing the government that used to include him. How about Pulitzer Prize-winning U.S. investigative journalist Seymour Hersh? Hersh does not approve of Russia’s entry into the war but he nonetheless published a piece on rampant corruption in Ukraine, “Trading with the Enemy,” back in April.
Zelensky has been buying fuel from Russia, the country with which it, and Washington, are at war, and the Ukrainian president and many in his entourage have been skimming untold millions from the American dollars earmarked for diesel fuel payments. One estimate by analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency put the embezzled funds at $400 million last year, at least; another expert compared the level of corruption in Kiev as approaching that of the Afghan war………………………………
Then there is President Zelensky, elected on pledges to end corruption and, incidentally, the war on the Donbas.
Pre-2022, i.e. when corporate media headlines about Ukraine did a 180, even The Guardian found he was part of the problem and not likely to be part of the solution.
Neither is the U.S. government likely to be part of the solution. The Pentagon failed its fifth consecutive audit last year, appearing to lose track of 61% of its $3.5 trillion in assets……………………….. more https://went2thebridge.substack.com/p/corruption-in-ukraine-and-the-us?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1580975&post_id=135301485&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email_medium=email
Is the UK Government unable to fund its promised nuclear renaissance?
- “Great British Nuclear has no legal basis – the Energy Bill has been delayed till the autumn, so it can’t do anything legally.
- “Great British Nuclear has no budget, so it can’t buy anything or commission anything.
- “Great British Nuclear has no premises.
- “Great British Nuclear has no paid staff.”
Great British Nuclear officially launched, sparks funding doubts.
Electrical Review 18th July 2023
“………………… So we’ve heard that Great British Nuclear has high hopes to kickstart a renaissance period for nuclear power in the UK, but how does it plan on achieving that? Well, thanks to the official launch, we now have more concrete information as to what the body plans to do.
The UK Government has officially launched Great British Nuclear, a new Government agency that is designed to support the growth of nuclear energy in the UK.
The official launch of Great British Nuclear was initially tipped for July 13, although the launch was pushed back due to “unforeseen circumstances.” Despite the delayed start, the Government has high hopes for the new department, with it hoping to create a renaissance for nuclear energy in the UK.
One of Great British Nuclear’s first acts will be to kickstart a competition for small modular reactor (SMR) technology, which it believes could help boost energy security, create cheaper power, and grow the economy through well-paid jobs.
Many in the industry have been calling for the UK Government to do more to encourage the construction of more nuclear power, including SMRs, as the UK transitions towards cleaner power generation. The UK Government has even gone so far as to claim that nuclear will be essential to our net zero future, noting that it will provide a ‘baseload’ to cover more intermittent renewable energy generation – something that our Gossage Gossip columnist recently described as a ‘load of cobblers’.
How will Great British Nuclear Help?
So we’ve heard that Great British Nuclear has high hopes to kickstart a renaissance period for nuclear power in the UK, but how does it plan on achieving that? Well, thanks to the official launch, we now have more concrete information as to what the body plans to do.
From today, companies can register their interest with Great British Nuclear to participate in a competition to secure funding support to develop their SMRs. Additionally, the Government body is eager to explore future sites for new large gigawatt-scale nuclear power plants, such as those at Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C.
That’s about as much as we know about Great British Nuclear’s initial plans – although the UK Government is throwing its weight behind the nuclear industry with a brand-new funding package totalling up to £157 million.
This includes:
Up to £77.1 million of funding for companies to accelerate advanced nuclear business development in the UK and support advanced nuclear designs to enter UK regulation, maximising the chance of small and advanced modular reactors being built during the next ParliamentUp to £58 million funding for the further development and design of a type of advanced modular reactor (AMR) and next generation fuel. AMRs operate at a higher temperature than SMRs and as a result they could provide high temperature heat for hydrogen and other industrial uses alongside nuclear power. This includes:
- Up to £22.5 million to Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation UK in Warrington to further develop the design of a high temperature micro modular reactor, a type of AMR suited to UK industrial demands including hydrogen and sustainable aviation fuel production.
- Up to £15 million to the National Nuclear laboratory in Warrington to accelerate the design of a high temperature reactor, following its success in Japan.
- Up to £16 million to National Nuclear Laboratory in Preston to continue to develop sovereign coated particle fuel capability, a type of robust advanced fuel which is suitable for high temperature reactors.
