nuclear-news

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

‘Deeply concerning’: British General’s Israeli weapons job criticised.

“That the UK’s former chief of the defence staff is now advising Israeli arms companies exemplifies the extent of the links between the British state and Israel’s arms industry. “

General Carter signed a military treaty with Israel. Now he advises Israeli arms firms.

PHIL MILLER, 20 March 2025,  https://www.declassifieduk.org/deeply-concerning-british-generals-israeli-weapons-job-criticised/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Image&utm_campaign=ICYMI&utm_content=Image

The former head of Britain’s armed forces is providing advice to Israeli arms firms, sparking questions over his role in a country whose prime minister is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

General Sir Nick Carter was chief of the defence staff – Britain’s most senior military position – from 2018-21. Months before stepping down, he signed a military cooperation agreement with Israel.

That pact has never been published – despite freedom of information requests and questions in parliament – but it was hailed as a landmark moment in relations between the two militaries.

Carter had visited Israel earlier in his tenure, touring military bases and shaking hands with his opposite number, General Aviv Kohavi.

That experience of rubbing shoulders with the top of the IDF is likely to come in handy for his new job at Exigent Capital, a boutique financial services firm based in Jerusalem.

Carter is one of Exigent’s two “domain experts” in its “strategic advisory” wing, with his focus on “aerospace and defence”.

His role there is to “develop international growth strategies for our clients as well as identify and open doors to new business opportunities that accelerate growth”, according to the company’s website.

Or, as the Jerusalem Post put it, Carter provides “strategic consulting services to Israeli companies operating in the defense sector.”

Doing business

Carter attended a military tech summit in Tel Aviv in December 2024 – before the ceasefire had been signed in Gaza – when he told a journalist: “Israel is very significant in the world of defense tech.”

Carter added: “We appreciate the extraordinary innovation that Israeli defense companies exhibit and sometimes adopt what we see in Israel. It’s impressive to see the innovation of Israeli companies”.

The British army has bought Israeli-made drones, rifle sights and air defence systems. 

More recently, he felt “privileged” to have signed the “successful” UK-Israel military deal in 2020, commenting: “It’s very important for both militaries to work together, share the best training, and understand together the complexity of the modern battlefield. This is a very good way to do business.”

General Carter: Caught in the revolving door?

However campaigners are criticising Carter’s business decisions. Dr Sara Husseini, director of the British Palestinian Committee, told Declassified: “That the UK’s former chief of the defence staff is now advising Israeli arms companies exemplifies the extent of the links between the British state and Israel’s arms industry. 

“These revelations are deeply concerning, particularly at this moment in which Israel is recommencing its large-scale bombardment of Gaza, killing more than 400 Palestinians in the past two days.

“Rather than aligning with a state which is on trial for genocide and – as the Foreign Secretary acknowledged earlier this week – is in breach of international law, Keir Starmer’s government must now halt its military collaboration with Israel, including scrapping the agreement signed by Sir Nick Carter.”

Chris Doyle, director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding, said: “Serious questions arise from former defence officials working with arms companies in states that have a track record of serious violations of international law.”

Turning to Labour’s partial embargo on weapons exports to Israel, Doyle commented: “It also raises longer term questions about whether former officials should be allowed to work with arms companies in countries where there is a ban on arms exports because the government has already acknowledged a serious risk of human rights abuses.”

Arms trade expert Andrew Feinstein from Shadow World Investigations remarked: “This is an example of what used to be called the revolving door – or is now known as the open plan office – between the British state and arms companies. It raises the question of whose interests the most senior political and military figures are working in: their own material interests, or the interests of Britain?”

‘System is bust’

Under government rules supposed to prevent conflicts of interest, former Generals must inform Whitehall’s Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) of any job offers they receive for two years after leaving the military.

General Carter notified ACOBA of 12 jobs he had been offered since stepping down from the army in July 2022, although Exigent was not among them. 

General Carter and Exigent did not respond to a request for comment on when they began working together. A LinkedIn post by the company shows they had started at least three months ago, when Exigent said: “We look forward to sharing his unparalleled expertise, insights and network with our clients.”

His other job offers encompassed unpaid roles at Harvard and Stanford universities, plus a trusteeship at the Royal United Services Institute think tank.

Paid positions included working part-time as a strategic advisor for Schroders bank, plus advisory roles at Helsing – a German AI defence start-up – and an insurance firm.

On top of this, Carter spends 30 days per year “as a thought partner for Tony Blair in his role as Executive Chairman” at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change.

And he is chairman of Equilibrium Gulf Limited, which advises the crown prince of Bahrain on the autocratic country’s notoriously brutal interior ministry.

