Strong feeling in UK public that the Covid recovery must be a green recovery, too
Centre for Science & Policy 12th Oct 2020, According to Professor Rebecca Willis, the findings from the UK Climate Assembly suggest that the general public feels strongly that covid recovery must be aligned with net zero goals, both in terms of a green economic stimulus and in terms of not giving government money to big polluters. She also noted that the pandemic has create an opportunity space, in which people are more open to lifestyle changes – including those that might be more environmentally friendly.
http://www.csap.cam.ac.uk/news/article-understanding-challenges-green-recovery/
Russia’s nuclear doctrine – both Russia an USA benefit from nuclear weapons control agreements
A Closer Look At Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine, https://www.globalzero.org/updates/a-closer-look-at-russias-nuclear-doctrine/ June 4, 2020 Emma Claire Foley On June 1, Russia released a document detailing its nuclear doctrine. Though the 7-page document is much shorter than U.S. Nuclear Posture Reviews, it plays a similar role as a publicly available statement of the situations under which a country would use its nuclear weapons.
In some ways, this release is unprecedented. Though Russia has released information about its nuclear posture before, this is the longest and most comprehensive public statement of that posture to date. A similar document, signed in 2010, was classified.
Until now, much of what is publicly known about Russia’s nuclear doctrine was drawn from its 2014 Military Doctrine. The new document draws heavily from the sections of the 2014 document that dealt with nuclear weapons, but sheds new light on some issues, particularly having to do with Russia’s weapons developed after its withdrawal from New START.
The document confirms Russia’s adherence to a launch-on-warning posture, as discussed by President Putin in 2018. That means Russia would launch a nuclear strike once it received information that another country had launched missiles at Russia, leaving open the possibility that a technical failure or mistaken intelligence could lead to an unintended first strike.
It also leaves open a broad range of situations in which Russia could respond to an attack with nuclear weapons, including “critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the failure of which will lead to the disruption of the retaliatory action of nuclear forces,” an attack with a nuclear weapon or other weapon of mass destruction, or a conventional attack that threatens “the existence of the state.” Though this largely corresponds with what experts had gathered from previous statements, it leaves open to interpretation the definition of “critical state or military facilities.”
The document’s release must be viewed in context. It articulates a launch-on-warning posture as part of a larger defensive role for nuclear weapons, yet history has shown that nuclear “false alarms” that might compel Russia to launch an inadvertent first-strike are not only possible—they’re relatively common. A global No-First-Use agreement, accompanied by changes to nuclear force structure so that nuclear weapons are not kept ready to launch at a moment’s notice, would eliminate this very real risk.
In recent months, Russia has repeatedly, explicitly conveyed its willingness to extend the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which expires in 2021 and would leave the world without key limits on the two largest nuclear arsenals. These overtures seem to have fallen on deaf ears in the Trump administration, which has expressed its intention to replace the treaty with a trilateral agreement with China despite China’s persistent rejections of the idea. In light of U.S. withdrawals from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty, the prospects for a New START renewal look dim.
Despite the lack of U.S. participation in international arms control efforts, however, it’s clear that the rest of the world sees the value in maintaining these hard-won agreements. Other signatories have worked hard to maintain the Iran Deal’s frameworks, even after the U.S. withdrew and in the face of its ongoing attempts to start a conflict with Iran. The Trump administration’s knee-jerk rejection to any international agreement reveals a fundamental inability to understand that an international agreement could be in the interest of all of its signatories.
Russia’s step to increase transparency while remaining clear about its faith in its nuclear deterrent, on the other hand, may be another acknowledgment that both countries stand to win from a return to arms control. The only way to make sure that nuclear weapons are never used is to eliminate them. But extending New START maintains progress made by earlier generations and leaves the door open for more ambitious negotiations in the future. It’s a key next step toward making sure nuclear weapons are never used again.
UK government’s economic recovery plan funds fossil fuels £3.8bn, but renewables only £121m
Edie 29th Oct 2020, The UK Government has earmarked £3.8bn of stimulus funding for legacy fossil fuel and nuclear generation, compared to just £121m for renewables, a damning new report has claimed. Published by global technology company Wärtsilä’s energy arm, the analysis concludes that the UK Government’s short-term plans for helping the energy sector recover from the financial impacts of Covid-19 are not aligned with the 2050 net-zero target or the interim carbon budgets.
storage capacity would be scaled up dramatically.
Putin’s Russia keen to exploit the Arctic for fossil fuels: more nuclear-powered icebreakers on the way
|
Putin decrees development of Arctic with more nuclear icebreakers – This will help Russia cash flow from fossil fuels. Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed an executive order, On the Strategy for Developing the Russian Arctic Zone and Ensuring National Security until 2035, which foresees the construction of at least five new nuclear-powered icebreakers of the Project 22220 series, and three of the Project 10510 series. The vessels are needed to ensure year-round navigation along the Northern Sea Route. Project 10510, also known through the Russian type size series designations LK-110Ya and LK-120Ya or the project name Leader, will supersede Project 22220 icebreakers as the largest and most powerful in the world…….. https://www.oilandgas360.com/putin-decrees-development-of-arctic-with-more-nuclear-icebreakers-this-will-help-russia-cash-flow-from-fossil-fuels/ |
|
|
90% of Sellafield’s Discharged Plutonium Wastes are on the “Cumbrian Mud Patch” Below which Lies the Coal Mine Plan —
Graphic from New Report Published in Science of the Total Environment “Controls on anthropogenic radionuclide distribution in the Sellafield-impacted Eastern Irish Sea”? Daisy Ray et al.??https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720342893 This information has been sent out to press on numerous occasions. So far it has not been picked up.
“our concerns are that no-one is taking
adequate notice of, or responsibility for the impact this mine would have
both on the wastes at Sellafield and also on the reprocessing wastes that
have been discharged over many decades and are now sitting on the Irish Sea
bed directly under the area that West Cumbria Mining propose mine out.A massive void the size of Wastwater lake is proposed under the Cumbrian Mud
Patch, this would lead to likely collapse of the Irish Sea bed. Our own
commissioned report by Tim Deere-Jones has been vindicated with another
report published more recently in Science of the Total Environment which
includes findings from the Centre for Radiochemistry Research -The
University of Manchester and Radiochemistry Unit -The University of
Helsinki, Finland.Findings are that up to 90% of the plutonium discharged
90% of Sellafield’s Discharged Plutonium Wastes are on the “Cumbrian Mud Patch” Below which Lies the Coal Mine Plan —
from Sellafield are likely to be sitting in the silts on the Cumbrian Mud
patch along with a cocktail of other radionuclides. To mine underneath this
area for any reason, let alone for unneeded coal, knowing that this is the
case, is an act of premeditated murder no less than letting off a series of
nuclear bombs.” New Report Published under Creative Commons in Science of
the Total Environment “Controls on anthropogenic radionuclide
distribution in the Sellafield-impacted Eastern Irish Sea” Daisy Ray et
al. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720342893
EDF trucks enriched uranium to the unfinished Flamanville nuclear reactor. Why so much in advance of the need for it?
Reuters 26th Oct 2020, A first truck responsible for transporting enriched uranium to the EPR
reactor in Flamanville (Manche) left Monday morning from the Framatome
plant in Romans-sur-Isère (Drôme), according to anti-nuclear associations
who denounce an EDF “maneuver” to “make it impossible to question”
the project.
Associations, including Greenpeace, France Nature
Environnement and several anti-nuclear collectives, believe in a press
release that “nothing guarantees” that the EPR “can work one day”
and therefore consider that the fact of storing fuel there now is “an
aberration”. They also consider that “the arrival of fuel in Flamanville
also questions the security of the site” and stress that this first
delivery opens “a ballet of trucks which will last several months”.
https://fr.reuters.com/article/idFRL8N2HH2HL
Greenpeace 26th Oct 2020, EDF has just obtained the authorization to transport new fuel to the
Flamanville EPR nuclear reactor site. A first truck left at 8 am Monday,
October 26 from Romans-sur-Isère, in Drôme, and arrived in the evening at
Flamanville, in Manche. In the coming weeks, these nuclear road convoys
will therefore multiply… As if the EPR were ready to start. Yet this is
far, very far from being the case. Why such a rush, when the EPR is
accumulating delays? EDF once again adopts the strategy of a fait accompli,
despite common sense.
https://www.greenpeace.fr/epr-de-flamanville-du-combustible-pour-un-projet-obsolete/
Finland, stuck with increasingly costly Olkiluouti nuclear nightmare, plans and even worse expense, with small nucler reactors!
Taz 26th Oct 2020, The European pressurized water reactor Olkiluoto 3 has long since developed into a Finnish BER – at least twelve years too late, three times as expensive as planned. And it’s far from being online. The same goes for the
new Hanhikivi project: years behind before construction began .
But the Finnish nuclear lobby is already planning another nuclear energy adventure: the construction of so-called Small Modular Reactors (SMR). Paul Dorfman of the UK UCL Energy Institute and co-author of an SMR study by the Nuclear
Consulting Group estimates that small reactors would provide increasingly expensive energy due to the cost of materials and personnel : the massive investments that would be required to create a supply chain so that replacing the economies of scale of large reactors with the advantage of series production would make the investment risk for SMR even higher than for standard reactors.
Britain to lose protection of the environment – as a result of Brexit
behalf of citizens is being undermined by the UK government. Ministers
promised that after Brexit, laws on air, water and waste would be policed
by an independent Office for Environmental Protection (OEP).
these laws were enforced by European courts, which prosecuted EU
governments that breached green rules. Ministers promised the OEP would be
similarly independent. But they now want to grant themselves powers to
“advise” the new body. These plans were revealed in a tabled amendment
to the Environment Bill. Critics fear ministers may counsel the OEP against
taking the government to court if it breaches laws.
Pressure on UK Prime Minister to show strong climate leadership
Business Green 28th Oct 2020, Pressure is mounting on Boris Johnson to come up with an ambitious
decarbonisation plan ahead of COP26 next year, with a major coalition of
health professionals, academics, faith and youth leaders today joining
calls from Conservative MPs and former world leaders for UK to demonstrate
strong climate leadership in the run up to the critical UN summit.
In a
series of letters to the Prime Minister today, various groups representing
millions of people in the UK and overseas urge the government to deliver a
“world-leading” climate plan to the UN in support of the Paris Agreement
“as early as possible this year” or well ahead of COP26 in November 2021.
Such a plan – or Nationally-Determined Contribution (NDC) in UN jargon –
should “at the very least” aligned with limiting global warming to 1.5C by
the end of the century and the UK’s 2050 net zero target, and should be
achieved entirely through domestic action without the use of international
carbon credits, according to the letter from faith groups.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4022373/pressure-mounts-pm-ambitious-uk-climate-plan-soon
Lithuania protests Belarus’plan for nuclear power station close to their border
Daily Mail 27th Oct 2020, The Baltic nation of Lithuania sent a protest note Tuesday to Belarus over
a planned nuclear power plant close to their border that is scheduled to
start operating in early November. The Astravyets nuclear power plant, 40
kilometers (25 miles) south of Vilnius, Lithuania´s capital, is to start
production between Nov. 1-10, Belarusian operator Belenergo told
Lithuania´s power transmission system operator Litgrid on Monday.
France trying to market nuclear reactors to Romania
World Nuclear News 27th Oct 2020, France and Romania have signed a declaration of intent on cooperation inthe civil nuclear field, which aims, among other things, to work “with
strategic partners” to build units 3 and 4 of the Cernavoda nuclear power
plant and to upgrade unit 1. The document was signed yesterday by French
Prime Minister Jean Castex and his Romanian counterpart Ludovic Orban, who
led a delegation of his ministers to Paris.
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/France-and-Romania-plan-joint-work-on-Cernavoda-pr
Using a robot to map the highly radioactive area of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant
University of Bristol and Spot on October 22, and the team intended to use
the robot to create a three-dimensional map of the distribution of nuclear
radiation.
1986 nuclear accident and, as a result, the robot adds new surveying
capabilities to the teams involved. Other robots were also implemented to
inspect and survey the area.
https://www.unilad.co.uk/technology/boston-dynamics-sent-spot-into-chernobyl-nuclear-plant/
Britain, and other countries, got nuclear weapons for reasons of status and pride
|
We’re nuclear because of the kudos, https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18818883.letters-nuclear-kudos/ Ian W Thomson, Lenzie. 23 Oct 20 DAVID Crawford asks a question about why the UK Government allows a large element of UK tax revenue to be spent with the US facilities to support the UK nuclear weapon submarine resource. He answers his question by saying “money”, because the UK itself is a substantial supplier of weapons
I believe that there is more to it than he suggests. The Labour Government at the end of the Second World War could have decided not to have nuclear weapons. It initially took the option to have them largely because of status and pride. Ernest Bevin, then the Foreign Secretary, stated: “We’ve got to have the bloody Union Jack on top of it.” The costs of maintaining that status have become more and more expensive over the years, which has led to the UK becoming more and more reliant upon the US for technical support at a cost. The theory must be that it is better to have a nuclear deterrent sort of independent rather than not have such deterrent at all. I also believe that status still has a large part to play in the UK’s position today, albeit we are far removed from the circumstances prevailing at the end of the Second World War. It is interesting that all five permanent members of the UN Security Council are nuclear powers: China, France, Russia, the UK and the US. The UK, no doubt, places great value upon that status and is likely to regard being a nuclear power as helping to sustain it. The original idea was that the five would progressively disarm in exchange for other states not acquiring nuclear weapon facilities. That idea has gone well, hasn’t it? Look at India and Pakistan and the likelihood of some others. |
|
Hope for nuclear arms control with Russia?
|
Hope for nuclear arms control with Russia? Brookings Steven Pifer, Monday, October 26, 2020 Editor’s Note: The U.S.-Russia nuclear arms treaty, New START, is set to expire in February 2021. Little progress was made during the summer and it was unclear if the two countries would reach an agreement. However, a breakthrough has given the arms control treaty a new lease on life, albeit with a lot of questions, writes Steven Pifer. This piece originally published by the Freeman Spogli Institute’s Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University.
While concern had grown over the past several weeks about a breakdown in U.S.-Russian arms control, it appears the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and nuclear arms control more broadly may have a new lease on life, albeit with lots of questions. Washington’s negotiation with Moscow on New START hit a roadblock on October 16. President Putin said Russia would agree to a one-year extension, which U.S. negotiators had proposed instead of five years, but without the conditions sought by the American side. National Security Advisor O’Brien summarily rejected the Russian position because it ignored the U.S. demand for a freeze on all nuclear warhead numbers.
Things changed recently. The Russians announced that they would agree to a one-year extension of New START and said they are “ready to assume a political obligation together with the United States to freeze the sides’ existing arsenals of nuclear warheads during this period.” The Russian statement added that this presumed no additional U.S. conditions. The Department of State spokesperson quickly and positively reacted, saying U.S. negotiators are “prepared to meet immediately to finalize a verifiable agreement.” New START constrains U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces to their lowest levels since the 1960s. However, when it comes to nuclear warheads as opposed to delivery systems, the treaty limits only “deployed” strategic warheads—that is, warheads on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) or submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The treaty does not cover reserve strategic warheads or any non-strategic (tactical) nuclear weapons. If Russian acceptance of a one-year freeze means that the Trump administration has succeeded in persuading Moscow to negotiate a treaty limiting all U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons, that is a commendable breakthrough. Indeed, a treaty covering all the two sides’ nuclear arms has long seemed the logical next step after New START (President Obama proposed such a negotiation in 2010). Questions remain, however. The Russian statement indicates that Moscow is ready to undertake, as a political obligation, a one-year freeze on nuclear warhead numbers. It remains unclear whether Russian officials, beyond that freeze, are prepared to negotiate a legally-binding and verifiable treaty constraining all nuclear warheads that would be in effect for a number of years (New START is in force for 10 years, with the possibility of its extension for an additional five years). ……
it appears that U.S. and Russian negotiators still have issues to resolve. Irrespective of the freeze, New START is worth saving and extending to 2026 (the treaty’s terms provide that there could be multiple extensions). Extension to 2026 would mean five more years of limits on Russian strategic nuclear forces. It would mean five more years of information about those forces provided by the treaty’s verification measures, including data exchanges, notifications and on-site inspections. And extending the treaty would require no change in U.S. strategic modernization plans, as those plans were designed to fit within the treaty’s limits. One last observation: New START requires that, if a side wishes to withdraw from the treaty, it must give the other three months’ notice before doing so. It is now October 21, which means that, if negotiations with the Russians do not go well and the Trump administration were to give notice, the United States could not actually withdraw from the treaty until after January 20, 2021—when Donald Trump will be starting his second term or Joe Biden will have become the 46th U.S. president. Mr. Biden is on record as supporting New START’s extension for five years, with no conditions. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/10/26/hope-for-nuclear-arms-control/ |
|
1 This Month
19 May – Webinar No To Nuclear: Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War
1 June Webinar – The High Cost of Nuclear Power – Register
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
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 