A further £22.3 million from the Nuclear Fuel Fund will enable eight projects to develop new fuel production and manufacturing capabilities in the UK, driving up energy security and supporting the global move away from Russian fuel. This will include:
- Over £10.5 million to Westinghouse Springfields nuclear fuel plant in Preston to manufacture more innovative types of nuclear fuel for customers both in the UK and overseas, boosting jobs and skills in the North West.
- Over £9.5 million to Urenco UK in Capenhurst Chester, an international supplier of nuclear materials, to enrich uranium to higher levels, including LEU+ and high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU). LEU+ will allow for current reactors and SMRs to run for longer between refuelling outages, improving reactor efficiency and economics both in the UK and abroad. HALEU development will ensure that the UK remains at the forefront of fuel development for future advanced reactors.
- Over £1 million has also been awarded to Nuclear Transport Solutions, a subsidiary of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, to develop transport solutions to facilitate a supply chain for highly enriched uranium in the UK and internationally.
- Over £1.2 million to support MoltexFLEX, a UK molten salt reactor developer based in the North West, to build and operate rigs for the development of molten salt fuel. Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs) are an AMR type that use a molten salt as a coolant and fuel, leading to intrinsic safety compared with conventional fuels.
Is the UK Government unable to fund its promised nuclear renaissance?
Despite announcing £157 million in investment for the nuclear industry in the UK, many experts will argue that the UK Government’s funding plans are woefully inadequate to meaningfully move the needle.
Recent nuclear projects within the UK have been unable to get off the ground without significant Government intervention, including Hinkley Point C, which the Government has committed at least £679 million towards, despite the new reactor facing constant delays – with its opening date now set for September 2028.
Rolls-Royce, which is currently undergoing regulatory testing on its small modular reactor technology, has suggested that SMRs will be cheaper – although the company still believes each SMR will carry a price tag of at least £1.8 billion when they start rolling out of factories in 2030. That is expected to get you around 440 MW of generation – which for the same price, you could purchase 782 Enercon E82 onshore wind turbines, netting you up to 2346 MW of generation.
One industry insider suggested that the UK Government’s woeful funding figures was “the best example I have ever seen of what a Government on its last legs sounds like when it has nothing to say and no money to spend.” Adding that, “All this amount will buy you, literally, is a very large pile of paper and possibly a few more headlines.”
Given the Conservative Party’s performance in recent polls, it’s likely the UK Government is unwilling to commit large amounts to Great British Nuclear when it’s unlikely to be in Government for much longer. Unfortunately, large infrastructure projects of this nature require huge investment across multiple parliamentary terms – and the short-sighted nature of the country’s leaders got us into this situation in the first place. In fact, by the time Hinkley Point C comes online, it will be 20 years since the Government of the day supported a new reactor.
Will the launch of Great British Nuclear move the needle?
The UK Government is hopeful that Great British Nuclear will move the needle in the development of nuclear power technology in the UK. While it may not have the budget to invest in new nuclear reactors itself – it could potentially foster an environment that is ultimately friendly to nuclear power.
Unfortunately, as our industry insider notes:
- “Great British Nuclear has no legal basis – the Energy Bill has been delayed till the autumn, so it can’t do anything legally.
- “Great British Nuclear has no budget, so it can’t buy anything or commission anything.
- “Great British Nuclear has no premises.
- “Great British Nuclear has no paid staff.”
So, the chance of meaningfully moving the needle is essentially nil. But at least the current Government can capture headlines and act like it’s trying to help. https://electricalreview.co.uk/2023/07/18/great-british-nuclear-officially-launched-sparks-funding-doubts/
Don’t believe the UK government’s hype about small nuclear reactors and Great British Nuclear.
In response to Energy Security Secretary Grant Shapps’ announcements
relating to ‘Great British Nuclear’, Dr Doug Parr, Chief Scientist for
Greenpeace UK, said – “As the government tries to whip up investment for
the latest generation of reactors, it is striking how many of the nuclear
industry’s speculative claims are being repeated by ministers as fact.
The hype seems to have been enough to convince our government that nuclear’s
last gasp is in fact a new dawn, but at their radioactive cores SMRs remain
the same bad bet. SMRs have no track record, but initial indications are
that the familiar problems of cost overruns and delays will be repeated,
and the accumulation of unmanageable waste will continue.
Maybe the hope is that splitting one big mistake into several smaller mistakes means each
reactor’s inevitable problems receive less scrutiny?
By continually obsessing about nuclear the government is taking its eye off the net zero
ball, which will have to be delivered through a predominantly renewable,
modern electricity grid. No number of SMRs will fix the government’s
lacklustre effort to address issues of delayed connections, smart local
grids and home efficiency.
The government may argue that renewables can
compete in the market unaided, while nuclear still needs state support to
survive, but atomic power has been showered with money and support for the
best part of a century without ever working well enough to pay its way.
This is a technology that has gone straight from adolescence to
obsolescence without passing through maturity.”
Greenpeace 18th July 2023
Ukraine Again Bombs Crimean Bridge
18, July, 2023 https://scheerpost.com/2023/07/18/ukraine-again-bombs-crimean-bridge/—
Ukrainian sources are telling media outlets it was a joint operation between the SBU and the Ukrainian Navy.
By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com
The Crimean Bridge that links Crimea to the Russian mainland was again targeted by Ukrainian forces in a bombing early Monday morning that killed two civilians and injured a young child.
Russian authorities said the Crimean Bridge, also known as the Kerch Bridge, was targeted by drones operating on the surface of the water. The previous attack on the bridge that took place in October 2022 was a truck bombing.
Ukrainian sources are telling media outlets that the attack was a joint operation between Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) and Ukraine’s Navy. The government in Kyiv hasn’t officially taken credit for the attack but has hinted at responsibility, which is typical of their covert attacks on Russian territory.
Russian authorities have halted vehicle traffic on the bridge and are assessing the damage. According to RT, rail transport on the bridge was temporarily halted but has resumed.
The Crimean Bridge is a sensitive target for Russia, and the last time it was attacked, Russian President Vladimir Putin significantly escalated the war. In response, the Russian military began large-scale missile strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure, which it hadn’t done before October 2022.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova hinted at Western involvement in the Monday attack, saying that Ukrainian decisions on such operations are made “with the direct participation of American and British intelligence services and politicians.”
The Grayzone previously reported that British intelligence officials were plotting ways to blow up the Crimean Bridge before the October 2022 attack. The Grayzone obtained a presentation drawn up for British intelligence in April 2022 that reviewed options for attacking the bridge.
The document suggested using cruise missiles or divers to plant mines to blow up the bridge. The Ukrainian attacks differed operationally, but the existence of the document signals the British could have helped Ukraine plot the attacks or at least offered advice.
US turning Ukraine into ‘burial ground’ for lethal waste – Russian envoy
Rt.com 19 Jul 23
Undetonated cluster bombs will make normal life “impossible” in parts of Ukraine, Ambassador Anatoly Antonov has said.
The US is using the Ukrainian battlefield as a dump site for its outdated weapons, Russia’s ambassador to Washington has said, warning that the country will become a graveyard for “lethal waste.”
After the White House claimed it has no plans to replenish the Pentagon’s stockpiles of controversial cluster bombs, Ambassador Anatoly Antonov said the US is “plunging lower and lower in terms of observing elementary moral principles, cynically dumping the lethal waste on Ukraine.”
“Washington wants to use [Ukraine] to dispose of its old weapons, turning the once rich and fertile part of the USSR into a ‘burial ground’ where it will be simply impossible to live,” he said. “Unexploded US submunitions will remain in this territory, as well as piles of scorched metal of the German-made Leopards and other Western materiel.”
In an interview with NBC News on Sunday, White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan was asked whether President Joe Biden would continue supplying 155-millimeter cluster bombs to Ukraine. Though he stopped short of a direct answer, Sullivan said the administration is working to build up production capacity for standard 155mm artillery shells and is not looking to replenish its cluster munition stocks. …….
The decision to provide cluster bombs was controversial even for US allies, as more than 120 nations have agreed to ban the weapons due to their tendency to leave behind undetonated submunitions. The unexploded ordnance can remain live in former conflict zones for decades, posing a danger to anyone unfortunate enough to stumble across them.
