Chinese demands on nuclear power investment complicate EU talks
Chinese demands on nuclear power investment complicate EU talks – WiWo, Reuters Staff BERLIN (Reuters) 23 De 20, – Negotiations between the European Union and China on an investment agreement have stoche reported on Wednesday.
The issue of nuclear power is controversial among EU countries because such invealled at the last stretch because China is raising additional demands on nuclear energy, German magazine WirtschaftsWstments could put sensitive infrastructure under Chinese control.
“China wants to invest in European nuclear power plants and use Chinese technology in this area,” WirtschaftsWoche cited EU sources as saying.
During the negotiations, China had indicated to its European counterparts that it viewed its own technology in this field as more advanced, the report said
|
Several EU member states reject nuclear energy or have decided to withdraw from the technology within the next few years.
The EU and China aim to reach an investment accord by the end of the year that would grant European companies greater access to the Chinese market, according to German and EU officials.
The EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment would put most EU companies on an equal footing in China, potentially a big step in repairing Sino-European ties after the coronavirus outbreak in China and Beijing’s crackdown on dissent in the former British colony of Hong
|
|
|
Dredging of the Pripyat river poses danger of Chernobyl radioactivity to drinking water of 8 million people.
Guardian 23rd Dec 2020, The river running past the Chernobyl nuclear reactor is being dredged to
create an inland shipping route, potentially resurfacing radioactive sludge
from the 1986 disaster that could contaminate drinking water for 8 million
people in Ukraine, scientists and conservationists have warned.
The dredging of the Pripyat began in July and is part of an international
project to create the 2,000km (1,240-mile) long E40 waterway linking the
Baltic and Black seas, passing through Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. The
river – which snakes within 2.5km of the reactor responsible for the
world’s worst nuclear disaster – has already been dredged in at least
seven different places, five of which are within 10km of the reactor,
according to the Save Polesia coalition.
Are forest fires unlocking radiation in Chernobyl?
The firefighters sent in to tackle the blazes in the radioactive forests agreed to speak to BBC anonymously, scared of losing their jobs.
Their accounts expose a month of chaos in which fires almost reached the nuclear reactors.
Journalism: Zhanna Bezpiatchuk and Charlotte Pamment
Unacceptable secrecy by the nuclear industry in Sizewell documentation
|
Sizewell C documentation secrecy just a continuation of lack of transparency by the nuclear industry http://drdavidlowry.blogspot.com/2020/12/sizewell-c-documentation-secrecy-just.html Dr David Lowry, 22 Dec 20, Between 18 November and 18 December 2020, NNB Generation Company (SZC Co.) carried out a public consultation on the proposed changes (dated 23 October 2020) for an Order Granting Development Consent for The Sizewell C Project. The document launching this supplementary consultation noted: “In January 2021, SZC Co. will submit a formal application to change the Sizewell C DCO application, as well as some Additional Information (i.e. information that has been developed in response to continuing engagement with stakeholders and which adds to the detail available within the application (but does not change it)).”
One of the supplemental documents submitted by SZC co. was on “Main Development Site Flood Risk Assessment,” a not inconsequential matter, in the context of climate change –induced sea-level rise, and greater perturbations in extreme weather ( storms, rainfall increase etc) over the time period SZC would operate, if ever built. (https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010012/EN010012-001715-SZC_Bk5_5.2_Appx1_7_MDS_Flood_Risk_Assessment_Part_1_of_14.pdf) The new mini-consultation letter then added under the headline Information Redacted or Marked as Confidential, the following: “The Procedural Decision requested clarification on the reasons for redactions and confidential marking on a number of the application documents. A summary of reasons is provided in Table 2. SZC observes in these reasons for redaction that “comprehension of the report is not affected by this redaction.”
The Planning inspectorate was not convinced by this assertion, and responded in a rejoinder letter on 22 December stating it was dissatisfied with “the extent and nature of the commercially sensitive aspect of these documents” and pointedly asked “why this could not be redacted without rendering them incomprehensible?”
Here is the full section outlining the Planning Inspectorate’s disquiet with SZC Co’s secrecy. Request for further clarification and documents from the Applicant Confidential documents “The Applicant’s response letter dated 16 November 2020 [AS-006] to the ExA’s procedural decision [PD-005] sets out at Table 2 a summary of its reasons for redactions and confidential markings. For certain documents [APP-292 to APP-295], the Applicant states that: “As these reports are not required in order for the Examining Authority to examine the application, we therefore request that these reports are withdrawn from the application.”
However, the commercial sensitivity of the investigations and data set out in these Environmental Statement (ES) Appendices is not immediately apparent. Furthermore, they comprise part of the ES which was submitted as part of the application and considered as such when the decision [PD-001] to accept the application was made. The Applicant is therefore requested to provide a further explanation in relation to:
(i) The extent and nature of the commercially sensitive aspect of these documents and why this could not be redacted without rendering them incomprehensible;
(ii) The justification for them not being required in order for the ExA [Examining Authority] to satisfactorily examine the application and to properly assess the basis for the related conclusions and findings in the main parts of the ES.” It adds: The additional information that is sought in respect of these confidential documents will assist the ExA to assess the potential implications of that course of action and reach an informed decision on the question of their withdrawal.” (National Infrastructure Planning, Planning Inspectorate, Document Reference: EN010012, 22 December 2020; https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010012/EN010012-002699-Sizewell%20PD4%20-%20Rule%2017%20VE%20Q.pdf)
This is just the latest of a very, very long line of unacceptable secrecy incidents by nuclear power plant operators, and demonstrates that notwithstanding their protestations as to transparency, they remain in fact addicted to secrecy.
|
|
EU visit to Belarus nuclear plant called off, deepening safety concerns
EU visit to Belarus nuclear plant called off, deepening safety concerns
A visit by European experts to the controversial and newly-operational Belarusian nuclear plant was cancelled after local officials failed to participate in an organizational meeting, Bloomberg reported, citing the European Union energy commissioner. Bellona, December 23, 2020 by Charles Digges
The Belarusian nuclear power plant.Credit: Rosatom
A visit by European experts to the controversial and newly-operational Belarusian nuclear plant was cancelled after local officials failed to participate in an organizational meeting, Bloomberg reported, citing the European Union energy commissioner.
Belarus’s nuclear energy regulator responded by saying it was willing to hold the meeting at a later date, the agency said.
The plant, located in Ostrovets, was expected to be visited by the European delegates after neighboring Lithuania alleged safety issues while the first reactor was coming into service in November. During a summit earlier this month, EU leaders emphasized the importance of ensuring safety at the site, Bloomberg said.
Among the alleged safety violations at the plant, Lithuania said in a memo circulated ahead of the summit, was cooling system malfunction that occurred on November 30. That was preceded on November 8 by a breakdown of four voltage transformers, which forced the plant to go offline shortly after it was started.
Lithuania also complained that the plant had come online without implementing the vast majority of EU or International Atomic Energy Agency recommendations, the EU Observer reported, citing the memo.
Warning that the plant could pose “significant risks” to the EU, the Lithuanian memo said that the nuclear plant’s “hasty commissioning and growing incidents indicate a real risk, which is amplified by limited management and competence abilities.” The memo went on to urge EU nations to boycott electricity produced by the Belarusian plant………….
In comments reported by Bloomberg last week, EU Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson called the delay “very regrettable.”
Commenting at a European Parliament committee meeting last Wednesday, she said, “The Belarusian regulator didn’t participate in the necessary preparatory technical meeting” to prepare the visit and “in these circumstances the physical visit to the Ostravets site would have no value.” As a result, the team called off the visit.
“The mission continues to call on Belarus to act responsibly and cooperate so that the peer-review exercise can be completed safely and in full transparency,” she said. The EU Commission aims to reschedule the visit as soon as possible and complete the review before the station begins commercial operations, she said…….https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2020-12-eu-visit-to-belarus-nuclear-plant-called-off-deepening-safety-concerns
The real reason for “civil” Small Nuclear Reactors- to supply expertise and technology for the nuclear weapons industry
 How investment in SMRs supports “defense nuclear programs” https://concernedcitizens.net/2020/12/19/how-investment-in-smrs-supports-defense-nuclear-programs/comment-page-1/?unapproved=2198&moderation-hash=3219adce054494626a5ee71e323fef71#comment-2198
1. Rolls-Royce, 2017, ‘UK SMR: A National Endeavour’, https://www.uknuclearsmr.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/V2088-Rolls-Royc… “The indigenous UK supply chain that supports defence nuclear programmes requires significant ongoing support to retain talent and develop and maintain capability between major programmes. Opportunities for the supply chain to invest in new capability are restricted by the limited size and scope of the defence nuclear programme. A UK SMR programme would increase the security, size and scope of opportunities for the UK supply chain significantly, enabling long-term sustainable investment in people, technology and capability. “Expanding the talent pool from which defence nuclear programmes can draw from would bring a double benefit. First, additional talent means more competition for senior technical and managerial positions, driving excellence and performance. Second, the expansion of a nuclear-capable skilled workforce through a civil nuclear UK SMR programme would relieve the Ministry of Defence of the burden of developing and retaining skills and capability. This would free up valuable resources for other investments.” |
|
Russian environmental defenders under attack
For future updates follow RSEU on facebook.
For more information contact:
Vitaly Servetnik,
Russian Social-Ecological Union / Friends of the Earth Russia
Email: vitservetnik@gmail.com
Program Area: Environmental Human Rights Defenders
Member Group: Russian Social Ecological Union (RSEU)
EDF did a small survey of Suffolk community opinion -weighted to favour nuclear industry?
Suffolk towards the building of a new nuclear power station on the coast.
The survey was carried out by a company called ICM Unlimited on behalf of
EDF, which is looking to build the Sizewell C station. ICM interviewed a
representative sample of 500 adults in east Suffolk over the phone between
November 5 and November 19.
dismissed the research as “meaningless”, saying a sample of 500 people – in
an area with a population of 247,000 – was “hardly representative”. All
those that took part in the survey live in the area with data having been
weighted to the population profile of the East Suffolk Council adult
population.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizewell-c-survey-shows-favourable-results-6854678
Sizewell C nuclear plan – a disastrous and expensive mistake
heritage coast, but quite possibly the entire county, could be changed for
ever by the arrival of two new European pressurised reactors (EPRs).
‘Sizewell C, a proposed new nuclear power station in Suffolk, has the
potential to generate the reliable low carbon electricity the country needs
for decades to come’ is the claim made by EDF Energy, the French-owned
company behind the project. It also has the potential to be a disastrous
and expensive mistake. Many believe it already is.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/building-sizewell-c-would-be-a-nuclear-sized-disaster#
Ipswich Council raises fresh worries about Sizewell nuclear power plan
nuclear power station project on the Suffolk coast, citing train concerns
and impacts on housing as key worries.
consultation last month after tweaking plans for the £20billion scheme,
with Ipswich Borough Council’s planning committee on Wednesday agreeing its
response.
movements by rail on the East Suffolk Line should have regard to noise and
air quality disturbance; questions over the impact freight transport would
have on the Ipswich Garden Suburb development being built at the north of
the town; and fears that the extra freight by rail could reduce the number
of passenger trains on the East Suffolk Line – a key commuter route and
sustainable mode of transport. EDF agreed to transport more construction
materials by rail and sea in a bid to take hundreds of lorries off the road
during the construction, a move that would cut road haulage by 20%,
according to the developers.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/local-council/ipswich-borough-council-sizewell-c-consultation-response-6855812
34 years later, food crops near Chernobyl still contain ionising radiation
Unsafe levels of radiation found in Chernobyl crops, By Harry Baker – Staff Writer https://www.livescience.com/chernobyl-radioactive-isotopes-crops.html– 19 December 20, The effects of the explosive 1986 disaster can still be seen in nearby crops.
Crops grown near the Chernobyl nuclear site in Ukraine are still contaminated with radiation from the explosive 1986 disaster.
In a new study, researchers found that wheat, rye, oats and barley grown in this area contained two radioactive isotopes — strontium 90 and cesium 137 — that were above safe consumption limits. Radioactive isotopes are elements that have increased masses and release excess energy as a result.
“Our findings point to ongoing contamination and human exposure, compounded by lack of official routine monitoring,” study author David Santillo, an environmental forensic scientist at Greenpeace Research Laboratories at the University of Exeter, said in a statement, referring to the fact that the government suspended its radioactive goods monitoring program in 2013.
Santillo and his colleagues, in collaboration with researchers from the Ukrainian Institute of Agricultural Radiology, analyzed 116 grain samples, collected between 2011 and 2019, from the Ivankiv district of Ukraine — about 31 miles (50 kilometers) south of the nuclear plant.
This area is outside of Chernobyl’s “exclusion zone,” which is a 30 mile (48 km) radius around the plant that was evacuated in 1986 and has remained unoccupied. They found radioactive isotopes, predominantly strontium 90, were above safe consumption level in 48% of samples. They also found that wood samples collected from the same region between 2015 and 2019, had strontium 90 levels above the safe limit for firewood.
The researchers believe that the lingering radiation in the wood, in particular, may be the reason for the continued contamination of crops, almost 35 years after the disaster. When analyzing the wood ash from domestic wood-burning ovens, they found strontium 90 levels that were 25 times higher than the safe limit. Locals use this ash, as well as ash from the local thermal power plant (TPP), to fertilize their crops, which continues to cycle the radiation through their soil.
However, computer simulations suggest that it could be possible to grow crops in the region at “safe” levels if this process of repeated contamination ceased. The researchers are now calling for the Ukrainian government to reinstate its monitoring program and create a system for properly disposing of radioactive ash.
“Contamination of grain and wood grown in the Ivankiv district remains of major concern and deserves further urgent investigation,” study author Valery Kashparov, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Agricultural Radiology, said in the statement. “Similarly, further research is urgently needed to assess the effects of the Ivankiv TPP on the environment and local residents, which still remain mostly unknown.”
The findings were published on Dec. 17 in the journal Environment International.
Originally published on Live Science.
Big boasts for small nuclear reactors on ships – but a recipe for disaster?
Floating ‘mini-nukes’ could power countries by 2025, says startup, Danish company plans to fit ships with small nuclear reactors to send energy to developing countries, Guardian, Jillian Ambrose, 18 Dec 2020 Floating barges fitted with advanced nuclear reactors could begin powering developing nations by the mid-2020s, according to a Danish startup company.Seaborg Technologies believes it can make cheap nuclear electricity a viable alternative to fossil fuels across the developing world as soon as 2025……..
Seaborg has raised about €20m (£18.3m) from private investors, including the Danish retail billionaire Anders Holch Povlsen, and received the first of the necessary regulatory approvals within a four-phase process from the American Bureau of Shipping this week. ….
Seaborg hopes to begin taking orders by the end of 2022 for the nuclear barges, which would be built in South Korean shipyards and towed to coastlines where they could be anchored for up to 24 years, he said. ……….
Seaborg’s design would be one of the first examples of a commercially available nuclear barge used to provide electricity to the mainland.
Chris Gadomski, a nuclear analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, said: “The concept of a floating nuclear power plant has been around for a long time, and makes a lot of sense. But there are concerns.” There was inherent risk involved with nuclear reactor technologies and floating power plants, so combining to two could raise serious questions for investors and governments, he said.
“In places like the Philippines and Indonesia it makes a lot of sense. But it wasn’t so long ago that the Philippines was the site of a major tsunami, and I don’t know how you would hedge against a risk like that,” he added.
Jan Haverkamp, from Greenpeace, said floating reactors were “a recipe for disaster” including “all of the flaws and risks of larger land-based nuclear power stations”. “On top of that, they face extra risks from the unpredictability of operation in coastal areas and transport – particularly in a loaded state – over the high seas. Think storms, think tsunamis,” he said. ……..https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/17/floating-mini-nukes-could-power-countries-by-2025-says-startup
Doubts about planned Berkshire ”garden town”, because it’s too close to AWE nuclear weapons factory
BBC 15th Dec 2020, Plans to build a new “garden town” could be scrapped over concerns about a
potential nuclear emergency. The proposed 15,000-home development in
Grazeley is within a couple of miles of nuclear weapons factory AWE
Burghfield. The Office for Nuclear Regulation has extended a “detailed
emergency planning zone” (DEPZ) for the plant, taking in most of the site
earmarked for homes.
That means anyone living in the zone could be affected
by a “reasonably foreseeable” radiation emergency. Three Berkshire councils
that have worked jointly on the plans are now considering shelving the
project, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS).
Russian hackers evaded layers of U.S. security to attack America’s military and intelligence agencies
New York Times 14th Dec 2020, The scope of a hack engineered by one of Russia’s premier intelligence agencies became clearer on Monday, when some Trump administration officials acknowledged that other federal agencies — the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and parts of the Pentagon — had been compromised. Investigators were struggling to determine the extent to which the military, intelligence community and nuclear laboratories were affected by the highly sophisticated attack.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/us/politics/russia-hack-nsa-homeland-security-pentagon.html
Why is UK govt taking the financial and flooding risk of Sizewell nuclear, when renewables are clearly safer and cheaper?
Tax Research UK 16th Dec 2020, There is an article in the FT this morning that suggests something thatshould be obvious, but needs saying. And that is that renewable energy is
now bringing deflation into the energy market.
Management. As he puts it: With the US poised to rejoin the Paris Agreement
under the incoming Biden administration and the proliferation of net-zero
commitments from various governments, the romance between equity markets
and renewable-energy goes from strength to strength.
overlooked: the underlying reason for the astonishing transformation of
renewables over the past decade from niche to mainstream competing
head-to-head with fossil fuels is economic rather than environmental.
fuels are intrinsically inflationary. This has huge implications for the
distribution of value across the global energy system over the next three
decades.
on the Suffolk coast where the chance that it will be flooded within the
foreseeable future is high? I wish I knew. We now have the option of viable
energy to sustain the transition we need. More investment in it only
increases its appeal. And yet still we stick with the harmful solutions. I
have never got this. I never will.
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (187)
- 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 