nuclear-news

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

Russian nuclear submarines decommissioned, but reactor compartments still contain highly radioactive trash.

Last three reactor compartments soon off the water https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/ecology/2018/10/last-three-reactor-compartments-soon-water#.W8P-hlNi_4E.facebook25-years with safe decommissioning of Cold War submarines in the Russian north will come to an end next year. By Thomas Nilsen, October 14, 2018

120 nuclear-powered submarines sailing in-and-out from the Kola Peninsula during the Cold War have been properly decommissioned since the early 1990s. While most of the metal could be recycled, the still-highly radioactive reactor compartments had to be secured for long-term storage.

Intermediate, that meant storing the compartments floating at piers until they could be taken onshore at the central storage complex in Saida Bay, north of Murmansk on the coast of the Barents Sea.

In 2017, the Barents Observer reported that 15 compartments were still kept afloat on the water.

Today, only three reactor compartments remain and they will be taken onshore in 2019, Izvestia reports with reference to the northwestern branch of RosRao, Russia’s state owned company for handling radioactive.

The three compartments are today stored at piers in Saida Bay, while 117 compartments are stored on the huge concrete pad.

RosRao’s Chief Engineer says the very last reactor compartment t be taken onshore is the one from the “Kursk” submarine that sant in the Barents Sea in August 2000 during a naval exercise. The submarine was lifted from the seabed two years after and the remaining parts of the hull were scrapped.

In Saida Bay, the reactor compartments will have to be stored for onshore for many decades before the radioactivity have come down to levels acceptable for cutting the reactors’ metal up and pack it for final geological disposal.

October 15, 2018 Posted by | Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

USA-Russia relations at a low ebb: nuclear treaties are under threat

WORLD WAR 3: Russian minister warns nuclear treaties under threat as relations plunge

SKY-HIGH tensions between the US and Russia are putting critical treaties designed to prevent a nuclear arms race in jeopardy as relations sink to an all-time low, a senior Russian official has warned.

By SIMON OSBORNE, Express UK,  Oct 11, 2018 Moscow’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov described Western governments as “adversaries, not friends” and said a “complete malfunction of the American system” meant longstanding weapons agreements could be binned, leaving nuclear powers without constraint in the event of a future conflict.

He said: “We could lose several elements on arms control infrastructure. The building is shaky.”

Mr Rybakov warned another round of sanctions intruded by Donald Trump in the summer were “dangerous” and getting in the way of negotiations over renewing the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty “New START” which saw both sides agree to reduce their deployed nuclear arms by half but is set to expire in 2021.

He said: “If there is no progress then risk of a real backfire grows.

Mr Ryabkov was speaking as negotiators from the two countries met in Geneva to discuss a Cold War era treaty that was supposed to keep expansion of long-range nuclear-capable missiles in check.

Moscow and Washington have repeatedly accused each other of breaching the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, a 1987 pact which bans firing land-based missiles with a range of up to 5,500km.

The US ambassador to NATO warned Moscow against developing a new cruise missile that could be armed with nuclear warheads, arguing that it was in breach of the INF and could be used against members of the Western military alliance.

Kay Bailey Hutchison said: “Counter measures by the United States would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty. They are on notice.”

The US government took a more aggressive line against Russia this year, when Mr Trump unveiled a new nuclear strategy that revolved around countering Russia and called for the development of small tactical nuclear weapons that were cheaper to maintain and could be used in more realistic scenarios.

Washington has also accelerated long-running US military plans to develop new intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and nuclear-capable cruise missiles and has just confirmed hypersonic weapons testing is well underway……..https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1030089/world-war-3-russian-minister-sergei-ryabkov-nuclear-treaties-moscow-washington-cold-war

October 13, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Federal indictment alleges that Russian military targeted USA nuclear company Westinghouse

October 9, 2018 Posted by | Russia, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Russia challenges US compliance with nuclear arms treaty

 MOSCOW https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Russia-challenges-US-compliance-with-nuclear-arms-treaty-495949041.html?ref=041 (AP) 8 Oct 18— Russia on Monday challenged the U.S. claim that it has fulfilled its obligations under a pivotal nuclear arms deal, a new argument that could further fuel tensions between Moscow and Washington.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said it “can’t confirm” the latest U.S. State Department data indicating that the U.S. has complied with the thresholds set by the 2010 New START treaty. It limits each country to no more than 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers.