While he claims no military experience is required for the Bahrain role, previous Equilibrium directors include another former defence chief, General David Richards, and MI6’s one-time Middle East controller Geoffrey Tantum.

Lord Pickles, who oversees ACOBA, has acknowledged there are weaknesses in the system supposed to regulate Whitehall’s ‘revolving door’ between government positions and corporate careers.

Pickles said of ACOBA last year: “The system is bust and needs fixing.”

March 27, 2025 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Militarize Ukraine ‘to the teeth’ – Finnish president

Comment: Is the Finnish President among those that do not really want a settlement in Ukraine any time soon?


Thu, 20 Mar 2025  https://www.sott.net/article/498616-Militarize-Ukraine-to-the-teeth-Finnish-president

Alexander Stubb has also called for stronger sanctions against Russia and the seizure of its frozen assets

Finnish President Alexander Stubb has called on Kiev’s Western backers to pump Ukraine with military resources and financial aid, claiming that this will deter Russia. He made the call shortly after meeting Vladimir Zelensky in Helsinki and as EU lawmakers negotiate doubling the bloc’s weapons budget.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas had pitched a plan to increase the bloc’s cashflow for Ukraine from €20 billion ($20.9 billion) in 2024 to €40 billion ($43.7 billion) this year. However she admitted to La Stampa that she was opposed by Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal. The Italian newspaper has reported that a €5 billion cap has been placed on the donation.

Stubb told Politico on Wednesday that “Deterrence – which is based on militarizing Ukraine to its teeth,” would be the best way to end the Ukraine conflict.

The Finnish president lamented the fact that Kallas failed to gather support for her plan, expressing hope that that heads of state and government would be able to salvage the package.

“It’s very important now to send a message from Europe that the military, political and economic support continues,” he said, emphasizing that sanctions against Russia should be bolstered, while its frozen assets should be seized to ramp up pressure.

Hungary has refused to sign a joint EU summit statement on Ukraine, according to TASS, which reported that both lethal and non-lethal aid had been rejected by Budapest.

The Finnish president also supported potential Ukrainian membership in the EU and in NATO. Finland, which only joined the US-led military bloc in 2023, has been a strong backer of Kiev since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in February 2022.

Moscow has consistently condemned NATO expansion towards its borders, describing the bloc as a threat to Russia’s national security. President Vladimir Putin and other officials have repeatedly stressed that efforts to include Ukraine in the military bloc had been one of the root causes of the escalation of the conflict in 2022.

Stubb’s comments come amid negotiations for a 30-day ceasefire aimed at halting long-range strikes on energy infrastructure by both sides advocated by US President Donald Trump. Another round of talks between Russian and US delegations is scheduled for March 24 in the Saudi city of Jeddah.

March 27, 2025 Posted by | Finland, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France delays EPR2 reactors to 2038

 The 4th meeting of France’s Nuclear Policy Council (CPN – Conseil de
politique nucléaire), chaired by President Emmanuel Macron, decided to
delay the commissioning of EPR2 reactors to 2038 – a postponement of
three years. The CPN, which has been held regularly since 2022, defines the
main orientations of national nuclear policy.

The EPR2 programme, announced
in February 2022, envisages the construction of six upgraded EPR reactors
with an option for eight more. The first three pairs of EPR2 reactors are
planned for the Penly, Gravelines and Bugey NPP sites. Construction is
expected to start in 2027. The cost was originally estimated at €51.7bn
($56.4bn), but this was revised upwards to €67.4bn in 2023, according to
the Court of Auditors. Taking inflation into account, a total budget of
nearly €80bn is now being considered.

 Nuclear Engineering International 21st March 2025, https://www.neimagazine.com/news/france-delays-epr2-reactors-to-2038/

March 27, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, France | 1 Comment

Redirect Sizewell C funding to the Warm Homes Plan, say campaigners.

 Alison Downes, https://stopsizewellc.org/sizewellcvswarmhomes/

Campaigners call on Rachel Reeves and Ed Miliband to stop Sizewell C, redirect its funding to generate ‘Warm Homes’ jobs in every constituency by the next election.

Building Sizewell C would likely cost around £40bn over the next 15 years. Deducting money already spent, if Sizewell C is cancelled now, the public money saved by 2030 would be £7.1bn.

A paper from Stop Sizewell C and the Green New Deal Group  calls for this saving to be added to the £6.6bn the government is committed to spend in the current Parliament on energy efficiency in the nation’s homes. Turbocharging this ‘Warm Homes Plan’ by more than doubling its budget will generate long term, secure jobs, particularly for young people across the UK. It will be quick to implement, so by the next election new jobs and cheaper, warmer, healthier homes will have appeared in every constituency.

