Britons want real action on climate change, but Boris Johnson’s govt missing in action on this
  UK Energy Policy, Independent 12th Jan 2020Boris Johnson was today facing calls to step up action on global warming, after a poll for The Independent found overwhelming support for radical change to end the UK’s net carbon emissions by the end of the decade. Some 70 per cent of those questioned by pollsters BMG said they supported the target of net-zero emissions by 2030, with only 7 per cent opposing it. And support for swift action over the next 10 years was high across all age ranges, social groups and parts of the country, countering perceptions of a generational or urban/rural split on the climate emergency. Independent 8th Jan 2020, Ministers are under fire after revealing their strategy to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 will not be released until the end of the year. It means the plans – which will require huge and potentially unpopular changes to transport, energy and agriculture – will only emerge more than a year after the legal commitment was made. “If this is true, it doesn’t really smack of a government treating this issue as a climate emergency,” said Clive Lewis, Labour’s Treasury spokesman and a
leadership candidate. And Wera Hobhouse, the Liberal Democrat climate emergency spokesperson, pointing to the wildfire crisis in Australia, said: “While the world is waking up to the dangers of climate change, this Tory government is still on holiday. |
|
Britain’s Sizewell nuclear project in jeopardy, as EDF struggles to get funding
 Sizewell, Times 13th Jan 2020, EDF is in a race against time to secure a funding deal for its proposed nuclear power station in Suffolk as delays risk making the project prohibitively expensive. The French energy giant has hired Rothschild as financial adviser for the Sizewell C project and says it wants a “definitive way forward” from the government this year so it can start construction in 2022. The company building the £22 billion Hinkley Point C plant in Somerset has promised it can significantly reduce the cost of the sister plant in Suffolk, including by transferring workers and equipmentbetween the two. Delays to funding that result in a hiatus between the
projects would erode such savings and jeopardise Sizewell, which the government has said must be cheaper than Hinkley. A senior executive at Sizewell recently admitted that if funding proposals ended up “outside an acceptable price range for the government, then the project probably won’t go ahead — it’s as simple as that”.
EDF has proposed an alternative, funding model for Sizewell C, under which consumers would pay for the project while it is still under construction. This would cut borrowing costs but also put consumers on the hook for cost overruns.
The government ran a consultation last year on adopting the model but is yet to give its verdict. An EDF spokeswoman said: “We hope to see a way forward on nuclear financing in 2020 ahead of COP26 [the Glasgow climate change summit]. This would ensure we can maximise the benefits of replicating the design of Hinkley Point C at Sizewell C.”
|
‘Error of judgement’: UK police recall guide which listed Extinction Rebellion among extremist groups
‘Error of judgement’: UK police recall guide which listed Extinction Rebellion among extremist groups https://www.sbs.com.au/news/error-of-judgement-uk-police-recall-guide-which-listed-extinction-rebellion-among-extremist-groups
Counter-terrorism police in South-East England say they made an ‘error of judgement’ in adding climate Justice group Extinction Rebellion to a list of extremist ideologies.
The Guardian revealed the group was included in a 12-page guide named ‘Safeguarding young people and adults from ideological extremism’.
The document was designed to help educate people working with youth to “recognise when young people or adults may be vulnerable to extreme or violent ideologies”,
The guide advises people to look out for young people who “neglect to attend school” or “participate in planned school walkouts” – an apparent reference to the global School Strike for climate movement started by Greta Thunberg this year.
It also suggests that young people who engage in non-violent direct action such as writing environmentally-themed graffiti, sit-down protests or banner drops are potentially at risk of radicalisation.
The environmental group featured alongside Neo-Nazi terror operations and a pro-terrorist Islam outfit.
In a statement to The Guardian, Counter Terrorism Policing South East boss Kath Barnes said the guide is being recalled.
“The document was designed for a very specific audience who understand the complexities of the safeguarding environment we work within and who have statutory duties under Prevent. We are in the process of confirming who it has been shared with and recalling it.”
Extinction Rebellion was founded in October 2018 and the group maintains a welcoming, non-violent culture is at the core of its beliefs.
A spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion’s Sydney arm, AJ Tennant, says it was a shock to hear the international movement had made it onto the list in the first place.
“It’s very distressing that a peaceful, environmental organisation that’s trying to advocate for the protection of humanity would be treated with such disdain.”
He says he understands that people may find the extinction rebellion movement confronting, and even frustrating at times, but argues the movement has always been focused on non-violent methods of drawing attention to the climate debate.
“The first word that applies to everything that XR does is non-violent. We talk about being peaceful, we talk about having love in the movement, we talk about apologising to people for any inconvenience we caused, so while we are disruptive, we are always, always peaceful.
London-based human rights lawyer and media commentator Shoaib Khan has taken to Twitter to condemn the actions of British authorities.
Tens of thousands of Australians took to the streets on Friday to demand stronger action on climate, with some in the large crowds carrying the Extinction Rebellion network’s recognisable logo and flag.
A nuclear accident in Essex would be catastrophic
|
How much of Essex would disappear if there was a nuclear disaster?The damage would be catastrophic, Essex Live, By Brad Gray Multimedia Reporter 12 Jan 2020 “…………. disasters can happen, and Essex has it’s own nuclear power plant up in Bradwell-on-Sea.
Although the plant was closed down back in 2002 – and works have taken place over the past 20 years to remove nuclear waste and storage vaults – there are plans to reopen the site. A new plant could be built on the same location, up to modern standards, by 2030, but plans are not fully in place. However, with the date only a decade away – and interest in nuclear disasters higher than usual because of the hit TV show Chernobyl – it’s worth seeing how bad a nuclear disaster would be if something happened near Essex. How bad would the damage be in Essex?No 2 Nuclear Power have created a map tool to see how bad the damage would be if Sizewell were to have a nuclear accident the scale of Chernobyl’s. The map shows that much of Essex would become uninhabitable and areas in dark red or purple would have compulsory evacuation take place. At around 30 miles from the Essex border, the impact would still encompass most of the county. What about elsewhere?The damage wouldn’t just stop at our county. Suffolk and Norfolk would both be equally as affected as Essex, and London would also be heavily affected with some relocation needed. The affects would be felt as far away as Birmingham and Wales, and even further north to Nottingham and Sheffield. It’s fair to say that an explosion would be a national disaster unlike anything ever seen in the country. These estimations are also based upon there not being strong winds on the hypothetical day in question, as radiation can spread further if gusts are strong. If wind was blowing strongly west a huge portion of the country would be brought to a halt. Cities like Nottingham, Derby, Lincoln and Sheffield would all require immediate evacuation. Huge parts of the country would become uninhabitable and it would be a nationwide disaster not seen in the UK since World War Two. How likely would something like this be?It’s worth remembering that at the moment, Bradwell’s site is a non-operable plant. A disaster like this cannot happen until reactors there are up and running. And even then, with modern technology and monitoring standards, explosions like this are incredibly unlikely. In regards to Sizewell, which is made up of two nuclear power stations, there are plans that it could be transferred to a ‘nuclear island’ off the Suffolk coast………. HTTPS://WWW.ESSEXLIVE.NEWS/NEWS/ESSEX-NEWS/HOW-MUCH-ESSEX-WOULD-DISAPPEAR-3729222 |
|
|
UK’s planned Sizewell power station likely to become a ‘nuclear island’
Rising sea levels could turn new Sizewell power station into ‘nuclear island’ East Anglian Daily Times, 10 January, 2020, Andrew Hirst
Surging sea levels due to climate change could mean new power station Sizewell C is cut off by the water within decades, a top scientist has warned.
UK’s competition watchdog to investigate Jacobs’ acquisition of Wood Nuclear Limited
Times and Star 9th Jan 2020, The proposed £250 million acquisition of a major player in the clean-up of the Sellafield site in West Cumbria could be blocked. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched an investigation into global engineering firm Jacobs’ acquisition of Wood Nuclear Limited – the nuclear arm of the Wood Group.
The proposal deal – announced in August last year – would see Wood Nuclear Limited along with “subsidiary and certain affiliated companies” come under control of Jacobs’ UK division. Jacobs would also take on existing contracts held by the business – which include managing the Design and Engineering lot for the Programme and Project Partners (PPP) framework.
20-year contract awarded last year by Sellafield Limited as part of its push to “revolutionise” the decommissioning of the site, could be worth up to £769 million. Wood’s nuclear division is already a long-standing big tier company at Sellafield and, in December was awarded a £50m contract to provide programmable digital control technologies to the plant.
Bradwell nuclear power plan – foolish, in view of climate change predictions
BANNG 8th Jan 2020, As we enter a new year, Andy Blowers muses on the massive challenge of climate change that lies ahead, globally and locally, in the column for Regional Life, January 2020.
In East Anglia, we are increasingly aware of record heatwaves, milder and wetter winters, retreating coastlines and loss of precious habitats and declining and disappearing species. To an extent, these may be tackled by adaptive measures such as managed retreat of the coastline or hard defences. Even then, land loss and inundation will be unavoidable.
The idea of a massive nuclear power station at Bradwell on a
site threatened by the impacts of climate change seems foolish in the
extreme. Far better to go for cheaper, less risky and easily deployable
renewable options. Concerted action worldwide and locally, by governments,
businesses and individuals, is needed now if we are to reduce carbon
emissions to net zero and avert catastrophe. That was a clear message from
the General Election. Now we must get on with it.
UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget.
BBC 10th Jan 2020, UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget. The Ministry Of Defence’s “poor management” of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme has led to rising costs and lengthy delays, according to the government spending watchdog.
UK Leading Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey would use nuclear weapons
|
8 January 2020 Leading Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey has said she would be prepared to use nuclear weapons as prime minister.It is a marked contrast to the policy of outgoing leader Jeremy Corbyn, a passionate and long-standing advocate of nuclear disarmament. Ms Long-Bailey, a staunch defender of Mr Corbyn’s failed leadership of the party, has previously been accused of being his “continuity candidate”. Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme whether she would be prepared to launch a nuclear strike, Ms Long-Bailey said: “If you have a deterrent you have to be prepared to use it.”…. https://au.news.yahoo.com/rebecca-long-bailey-labour-leadership-nuclear-weapons-134918253.html |
|
|
Britain’s £1.2bn cleanup begins, of Berkeley power station, closed 30 years ago
 Nuclear waste removal begins 30 years after power station closure, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-50866867 5 Jan 2029, Work has begun on removing nuclear waste from Berkeley power station, 30 years after it was decommissioned.The disused Magnox generator, situated on the banks of the River Severn in Gloucestershire, closed in 1989.
It was the world’s first commercial power station and its laboratories and many of its buildings have already been dismantled. Work emptying its vast concrete vaults of the nuclear waste Berkeley generated is only now able to safely begin. But it will not be safe for humans to go inside its reactor cores until 2074. The BBC has been given a rare glimpse of what is stored under the disused site.For the past 50 years parts of the coastline of the west of England have been dominated by nuclear power stations. The 1960s saw the construction of Hinkley A and Hinkley B in Somerset, with both Oldbury and Berkeley built on the banks of the River Severn in the 1950s. Only Hinkley B is still in use but the nuclear waste the stations generated has remained in place. It takes hundreds of years to decompose and has to be stored underground. It will cost an estimated £1.2bn to fully decommission Berkeley. About 200 people are currently working on the site under strict security. Work emptying waste products from the concrete vaults, eight metres (26ft) underground, is a complicated process. They contain used graphite from the fuel elements in the nuclear generating process, material from the cooling ponds and from the laboratories. The removal is expected to take five or six years to complete. Rob Ledger, waste operations director at Berkeley, said: “When the power stations first started generating I don’t think there was much thought put into how the waste was going to be dealt with or retrieved. “It’s taken a while to develop the equipment and the facilities [to do this]. “A mechanical arm moves the debris into position and then a ‘grab’ comes down through an aperture in the vaults and picks up the debris [and] puts it into a tray. “Each debris-filled tray weighs up to 100kg (220lb). “The automated machinery is controlled by computers [and] tips [the waste] into a cast iron container.” The containers will house the waste in an intermediate storage facility until a long-term solution can be found. “Nuclear waste does take a long time to decay… it’s hundreds of years. And that’s why we have to go to these lengths, to store it safely,” said Mr Ledger. Eventually the boxes will be housed deep underground in a long-term storage facility. The location has not yet been decided by the government. There are currently estimated to be almost 95,000 tonnes of nuclear waste in the form of graphite blocks across the UK. But if the Carbon 14 can be extracted from the blocks, they become much safer and easier to deal with. A new process is being explored, by scientists at Bristol University, to ensure not all of the waste will be discarded. They have developed a process that uses reactor core spent contents in a new power form. Carbon 14 from nuclear reactors is infused into wafer-thin diamonds, man-made in a lab at Bristol University. They then become radioactive and form the heart of a battery that would last for many thousands of years. The tiny batteries could be used in pacemakers, hearing aids or sent into space as part of the space programme. The process is being piloted in association with the UK Atomic Energy Authority in Abingdon. It is hoped the decommissioned Gloucestershire site may be redeveloped to manufacture the new batteries, creating jobs in the region. |
|
UK govt trying to finance new nuclear plants, – complicated relations with China and USA
boss Vincent de Rivaz ill-advisedly said that customers would be using
electricity from the planned Hinkley Point C power plant to cook their
Christmas turkeys by 2017. Two years on from that self-imposed deadline,
the £21bn nuclear power station is still being built over a sprawling site
in the Somerset countryside – while the very future of nuclear power in
the UK is up for debate as other sources of energy snap at its heels and
investment in the sector gets harder to find.
backdrop of wariness about the source of potential investments:
state-backed China General Nuclear (CGN) is one of few investors willing to
pour money into the risky nuclear sector – but the communist
superpower’s involvement has brought political and security concerns as
well as opposition from the US.
beset by controversy, with Theresa May, the former prime minister,
reversing George Osborne’s courting of China in 2016 when she ordered a
review of China’s involvement in the UK’s nuclear industry, amid
concerns about national security.
consultation opened in the summer on the potential new financing mechanism for nuclear power plants which will see consumers pay for nuclear power plants before they start producing, in an attempt to bring down the costs of financing.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/01/05/britain-heading-fallout-nuclear-conundrum/
UK’s Sizewell C nuclear project not viable, due to escalating costs?
Could escalating costs mean ‘game over’ for nuclear power and Sizewell C? East Anglian Daily Times, January 2020, Andrew Hirst
The growing cost of nuclear power could mean ‘game over’ for Sizewell C, experts claim. While much of the debate in Suffolk around EDF Energy’s proposals have focussed on the local impacts, recent reports from energy forums have started to question how viable the industry is for the UK – and globally.
At a recent debate, Paul Dorfman of the University College London’s Energy Institute went head to head with Paul Spence, director of strategy and corporate affairs at EDF to discuss the future of the sector.
Dr Dorfman, who also founded the Nuclear Consulting Forum, said the “massive cost escalations” of nuclear power together with the increasing competiveness of renewables meant there was “little rationale for new nuclear builds”.
Costs for offshore wind have plummeted to around £40 per MWh – making it now one of the cheapest forms of power available.
Meanwhile, the costs government agreed to pay EDF for Hinkley Point C, is more than twice as expensive at £92.50 per MWh.
The latest World Nuclear Industry Status Report warned of “substantial challenges” and a decline in usage, with fewer reactors in operation today than 30 years ago.
Globally, while investment in renewables has increased to around $350bn per year, nuclear fell to just $17bn. Dr Dorfman said: “In this context, nuclear power at the expense of more flexible, safe, productive, cost-effective and affordable technologies really does seem to be rather foolish.”
He said it could mean “game over” for nuclear projects, including Sizewell…….
The government consulted earlier this year on the “Regulated Asset Base model”, which is intended to incentivise private investment in public projects by guaranteeing a return for developers. It would mean developers can raise revenue, potentially though customer bills, and reduces their risk. ……
although EDF claims RAB could save money for consumers – critics say it merely leaves the public with all the risk.
“Under RAB, the plan is for the burden of risk to pass to hard-pressed UK consumers and/or taxpayers labouring under post-Brexit conditions,” said Dr Dorfman.
“Not only that, but the revenue stream will include a variable strike price – with taxpayers and/or electricity consumers forced to write, what is essentially, a ‘blank cheque’.
Earlier this year it was reported a “Sizewell surcharge” could add £6 to annual energy bills under the RAB model. A petition opposing the surcharge was signed by more than 36,000 people.
Concerns were further compounded by EDF’s precarious financial position. The company is €37.4billion net debt and its stock lost 34% of its value this year.
Professor Steve Thomas, a researcher in energy policy at the University of Greenwich, questioned the company’s credentials ahead of a seminar organised by the Nuclear Free Local Authorities in Colchester last month.
“EDF is in deep financial crisis and will only be able to survive with heavy French government support and radical restructuring,” he said. “It is unclear how EDF will be able to finance Hinkley Point C, much less Sizewell C, and the UK government must resist pressures to throw more public money at these ill-conceived projects and abandon them now.”
UK: legal action against environmental destruction by Sizewell nuclear project
Crowd Justice (accessed) 30th Dec 2019, Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) is an unincorporated citizens’ group
formed to oppose the building of Sizewell C’s twin nuclear reactors and
associated works in Suffolk Coast & Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural
Beauty (AONB) in a legal open, peaceful and fully accountable manner.
TASC has mounted a legal challenge against East Suffolk Council’s decision to
approve the planning application submitted by EDF, the nuclear developer,
to: – chop down 100-year-old Coronation Wood, turn a large area of priority
habitat acidic grassland, known as Pillbox Field, into a 576 space car
park, relocate over 320,000 sq. feet of 7 largely non-essential and
non-operational Sizewell B buildings and an additional 128 car parking
spaces, that will encroach further into the AONB. Most of these
buildings/facilities could be located outside the AONB. The works are
needed to free up land for the construction of Sizewell C as the existing
site is too small and are clearly integral to the wider Sizewell C
development.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/save-coronation-wood/
BBC 30th Dec 2019, Campaigners opposing a new nuclear power station are seeking a judicial review over a “premature” decision to allow woodland to be felled. EDF Energy wants to build two reactors next to Sizewell B in Suffolk and in September was told it could chop down Coronation Wood on the site. TogetherAgainst Sizewell C (Tasc) said the area was vital for wildlife. East
Suffolk Council said it would respond to the campaigners’ challenge in due
course.
Britain’s nuclear weapons convoys a disaster waiting to happen
DOZENS of safety failures during nuclear weapons convoys are a “disaster waiting to happen,” campaigners charged as they demanded the Ministry of Defence (MoD) answer for the risks it is exposing the public to.
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and political campaigners have hit out at the MoD after concerning reports show 40 lapses in safety while nuclear and radioactive materials were being transported across the country over the past five years.
A Freedom of Information request has revealed the 40 operational and engineering issues on convoys carrying bombs and hazardous materials.
These incidents included issues identified with brakes on convoy vehicles, included burning smells during transportation.
On other occasions convoy vehicles were forced to stop, and road lanes closed, after suffering flat tyres.
Among other engineering faults listed were warnings of overheating in convoy vehicles.
Multiple “operational” issues also disrupted transportation of dangerous materials.
Reported in these were rolling road blocks needed to manoeuvre the convoy through busy, congested routes across the UK, causing delays in the journey.
CND general secretary Kate Hudson said: “Nuclear bombs carried on our roads are a disaster waiting to happen.
“This report shows that ‘poor maintenance’ is a factor in these safety lapses.
“The MoD must be brought to book for this disgraceful failure — and our new government must end this cargo of death through our communities.”
Britain’s nuclear weapons are still based in Scotland and those north of the border have said it is time to rid ourselves of the apocalyptic threats.
Scottish Green MSP Mark Ruskell led a debate on the topic last year.
He said: “Like many I’d like to see an end to the housing of nuclear weapons in Scotland, but while they are still here it’s not unreasonable to expect the highest standards of safety to apply to their movement.
“People will be shocked at the thought of nuclear convoys travelling on public roads.
“In Stirling the convoys even park up overnight behind a chain-link fence across the road from a Nando’s and a Vue Cinema. This is an absurd situation that must come to an end.”…… https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/britain-nuclear-weapons-convoys-are-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-peace-campaigners-warn
Documents reveal UK’s plans for rolling out nuclear weapons
World War 3: UK’s plan for ‘rapid deployment of nuclear weapons’ in 24 hours exposed https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1219002/world-war-3-uk-nuclear-weapon-deployment-24-hours-soviet-union-cold-war-spt, by CALLUM HOARE, Mon, Dec 30, 2019 |
THE UK planned to roll out its nuclear arsenal in as little as 24 hours in what would have been a “frenetic” response to the Soviet Union’s escalation of war in the Eighties, documents seen by Express.co.uk reveal.
The 1983 papers came at a time of intense tensions, as the Cold War reached boiling point, threatening to topple into World War 3. The US and the Soviet Union were jostling for world supremacy and, as the threat of nuclear war increased, allies on both sides prepared for how they would respond, including the UK. Ministry of Defence documents expose a top secret mission for “rapid deployment of nuclear weapons” in the event things spiralled out of control.
One document seen by Express.co.uk reads: “The Secretary of State asked for further advice on the arrangements which would be needed for the rapid deployment of Tactical Nuclear Warheads (TNW) in a crisis on the assumption that all naval nuclear weapons were stored in the UK in peacetime.
“A plan – Operation Perfidious – is already in existence to allow for the rapid deployment of TNW from the stock-pile at RAF Honington in Suffolk, either directly by helicopter to the ship, or to service airfields in the UK by helicopter or C130 Hercules aircraft for onward transmission to ships.
“Theoretically, transfer from Honington to sea could take as little as 24 hours, but this assumes that the ships are close to the Norfolk coast and that all the assets from the movement are available.
The documents go on to discuss the need to act quickly, and the risks the Soviet Union posed.
They add: “Nuclear stockpiles are known to be prime targets for Soviet Special Forces.
“Additionally, each time a nuclear weapon is moved there is a safety risk, a security risk, and, if the timing of the move can be predicted, a risk of civil, industrial or even military intervention.
“The risks are small if the move is preplanned and conducted in isolation of all other activities.
The risks would be higher if hurried embarkation of a large number of TNW were attempted amidst all the other preparations for war under the eagle eyes of the media and anti-war faction.
“Nuclear stockpiles could be created around the country, but the cost in preparing storage facilities and the manpower necessary to service and guard such areas would be disproportionately high.”
Thankfully, they were never needed.
While tension did reach unthinkable levels, both the US and the Soviet Union were aware of each other’s nuclear capabilities.
As a result, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction was accepted between the two.
This was the belief that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender.
It is based on the theory of deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons against the enemy prevents the enemy’s use of those same weapons.
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (317)
- 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)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 