The ministry said the U.S. removed 56 Trident II submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles and 41 B-52H strategic bombers from its count of nuclear arsenals after re-equipping them to carry conventional weapons.

But it argued that the U.S. had failed to let Russia verify the move in line with the treaty, and failed to list four land-based missile silos converted for training purposes — a move Russia said didn’t conform to the treaty.

The ministry said the perceived U.S. breach of the treaty’s limits was “unacceptable,” adding that it expects Washington to “show a constructive approach to settling that acute issue.”

The tough statement marked the first time Russia raised the issue of the alleged U.S. non-compliance with the pact signed by President Barack Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev amid a brief thaw in Russia-U.S. ties. The New Start came into effect in 2011 and is to expire in 2021 unless the two countries extend it.

Officials in both Russia and the U.S. have given mixed signals about the pact’s future.

Russia-U.S. ties have sunk to their lowest levels since the Cold war times over the Ukrainian crisis, the war in Syria, the allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and alleged Russian hacking of world anti-doping bodies, athletes, plane investigations and chemical weapons probes, among other disputes.

In the arms control sphere, Moscow and Washington also have been at loggerheads over another arms control treaty — the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

The U.S. has accused Russia of deploying a new type of missile in violation of the pact that bans an entire class of weapons — all nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles of intermediate range. Russia has rejected the accusations.

October 9, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA | Leave a comment

Dubious claim from Russia, about bacteria “neutralising nuclear waste”

Andrew Allison comments on this Russian claim Biological processes operate at the chemical level (electronic structure around atoms) these would be ineffective at changing anything at the nuclear level (strong and weak forces between parts of the nucleus). I would expect that the *most* that bacteria could do would be to concentrate and to isolate distributed atoms that happen to be radioactive.

Russian Scientists Discover Bacteria That Neutralizes Nuclear Waste   https://sputniknews.com/science/201810081068701682-nuclear-waste-neutralizing-bacteria/ The unique bacteria, discovered in a nuclear waste storage site in Siberia, shows promise as a tool for the creation of a natural barrier to the spread of radionuclides.

Researchers from the Moscow-based Frumkin Institute of Physical Chemistry and the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Federal Research Center for Biotechnology have been able to isolate microorganisms which can be used to safeguard the surrounding environment from liquid radioactive waste.

Scientists made the discovery while conducting microbiological studies of the groundwater at the Seversky deep radiation burial site in Seversk, Tomsk region, Siberia, where liquid radioactive waste from the Siberian Chemical Combine, which supplies and reprocesses low enriched uranium for nuclear fuel, is stored.

Their research, recently published in Radioactive Waste, a Russian scientific journal, suggests that the bacteria is capable of converting radionuclide ions, including those found in uranium and plutonium, into sedentary forms, thereby preventing the spread of dangerous radiation into the surrounding environment. Through lab experimentation, the scientists were able to fine tune the conditions necessary for the bacteria to carry out its useful work.

The researchers say their findings are a first step in creation a biogeochemical barrier for radionuclides for use in deep burial sites containing liquid radioactive waste.

Research into microbiological tools to limit the effects of nuclear waste have been conducted since the 1980s, with scientists from around the world saying microbial processes must be taken into account in projects to bury and store nuclear waste which can otherwise decay over a period of millions or even billions of years.