While NBC’s Chuck Todd pressed Sullivan on whether the US should continue to provide “barbaric weapons” to Kiev, the senior official insisted on America’s “moral authority,” saying the White House would continue to “give Ukraine what it needs in order to not be defenseless in the face of a Russian onslaught.”
Moscow has repeatedly condemned foreign arms transfers to Ukraine, arguing they will only prolong the conflict and do little to deter its military aims. It has singled out weapons such as cluster munitions and depleted uranium rounds as especially problematic, noting they are likely to harm non-combatants in the region long after the fighting is over. https://www.rt.com/russia/579875-us-cluster-bombs-ukraine-graveyard/
Europe heatwave: EU sends planes to Greece as thousands flee fires. Highof 48C expected on continent as red spreads across the European weathermap.
Times 18th July 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/europe-heatwave-weather-charon-forecast-latest-news-ffq9k9drn
A sleepy town of 8,000 located near the Sardinian capital of Cagliari,
Decimomannu is currently one of Italy’s hottest locations, and experts
had predicted record temperatures on Tuesday and Wednesday. Locals say many
have locked themselves in shuttered homes or fled to surrounding beaches.
Times 19th July 2023
Hundreds have fled as wildfires rage in Greece for a third day while
authorities brace for a new heatwave stoking tinderbox conditions across
the country. Dozens of homes were gutted in towns west of Athens, while the
fire brigade reported that a third fire had broken out on the island of
Rhodes. Firefighters worked throughout the night and four aircraft sent
from Italy and France will soon join the efforts to keep the flames at bay,
as a second heatwave is forecast to start in Greece on Thursday. Thousands
have also been evacuated in the Canary Islands and Switzerland in recent
days, as southern Europe is gripped by the ongoing wildfires and extreme
heat caused by the fossil-fuel-driven climate crisis.
Independent 19th July 2023
Great British Nuclear: High on hype, Low on substance
“How is Great British Nuclear meant to take forward the SMR competition when it has no operating budget, no legal powers, no permanent staff team, and no base from which to operate?”
“How is GBN meant to take forward the SMR competition when it has no operating budget, no legal powers, no permanent staff team, and no base from which to operate?”
https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/great-british-nuclear-high-on-hype-low-on-substance/ 18 Jul 23
Energy Secretary Grant Shapps finally launched ‘Great’ British Nuclear today (18 July), but whilst the minister’s announcement was big on hype, the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities noticed that it was short on substance.
Great British Nuclear was the new body announced by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson in April 2022 as part of his revised energy strategy. GBN is supposed to be front and centre of a ‘rapid expansion of nuclear power at an unprecedented scale and pace’, but the formal launch of the initiative has been put on hold several times, including humiliatingly at the eleventh-hour last week.
Nuclear in the UK has made little progress since April 2022. EDF Energy, which is building the only nuclear plant under construction at Hinkley Point C, has recently announced a further delay in delivery and a huge increase in costs, whilst its reactor design – the EPR-1 – has been beset with serious safety and reliability issues, with an accident at Taishan-1 in China and repeated delays to the start-up of its reactor in Olkiluoto in Finland. And the UK government has so far failed to engender any interest within the financial markets to back its Sizewell C development, meaning that the British and French governments (and ultimately taxpayers) continue to carry the can.
More faith is being placed by ministers on the development of so-called Small and Advanced Modular Reactors, with GBN’s role being to provide oversight to a competition amongst rival designs to select those deemed worthy of government funding to take forward through the regulatory approvals process and onto deployment. Such reactors would be fabricated remotely and then taken in parts for assembly on site, but all is not rosy – developments costs are rising exponentially, none of the designs are proven to be safe or reliable, none have been built, the financial position of some developers is becoming uncertain, and there remains the intractable radioactive waste problem.
NFLA Chair, Councillor Lawrence O’Neill identified some of the remaining challenges following today’s press conference:
“Like much concerning nuclear, once again when we look at GBN there is a noticeable disconnect between the upbeat speech of the Energy Secretary and the actual reality on the ground.
“Mr Shapps announced a further £157 million in government funding for nuclear, but this sum is small beer relative to the billions required to get any plant up and running, and strangely absent, yet again, was any clear indication of where the money to fund the operation of Great British Nuclear would come from. Figures of up to £500 million per year have been bandied about, and the NFLA has previously pointed out that this funding shortfall was also noticeable in the Chancellor’s Spring Budget where much was made of the ‘promise’ of GBN, but with no money to follow it.
“Furthermore, Great British Nuclear still does not have all its legal powers to function, including the power to award funding for future nuclear development. Its powers are contained within the Energy Bill currently in its Reporting Stage before the House of Commons in Parliament, and this still needs to clear its final hurdles before receiving Royal Assent and becoming legislation. As the recess is almost upon us, with MPs leaving for their summer holidays, no further progress can be made before the autumn. In addition, GBN only has an interim staff team and no real headquarters.
“How is GBN meant to take forward the SMR competition when it has no operating budget, no legal powers, no permanent staff team, and no base from which to operate?”
Mostly damningly, Emeritus Professor of Energy Policy at the University of Greenwich, Stephen Thomas, has poured scorn on the ‘promise’ of Small and Advanced Modular Reactors in his recent paper:
which includes quotes:
‘The much-hyped Small Modular Reactors are a long way from being commercially available and the claims for them being cheaper than large reactors are not credible’.
‘Advanced Modular Reactors have all been talked about for 50 years or more. However, they have either been built as unsuccessful prototypes or demonstration plants or not been built at all as power reactors. All AMR designs will require major innovations if they are to be technically viable’.
The NFLAs are at one with Professor Thomas in condemning the British Government’s continued foolhardy obsession with unproven, unreliable and potentially unsafe new nuclear, when renewable technologies already exist that can deliver affordable, sustainable electricity far more quickly and far more cheaply.
Councillor O’Neill concluded:
“Every pound spent on the vainglorious pursuit of nuclear power means a pound denied to investment in a national programme of insulation and energy efficiency measures to bring down energy usage and customer bills or a pound denied to investment in solar, wind, hydro, biomass, geothermal, tidal or wave power projects that, in combination with energy storage solutions, can provide more affordable, sustainable electricity to meet our nation’s energy needs right now.”
Heatwaves are new normal as 50C hits US and China – UN
The extreme temperatures sweeping the globe this week are the new normal in
a world warmed by climate change, the UN weather agency says. Temperatures
went over 50C (122F) in parts of the US and China on Sunday. The World
Meteorological Organisation warned the heatwave in Europe could continue
into August. Millions around the world are under heat advisories as
officials warn of danger to life from the hot temperatures. Night-time in
Europe and the US is not expected to bring widespread relief as
temperatures stay above 30C in places including Arizona or southern Spain.
BBC 17th July 2023
Best foot forward: Campaigners are marching again for a Nuclear Free Wales
Nuclear Policy info 19 July 23
Campaigners from anti-nuclear campaign groups in Wales and beyond will be pulling on their walking boots to march the 44 miles (72 kms) from Trawsfynydd to the Eisteddfod at Boduan next month in support of a nuclear free Wales.
The march is being organised by CND Cymru (the Welsh Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament), CADNO (the Society for the Prevention of Everlasting Nuclear Destruction) and PAWB (People against Wylfa B). The marchers will also receive the full support of the Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities which are equally opposed to the plans being hatched in Westminster and Cardiff to redevelop new nuclear plants at inland Trawsfynydd in Gwynedd and at the coastal Wylfa site in Ynys Mon (Anglesey).
Since former Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced in April of last year his ill-judged intention to develop 24 gigawatts of nuclear power generating capacity in the UK by 2050, at Trawsfynydd, the Welsh Government has established a new company, Cwmni Egino, to attract inward investment in nuclear, whilst at Wylfa, following the abandonment of a nuclear power plant plan led by the Horizon consortium in 2021, a British government minister and the local Member of Parliament have both been courting US nuclear operators Bechtel and Westinghouse to bring their large reactors to the island.
There has also been persistent agitation within the nuclear industry, the media, and most recently from Parliament’s Welsh Affairs Committee to bring so-called Small Modular Reactors to the two sites, however none of the SMR designs have so far received the necessary licencing approvals to be deployed in the UK or none have even been built.
Since former Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced in April of last year his ill-judged intention to develop 24 gigawatts of nuclear power generating capacity in the UK by 2050, at Trawsfynydd, the Welsh Government has established a new company, Cwmni Egino, to attract inward investment in nuclear, whilst at Wylfa, following the abandonment of a nuclear power plant plan led by the Horizon consortium in 2021, a British government minister and the local Member of Parliament have both been courting US nuclear operators Bechtel and Westinghouse to bring their large reactors to the island.
There has also been persistent agitation within the nuclear industry, the media, and most recently from Parliament’s Welsh Affairs Committee to bring so-called Small Modular Reactors to the two sites, however none of the SMR designs have so far received the necessary licencing approvals to be deployed in the UK or none have even been built.
Since April of last year, Welsh anti-nuclear campaigners have also been especially active with an exhibition highlighting 40 years of nuclear free Wales touring the nation, with rallies held and declarations made at events in Caernarfon and Cardiff, and with actions opposing the dumping of radioactive water at Fukushima in Japan. A key part of the 2022 campaign was a first successful march, organised in the summer of last year from Trawsfynydd to Wylfa.
This time again the intrepid marchers will set off from Trawsfynydd on 2 August, but this year they are Eisteddfod bound!
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. For more details, and to book your place on the march, please contact Organiser Sam Bannon by email to sampbannon@gmail.com or telephone 07482536264. https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/best-foot-forward-campaigners-are-marching-again-for-a-nuclear-free-wales/
Why EU sanctions don’t include Russian nuclear industry
DW, Ashutosh Pandey 19 Jul 23
While the EU is on course to wean itself off Russian fossil fuels, it’s struggling to kick its nuclear habit. That’s because Russia’s nuclear industry still wields huge clout.
Less than a week after the first Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, an Ilyushin Il-76 cargo aircraft, belonging to Russian cargo airline Volga-Dnepr, flew across Belarus and Poland before landing in Slovakia.
The mysterious jet taking off from Russia took flight trackers by surprise as only a day ago the European Union had closed its airspace to Russian airlines and private jets in response to Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.
Soon, it became clear that the plane was exempted from the ban as it was shipping critical nuclear fuel for Slovakia’s four Russian-designed nuclear reactors.
About a month later, a Russian aircraft of the same make flew even further into neighboring Hungary again to deliver nuclear fuel. Much like Slovakia, Hungary is fully dependent on atomic fuel from Russia to power its nuclear power plants.
The twin flights were yet another symptom of Europe’s decadeslong binge on Russian energy. Nuclear fuel sourced from Russia’s state-owned nuclear agency Rosatom and its units helps generate nearly half the total electricity produced in Slovakia and Hungary and more than a third in the Czech Republic and Bulgaria.
While the EU is on course to wean itself off Russian fossil fuels, it’s struggling to kick its Russian nuclear habit. As a result, hundreds of millions of euros continue to flow into Moscow’s coffers.
The bloc has found it politically unpalatable to impose sanctions on the Russian civil nuclear industry……………………….
The Rosatom leverage
The EU’s foot-dragging stems from the outsized influence the Russian nuclear industry enjoys globally. Russia accounts for more than 45% of the world’s uranium enrichment capacity, delivering atomic fuel to nuclear power plants in several countries, including in the US, which despite its harsh sanctions regime against Moscow continues to pay $1 billion (€912 million) a year to source fuel from Rosatom.
Almost 20% of raw uranium imported by the EU comes from Russia, Euratom Supply Agency data shows, with another 23% coming from Kazakhstan, where Rosatom is a major player. Russia also supplies a large proportion of the fuel rods for European nuclear power plants.
“Rosatom is one of the few companies in the world that has mastered the entire nuclear fuel cycle, i.e. enrichment, fuel production and also reprocessing,” said Sonja Schmid, professor of science and technology studies at Virginia Tech University and the author of “Producing Power: The Pre-Chernobyl History of the Soviet Nuclear Industry.”
Central and Eastern European countries are particularly reliant on Russian fuel. There are a total of 18 Russian-designed nuclear reactors — in Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Finland — that currently run exclusively on Russian fuel and rely on Russian technologies.
Additionally, Rosatom has had a long association with French utility EDF with the two signing a “long-term cooperation agreement” in 2021 to further boost ties……………………………………………………………… more https://www.dw.com/en/why-eu-sanctions-dont-include-russian-nuclear-industry/a-66275352
UK Government announces fantasy small modular reactor programme as a cover for Sizewelll C failure
By David Toke, https://100percentrenewableuk.org/government-announces-fantasy-small-modular-reactor-programme-as-a-cover-for-sizewelll-c-failure 19 Jul 23
What is really most significant about the Government’s new announcement for £137 million funding for research into so-called small modular reactors (SMRs), is the failure to move forward with plans to finance Sizewell C. This latest nonsense about SMRs can best be seen as a cover for this lack of movement.
The Government and EDF have both taken small part shares in the Sizewell C project. Most people know that the project cannot move forward unless the Government takes more or less the rest of the equity (with maybe EDF making a token extra small gesture). However the Treasury does not like this since then the Government (read taxpayer/electricity consumer) will be mainly on the hook for the inevitable massive cost overruns that will result.
So the Government continues to go through the motions of encouraging private investment in the project that will never occur. The consultants who advise the pension funds etc on whether such an investment is a good thing feel obliged to live in the real world and tell them that this would be a terrible idea. Only action from the Prime Minister can force the Treasury’s hand, but evidently, the PM feels that this can wait to be implemented after the General Election.
Meanwhile, in the real world, as many people have always known but did not want to say, Hinkley C’s construction becomes later and later and more and more incredibly ruinous for EDF. The Chief Finance Officer of EDF resigned when the company gave the final go-ahead for the project in 2016, fearing that it would become the financial disaster that it has now become. But then maybe people always knew that the French Government would end up paying for the project. As in the UK, the British Government will end up paying for the horrendous costs and incredibly late delivery of Sizewell C, albeit passed on to consumer energy bills.
The French, whose electricity system is collapsing because of nuclear power failure have even abandoned any hope in the EPR design that is being planned for Sizewell C (and which is sinking slowly into the Hinkley mud). They now want a simpler design. But we are still plodding on with the old EPR design for Sizewell C.
Meanwhile the Government distracts people’s gaze with fantasy announcements about small modular reactors. They are throwing good money in the direction of bad technologies (high-temperature reactors, molten salt reactors) that were discarded around 60 years ago. Little will happen as a result of this research. Apparently, according to the press release, investments of £20 billion are to follow. Really? On which planet is this happening? Not this one for sure, and certainly not budgeted by the Treasury.
Meanwhile, news about the (rather large) so-called small modular reactors that Rolls Royce was planning has petered out. The Government were supposed to be producing hundreds of millions of pounds to push that boat along. However this earlier (now apparently no longer operative) piece of nuclear fantasy has seemed to disappear to be replaced by a brand new fantasy-packed press release from the Government this very morning.
I never fail to be surprised by how gullible people are when faced by these press releases from the Government when they talk about nuclear power. People obviously have a mixture of very short memories and a huge appetite for wanting to believe wishful thinking about nuclear power.
But the sad thing is that when (let’s assume) Keir Starmer comes in as Prime Minister he will have these fantasy nuclear plans stacked on his desk, or pushed that way by an unwilling Chancellor. How will he deal with them? By pushing much of the funding for otherwise sensible green energy investments into a (Sizerwell C) nuclear black hole?
Read about the 100%RenewableUK energy model and how it compares to the Government’s net zero plan. 100%RE gives lower emissions for much lower overall cost! Our new report concludes that a 100% renewable energy mix for the UK would save well over £100bn in achieving net zero by 2050, compared to the UK Government’s current strategy. It would also mean more than 20% lower cumulative carbon emissions in the process. The study, carried out by renowned energy modelling academics at LUT University in Finland, involves hour-by-hour simulation of different scenarios for reaching net zero for UK energy systems. Click HERE for more information, including links to the report itself and accompanying material
You can see the youtube recording of our seminar on 100percent renewable energy for the UK held in London on April 22nd HERE
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) condemns additional billions for Britain’s nuclear arsenal
https://cnduk.org/cnd-condemns-additional-billions-for-britains-nuclear-arsenal/ 19 Jul 23
CND condemns the multi-billion pound announcement for additional spending on Britain’s nuclear weapons, as outlined in the Defence Command Paper 2023 by the Defence Secretary on Tuesday.
It notes that further to the extra £3 billion over the next two years, already announced in this year’s budget, the MoD is receiving “a further £6 billion over the subsequent three years, which will be invested across the defence nuclear enterprise. This is in addition to our current levels of investment.”
CND has regularly highlighted that it is a political choice made by governments to possess nuclear weapons – and a political choice to deny crumbling public services vital funds while spending billions of pounds on maintaining and investing in these weapons of mass destruction.
CND General Secretary Kate Hudson said:
“A week ago, the Prime Minister was announcing a below-inflation pay rise for public sector workers, insisting it was their best and final offer. Now, the Defence Secretary is finding billions of pounds of new money for nuclear weapons seemingly without any pushback. They say there’s no magic money tree to fix the NHS, our schools, or the planet, but there always seem to be billions more pounds of tax payers’ money available for weapons of mass destruction that can destroy us all.”
A Scott Ritter Investigation: Agent Zelensky – Part 2
In the intelligence business, every agent is assigned tasks by his or her handlers. In the case of Agent Zelensky, I’ve identified ten obligations that define his relationship with his foreign intelligence masters. Once you’ve examined each of these, it becomes clear why Zelensky the comedian said one thing, and Zelensky the President did another. What are the true reasons behind the current situation in Ukraine today? What kind of operation has the CIA been running in Ukraine over the course of many years? You will find the answers to these and other questions in Part 2 of my investigative documentary film, “Agent Zelensky.” Click here to watch Part 1.
UK government launches”Great British Nuclear” with big bribes, and big promises, for the “small nuclear reactor” industry
Shapps announces £157m in grants at launch of new UK nuclear body
Guardian, Joe Middleton, Tue 18 Jul 2023
The UK government is to offer grants of £157m as part of its launch of a new body to support the nuclear power industry.
Great British Nuclear (GBN) will be tasked with helping deliver the government’s commitment to provide a quarter of the UK’s electricity from nuclear energy by 2050.
The new body will help drive rapid expansion of nuclear power plants in the UK, boost energy security and reduce dependence on fossil fuel imports, said the energy security secretary, Grant Shapps.
It is hoped that a competition to develop small modular reactors (SMRs) will drive billions of pounds of investment into the technology, which the government hopes will be cheaper and quicker to build than traditional large nuclear power plants.
However, environmental campaigners and academics have argued that SMRs have no track record and that time and resources would be better spent on renewables such as more offshore wind.
The launch at the Science Museum in London on Tuesday was delayed from last week after it clashed with the government’s public sector pay deal announcement.
The government’s previous attempts to attract funding for conventional large reactors have so far only yielded the much delayed and over-budget Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset.
Shapps is expected to announce the winners of the competition in the autumn, with a number of manufacturing firms such as Rolls-Royce and Hitachi interested in developing SMRs.
The government said it was still committed to Hinkley Point C and also Sizewell C, a nuclear power plant in Suffolk that was announced last year and has been backed with £700m of public funds.
In addition to the competition launch, Shapps announced that up to £157m of grant funding would be available. There will be up to £77m to accelerate the development of a nuclear business in the UK and support new designs, and a further £58m for the development and design of a new advanced modular reactor that operates at higher temperatures……………………………………….
Dr Doug Parr, the chief scientist for Greenpeace UK, accused the government of “obsessing” over nuclear power and decried SMRs.skip past newsletter promotion.
“As the government tries to whip up investment for the latest generation of reactors, it is striking how many of the nuclear industry’s speculative claims are being repeated by ministers as fact,” he said. “The hype seems to have been enough to convince our government that nuclear’s last gasp is in fact a new dawn, but at their radioactive cores SMRs remain the same bad bet.
“SMRs have no track record, but initial indications are that the familiar problems of cost overruns and delays will be repeated, and the accumulation of unmanageable waste will continue.”
Parr added: “By continually obsessing about nuclear, the government is taking its eye off the net zero ball, which will have to be delivered through a predominantly renewable, modern electricity grid. No number of SMRs will fix the government’s lacklustre effort to address issues of delayed connections, smart local grids and home efficiency.”
Steve Thomas, an emeritus professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich, said: “Yet again, the British government has proved credulous to the claims of the nuclear industry that a new generation of technology will solve all the problems of its predecessors.
“SMRs are a long way from being commercially ready and at best will be as uneconomic as existing technology and at worst won’t even be technically feasible. The answers to reaching net zero with electricity are already available – energy efficiency and renewables. This announcement will only divert time and resources from these.” https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/18/grants-of-157m-offered-in-support-of-uks-nuclear-power-industry
-
Archives
- May 2026 (62)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 