Alison Downes of Stop Sizewell C said: “The taxpayers’ money being ploughed into risky, expensive Sizewell C – which will inevitably soar higher due to cost overruns and building delays – would be far better spent improving the lives of households nationwide, bringing down their bills, and helping the UK meet its net zero target”.

Colin Hines of The Green New Deal Group said: “At absolutely no extra cost to the nation’s finances Rachel Reeves and Ed Miliband could stop funding the nuclear white elephant that is Sizewell C and not only improve the living conditions for homes in every constituency, but create jobs in every constituency, thereby improving their chances of winning the next election.”

Sizewell and warm homes report

March 27, 2025 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear experts pour cold water on US idea to restore and run Ukrainian power plant.

Nuclear experts have also highlighted that the US does not have any nuclear plants that use the same class of technology as Zaporizhzhia, which is a Soviet-designed “water water energetic reactor” (abbreviated as “VVER” in Russian).

By Lauren Kent, CNN, 20th March 2025, https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/20/europe/ukraine-us-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-explainer/index.html

Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, occupied by Russian forces since the early days of the war, could be restored and protected by US ownership – at least according to the Americans.

But it’s unclear how the operation would work in practice, experts say, especially as the plant is on the front line, in territory controlled by Russia.

As part of ongoing talks to inch toward a partial ceasefire, US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky “discussed Ukraine’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants” during a Wednesday phone call, according to the US readout of the call.

“(Trump) said that the United States could be very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise. American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” the readout said.

On Thursday, Zelensky disputed that section, saying: “In terms of ownership, we definitely did not discuss this with President Trump.” Zelensky stressed that “all nuclear power belongs to the (Ukrainian) state, including the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhia region.”

Zelensky said the day before that Ukraine is ready to consider the possibility of American investment in the restoration and modernization of Zaporizhzhia. During a news conference after his call with Trump, Zelensky said they only discussed the occupied Zaporizhzhia plant, rather than Ukraine’s wider nuclear power network.

“I believe that the station will not work under occupation. I believe that the station can be restored to operation,” Zelensky said, also cautioning that the process will take an estimated two years or more.

Before Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, the Zaporizhzhia plant supplied roughly 20% of Ukraine’s energy, with six reactors, making it the largest nuclear power station in Europe. Ukrainian staff remain at the plant under Russian occupation, and at one point staff were forced to work at “gunpoint.”

But the plant is now disconnected from the grid and the electricity infrastructure required to operate the plant safely has been damaged by drone strikes and frequent shelling. Russia also destroyed the nearby Kakhovka dam, emptying the reservoir that supplied water to cool the plant.

All six reactors are shut down and there are concerns over the plant’s ongoing maintenance, as explosions continue nearby, according to a UN nuclear watchdog team on the ground.

When asked about how the US could potentially run a Ukrainian nuclear plant, Energy Secretary Chris Wright told Fox News that he didn’t believe it would require American troops on the ground.

“Certainly, we have immense technical expertise in the United States to run those plants. I don’t think that requires boots on the ground,” Wright said. “But I’ll leave the foreign policy to President Trump and Secretary (of State Marco) Rubio. I know they are working tirelessly, ‘How do we bring peace to Ukraine?’

“But, if it was helpful to achieve that end – have the US run nuclear power plants in Ukraine? No problem. We can do that,” Wright added.

But experts question how feasible the idea floated by the Trump administration would be.

Operating the plant safely would require a safe, constant power supply to avoid a reactor meltdown, as well as the restoration of sufficient water supplies for cooling the plant.

“The first word of business would be to establish definitively that there could be no attacks on either the plant directly or on the supporting infrastructure – both power and water resources – and that would have to be iron-clad,” said Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “So far, that kind of agreement has been elusive, as shelling occurs at a daily basis in the vicinity of the reactors.”

“There’s no point in trying to rebuild a plant and operate it if it could be jeopardized at any moment,” Lyman said. “And the notion that US-ownership would somehow be more of a deterrent to Russia attacking the plant than now, when the Russians themselves control the plant, that doesn’t make sense either.”

The idea of US operation “raises a whole lot of logistical and technical and practical questions that are very unclear,” Lyman said, including the question of US liability for any accident at the facility. “With ownership or operator status comes responsibility.”

Nuclear experts have also highlighted that the US does not have any nuclear plants that use the same class of technology as Zaporizhzhia, which is a Soviet-designed “water water energetic reactor” (abbreviated as “VVER” in Russian).

“These are different technologies,” said Elena Sokova, director of the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, adding that there are strict licensing requirements for the plant’s operators.