October 9, 2018 Posted by | Russia, spinbuster, wastes | Leave a comment

The dangers and unknown challenges of Russia’s plan for floating nuclear power plants in Northeast Asia

Floating Nuclear Power Plants in Northeast Asia? A Daunting Prospect.  Weak multilateral architecture, territorial disputes, and natural disaster vulnerability compound the unknowns of Russia’s new energy platform. The Diplomat, By Tom Corben October 05, 2018 Given the controversy of all things nuclear power in the post-Fukushima era, it was no surprise that the April launch of Russia’s first floating nuclear power plant (FNPP), the Akademik Lomonosov, drew polarizing responses immediately (in spite of the fact that its nuclear fuel was only loaded earlier this week). Russia’s state-owned nuclear utility Rosatom, claimed that the Akademik Lomonosov’s safety precautions exceed “all possible threats,” granting it “invincibility against natural disasters,” and highlighted the enhancements to economic development efforts in Russia’s far-flung territories. Conversely, environmental organizations like Greenpeace labeled the Akademik Lomonosov a “nuclear titanic” or “Chernobyl on ice,” a serious risk to the global environmental and human security. Observers ought to regard warily the sensationalist claims of advocates and opponents of FNPPs alike. Even so, it is difficult not to view Rosatom’s “invincibility” claim without incredulity.

Rosatom has previously claimed in safety briefings to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that the Akademik Lomonosov could withstand a magnitude-10 earthquake, tsunamis powerful enough to cast the barge ashore, and even the impact of a 10-ton aircraft. However, disasters such as that at Fukushima in March 2011 show the perils of blind faith in the integrity of nuclear technology and existing safety regimes that claim to preclude all possible disaster scenarios, particularly those where consecutive or compounding disaster events may present unforeseen challenges. That the Akademik Lomonosov is essentially the first of its kind (the comparatively small USS Sturgis aside) means that practitioners and observers alike have little historical experience to draw upon in offering completely watertight safety assessments. Commentators have pointed to nuclear-powered carriers and submarines to counter criticisms that seaborne reactors are inherently dangerous, yet several such vessels have sunk in the past, along with their radioactive cargo. There is, however, no precedent for a reactor complex the size of the Akademik Lomonosov’s going down in coastal or blue waters, nor for the sorts of short- or long-term hazards that may result or the responses that may be required.

These unknown risks are particularly accentuated when framed in the Northeast Asian context. Either the Akademik Lomonosov or one of its successors will reportedly head for the seismically-active Kamchatka Peninsula, which lies north of the Kuril Island chain presently disputed by Japan and Russia. The Sanchi oil tanker disaster in January demonstrated that the region’s geopolitical faultlines can complicate multilateral responses to industrial-environmental threats when they occur in or impact upon disputed territories, even when multilateral fora designed to facilitate collective risk management response to ocean-born hazards already exist. As far as FNPPs are concerned, these mechanisms do not presently account for potential radiological crises. In short, Northeast Asian states will need to move quickly and recalibrate existing institutions accordingly if they are to preclude another serious geopolitically-charged, potentially radiological, environmental disaster.

The Akademik Lomonosov features two KLT-40C reactors (variants of the military-grade KLT-40M model used aboard Russian icebreakers), capable of generating 70MWe — enough energy to provide power and desalinated water for between 100,000–200,000 people. These impressive statistics aside, however, neither the KLT-40C model nor Russia’s overall nuclear safety record are entirely reassuring. In May 2011, for example, the Russian icebreaker Taymyr experienced a severe coolant leak, releasing radioactivity into the atmosphere, and needed to be towed into port for urgent repairs — all this despite recent safety upgrades. There are also several cases of Russian nuclear submarines sinking with hundreds of kilos of uranium and/or nuclear-tipped missiles still aboard, most notably the K-159 wreck in the Barents Sea, though what threat these might pose to the local environment remains unknown.

Furthermore, the appeal of FNPPs as a portable baseline power source for developing distant territories could become a significant setback in the event of a crisis of “unforeseeable” circumstances. Remote territories are just that — remote. In the event of a serious crisis, and considering the absence of local Russian nuclear infrastructure, it may take considerable time for a response team to reach the vessel. That would translate into more time for said crisis to spiral further.

Compounding the tyranny of distance is the region’s geological volatility. A magnitude 7.8 earthquake struck the Kamchatka Peninsula last July, while magnitude 8 quakes struck the Kuril Islands in 2006 and 2007, generating 50-foot tsunamis. While none of these instances resulted in major damage, in 1952 a massive earthquake and tsunami killed thousands and wrought destruction on settlements across the peninsula and the Kuril Islands. In fact, recent research has also demonstrated that seismic and volcanic activity in Russia’s Far East poses a serious natural disaster threat to the entire Pacific Rim. As far as the Akademik Lomonosov is concerned, some argue that its flat-bottomed hull design and lack of self-propulsion increases its vulnerabilityto impending or sudden disaster events. With a registered top speed of only 4 miles per hour with the assistance of tugboats, the task of avoiding an oncoming threat would become all the more difficult. For the sake of comparison, nuclear-powered carriers can hit anywhere between 55-92 kilometers (34-57 miles) per hour unassisted.

In a worst case scenario, a damaged or sinking FNPP could pose a regional radiological threat, one quickly compounded should the vessel be cast toward or into disputed territories or those of another state. Events in January suggest that Northeast Asia is unprepared for such an event. A slow response to the Sanchi oil tanker incident saw the burning vessel drift out of recognized Chinese waters and into those adjacent to the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, where it eventually sank. Neither Beijing nor Tokyo moved to assume control of clean-up operations because of these geopolitical tensions, yet their inaction ironically saw the corruption of adjacent common fishing grounds.

In response, commentators (including myself) called for the creation of a regional disaster response agreement capable of bypassing competing territorial claims in the interests of containing similar catastrophes in the future…….

The likely arrival of FNPPs in Asia in the future will bring with them unprecedented risks that should not be discounted if states are serious about avoiding, or at least preparing for, an unprecedented radiological crisis of regional proportions.  https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/floating-nuclear-power-plants-in-northeast-asia-a-daunting-prospect/

October 8, 2018 Posted by | ASIA, Russia, safety, technology | Leave a comment

USA and Russia argue, threat to Abandon a Key Nuclear Treaty

U.S., Russia: The Rivals Threaten to Abandon a Key Nuclear Treaty https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/us-russia-rivals-threaten-abandon-key-nuclear-treaty

What Happened

In a speech on Oct. 2 in Brussels, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison demanded that Russia return to complying with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty or else the United States would be forced to develop its own non-INF-compliant weapons to match Russian capabilities. In response, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that “It seems that people who make such statements do not realize the level of their responsibility and the danger of aggressive rhetoric.”

Some Background on the INF

The INF Treaty is a key arms control pact between the United States and Russia that halted a destabilizing buildup of intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe during the 1980s. The pact served as a cornerstone in efforts to end the Cold War. Recently, however, the United States has accused Russia of developing, testing and deploying a type of cruise missile that violates the limits set by the INF, and Moscow in turn has accused Washington of deploying drones and missile launchers that violate the terms of the treaty.

Over the past year, the United States has tried various tactics to get Russia to comply with the treaty. Washington has sanctioned Russian officials and tried to pressure Moscow by deploying tactical nuclear weapons aboard its submarine-launched ballistic missiles. The U.S. Congress has also passed legislation that would pave the way for the development of a missile that, if fielded, would violate the INF treaty. None of these measures appear to have worked yet; the United States and its NATO allies insist that the Russians are still in violation of the treaty.

Why It Matters

Hutchinson’s statements show that the White House is clearly determined to follow Congress’ lead in considering the deployment of U.S. missiles that violate the INF. The first open INF violations from both the United States and Russia will likely lead to many more violations that could kill the already fragile treaty. The demise of the INF would further catalyze a budding and potentially highly destabilizing arms race between the United States and peer competitors Russia and China. It would also be deeply alarming to Washington’s European allies, who would once again sit between Russian and U.S. intermediate range nuclear missile arsenals, just as they did during the Cold War.

An additional concern is that an ugly fight over the status of the INF could spill over into negotiations for the renewal of the other big global nuclear arms control treaty: the New START treaty, which limits the number of U.S. and Russian deployed strategic nuclear weapons and launchers. Unlike the INF, New START is nominally on much surer ground, as Russia and the United States both already have so many strategic nuclear weapons that there are few major incentives to violate it. However, mistrust from the demise of the INF could potentially erode New START anyway. This outcome, although unlikely for now, would lead to a far more serious arms race than is currently taking place.

October 8, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA threat about “taking out” Russian missiles

US threatens to ‘take out’ Russian missiles if Moscow keeps violating nuclear treaty By Ryan Browne and Frederik Pleitgen, CNN October 2, 2018   CNN)The United States Permanent Representative to NATO, Amb. Kay Bailey Hutchison, warned Tuesday that the US could “take out” Russian missiles that are perceived to be in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty should Moscow continue to violate the agreement…..

“They are building a medium-range ballistic missile in violation of the INF. That is a fact which we have proven,”

Asked what type of countermeasures the US and NATO would pursue in the face of the Russian violation, Hutchison said “the countermeasures would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty.”…..

Later on Tuesday Hutchinson said she “was not talking about preemptively striking Russia” when she said the US would have to “take out” the Russian missiles…..https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/02/politics/us-threatens-russia-missiles-nuclear-treaty/index.html 

October 5, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US indicts seven Russians for hacking nuclear power firm Westinghouse

 The United States on Thursday indicted seven Russian intelligence officers for conspiring to hack computers and steal data, including attempts to break into the computer networks of the nuclear power company Westinghouse Electric Co. France 24 4 Oct 18The Justice Department said one of the Russian officers performed online reconnaissance and stole log-in credentials of Westinghouse workers, including staff that work at its advanced nuclear reactordevelopment and new reactor technology units.

Westinghouse, which is located outside of Pittsburgh, provides fuel, services and plant design to customers, including Ukraine.

Three of the seven Russian military officers indicted on Thursday were charged in a separate case brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office for their role in hacking activities designed to influence the 2016 presidential election……..

In the indictment, prosecutors alleged that one of the Russian officers, Ivan Sergeyevich Yermakov, performed “technical reconnaissance” of the company as early as Nov. 20, 2014, and got access to IP addresses, domains and network ports. The hackers also researched Westinghouse to learn about the company’s employees and their backgrounds in nuclear energy research.

In December, the Justice Department said, Yermakov and his co-conspirators registered a fake domain and website designed to mimic the company’s website and sent phishing emails to at least five employees. Once people clicked on the spoofed domain and provided their log-ins, they were rerouted to the original network.

On other occasions, according to the indictment, the conspirators also sent spearphishing emails to the personal emails of employees at Westinghouse. Two account users clicked on the malicious links.

The indictment does not clearly explain why Westinghouse was targeted or whether the hackers succeeded, and Justice Department officials declined to comment beyond the indictment.

Westinghouse did not immediately respond to a request for comment. https://www.france24.com/en/20181004-us-indicts-russians-hacking-nuclear-company-westinghouse

October 5, 2018 Posted by | legal, Russia, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Russia’s campaign for power globally via its nuclear reactor exports

Is the global nuclear industry Russia’s latest power play? , Telegraph UK 4 Oct 18   “…….Amid the financial fallout of the West’s attempts at a new nuclear dawn, Russia is quietly building an army of nuclear reactors across the world in an increasingly important power play for a country that has traditionally been powered by fossil fuels.

Kirill Komarov, the first deputy chief executive of Russia’s Rosatom, is also the head of the World Nuclear Association. It is a fitting role for man helping to lead Russia’s global nuclear expansion.

“We are the ultimate leader in the majority of nuclear sectors,” he says, and it is hard to disagree. “In the last 11 years we have commissioned 13 new nuclear plants, which is probably the biggest number in the world even compared to the increase from our Chinese friends.”………

“We are a unique company in that we have activities in all areas of the nuclear business; starting with mining of natural uranium, enrichment fuel fabrication, developing our own nuclear equipment, the construction of nuclear power plants, the decommissioning, waste management… everything,” says Komarov…..

says Tim Yeo, a former Tory MP and the leader of New Nuclear Watch, an industry-backed lobby group.

“They back this up with helpful vendor financing packages, which the Russian government is ready to support where necessary,”………https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/10/04/global-nuclear-industry-russias-latest-power-play/

October 5, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Russia and USA will talk about extending New START nuclear weapons treaty

US and Russia to discuss nuclear weapons treaty extension in October https://www.ft.com/content/b26d62fe-c0a1-11e8-95b1-d36dfef1b89a, Henry Foy in Moscow

Russia and the US will hold talks on a potential extension to the New START nuclear weapons treaty in Geneva in October, a Russian official said on Tuesday. The future of bilateral treaties that govern the use of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles is one of the most critical issues in US-Russia relations. Experts have warned that the recent breakdown in relations between Washington and Moscow could jeopardise longstanding agreements on so-called ‘strategic stability’ that were designed to prevent nuclear armageddon.

New START, a 2010 agreement that limits the number of nuclear warheads held by both countries, expires in February 2021. Separately, both capitals have accused the other of breaching the 1987 INF Treaty, which limits the use of long-range missiles. “It is absolutely realistic to reach an agreement on an extension [to New START], if there is political will on the part of the American side. There are readiness from the Russian side,” said Vladimir Yermakov, director of the department of non-proliferation and arms control at the Russian foreign ministry. “We have given suggestions on how to do this, and in a couple of weeks we will meet in Geneva within the framework of a bilateral advisory commission,” he added, in comments reported by local newswires.

The US and Russia possess 13,300 nuclear warheads between them, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 92 per cent of the world’s stockpile. New START’s terms allow for a five-year extension, and experts have suggested that writing a whole new agreement would not be possible before its expiry. Regarding the INF Treaty, Mr Yermakov said Russia was “ready to discuss any issues relating to the treaty with our American partners, in any format.” Mr Yermakov added that there was “not a very big possibility” of Russian signing any brand new arms control agreements in the next few years.

September 26, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia’s nuclear wastes, and the clean-up of Andreeva Bay 

What is the situation at Russia’s biggest dump site for spent nuclear fuel?

There is growing concern in nearby Norway about cooperation over the cleanup of Andreeva Bay    https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/ecology/2018/09/what-situation-russias-biggest-dump-site-spent-nuclear-fuel, By Atle Staalesen, September 06, 2018

Three shiploads with spent nuclear fuel are to be sent from site this year and the whole cleanup is to be completed in year 2024, representatives of nuclear power company Rosatom said in this week’s meeting in the Joint Russian-Norwegian Commission Nuclear Safety.

The cleanup of the Andreeva Bay is one of the biggest ongoing bilateral cooperation projects between Norway and Russia and Norwegian tax payers have over the years covered project expenses worth hundreds of millions of kroner.

The nuclear waste storage, which is located only about 55 km from the border to Norway, holds about 22,000 spent nuclear fuel elements, and was long considered a ticking environmental bomb.

Shipments to Mayak

The cooperation on site marked a milestone in late June 2017, when the first batch with 470 spent fuel elements left Andreeva Bay. Present were a number of dignitaries, among them Norway’s then foreign minister Berge Brende. They all waved as special purpose vessel «Rossita» set course for Murmansk, where the deadly materials will be reloaded onto special trains and sent to reprocessing plant Mayak.

«It is a big day for the environment, for Russian-Norwegian cooperation, for people in Finnmark and the Kola Peninsula and all the ones who care about the Barents Sea,» Brende told the Barents Observer at a press briefing following the event.

However, far from everything is smooth and easy in cooperation over the complex and highly sensitive nuclear wastes. Access to site by independent controllers is strictly regulated and information  sparse. The Norwegian journalists that have been invited to take part in official visits have not been allowed to bring cameras.

Growing concern

The situation might have become ever more complicated this week, after two leading Norwegian officials on nuclear safety were held back on the Russian border.

One of the two people is Per-Einar Fiskebeck, the long-serving special adviser at the Finnmark County Governor’s office, who for decades have closely followed up the Andreeva Bay project.

The Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs describes the incident as «serious» and confirms that it is concerned about the situation.

«It is worrying if this would affect the further progress in the nuclear safety cooperation, which otherwise has been a success story in the Norwegian-Russian relationship in the north,» a comment from the ministry reads. Continue reading →

September 6, 2018 Posted by | Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

USA and Russia – in 20th Century -devised hideously elaborate ways of blowing each other up

Top-secret ‘doomsday machine’ documents reveal terrifying nuclear apocalypse plans https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/04/top-secret-doomsday-machine-documents-reveal-terrifying-nuclear-apocalypse-plans-7911916/ Jasper Hamill  4 Sep 2018 It’s no secret that the US and Russia spent much of the 20th century devising hideously elaborate ways of blowing each other up. Now declassified documents written in 1964 have revealed the true extent of the apocalyptic atomic broadside Washington planned to unleash against its greatest enemy. A pair of top-secret memos written by top military chiefs shows the US was intending to implement an ‘overkill’ strategy which would have flattened Russian cities and killed tens of millions of people.

They demonstrate how generals were considering the possibility of unleashing thousands of nukes in a bid to cause ‘95% damage’ to targets such as military facilities and ‘urban-industrial centres’ including major cities. The files also document plans to blow up 30% of all the people living in 30 Chinese cities, saying this outcome would be ‘desirable’. The secret files were unearthed by George Washington University’s National Security Archive and shed light on a secret nuclear strategy called the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), which is often referred to as a ‘doomsday machine’ and has never been declassified. Researchers are only able to learn about this highly disturbing scheme by reading other documents which discuss it, meaning the release of the two memorandums is a major step forward in understanding the grim fate which would have befallen the world if a nuclear war erupted.

‘US nuclear war plans [made] during the Johnson administration included the option of a retaliatory strike against nuclear, conventional military, and urban-industrial targets with the purpose of removing the Soviet Union “from the category of a major industrial power” and destroying it as a “viable” society,’ wrote the National Security Archive in a statement. ‘The document, the Joint Staff’s review of SIOP guidance in June 1964, showed continued acceptance by policymakers of the cataclysmic nuclear strike options that had been integral to the plan since its inception. Accordingly, the SIOP set high damage requirements – 95% for the top priority nuclear targets – ensuring that it remained an “overkill” plan, referring to its massively destructive effects. ‘Prepared and continually updated by the Joint Strategic Target Planning Staff, the SIOP has been characterized by some as a “doomsday machine”.’ The latest declassified document is a review of SIOP conducted by the Joint Staff, a group of senior military leaders.

It lays out plans for retaliatory and preemptive strikes against Russia or China which range in severity from an assault aimed at knocking out nuclear weapons facilities to a blitzkrieg designed to ‘destroy the will and ability of the Sino-Soviet bloc to wage, remove the enemy from the category of a major industrial power and assure a post-war balance of power favourable to the United States’. The plans also expose a scheme to use ‘population loss as the primary yardstick for effectiveness in destroying the enemy society with only collateral attention to industrial damage’, the National Security Archive added. What this means is that the US was willing to bomb Russia back to the Stone Age and viewed the destruction of its population as a valid strategy of war…. https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/04/top-secret-doomsday-machine-documents-reveal-terrifying-nuclear-apocalypse-plans-7911916/?ito=cbshare

 

September 6, 2018 Posted by | Reference, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Despite Putin’s boasts, loss at sea, and test failures in ‘invulnerable’ nuclear-powered missile

Putin lost his supposedly ‘invulnerable’ nuclear-powered missile at sea — now he has to go find it https://www.businessinsider.co.za/russia-to-search-for-nuclear-powered-cruise-missile-lost-at-sea-2018-8, Ryan Pickrell , Business Insider US Aug 26, 2018 

  • Russia is gearing up to search for a missing nuclear-powered cruise missile that was lost at sea during a failed test-fire last year.
  • Russian President Vladimir Putin has boasted about the weapon’s advanced capabilities, but all tests have reportedly ended in failure.
  • While the missile is supposed to be able to fly indefinitely, its nuclear-powered core has yet to initiate to allow it to do that.

Russia lost a nuclear-powered missile during a failed test last year, and now Moscow is gearing up to go find it, according to CNBC, citing people familiar with a relevant US intelligence report.

Proudly claiming that the world will “listen to us now”, Russian President Vladimir Putin boasted in early March that his country had developed a new nuclear-powered cruise missile with unlimited range, but each of the four tests between November 2017 and February reportedly ended in failure, according to reports from May.

“The low-flying, stealth cruise missile with a nuclear warhead with a practically unlimited range, unpredictable flight path and the ability to bypass interception lines is invulnerable to all existing and future missile defence and air defence systems,” Putin claimed. “No one in the world has anything like it,” he added.

The reports from testing don’t support the Russian president’s claims.

The longest recorded flight, according to US assessments, lasted only a little over two minutes. Flying just 35km, the missile spun out of control and crashed. In each case, the nuclear-powered core of the experimental cruise missile failed, preventing the weapon from achieving the indefinite flight and unlimited range the Russian president bragged about.

The tests were apparently conducted at the request of senior Kremlin officials despite the protests of Russian engineers who argued that the platform was not ready for testing. Russian media reports claim the weapon will be ready to deploy in ten years.

During one weapons test in November of last year, the missile crashed into the Barents Sea. Three ships, one with the ability to handle radioactive material, will take part in the search operations, which have yet to be officially scheduled.

Experts are concerned about the possibility that the missile may be leaking radioactive nuclear material. The missile is suspected to rely on gasoline for takeoff but switch to nuclear power once in flight.

August 27, 2018 Posted by | incidents, Russia | Leave a comment

Scepticism, even among pro-nukers, about Russia’s much boasted floating nuclear power plant

The Nuclear Power Plant of the Future May Be Floating Near Russia, NYT 26 Aug 26   18  “………some environmental groups — even those open to a role for nuclear power as a substitute for traditional power plants — are skeptical.

For one, they are not convinced by Rosatom’s assurances of safety. Critics worry that during a tsunami, the 21,000-ton steel structure might not ride out the wave. In a worst-case scenario, they say, it would instead be torn from its moorings and sent barreling inland, plowing through buildings until it landed, steaming and dented and with two active reactors on board, well away from its source of coolant.

In such a case, Rosatom says, a backup power source and coolant on board would prevent the reactors from melting down, at least for the first 24 hours. “During this time we would consider what to do,” said Dmitri Alekseyenko, the deputy director for Rosatom’s floating reactor program. Regulators in the United States, however, require on-land reactors to operate for 72 hours in an emergency shutdown without external water supplies.

And the fact that the technology is well tested in Russian ships gives critics little solace, given a long history of spills and accidents involving nuclear-powered submarines and icebreakers operated by the Soviet and Russian navies.

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviet Union dumped reactors in the Kara Sea, in the Arctic Ocean north of Kola Bay. Russian nuclear submarines sank in 1989 and 2000, while one Russian nuclear icebreaker caught fire in 2011 and the reactor on another leaked radiation that year, according to Bellona, a Norwegian environmental group.

“The question is, would clients of Russia be comfortable with something like this being parked right at a pier in a major city?” Matthew McKinzie, director of the nuclear program at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, said in a telephone interview.

A Greenpeace sailboat tailed the Akademik Lomonosov on its maiden voyage from a shipyard in St. Petersburg to Murmansk, where it will be fueled, flying a banner in English saying: “Floating Nuclear Reactor? Srsly?”  ….

August 27, 2018 Posted by | Russia, spinbuster, technology | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »