Nuclear fusion – triumph of hope over expectation.
Letter Andrew Warren: The subhead for your editorial (The FT View, March
20) enthusing about the UK government’s latest £2.5bn commitment to
nuclear fusion research acknowledges it to be an “elusive power
source”. That is a decided understatement.
Back in 1967, the second
Wilson government produced an energy white paper. In it, regret was
expressed that, despite 20 years of government funding, nuclear fusion
research had yet to begin any moves towards producing any hard results.
Nonetheless confidence was expressed that a breakthrough, with important
commercial and policy implications, could be confidently anticipated by
1990.
Strangely enough, the next energy white paper (not published until
2003, by the Blair government) expressed very similar sentiments — but
with the “fulfilment date” for nuclear fusion brought forward by a
further 20-plus years. Here we are 23 years later. And now we have the
latest Labour government, announcing further billions in research funds
dished out towards delivering nuclear fusion, with results due perhaps some
time after 2040. Truly, a triumph of hope over expectation.
FT 25th March 2026 https://www.ft.com/content/232c1ef5-9689-4911-8936-72af18e88165
Did Trump bomb Iranian schoolgirls with UK-made weaponry?
Exclusive: Scottish factory helps make US Tomahawk missiles reportedly used in attack on the Minab compound in Iran, where over 100 children were killed.
JOHN McEVOY, 9 March 2026
On 28 February, a girls’ primary school in southern Iran was hit by a missile, killing 168 people, mostly children.
The UN education agency, UNESCO, said the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh school in Minab was a “grave violation of humanitarian law”.
Videos analysed by Bellingcat revealed yesterday that a US Tomahawk missile was used to hit another building inside the same compound, adding to evidence indicating the US was responsible for the school strike minutes earlier.
Neither Israel nor Iran is known to possess Tomahawk missiles.
The revelation raises serious questions about whether UK-made components were used in the attack.
This is because a factory owned by US arms firm Raytheon in Glenrothes, Scotland, has won several contracts to produce components for Tomahawk missile systems over recent years.
In 2017, Raytheon won a $260 million contract to make 196 Tomahawks, with 4.4 percent of the goods being supplied from its factory in Glenrothes.
A similar US navy contract published in May 2022 shows that around 3 percent of the Tomahawk supply chain was awarded to Raytheon’s site in Scotland.
Most recently, in December 2025, the Pentagon announced Glenrothes would have a 2.9 percent stake in making another 350 Tomahawks.
A defence industry website said this arrangement reflected the missiles’ “longstanding transatlantic supply chain”.
Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) spokesperson Sam Perlo-Freeman told Declassified: “The UK arms industry is deeply entwined with the US. This is true of the F-35 aircraft that has played such a devastating role in Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and is now playing a crucial role in the illegal US-Israeli war on Iran.
“And it is true of the Tomahawk missiles, which appear to have been used to commit this horrific massacre of schoolgirls in Iran.
“Far from being a guarantee of international peace and security as the government claims, this arms producing partnership is a principal source of war, death and destruction across the world. It is time for the UK to stop fuelling this US-led war machine, and disentangle itself from it”.
Asked whether it will review and potentially suspend export of the components, a UK government spokesperson said: “We operate one of the most robust export control regimes in the world and keep export licences under continual and careful review”.
Raytheon was asked to comment.
‘Play a key part’
A parliamentary report published in 2012-13 noted that Raytheon’s site in Glenrothes “design and manufacture components, predominantly exported to the US, for guidance systems used in weapons like the Tomahawk missile”.
A Glenrothes manager said in 2020 the factory “designed and manufactured three power supplies” for the Tomahawk, adding: “This work enabled us to be involved in one of the US Navy’s flagship programmes and to play a key part in the manufacture of the electronics used in the system”.
Raytheon UK’s own website notes that its “advanced manufacturing business supports… Tomahawk long-range land attack cruise missile[s]”.
A CAAT report from 2021 found that “Glenrothes was the only Raytheon facility outside North America to play a part in the US-sold Tomahawk Missile production and is the sixth most involved of the 25-plus factories contributing to the weapon system”.
‘It was done by Iran’
The new evidence contradicts statements made by US president Donald Trump, who said on Sunday that the attack was launched “by Iran”.
He said: “They’re very inaccurate, as you know, with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever. It was done by Iran”
NR Jenzen-Jones, the director of Armament Research Services, an intelligence consultancy that provides munitions analysis to governments and NGOs, told the Guardian: “The video shows a Tomahawk missile striking a target. Given the belligerents, that indicates it is a US strike, as Israel is not known to possess Tomahawk missiles”.
He added: “Despite various claims circulating online, the munition in question is clearly not an Iranian Soumar missile [as] the Soumar has a distinctive external engine located towards the rear, on the underside of the munition”.
Reuters reported on 5 March that US military investigators “believe it is likely that US forces were responsible” for the “strike on an Iranian girls’ school”.
Raytheon’s site in Glenrothes has previously been linked to war crimes in Yemen by Saudi Arabia, a key customer.
When Declassified visited the town in 2022, local primary school teacher Sharon Rickard said she was “horrified” to hear weapons made in her town might be used on civilians.
“I have a friend who works there as an engineer and she’s never really said too much about her job”, she said, “but maybe that’s why”.
UK Government reviewing fallout report after nuclear test concerns
By Craig Langford, UK Defence Journal 5th April 2026,
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/government-reviewing-fallout-report-after-nuclear-test-concerns/
The government has said it will examine the implications of a previously restricted report into nuclear fallout contamination, following renewed scrutiny over its handling and potential impact on past legal cases involving veterans.
Responding to two written questions from Lord Watson of Wyre Forest, Defence Minister Lord Coaker did not directly address whether the report calls into question evidence presented in earlier litigation, but confirmed that further work is underway.
“We remain committed to listening to their concerns and working collaboratively to address them,” he said, referring to nuclear test veterans.
The questions relate to a 2014 report, disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act, which has prompted claims about the suppression of evidence and its possible relevance to historic court proceedings, including the Supreme Court case Ministry of Defence v AB and others.
Coaker pointed instead to a recent Commons statement, noting that ministers have committed to reviewing both the contents of the report and how it was handled.
“The Minister for Veterans and People reiterated the government’s commitment to maximum transparency and made a commitment to undertake work to fully understand the implications of the 2014 report and its handling, and to take action if necessary,” he said.
Chernobyl at 40: The World’s Worst Nuclear Power Accident and Where It Stands Now
Alice Marchuk, Jack Goras, and Aaron Larson, Wednesday, April 1, 2026
At 1:23 a.m. local time on April 26, 1986, a sudden and
uncontrollable power surge destroyed Unit 4 of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant, located about 130 kilometers (km, 81 miles) north of Kyiv and just
20 km (12.5 miles) south of the Belarusian border. The explosion—followed
by fires that burned for 10 days—released up to 5% of the radioactive
reactor core into the atmosphere, scattering contamination across Belarus,
Ukraine, Russia, and much of Europe
. It remains the only accident in the
history of commercial nuclear power reactors where radiation-related
fatalities occurred, and its consequences—human, environmental,
political, and technical—continue to reverberate four decades later.
The 40th anniversary arrives at a moment when the Chernobyl site is anything
but a static memorial. Decommissioning of the plant’s three undamaged
reactors is underway. A massive dry spent fuel storage facility—the
largest of its kind in the world—is in the midst of a multi-year fuel
transfer campaign. And the New Safe Confinement (NSC, Figure 1), the
enormous arch-shaped structure that took more than a decade to design and
build, sustained significant damage from a drone strike in February 2025,
raising urgent questions about the long-term security of the site in a
country still at war.
Power Magazine 1st April 2026, https://www.powermag.com/chernobyl-at-40-the-worlds-worst-nuclear-power-accident-and-where-it-stands-now/
Ukraine actively involved in US-Israeli aggression against Iran: Envoy to UN
Monday, 30 March 2026, https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/03/30/766089/Ukraine-actively-involved-in-US-Israeli-aggression-against-Iran–Envoy-to-UN-
A senior Iranian diplomat condemns Ukraine’s admission to the dispatch of “hundreds of experts” to the region to confront Iran, saying Kiev is actively participating in the military aggression launched by the United State and the Israeli regime against the Islamic Republic.
Iranian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Amir Saeid Iravani made the remark in a letter to Secretary General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres and president of the UN Security Council on Monday.
“Ukraine’s admission that it has dispatched ‘hundreds of experts’ to the region apparently to help some Persian Gulf governments to confront Iran is in its essence considered to be providing financial and operative support for an unlawful military aggression, led by the United States of America and the Israeli regime, against Iran, which began on February 28, 2026.”
He said Iran rejects all unfounded accusations leveled by the Ukrainian ambassador to the UN which are devoid of any credible evidence and have been made with the clear aim of diverting attention from the ongoing US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Such allegations also intended to whitewash the horrific crimes committed by the US and Israel against civilians and non-military infrastructure, he said.
“Such interference is not accidental. It exposes active participation in and facilitation of the illegal use of force against a sovereign state and raises serious concerns within the framework of international law, including the principles governing state responsibility and the prohibition of aiding or abetting in the commission of internationally wrongful acts.”
“Ukraine’s illegal acts constitute participation in an act of aggression and violate the fundamental prohibition on the use of force enshrined in Article 2, paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter,” he added.
Furthermore, the envoy reiterated, Ukraine’s attempt to justify or normalize the targeting of critical infrastructure is deeply concerning and inconsistent with fundamental principles of international humanitarian law.
Earlier on Monday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei told reporters that linking the conflict in Ukraine to the current developments in West Asia, particularly after the US-Israel military aggression against Iran, is a “very catastrophic miscalculation.”
In response to a question about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s offer to provide military assistance to the US allies in the region, Baghaei expressed hope that the countries in the region will be wise enough not to allow such a person, who exposed his country to a very destructive war over the past four years, to pursue his objectives.
France plans inquiry as cost of nuclear waste project hits €33bn
After France raised the cost of its Cigéo nuclear waste storage project to €33.3 billion, an increase of more than €8 billion, authorities are preparing to open a public inquiry into the plan – which has long faced opposition from anti-nuclear groups.
01/04/2026 , By:RFI,
https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20260401-france-plans-inquiry-as-cost-of-nuclear-waste-project-hits-%E2%82%AC33bn-cig%C3%A9o
The new estimated cost replaces a €25 billion figure set in 2016. It reflects updated costs and sits within a €26.1 to €37.5bn range set in May 2025 by the National Agency for Radioactive Waste Management, which is leading the project.
The government order, signed by Economy Minister Roland Lescure and Energy Minister Maud Brégeon, covers the entire lifespan of the site – from design and construction to operation and closure – over 151 years.
It puts the initial construction cost at €9.74 billion. Taxes linked to the project are estimated at €3.66 billion.
The revised estimate will be used as a reference by EDF, Orano and the Atomic Energy Commission, the three nuclear operators that fund the project under the “polluter pays” principle.
Deep underground
Cigéo is designed to store France’s most radioactive nuclear waste 500 metres underground at a site in Bure in eastern France. The site would hold 10,000 cubic metres of high-activity waste and 73,000 cubic metres of long-lived medium-activity waste produced by nuclear power plants.
When the cost was first set at €25 billion in 2016, based on earlier economic conditions, campaigners said it was “largely underestimated”.
The National Agency for Radioactive Waste Management filed a formal request for authorisation in January 2023. A final government decision is not expected before late 2027 or early 2028.
French media reports said the public inquiry had initially been planned for autumn and was still expected in early December when the ASNR, France’s nuclear safety and radiation watchdog, issued its final opinion on the construction authorisation request.
Race against the calendar
Speaking at a meeting of public inquiry commissioners in Euville on Thursday, Meuse prefect Xavier Delarue said the public inquiry would begin on 18 May.
He said around 50 elected officials had been consulted before the schedule was brought forward, with a strong response rate and 75 percent of the opinions returned favourable.
“There was every reason to launch the public inquiry,” he said.
Three commissioners, along with three alternates, have been appointed to examine the roughly 10,000-page file.
They will produce a report, which the agency must respond to by the end of the summer. “In September, I will write an overall report and send it to the ministry,” Delarue said.
Opposition pushback
Nine environmental organisations have criticised the decision and called for the consultation to be delayed.
In a joint statement, groups including Greenpeace France, France Nature Environnement and the Nuclear Phase-Out Network denounced “an unacceptable new attempt to push the project through” and said the file does not show that the project would be feasible and safe.
They also said the timetable reflects an electoral aim, with the goal of approving Cigéo before next year’s presidential election.
EBRD donors back plan to repair Chornobyl’s protective shield
Donors to the International Chornobyl Cooperation Account (ICCA), managed by the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), have endorsed
plans for early engineering and procurement works that will pave the way
for potential repairs to the New Safe Confinement (NSC) at the Chornobyl
Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine.
A Russian drone strike in February 2025
damaged the NSC, the giant structure built to contain the remains of
Reactor Four and enable the safe dismantling of the original sarcophagus,
which was hastily built after the 1986 accident.
Preliminary assessments by
Novarka 2 (comprising the original NSC designer-builder Bouygues Travaux
Publics and Vinci Construction Grands Projets) estimated that the corrosion
of the steel arch threatened the long-term safety of the NSC, and that work
was needed to restore the structure to full functionality by 2030. Repairs
could cost at least €500 million.
EBRD 1st April 2026, https://www.ebrd.com/home/news-and-events/news/2026/ebrd-donors-back-plan-to-repair-chornobyl-s-protective-shield.html
UK submarine captain steps down after link to Chinese spy case
Navy previously conducted investigation into senior officer to examine potential
blackmail risk. The captain of one of Britain’s nuclear-armed submarines
has stepped back from his role this week after being investigated over his
relationship with Joani Reid, the Labour MP whose husband has been arrested
on suspicion of spying for China.
FT 31st March 2026,
https://www.ft.com/content/93beaf9c-e1c8-4875-b446-2cd148529f6a
Massacre of UK aid workers: two years of obfuscation from Britain
Hamza Yusuf, Declassified UK, Apr 3, 2026
April 1st marked the two year anniversary of Israel’s massacre of World Central Kitchen (WCK) aid workers in Gaza. Seven members of the organisation were killed by Israeli drones while travelling in a convoy in Deir el-Balah in Central Gaza, after unloading 100 tonnes of food aid at its Gaza warehouse. The group was travelling in a “deconflicted zone” in two armoured vehicles that were clearly branded with the WCK logo and had coordinated their movements with the Israeli military. |
| The attack was not an anomaly, but a feature of Israel’s systematic targeting of aid workers in Gaza. The United Nations said that 383 aid workers were killed in 2025, with nearly half of them in Gaza. As Declassified previously revealed, Britain’s Ministry of Defence holds video footage of Gaza from the day of the attack but is refusing to publish it – footage taken by a Royal Air Force surveillance plane which spent approximately five hours above Gaza that day. |
n December 2025, the family of James Henderson renewed their demand for the MoD to release the recording. “The reason for not supplying that footage from the Ministry of Defence is a bit of an insult,” his father told Declassified.
The cousin of another of the victims, James Kirby, said in a statement released on the anniversary of his killing: “It is especially difficult to see that men who were so loyal and committed to their country have not yet received the justice they deserve.
The cousin of another of the victims, James Kirby, said in a statement released on the anniversary of his killing: “It is especially difficult to see that men who were so loyal and committed to their country have not yet received the justice they deserve.”Two years on, communication from the government has been limited, and the family remains unsure whether a full and formal investigation is underway.” A tepid statement from the UK’s Middle East Minister Hamish Falconer published on the two-year anniversary saidthe UK “will continue to push for justice”. But Falconer is only calling on Israel to investigate itself. “I urge Israel to swiftly conclude and publish their findings into this attack. The families of those killed must know why this happened. Lessons must be learnt”, Falconer said. |
But the accountability the British government is demanding would be much clearer if it released its own spy flight footage.
True to form, however, where Israel is involved, Britain prefers at best silence in the face of crimes and at worst smokescreens and deceit.
Legal challenge against nuclear site plan rejected
BBC 2nd April 2026,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy01wkgw2z8o
A judge has thrown out a legal challenge against a plan to extract water at the UK’s largest nuclear site.
Sellafield, in Cumbria, was given permission last May by the Environment Agency (EA) to extract water from its site, as part of the process to build a new radioactive waste storage facility.
Campaigners for Lakes Against Nuclear Dump (LAND) submitted a legal challenge against this, amid fears for the impact on nearby rivers. A high court judge said there was “no credible evidence” to allow the challenge to go ahead.
A Sellafield spokesman said the outcome would allow it to focus on its “mission to deal with the hazards on our site safely and sustainably”.
The licence granted to Sellafield would allow the company to extract up to 77,077,224 gallons (350,400 cubic metres) of water a year until 2031.
The EA previously said it had considered all the potential impacts on the environment before giving permission.
Marianne Birkby, who submitted the challenge for LAND, said the group disagreed with the decision and would be looking to lodge an appeal.
It argued the environmental impacts of the licence had not been properly assessed and feared contaminated water would end up in the rivers Calder and Ehen.
“We feel we must challenge the Environment Agency’s continual rubberstamping of Sellafield’s wish lists,” Birkby said.
Sellafield said removing water from a construction site was standard practice when preparing land for a building project.
A spokesman said: “This water will not be discharged to the rivers Calder or Ehen. It is pumped to on-site storage tanks for testing prior to being discharged direct to sea.”
Scenario Analysis for Partitioning and Transmutation(P&T) in a Phase-out Scenario
In February 2025, the German Federal Agency for Disruptive Innovation
(SPRIN-D) published the “Implementation Study on an Accelerator-Driven
Neutron Source at the Site of a Former Nuclear Power Plant” (Houben et
al. 2025), proposing an alternative waste management option. This type of
radioactive waste management is often summarized under the broader term of
Partitioning and Transmutation (P&T).
The SPRIN-D study has been critically
assessed with respect to its assumptions, feasibility, and expected
benefits for Germany e.g. by the German Federal Ministry for the Safety of
Nuclear Waste Management (Bundesamt für die Sicherheit der nuklearen
Entsorgung (BASE) 2025).
The P&T scenarios in the SPRIN-D study address
only a narrow and highly constrained case. They do not provide a
transparent, reproducible nationwide system description for the treatment
of the full German high-level waste inventory (HLW). Additionally key
modelling parameters and interim results are only partly documented. Under
the explicit assumption of hypothetical technical feasibility, based on
documented parameters and literature values, this INRAG study estimates
what a national implementation of a P&T scenario in Germany based on
Transmutex’ START concept could entail.
After briefly outlining the
background, we define a consistent set of scenario parameters and
justifying the chosen values. We then present the modelling results, such
as the number of facilities and time periods required under the stated
boundary conditions, followed by a discussion of selected potential safety
implications of operating a full-scale system over multiple decades.
The analysis is limited to technical and system-dimension aspects. Overall, the
results indicate that the optimistic assumptions in Houben et al. (2025) do
not provide a transparent, reproducible nationwide mass-balance model and
results change drastically if parameter ranges are applied as reported in
the scientific literature.
Even under optimistic modelling assumptions, P&T
does not remove the need for a geological repository. Rather, the burden of
nuclear waste is shifted into a long-lived multi-site nuclear industrial
system with additional facilities, operational waste streams, and prolonged
institutional requirements.
INRAG 11th March 2026,
https://www.inrag.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/inrag_put_publication_V2.pdf
Manchester Professor appointed expert reviewer for Government nuclear decommissioning review
A University of Manchester Professor has been appointed by Lord Vallance,
Minister of State for Science, Innovation, Research and Nuclear, as an
Expert Reviewer for an independent assessment of the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA); an executive non-departmental public body
that is charged with, on behalf of government, the mission to clean-up the
UK’s earliest nuclear sites safely, securely and cost effectively.
Professor Zara Hodgson FREng is an internationally recognised expert in
nuclear energy policy and research, and Director of the University’s
Dalton Nuclear Institute. She has been appointed to support the NDA 2026
Review, which has been commissioned by the Government to provide assurance
on the NDA’s performance and governance, and to make recommendations on
improvements.
The Review is led by Dr Tim Stone CBE, a senior expert
adviser to five previous Secretaries of State in two successive UK
governments and the Chair of Nuclear Risk Insurers. Professor Hodgson will
join a team of three other independent experts to support Dr Stone. The
review will focus on the NDA’s strategic planning and management, project
and programme delivery, and financial management. It will assess how
effectively the NDA delivers value for money for the taxpayer while
maintaining the highest standards of safety, transparency and governance
across the UK’s civil nuclear legacy. Reviewers will challenge current
practices, propose bold value-for-money recommendations, and highlight good
practice while identifying areas for improvement.
Manchester University 1st April 2026, https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/manchester-professor-appointed-expert-reviewer-for-government-nuclear-decommissioning-review/
Ukrainian Economy ‘Collapsing’
The only real solution to the Ukrainian problem is to accept the Russian peace terms.
By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, Global Research, March 29, 2026, https://www.globalresearch.ca/ukrainian-economy-collapsing/5920470
Even Ukrainian authorities are beginning to admit the serious crisis affecting the country.
Recently, the head of the Kiev regime’s finance sector confirmed that the country is going through a catastrophic situation, showing deep concerns about the regime’s future.
This clearly shows how the nationalist junta in Kiev is rapidly destroying the country – something that could be avoided if the authorities agreed to make peace with Russia.
During a speech to the Ukrainian parliament on March 26, Daniil Getmantsev, chairman of the Finance, Tax and Customs Committee of the Verkhovna Rada, said that Ukraine is indebted and unable to pay all the expenses accumulated since the beginning of the conflict. He expressed concerns about the future of the Ukrainian economy and “sovereignty,” considering the country’s growing debts with major global financial institutions.
Getmantsev primarily denounced the country’s debts to the EU, the IMF, and the World Bank. He emphasized that Ukraine is already indebted to these organizations and does not appear to be in a position to repay this debt anytime soon. Therefore, the tendency is for the country to continue contracting more loans and becoming increasingly indebted.
The official explained some of the numbers behind the crisis. Ukraine failed to pay the installments of the loan from the EU’s “Ukraine Facility” program. Thus, the country missed out on part of the expected funding, as it failed to fulfill its part of the agreement.
He drew attention to the situation and warned Ukrainian parliamentarians about the current dangers. According to Getmantsev, it is possible that Ukrainians are close to “losing” the country because of this crisis. Therefore, he urges local politicians to act quickly to prevent the worst-case scenario. He believes immediate reforms are necessary, as well as greater integration with the EU, an audit of public spending, and a reform of the Ukrainian social security system.
“In 2025, we failed to meet 14 indicators of the Ukraine Facility. And because of this, we did not receive 3.9 billion euros (…) Moreover, 300 million of that amount is being lost completely in the first quarter [as] we have already failed to meet 5 out of 5 indicators (…) We can lose the country like this (…( Today is not the time to hide from responsibility, not the time for populism, not the time to look for popular decisions (…) It is the time for systematic work, European integration, deregulation, pension reform, an audit of state expenditures, and bringing the economy out of the shadows” he said.
This makes it clear that not even the regime’s own officials can hide the Ukrainian reality anymore. The country’s crisis has reached such a critical point that all sides are gradually admitting that it is impossible to maintain the current situation in the long term. With the decrease in international aid and constant losses on the battlefield, Ukraine has entered a critical phase in the conflict – being extremely vulnerable and close to collapse on several levels, mainly militarily and economically.
The previous attitude of Ukrainian and Western propaganda was to deny the crisis and claim that Ukraine had the economic and military situation under control. These lies helped keep the Ukrainian war machine active for a long time, but Ukraine’s losses caused European public opinion to change its attitude on the subject – which generated popular pressure in the West against continued aid programs.
Furthermore, Europe itself has reduced its capacity for aid. With the energy and economic crisis resulting from anti-Russian sanctions, added to constant international instability, Europe is entering a phase of social insecurity, making it more prudent to control spending than to continue systematically sending money to Ukraine. Although this money is often delivered in the form of loans, it seems certain that Ukraine will not be able to repay it. And even loans secured by the delivery of rare earth minerals and natural resources are unsafe, since exploration will be hampered during hostilities.
In fact, the pro-war lobby in the EU is still strong, which is why aid continues, but the material circumstances have forced the bloc to significantly reduce assistance – which has further worsened the crisis for Ukrainians. Now, there is no longer any way to disguise reality. Ukraine is trapped in a crisis from which it cannot easily emerge. No matter how much local authorities speak of “urgent measures” or “necessary reforms,” the country will certainly not be able to overcome its current difficulties while the conflict with Russia continues.
In this sense, the correct course of action for Kiev would be simply to accept the Russian peace terms and establish an agreement to end hostilities. Any other “measure” would be a mistake, incapable of saving the country from absolute collapse.
No Three Mile Island in Suffolk!
A new nuclear review will ignore the obvious perils of new reactors on a UK beach, warns Together Against Sizewell C
The following is a statement from Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) in response to the “Fingleton Nuclear Review” adopted by the UK government, entirely influenced by the nuclear power industry and its lobbyists in a frantic effort to copycat the US model of accelerating approval of dangerous, expensive and entirely unnecessary nuclear power projects.
Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) is appalled that the UK government plans to adopt all 47 recommendations of the ‘Fingleton Nuclear Review’. This review is based on a false premise that nuclear is ‘clean energy’ [see Note 1] and ‘needed to power Britain’s future’[see Note 2]. Neither of these assertions stand up to public scrutiny, the review being driven by the nuclear industry, big business and lobbyists for commercial and ideological reasons. Claims that nuclear is ‘homegrown power’ conveniently overlook the fact that the UK do not have any indigenous supplies of uranium needed to fuel the reactors, that market currently being dominated by Russia.
Those trying to convey a false impression of nuclear as clean are merely gaslighting the British public. While nuclear may be able to claim relatively low carbon production during the operational period, the long deployment times for new gigawatt nuclear reactors such as Hinkley and Sizewell C means a lot of additional carbon is produced from burning more fossil fuels while we must wait for new nuclear to become operational when compared with far cheaper, quicker to deploy renewables and energy storage.
The review makes unsubstantiated claims that nature will benefit from adopting these recommendations but in TASC’s view this is an irresponsible assumption for this government to accept, especially as environmental experts were excluded from the review team. The UK is already one of the most nature depleted nations on the planet – we cannot afford to degrade our environmental protections any further.
In TASC’s opinion, Sizewell C demonstrates that regulations need to be strengthened, not weakened – Sizewell C is sited in a National Landscape, surrounded by designated wildlife sites, in the UK’s most drought-prone region and on one of Europe’s fastest eroding coastlines. Despite this, it received DCO approval from the Secretary of State against the recommendation of the 5 independent planning experts.
£40 billion Sizewell C is proceeding at pace, even though the project has still not secured a guaranteed sustainable supply of potable water essential for its 60 years of operation. Nor has it demonstrated that the site can be kept safe for its full lifetime in a credible maximum sea level rise scenario – after DCO approval TASC discovered that Sizewell C have committed to install two huge additional sea defences in an extreme climate change scenario, the need for which EDF knew about since 2015 yet chose not to include them in their DCO application, meaning the additional sea defences have had no public scrutiny or impact assessment on the receiving environment.
TASC fear for the safety of our descendants and the precious, rapidly eroding Suffolk coastline because future generations have been left to rely on the developer’s unassessed sea defences to protect Sizewell C and its 3,900 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel from flooding in an extreme sea level rise scenario over the next 150 years or longer if a geological disposal facility is not available [see Note 3]. Hardly responsible ancestry from this government.
Notes:-
1. The myth that nuclear is ‘clean energy’ In TASC’s view, the reasons why nuclear power can’t be legitimately labelled as ‘clean’ include:-
a) The pollution generated from the mining, milling, fabrication and enrichment to produce the nuclear fuel which mainly affects indigenous peoples in producer countries,
b) The pollutants discharged to air and water from an operational nuclear power station, including the thousands of tonnes of dead fish, heavy metals, chlorine and the cocktail of other pollutants that will be discharged to the sea annually from the plant’s cooling water system, and
c) The legacy of highly radioactive spent fuel and other radioactive waste from nuclear power plants currently has no universally agreed management programme, nor any waste repository and which will be an environmental, as well as financial, burden for future generations for thousands of years – see N Scarr Report, ‘Plutonium—the complex and ‘forever’ radiotoxic element of nuclear waste. How exactly should we manage its containment?’
2. Various reports have demonstrated that the UK can fulfil its low carbon energy requirements without new nuclear, and at lower cost than new nuclear e.g. the January 2023 report by LUT University, Finland, ‘100% Renewable Energy for the United Kingdom’ and the 2022 UCL report ‘The role of new nuclear power in the UK’s net-zero emissions energy system’. Regarding national security, events in Ukraine have demonstrated that nuclear plants and their associated infrastructure are both a target and a weapon (see iNews article, ‘Attacks on nuclear plants are being normalised – and the consequences could be disastrous’ and the recent direct drone attacks on Zaporizhzhya NPP which have led to fires at the plant) so are a threat to national scrutiny. Scattering SMRs throughout the country will only increase the risk of a malicious attack (or accident).
3. TASC press release 12.01.26, ‘Escalating Erosion on East Suffolk Coast should be a huge worry for Sizewell C’
Scotland won’t pursue ‘unproven’ SMRs and ‘experimental’ fusion as focus remains renewables
30 Mar, 2026 By Thomas Johnson, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/scotland-wont-pursue-unproven-smrs-and-experimental-fusion-as-focus-remains-renewables-30-03-2026/
Scotland plans to focus on investing in renewables as nuclear fusion and small modular reactors (SMRs) remain “unproven technology”, a Scottish Minister has said.
The Scottish National Party (SNP), the ruling party in Scotland, has banned the development of any new nuclear in the country – and seems set to maintain this even as promising new technologies emerge.
Speaking in Scottish Parliament last week, MSP for Aberdeenshire East and cabinet secretary for climate action and energy Gillian Martin outlined how even with the buzz around fusion at the moment, the Scottish government will not be pursuing new opportunities within the nuclear sector.
“The Scottish Government recognises the increasing interest in fusion energy. However, fusion remains experimental, with no commercial deployment and uncertainties around cost, safety and timescales,” she said.
“The UK Government’s prototype fusion plant is not expected to be operational until 2040, but the climate emergency demands proven, deployable solutions now.”
Martin explained how this policy extends to the deployment of SMRs.
“We do not plan to build small nuclear reactors, which are unproven technology that has not been deployed,” she said.
“The Scottish Government has a policy against new nuclear fission.”
The topic arose in Scottish Parliament after MSP for South Scotland Martin Whitfield quizzed Martin regarding any impact on Scottish energy policy could expect in light of plans Torness nuclear power station will close by 2030.
Torness, the East Lothian‑based nuclear power plant operated by EDF, is one of the UK’s four remaining advanced gas‑cooled reactor (AGR) stations. It was due to close in 2028 but EDF announced in 2024 it would be extending its life for a further two years.
-
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 