“The US is an advanced country… but to be prepared to immediately take control of something that is of a different design, designed by different country, and where you have no experience of running it – I don’t think it’s a good solution or viable option.”

“Having said that, if we’re talking about a long process, I’m sure certain things could be worked out, particularly if there is an arrangement… to have the majority of the Ukrainian staff and operators running these reactors,” Sokova added.

Ukraine wants role in restoration of plant

Zelensky emphasized on Wednesday night that safe restoration of the plant is in the whole world’s interest, and Ukraine should have a role in that “because it is ours, and this is our land, this is our station.”

The Ukrainian president said any return of the plant would not be possible without control of the area where it is located – the city of Enerhodar – on the Russian-occupied side of the Zaporizhzhia region.

“If you just hand over the station, and a meter away from the station, everything is occupied or there are Russian weapons, no one will work like that,” Zelensky told reporters, raising concerns that the plant could be restored with US and Ukrainian investment, only to have Russia possibly damage or destroy it again later.

As fighting continues along the front line, the dire situation at the Zaporizhzhia plant “remains unchanged,” Andrian Prokip, energy program director at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future, wrote last month.

“It still does not receive adequate maintenance and it continues to serve as a Russian ammunition depot,” said Prokip, also a senior associate at the Wilson Center.

CNN’s Svitlana Vlasova, Christian Edwards and DJ Judd contributed to this report.

March 26, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear Severnside…is this our future?


STAND (accessed) 23rd March 2025,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz9CaHbM-9o

The Severn Estuary, in Gloucestershire, is set to be a major hub for the
Government’s plans to expand nuclear power in the UK. This video, by STAND
(Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development)
https://www.nuclearsevernside.co.uk, explains the Government’s proposed
expansion of nuclear power by building the completely unproven technology
of SMRs (Small Modular Reactors. It also explains why they will be
disastrous for the economy, increase the cost for electricity bill payers,
rob renewable sources of power generation such as wind, solar and tidal of
essential resources, fail to secure energy security and come far too late
to help mitigate climate change or meet the country’s carbon emission
targets.

March 26, 2025 Posted by | environment, UK | Leave a comment

Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions – Waltz

 https://www.rt.com/news/614323-waltz-ukraine-territorial-concessions/ 24 Mar 25
Trump’s national security adviser has also indicated that the US is ready to ramp up sanctions pressure on Russia if it declines a 30-day ceasefire.

Ukraine should be prepared to give up certain territories as part of any future peace negotiations with Russia, US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has said.

Kiev claims sovereignty over Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions. The territories officially became part of Russia after referendums in 2014 and 2022. Moscow has maintained that their status is non-negotiable.

Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, Waltz said that a potential settlement to the Ukraine conflict “is going to be some type of territory for future security guarantees” for Kiev.

According to the official, an alternative in the form of NATO membership for Ukraine “is incredibly unlikely.” Ukraine has demanded accession to the US-led military bloc whereas Moscow views Kiev’s NATO aspirations as a root cause of the ongoing conflict.

Attempts to “drive every Russian off of every inch of Ukrainian soil, including Crimea” would be unrealistic at this point, Waltz believes. The ongoing diplomatic efforts spearheaded by the US should focus on the “reality of the situation on the ground,” the national security adviser argued.

Also on Sunday, in an interview with Fox News, Waltz said that “we are engaging in diplomacy, and that will involve both carrots and sticks to get both sides to the table.” When asked whether US President Donald Trump was prepared to “punish” Russian President Vladimir Putin with more sanctions if he rejected a ceasefire, Waltz replied that “all options are on the table.”

Earlier this week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealed that representatives from Washington and Kiev had “had conversations” on the issue of territorial concessions during the talks in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah on Tuesday. The diplomat argued that “neither side can militarily achieve their maximalist goals.”

He similarly predicted that “obviously, it’ll be very difficult for Ukraine in any reasonable time period to sort of force the Russians back all the way to where they were in 2014.”

Following the negotiations in Jeddah, Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire.

Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, traveled to Moscow on Thursday to present Putin with the details of the proposal.

The Russian head of state welcomed the ceasefire in principle but insisted on addressing several salient issues first, including the fate of the Ukrainian troops encircled in Russia’s Kursk Region

March 26, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Dounreay learns what its share of £4bn decommissioning cash will be

 Dounreay has been allocated a total spend of £221 million for the coming
financial year. Its share of the £4 billion budget overseen by the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is a good outcome for the site, according
to Dave Wilson, managing director of operators NRS.

“It’s a really, really good settlement given the current financial challenges,” he said
at the latest meeting of Dounreay Stakeholder Group (DSG) on Wednesday. Mr
Wilson said it was just over £5 million up on the previous year after
taking account of inflation. He said: “It’s a very positive settlement
for Dounreay and will make sure the site is safe, secure and able to
continue to protect the environment.” The funding would underwrite the
ongoing clean-up of the site and the upgrading of its ageing
infrastructure.

 John O’Groat Journal 22nd March 2025, https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/dounreay-learns-what-its-share-of-4bn-decommissioning-cash-377633/

March 26, 2025 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

What is the fate of Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant after Trump talks?

The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is one of the world’s 10 largest and Europe’s biggest

Hanna Arhirova, Friday 21 March 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-nuclear-power-plants-trump-putin-b2719353.html

President Donald Trump suggested a potential transfer of Ukrainian power plants to US ownership during a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, according to a US statement.

The discussion, later clarified by Zelensky, centred on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), currently under Russian occupation.

While the plant remains connected to Ukraine‘s grid, it is not producing electricity, raising questions about the feasibility and nature of any future US involvement.

The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is one of the world’s 10 largest and Europe’s biggest.

Who controls the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant

Located in Ukraine’s southern Zaporizhzhia region, Russian forces occupied it shortly after Moscow’s February 2022 invasion.

While Russia declared the region annexed in Autumn 2022, its largest city, Zaporizhzhia, remains under Ukrainian control.

Ukraine has accused Russia of stationing troops and weapons at the plant and using it as a launchpad for attacks across the Dnipro River. Russia denies this, accusing Ukraine of shelling the facility.

How many nuclear power plants does Ukraine have?

Besides Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine operates three active nuclear power plants, which generate the majority of the country’s electricity following sustained Russian attacks on thermal and hydroelectric plants.

These facilities are located in southern, western and northwestern Ukraine, away from frontline areas.

What did Trump and Zelenskyy discuss and are there negotiations over Zaporizhzhia’s fate?

During their call on Wednesday, Trump suggested that Zelensky should consider giving the US ownership of Ukraine’s power plants to ensure their long-term security, according to a White House statement from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz.

“American ownership of those plants could be the best protection for that infrastructure,” Trump suggested, according to the statement.

Zelensky later told journalists their conversation focused on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, and the following day, made it clear that “the issue of ownership” of the other three plants was never discussed.

“All nuclear power plants belong to the people of Ukraine,” he said.

Zelenskyy said that when they discussed Zaporizhzhia, the US leader had inquired about the facility’s future. “Trump asked my thoughts on the plant,” Zelensyy said. “I told him that if it is not Ukrainian, it will not operate. It is illegal.”

Even though ZNPP is a state-owned plant, Zelenskyy acknowledged that if the US were to claim it from Russian control, invest in it and modernise it, Ukraine might consider it. “That is a separate question, an open one,” he said.

What is the current state of Zaporizhzhia’s nuclear plant?

Since falling under Russian control, the plant’s conditions have deteriorated. While its six reactors have been shut down for years, they still require power and qualified staff to maintain cooling systems and safety features.

Energoatom, Ukraine’s state nuclear operator, said that after Russian forces took over, Ukrainian personnel were forced to sign contracts with Russian authorities and take Russian citizenship. Those who refused faced abduction or threats, forcing thousands to flee, leaving the facility understaffed and harder to manage.

The collapse of a dam in June 2023 further jeopardised the plant’s cooling systems, which relied on water from the reservoir. In response, plant administrators dug wells, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Zelensky said extensive repairs would be needed before the plant could operate again, estimating the process could take at least two years.

The IAEA has repeatedly warned the war could cause a radiation leak. While the plant no longer produces electricity, it still holds large amounts of nuclear fuel, requiring constant cooling.

Regular blackouts caused by the fighting have disrupted the facility, though power has been quickly restored each time.

IAEA experts permanently stationed there still face restricted access, with Russian authorities blocking some inspection requests, according to IAEA head Rafael Grossi.

Is any kind of deal imminent?

Zelensky said the discussions with Trump on restoring Zaporizhzhia were a positive step, but cautioned that no one would work at the plant if Russian forces remained stationed nearby.

Control over the plant is likely to remain a legal and logistical challenge, intertwined with a highly divisive issue for both warring sides: control over the land itself.

Russian troops hold the area, while Ukrainian forces are separated from it by the Dnipro River and more than 100 kilometres (62 miles) of terrain.

March 25, 2025 Posted by | politics, safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Macron ousts EDF boss accused of giving French industry ‘the middle finger’

Luc Rémont will be replaced in a reshuffle with factory energy prices set to soar

Alex Singleton, Business Reporter, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/03/21/macron-ousts-boss-state-run-edf-french-energy-prices-surge/

Emmanuel Macron has ousted the boss of the state-run EDF after French industrialists revolted over its high electricity prices.

Luc Rémont is to be replaced in a surprise reshuffling of the company’s top ranks, Mr Macron’s office said on Friday. Mr Rémont has run the the state-owned energy giant since November 2022.

The shake-up follows an outcry over the high energy prices EDF is poised to charge factories. Benoît Bazin, the boss of building materials giant Saint-Gobain, had accused EDF of “giving the middle finger to French industry” by increasing prices.

Rules that force EDF to sell energy to major industrialists at below-market prices are set to expire at the end of the year and the generator had announced plans to raise its prices.

Industry group Uniden, which represents dozens of France’s biggest manufacturers including Renault and steelmaker ArcelorMittal, claimed EDF was “deliberately turning its back” on French businesses at a time when manufacturers were “exposed to unprecedented non-European competition that threatens the very survival of many sites”.

The row is embarrassing for Mr Macron, who had pledged to “take back control of electricity prices” and who sees cheap electricity as a way of securing the French economy. Two years ago, he fully nationalised EDF by buying the 16pc of the company the government did not already own.

The shake-up comes days after the Macron administration said it had agreed state financing for six new nuclear reactors to be built by EDF over the coming decades.

Anger over high industrial energy prices is rising in the UK too. UK factories pay 50pc more for electricity than rivals in France and Germany, and four times as much as American plants. High prices have been blamed on net zero and slow-moving plans to expand nuclear power.

Warnings from industrialists that net zero energy policies are damaging the economy have fallen on deaf ears. Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, said this week the UK Government was “absolutely up for the fight” over net zero.

EDF is one of the largest players in the UK nuclear power market, after buying three formerly nationalised regional electricity boards and the nuclear operator British Energy.

It is currently building the UK’s first new nuclear power station for over 20 years, Hinkley Point C, and plans to embark on the construction of another, Sizewell C. But in January, the future of this new project was thrown into doubt after the French state auditor warned it against embarking on risky new foreign projects.

EDF declined to comment. The French government has been approached for comment.

March 25, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, France, politics | Leave a comment

Aaron Mate on how NATO provoked Russia in Ukraine and undermined peace

By Aaron Maté / The Grayzone March 23, 2025,  https://scheerpost.com/2025/03/23/aaron-mate-on-how-nato-provoked-russia-in-ukraine-and-undermined-peace/

The Grayzone’s Aaron Maté argues that the US and NATO provoked Russia in Ukraine by expanding NATO, dismantling arms control, installing military assets threatening Russia, meddling in Ukraine and blocking multiple opportunities for peace.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8IMtB6UkvM

March 25, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Russia | 2 Comments

Ministry of Defence under fire over nuclear clean-up in Scotland

Pete Roche, a Scottish-based nuclear consultant and critic, was concerned that no money had been set aside to cover decommissioning military sites, especially given the pressures on the budget for cleaning up civil sites.

Rob Edwards, March 23, 2025, The Ferret

The Ministry of Defence has been accused of trying to avoid responsibility for cleaning up a military nuclear site on the north coast of Scotland by making it “someone else’s problem”.

The Ferret can reveal that discussions to transfer ownership of Vulcan, a former submarine reactor testing site next to Dounreay in Caithness, to the UK and Scottish governments’ Nuclear Decommissioning Authority are at an advanced stage. The aim is to complete the deal in 2027-28.

But no decision has been taken on who will pay for the site’s multi-million pound clean-up, including dismantling and disposing of two defunct, radioactive reactors. Unlike some civil nuclear sites, military sites do not have any funding set aside for decommissioning.

Campaigners are concerned that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) could escape paying for the pollution it has caused at Vulcan and other military sites. They are demanding transparency, and calling on the Scottish Government to block any “backroom transfer” that undermines Scotland’s interests. 

The 26-strong UK group of nuclear-free local authorities is planning to raise the issue with UK nuclear minister, Lord Hunt, at a meeting on 31 March. It will be urging him to extract a promise from the MoD to fully fund the decommissioning of Vulcan.

The MoD promised to deliver “value for taxpayers’ money” on the Vulcan clean-up. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) said financing would be agreed with the UK Government “as part of the usual funding process”.

Construction work at Vulcan began in 1957, with one reactor operational from 1965 to 1984, and another from 1987 to 2015. They were used for onshore testing of five different designs of reactors to power the UK nuclear submarine fleet.

In 2012 the second Vulcan reactor suffered a mishap, and started leaking radioactivity into its cooling water. When the leak was disclosed two years later, it triggered a bitter argument between the Scottish and UK governments.

The then first minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, accused the Conservative UK defence minister, Philip Hammond, of deception. Hammond had told MPs that there had been “no measurable change in the radiation discharge” from Vulcan.

But an investigation by the Sunday Herald revealed that there had in fact been a tenfold rise in emissions of radioactive gases. Hammond subsequently corrected the official parliamentary record……………………………………………………..

There are seven defunct nuclear submarines awaiting decommissioning at Rosyth in Fife and a further 15 at Devonport in Plymouth. Other MoD nuclear sites in Scotland that may eventually need to be cleaned up are the Faslane nuclear submarine base and the Coulport nuclear weapons depot on the Clyde near Helensburgh.

The Scottish Government reports, however, have little to say about how the Vulcan clean-up will be paid for.  According to another January 2025 update, a paper on “post-transfer funding options” was “being socialised” within the NDA – though it is unclear what this means.

The costs of decommissioning the more recent civil nuclear power stations, including Hunterston B in North Ayrshire and Torness in East Lothian, will be covered by the UK Government’s Nuclear Liabilities Fund. It has secured more than £20 billion from private power companies.

But there is no equivalent fund for cleaning up military nuclear sites. Uncertainty over how Vulcan’s decommissioning will be funded has triggered widespread fears that the MoD could be seeking to wriggle out of its responsibilities. 

‘Unacceptable’ for MoD to evade nuclear responsibilities

Alba, the breakaway nationalist party launched in 2021 by former SNP leader, Alex Salmond, is “deeply concerned” that the MoD may “offload” defence nuclear liabilities “without transparency or adherence to the polluter pays principle.”

The party’s national organiser, retired Royal Navy commodore Rob Thompson, said: “It is unacceptable for current and future Scottish taxpayers to bear billions in clean-up costs while the MoD evades responsibility.  

“The Scottish Government must urgently clarify its due diligence processes, civil-defence cooperation policy and use its veto to oppose any backroom transfer that undermines Scotland’s interests.”………………………………………………..

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities highlighted reports in February that £2.8 billion given to the NDA by the UK Government to clean up the biggest and dirtiest nuclear site at Sellafield in Cumbria was “not enough”.

“We will be raising directly with nuclear minister, Lord Hunt, how important it is that he secures from his colleague, the defence secretary, a promise to fully finance decommissioning work at Vulcan,” said the group’s secretary, Richard Outram.

“It is our view that the principle that the polluter pays should apply equally to both the nuclear industry and the defence ministry.”

Pete Roche, a Scottish-based nuclear consultant and critic, was concerned that no money had been set aside to cover decommissioning military sites, especially given the pressures on the budget for cleaning up civil sites.

“The UK Government must increase the NDA’s budget sufficiently if it is expected to take on the MoD’s decommissioning work as well,” he said.

Tor Justad, chairperson of Highlands Against Nuclear Power (HANP), is a member of the Dounreay Stakeholder Group, which covers Vulcan. It was important that details of the transfer to the NDA were “clarified as soon as possible and that the full costs of returning the land to a brownfield site should be paid for by the MoD,” he said……………………………….
https://theferret.scot/nuclear-clean-up-vulcan-mod/

March 25, 2025 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

French government ousts head of nuclear power group EDF.

 Luc Rémont’s exit comes after months of tension over plans for new reactors and clash over pricing strategies.

France has ousted the chief executive of the
state-owned nuclear power group EDF after months of tensions over strategy
and the risk of cost overruns in the construction of six new reactors.

Luc Rémont, who had been at EDF since November 2022, would be replaced by
Bernard Fontana, the current head of Framatome, a subsidiary of EDF that
builds reactors and components, the Élysée Palace said on Friday.

EDF runs the country’s fleet of 57 nuclear plants that generate roughly 70
per cent of France’s electricity, and commercialises nuclear projects
abroad. Rémont succeeded in the initial challenge of restoring the output
of the fleet of reactors after a period plagued by technical problems, and
was in the early stages of a plan to build new more powerful, yet costly
ones, known as the EPR2.

But his term was marred by continued spats with
the state, which nationalised EDF through buying out the minority
shareholders in 2023. The Elysée decided not to renew Rémont’s
three-year term that was set to expire in June.

A major point of contention
was over Rémont’s plans to revamp how EDF sells electricity to big
industrial companies with energy-intensive activities. In the past, the
company was legally required to sell fixed amounts of electricity to them
at a price approved both by the French government and the European
Commission.

With those rules expiring next year, Rémont had been set to
combine market pricing with the signing of long-term contracts with
customers in energy-intensive industries. But the offers attracted few
companies since the terms and prices were less attractive. In parallel to
long-term contracts, EDF said this month that it would launch a new
auction-like process for other industries, including foreign buyers, in a
move that angered energy-intensive groups in France.

 FT 21st March 2025, https://www.ft.com/content/c822f4e4-c15a-4038-aad4-a7151629277d

March 24, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Leak is Sellafield’s ‘biggest environmental issue’


BBC 21st March 2025,

The head of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) called the silo “Britain’s most hazardous building” He said it was the “single biggest environmental issue” facing the nuclear plant

A longstanding leak at “Britain’s most hazardous building” is a nuclear plant’s “single biggest environmental issue”, a select committee has heard.

The leak in the Magnox Swarf Storage Silo (MSSS) – built more than 50 years ago at Sellafield in Cumbria – started in 2019 after first occurring in the 1970s.

Labour MP Luke Charters told the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Thursday that every three years the silo leaked enough material to fill an “Olympic-sized swimming pool”.

Sellafield head Euan Hutton said the leak did not “pose a detriment to the public”.

The silo contains Magnox fuel cladding, mostly made up of magnesium, which was removed from nuclear fuel rods.

It was built in the 1960s, with three further extensions built in the 1970s and 1980s.

The leak is being caused by a crack in the underground portion of the silo, Mr Hutton told the committee.

He said the team had “excellent ground modelling and monitoring” which showed the activity was staying in the ground beneath the facility.

The head of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) called the silo “Britain’s most hazardous building” and said the best way to the stop the leak was “to empty the silo as efficiently and quickly as we can”.

He said it was the “single biggest environmental issue” facing the nuclear plant

Mr Hutton said the team hoped to empty the silo by about 2059……………………………… https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgy77y21djo

March 24, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

The fight for control of Ukraine’s nuclear reactors

How serious is Donald Trump about US ownership of Kyiv’s nuclear power plants?

By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK,
https://theweek.com/world-news/the-fight-for-control-of-ukraines-nuclear-reactors

First, Donald Trump made a pitch for Ukraine’s critical minerals; now, the US president seems to want to own the war-torn nation’s nuclear power plants.

But there’s a lot of confusion over what Trump would do if he did take control of the plants – and if he actually even wants to.

How many nuclear power plants in Ukraine?

Ukraine has four nuclear power plants. The most significant one – and the largest in Europe – is Zaporizhzhia, which was seized by Russia in the first weeks of the war. And it’s this plant, in particular, that’s become Trump’s “new craving” in his “transactional approach to bringing peace”, said Politico.

What is Trump demanding?

As a demand, it’s Trump “at his most confusing”, said The Guardian. If the current frontlines in Ukraine were “frozen” in a ceasefire or peace deal, it would be “difficult to see” how Zaporizhzhia could be operated by the US while it’s “surrounded by Russian occupiers”. Besides, Ukraine is “not thought willing” to “renounce” ownership.

It’s “unclear” whether the US is actually looking to own Ukraine’s atomic power, said the Financial Times. A US account of a recent call between Kyiv and Washington suggested so, but Zelenskyy said the discussion only touched on the US helping to “recover” and modernise the Zaporizhzhia plant.

Why would Trump want control?

Trump’s minerals deal with Ukraine is “back on” but “can only go ahead if the materials can be extracted”, said The Telegraph. This “takes a lot of energy – something which the Zaporizhzhia plant could provide”.

Energy analysts have also noted that the US could have another “economic interest” in the plant, said The New York Times. Zaporizhzhia uses fuel and technology supplied by Westinghouse, an American nuclear technology company.

But still, the idea has “a catch” for “the man who coined the art of the deal”, said Reuters: “it would be years” before there is “even a hope of it making a return on investment”. So, the proposal could simply be the US “testing out various ideas to see what works”, as Trump “seeks to hammer out a lasting peace deal”.

What might happen next?

Control over the plant is “likely to remain a legal and logistical challenge”, said The Associated Press. And, of course, control over the land Zaporizhzhia stands on is a “highly divisive issue for both warring sides”.

It’s “unclear” what Trump could “offer to Russia to get it to hand over the plant”, said the NYT. Moscow is likely to demand something meaningful in return, such as “the lifting of Western sanctions that have hurt its economy”.

If Ukraine does regain control of Zaporizhzhia, the “more likely” alternative to US ownership is a “joint venture” – an investment fund for the ageing plant, which “both parties could contribute to and benefit from”, said The Telegraph. This is essentially the same concept that “formed the basis” of the minerals deal.

March 24, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »