nuclear-news

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

Jacobs to assist in planning of UK SMR projects

 In May, the company (Jacobs) was selected by GBE-N to provide
environmental services for potential SMR nuclear development at its Oldbury
site. Jacobs said that its work, with a multidisciplinary team including
AtkinsRéalis and AECOM, would cover terrestrial and marine environments,
environmental assessments, Habitats Regulations Assessment and “associated
activities to inform future potential planning, design and permitting
decisions”.

 World Nuclear News 21st July 2026 https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/jacobs-to-assist-in-planning-of-uk-smr-projects

July 24, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Crunch time for the nuclear lobby’s biggest lie (Small Modular Nuclear Reactors)?

22 July 2026, https://theaimn.net/crunch-time-for-the-nuclear-lobbys-biggest-lie-small-modular-nuclear-reactors/

There could be a big drama now, about Small Modular Nuclear Reactors sort of not really going to happen in the UK. But I don’t think so. The nuclear lobby is adept at twisting a negative outlook into a sorta positive one. And I’m sorry to say, but I think that Andy Burnham might just co-operate in this process.

At the moment, the UK, and the world, are waiting for the UK’s new progressive poster boy, Andy Burnham, to declare his policies on all sorts of things. His general theme is “left of centre”, socially progressive, with the emphasis on economic reform – “business-friendly socialism”. Most likely, Burnham’s approach to the big issues of climate and nuclear will be a cautious “business-as usual.” Those who are deeply concerned about climate and nuclear issues can hardly blame him. Unfortunately, the reality is that Burnham could never have got where he is now, if he bucked the prevailing system, with Labour now a kind of weaker Tory party.

At the moment, the UK, and the world, are waiting for the UK’s new progressive poster boy, Andy Burnham, to declare his policies on all sorts of things. His general theme is “left of centre”, socially progressive, with the emphasis on economic reform – “business-friendly socialism”. Most likely, Burnham’s approach to the big issues of climate and nuclear will be a cautious “business-as usual.” Those who are deeply concerned about climate and nuclear issues can hardly blame him. Unfortunately, the reality is that Burnham could never have got where he is now, if he bucked the prevailing system, with Labour now a kind of weaker Tory party.

What has this got to do with Small Modular Nuclear Reactors?

Well, as I have written before, the global nuclear lobby now depends on the UK to kick off the new nuclear renaissance, with a fleet of small nuclear reactors in the UK, as promised by the previous Prime Minister with his Great British Energy – Nuclear. The stated purpose is to provide the UK soon, with cheap, plentiful, clean, climate-friendly, proven technology, safe, community-welcomed, waste-free, peaceful electricity. In that statement there are already 10 lies. Of all those lies, I would say that “soon” is the biggest whopper of them all.

SOON

The most “exciting” SMR plan, that of Poland-based SGE (Synthos Green Energy), promises 14 SMRs in operation by 2034. That would provide about the same amount of electricity as one large nuclear reactor. However, SMRs that each provide 300 MW would provide very much more – but then they would have to be larger, and no longer qualify as “small”. Either way, that would be only a beginning – many, many more SMRs would be needed to meet the UK’s electricity needs. And, let’s not forget – the coming wave of data farms for artificial intelligence is going to probably double that need.

So, even in the most optimistic scenario, SMRs are not going to cut the mustard for showing the world that soon Small Modular Nuclear Reactors will power a nation. Of course the promise of “soon” also relates to the claim that SMRs are needed for action on climate change. Clearly, they are going to be irrelevant, too late for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, whereas we have renewable energy right now. And of course, but rarely mentioned – energy efficiency, energy conservation – the really effective way to reduce greenhouse emissions.

CHEAP

The next biggest whopper about Small Modular Nuclear Reactors is the statement that they would be cheap. Here we get into the minefield of deliberate obfuscation about the financial facts. The cost of building SMRs is likely to be astronomic, and the only practicable way is to build them en masse. That would mean that the company building them would need to have big orders, not just for one or two reactors. Big orders bring with them a heap of problems. Like an IKEA cupboard, these “modular” items are all the same – if you buy a whole lot of them they’d better all work out perfectly – no chance really to just try out one. Buyers are reluctant, and so are investors.

Of course, the argument will be that SMRs will provide cheap electricity. Well that absolutely would necessitate economies of scale. That was the reason that the idea of small reactors was abandoned in the past. Simply, a large reactor producing a huge amount of electricity has got to produce it more efficiently and cheaply. The proponents of SMRs never talk about the accompanying costs – insurance, the security staff required, the transport and disposal of toxic long-lasting wastes. The truth is, those proponents absolutely know that their product is in fact very expensive. And that is why the subservient corporate media consistently baffle us with convoluted arguments that minimise the cost to tax-payers. They know damn well that the only way that SMRs could possibly be developed is by government funding. Keir Starmer backed a Rolls Royce plan that would be blatantly funded by the tax-payer. The SGE plan purports to be privately funded, but it’s tangled up with various government-funded schemes.

These were 2 lies – but there are 8 more to go.

Plentiful? – well, apart from Russia and China’s 2 duds – SMR’s don’t actually exist – quite the reverse of plentiful.

Clean? They are still part of a dirty production system, starting from uranium mining, with its workers exposed to radiation, and its piles of radioactive tailings.

Climate-friendly? There is a whole chain of steps from mining through to waste disposal that involve fossil fuel energy.

Proven technology? Well, they don’t even exist.

Safe? SMRs can’t melt down in the same way as big reactors, but still contain radioactive material, a target for theft, terrorists or military attacks Can still have accidents releasing radiation.

Community-welcomed? This really is a big one, with a lack of proper consultation on plans – There’s strong resistance from some local groups, such as Radiation Free Lakeland.

Peaceful? The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors.

Wastes? Stanford-led research finds small modular reactors will exacerbate challenges of highly radioactive nuclear waste.

Now that Starmer, with his big promises, has gone, it’s probably no longer up to the UK’s Prime Minister to lead the global charge on small nuclear reactors. Andy Burnham has to negotiate the whole troubled energy scene, try to be progressive, placate the fossil fuel lobbies, and the nuclear lobby. He has been very quiet on nuclear policy, but he is committed to the existing defence and AUKUS nuclear agreements. So for “peaceful” nuclear, he’s most likely to go for a compromise – SMRs, supporting just a few, rather than the much-touted “fleets” of them.

So, no doubt the USA will take up the torch – One Year After Executive Orders, U.S. Nuclear Energy Renaissance is in Full Swing.

The media is awash with the wonder of new nuclear reactors, in concert with the AI data farm boom. The few voices who call for restraint, and point out the problems, are drowned out by the cacophony of handouts from the companies promising SMRs, handouts faithfully regurgitated by the corporate media, and by those universities which have bought into the propaganda.

There are the many good, decent people, whose living depends on their work within the uranium-nuclear-defence industries. And communities that are caught up in the nuclear industry, and its associated government bonuses. And many professionals, especially journalists, who, if they paused to look at the whole picture, might see the folly and the danger and the lies, of this so much touted technology. And of course, politicians who would be out of a job if they opposed the sacred cows of new energy and nuclear defence. So the whole SMR juggernaut moves on, bit by bit, and has itself become one big lie.

July 23, 2026 Posted by | Christina's notes, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Ceases to be a nuclear power’: The high-stakes deal the new UK PM inherits

SBS News,  21 July 2026 By Yasmine Alwakal

Andy Burnham has inherited a major AUKUS commitment with Australia. Whether Britain can deliver it is another question

IN BRIEF

  • On Monday, former Manchester mayor Andy Burnham succeeded Keir Starmer as the United Kingdom’s prime minister.
  • Experts say the change in leadership could impact the UK’s investment in defence but is unlikely to impact AUKUS.

Labour leader Andy Burnham has become the United Kingdom’s seventh prime minister in a decade — but experts say it remains unclear how the former mayor of Greater Manchester will approach the country’s most important strategic partnership with Australia.

Newly departed UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer suffered a high-profile split with his defence secretary, John Healey, over a perceived failure to properly fund the department.

Burnham now inherits Starmer’s £298bn ($573b) defence spending commitment over the next four years, £4.7b ($9b) of which is unfunded and will need to make up part of Burnham’s first budget.

Experts have said that, while Burnham is unlikely to renegotiate the AUKUS agreement, defence is likely to play a central position in the new UK leader’s job description, given the growing threat of Russia to NATO members.

Jennifer Parker, a non-resident fellow at the Lowy Institute, told SBS News that policymakers in Australia will be watching Burnham’s approach to foreign affairs closely.

“I think there are broader questions about the implications of Andy Burnham’s views on defence and the defence investment plan in the UK … [but] in many ways, AUKUS is critical for the UK,” Parker told SBS News.

The UK, alongside Australia and the United States, entered into trilateral AUKUS security agreement in 2021.

The deal is divided into two key pillars: Australia’s acquisition of conventionally-armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability and the development and delivery of advanced capabilities such as underwater drones.

In July 2025, Australia also entered into a bilateral agreement with the UK dubbed the Geelong Treaty. The 50-year agreement enables the cooperative design, building, operation, sustainment, and disposal of nuclear-powered submarines known as SSN.

Will Burnham deliver on the UK’s AUKUS commitments?

Since 1968, the UK has been a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and is recognised as one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

Parker said since the end of the Cold War the UK has operated ballistic missile submarines called SSBNs:

“Now, you need to have SSN’s — attack submarines — to be able to protect your ballistic missile submarines. AUKUS, for the UK makes designing, building and operating SSN’s cheaper. So, it makes it easier.”

That’s why she believes the UK, whether led by current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer or the incoming Burnham, will continue to uphold its AUKUS commitments.

“If the UK can’t achieve AUKUS … the long-term impact is quite significant in terms of the UK ceases to be a nuclear weapons power. Which really changes its global status.”

According to the Australian government, the UK will deliver its first SSN’s by the late 2030s. Defence Minister Richard Marles said the first class of Australian-built submarines is intended to enter service by the early 2040s…………………………………………………………………..

Parker from the Lowy Institute also believes the Australian government will watch to see if the UK takes “strides” to address what she described as capability constraints facing UK submarine industrial bases………….

“As much as I’m confident they’ll make it [AUKUS] work, whether they’ll make it work within the stated time frames is genuinely an open question.”

The UK’s defence committee has launched an inquiry into its military resilience and preparedness. It follows a July report by its defence ministry, which found that 47 out of 49 major defence projects in the UK were delayed or over budget.

In a statement, Dan Jarvis, the newly appointed defence secretary, said:

“Many projects had been announced with insufficient or no funding at all. The consequences were profound: limited availability of warships and aircraft, an army facing a recruitment crisis, morale weakened and renewal of our nuclear deterrent delayed.” https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/andy-burnham-aukus-submarine-deal-australia/j38e9qzzf

July 23, 2026 Posted by | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear plants face risks of AI-powered cyber-attacks and insider threats

17 Jul, 2026 By Tom Pashby, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/uks-nuclear-plants-face-risks-of-ai-powered-cyber-attacks-and-insider-threats-17-07-2026/

Civil nuclear power plants in the UK now face cyber-attacks enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI) and insider threats, according to the government’s National Risk Register 2026.

The National Risk Register (NRR) is the annual, public-facing version of the government’s National Security Risk Assessment, it “includes a summary of all but the most sensitive, classified risks,” according to Cabinet Office minister of state Darren Jones.

Jones informed parliament and the public of the publication of the 2026 edition of the NRR in a written ministerial statement on 14 July.

The NRR attracts attention because it explains the government’s assessment of the likelihood and severity of a broad range of risks, including terrorism, cyber threats, geopolitical and diplomatic risks, accidents and systems failures.

The 2026 edition covers 95 risks. Of relevance to the civil engineering and infrastructure sector, “cyber-attack water infrastructure” was added as a new risk to reflect learning “from reported cyber-attacks targeting the water sector,” the NRR said.

It also added, “accidental damage on the National Gas Transmission Network – to explore damage to the gas transmission network as a result of agricultural digging.”

In her foreword to the 2026 NRR, Cabinet Office security minister Angela Eagle said: “This government is committed to sharing risk information as openly as possible, to support all those working to build the UK’s resilience with their planning, preparation and response activity.

“Greater transparency also means that people can scrutinise our assessments, and challenge us to do things differently when needed.”

She added: “A whole of society approach is required to increase resilience; therefore, I encourage all risk and resilience professionals to consider the risks in this publication, and join our collective endeavour to make the UK more prosperous and secure.”

While the 2025 edition included “conventional attack” and “cyber-attack” against civil nuclear as two distinct risks, the 2026 edition removed the cyber-attack risk profile and instead covered cyber risks facing civil nuclear into “malicious attack: civil nuclear”, in its “state threats” grouping.

Within the new malicious attack: civil nuclear profile, the NRR 2026 said: “AI can automate the process of launching cyber-attacks, making them faster, more efficient and lower the barrier for entry.”

Reacting to the 2026 NRR, cybersecurity firm e2e-assure CEO Rob Demain told NCE: “Nuclear plants have always planned for physical threats and human error. What’s new is the assumption that the attacker may already have a way in, that someone with legitimate access can do real damage without ever needing to break down a fence.

“AI is exacerbating the threat. The National Risk Register itself says AI can automate attacks, making them faster, cheaper and easier to attempt without much skill.

“Elsewhere it goes further, describing how AI makes fake messages harder to spot and helps attackers find weaknesses faster. That’s a very different risk to plan for, than a lone bad actor.”

Demain added: “For the people who design, build and maintain this infrastructure, the message is simple: security can no longer be something bolted on afterwards, or left entirely to IT.

“It has to be built into how these sites operate, day to day, alongside the safety systems engineers already take for granted.”

Also responding to the “malicious attack: civil nuclear” risk profile, an EDF spokesperson told NCE: “As the risk from cyber-attack on UK critical national infrastructure continues to evolve, EDF continues to further refine its defences, with horizon scanning for developing threats and a constant series of system improvements to make it harder for those attempting to damage our systems.

We note that the National Risk Register does not propose a scenario of a safety risk but one that ‘results in a disruption to normal operations until investigations have demonstrated nuclear safety and security critical systems remain unaffected’, and that ‘the disruption is not a direct result of the attack’.”

Demain told NCE earlier in July that critical national infrastructure assets are now more at risk of cyber-attacks due to the deployment of newer, more powerful artificial intelligence (AI) tools like Anthropic’s Mythos.

July 23, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

New energy policy for Burnham?

, RENEW EXTRA WEEKLY

The soon to be UK Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, is being portrayed as a ‘new broom’ that could, or might, adopt better polices in all areas. Well, what about the energy sector? It’s in a mess, economically, driven by high fossil gas prices, with retail electricity prices at an all-time high, despite renewable energy doing well (65 GW so far) with its wholesale price mostly being low. It’s in a mess technologically, at risk of undermining the crucial next stage of its important renewables programme by diverting cash to support major high-cost nuclear and fossil carbon capture and storage projects.

Both of these programme involve multi-billion funding. The much delayed Hinkley Point nuclear plant may end up costing £40-50bn, inflation adjusted, when it finally gets completed, probably in 2030. Its follow-on project, Sizewell C, may not do much better, despite promises about learning from Hinkley, and despite the investment risks being met by a consumer levy.  There are already construction issues. A late 2030s start up at best? By then we might also be seeing some outcomes from the very speculative funding for small modular reactors and even maybe some results from the even more speculative fusion funding, with £2.5bn set aside for it.

Is any of that good value for money?  Will it deliver anything useful on time?  On past performance, it’s very uncertain. Same for the £21.7 bn  Carbon Capture and Storage programme, the full cost of which has been put at possibly up to  £264bn by 2050. CCS is basically an attempt to allow us to keep burning fossil fuel.  Is that sensible? Or for that matter the controversial Drax wood pellet combustion plant– it got £1bn in subsidies last year.  Burning imported wood from forests does not seem to be a very sustainable option…

There are arguably so many more worthy projects, for example in green hydrogen production and storage, a vital new area for expansion.  Heat storage linked to local heat networks too. To be fair, some of these ideas are now getting a bit of funding. For example, pioneering green hydrogen producer ITM Power has received £86.5 m from Great British Energy and DESNZ. It will be used to expand ITM’s electrolyser production at its Sheffield plant to 1GW p.a. But we need more like that for the rapid expansion of short and long duration storage. Freed from drain of endless nuclear and carbon capture diversions, we could also accelerate the newer renewables, like tidal stream turbines, via expansion of the Contacts for Difference (CfD) system. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

What next? Hinkley Point C is about half-built, so a lot of capital has already been sunk in it, but there are yet more billions scheduled to be spent on it. Burnham is unlikely to be willing to halt it (he is, it seems, pro-nuclear) but he might be persuaded to ditch Sizewell C, work on which has hardly started.

And the big proposed CCS programme too, so as to release further billions. To soften the change of policy, he could keep some small projects going (an SMR perhaps, or a CCSU project) as ‘insurance’ options, much as some renewables were treated in the past (including, at one stage, offshore wind) when nuclear was seen as the main new UK energy option. 

More or less everyone, except some deadhead Reform supporters, now see renewables as that. The only debate seems to be on what backup might be needed. Large inflexible nuclear plants are not much use at that, nor are costly CCS fossil gas plants, while SMRs are as yet uncertain in terms of cost and viability.

But we don’t need any of this to deal with variable renewables. Storage, large and small scale, is part of the answer, along with improved transmission and flexible demand management plus smart grid systems, so as to balance local variable demand and variable supply efficiently.

We have to build a new system and that will inevitably be costly, although, arguably, not as much as trying to keep the old system going with dubious supply choices and carbon fixes. For example, on the basis of its latest LCOE data, Lazard says ‘Despite rising and inflationary cost pressures across all generation technologies, renewables remain the most cost-competitive form of new-build generation on an unsubsidised basis’.  

And economic cost is not the only issue. For example, if built, Sizewell C will produce around 40,000 kg of plutonium in its spent fuel over its 60-year lifespan. Plutonium has a half-life of around 25,000 years, with SMRs, if they ever work, also adding to the pile. Is that what we want to bequeath our far-off descendants? Along with other long-lived nuclear wastes? 

That’s a big challenge. Andy Burnham has made some commitments on energy and climate, but only so far mostly in a limited and cautious way. Will he now come up with something more radical? We will have to wait to see. Meanwhile, the latest data show that over 70% of DESNEZ expenditure is now nuclear related…   
https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2026/07/new-energy-policy-for-burnham.html?m=1

July 23, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Witness- A visit to Donald Morrison, a chief witness in the case of Willie McRae

 I took a trip to Benbecula to visit Donald Morrison, a chief witness in
the case of Willie McRae, a prominent Scottish lawyer who was found dying
of a bullet wound in a car that had gone off the road in 1985. Donald was
the last person to see Willie McRae alive and whenever I have spoken to him
on the phone about this, he has always urged me to visit. The case has been
bugging me and so eventually I decided to take him up on the invitation.


McRae was an SNP politician, activist-lawyer and anti-nuclear campaigner.
On a misty April night 41 years ago, his car went off a quiet road – it
must have been going at speed – and came to rest 90 feet away. It was
spotted by an eagle-eyed accident investigator and his wife the next
morning at ten am. They glimpsed the car, which was partially hidden by a
gully, turned back to check on it and found Willie unconscious but still
breathing.

Neither they nor the other passers-by they flagged down, who
included a doctor, nor the paramedics, nor the nurses who received McRae at
the hospital noticed a bullet wound. However, an MRI scan after McRae was
transferred to Raigmore revealed that he had been shot. The authorities
later said that McRae had committed suicide by shooting himself in the
temple. But it seems unbelievable that all of the professionals who cared
for him would have failed to wash the blood away and see a bullet wound if
it was in his temple. A nurse who treated McRae came forward later and said
that there was a small entry wound under the hairline at the back of his
neck.

This is much more consistent with an attempted covert murder than
suicide. Donald was a beat policeman who walked the streets of the centre
of Glasgow, sometimes chatting in Gaelic to other Highland cops. He had
frequent interactions back then with McRae, because of a series of
break-ins at his office

 Jackie Kemp 18th July 2026, https://substack.com/home/post/p-207141868

July 23, 2026 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Ministry of Defence (MoD) finally admits ‘extensive’ human radiation experiments on nuclear test veterans

“There’s no truth, no justice. We were labrats in a government experiment which they didn’t bother to keep the paperwork for. But worse is the cover-up which continues.”

Susie Boniface Reporter, 16 Jul 2026, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nuclear-test-veterans-ministry-defence-37439854

The Ministry of Defence has finally admitted it ran an “extensive” programme of human radiation experiments on troops.

A two-year review has confirmed ministers and officials falsely denied that medical data was collected from servicemen and civilians at nuclear weapons tests for more than a decade. Worse, the MoD says it has been unable to locate the results – leaving veterans continuing to suffer after 70 years without answers.

The results were published online, with a host of other last-minute announcements, a few hours before kick off in England’s semi-final match against Argentina. John Morris, who has waited a lifetime to find out why his son Steven died in his cot aged four months, and why he he’s had cancer and a blood condition, said: “This is vindication, but there’s no relief.

“There’s no truth, no justice. We were labrats in a government experiment which they didn’t bother to keep the paperwork for. But worse is the cover-up which continues.

“They lied, hid it all behind national security, and have come clean now only because we forced them. People should go to jail for this.”

  • The review, ordered after the Mirror exposed the Nuked Blood Scandal in 2022, has found:
  • A secret hoard of 50,000 files that include nuclear veteran records but have not been examined
  • More than 5,000 nuclear test veterans deliberately excluded from government health studies
  • Veterans who applied for a war pension had their medical records permanently stripped, denying them proper diagnosis and treatment
  • Thousands of medical records were unlawfully destroyed, some as recently as last year

Prime Minister-in-waiting Andy Burnham has privately told staff to begin work on reparations, compensation and commemoration for the nuclear test programme, including setting up a special tribunal to determine the extent of government lies.

Criminal allegations of perjury, perverting the course of justice, fraud by false representation and misconduct in public office are being considered in a major crime review by Thames Valley Police. Officers have asked the Atomic Weapons Establishment to provide details of emails from 2014 which we reported this week, discussing a whistleblower report about fallout on inhabited areas, which was also covered up.

The review has not looked into how thousands of records were classified, why courts were told monitoring never happened, or why in 2018 Parliament was told by a minister that the MoD was “unable to locate any information” about blood testing. As recently as 2023, ministers said “only one blood test” existed.

It has also failed to look into the records of civilians, indigenous people, merchant navy crews and RAF units monitoring foreign nuclear weapons tests, who were all similarly monitored.

Lord Tom Watson, who as deputy Labour leader asked the first questions about the blood tests, said: “I am sure this report will deeply concern the new Prime Minister. It is extraordinary that veterans’ medical records were lost or destroyed, affecting their health and compensation claims. We now need to establish who knew what, when, and why nobody acted sooner.”

July 22, 2026 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Climate Change – It’s only a matter of time…

At the same time, nuclear energy is being consecrated as the answer to climate change and energy self-sufficiency. But, its high cost and long time scales, let alone the wastes and risks it brings, make it no solution at all. And in France closing nuclear power stations during a heatwave has become a routine response.

13 July 2026 Andrew Blowers, Chair of B Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG),
https://www.banng.info/news/regional-life/climate-change-a-matter-of-time/

“…………………………………. we seem woefully unprepared for what is becoming the new normal. Serious adaptation is required as the UK’s ‘infrastructure is built for a climate that no longer exists’.

As various ‘tipping points’ are passed the impacts on people and environments will become irreversible. Sea-level rise is already unstoppable and will irrevocably change environments. Here, in the Blackwater estuary there will be destruction of saltmarshes, widespread flooding and inundation of agricultural and urban areas beyond.

Until recently there was a broad political consensus on the need to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Now, the strenuous efforts by successive governments to achieve net zero by 2050 are being undermined by short-term political gestures such as opening up North Sea oilfields which does nothing for either energy or environmental security.

At the same time, nuclear energy is being consecrated as the answer to climate change and energy self-sufficiency. But, its high cost and long time scales, let alone the wastes and risks it brings, make it no solution at all. And in France closing nuclear power stations during a heatwave has become a routine response.

What drilling in the North Sea and building a few nuclear power stations does do is divert attention and resources from the pressing and fundamental need to press ahead with the energy transition as fast as we can.

Meanwhile it is only a matter of time before impacts will become intolerable. We shall have to ensure we can adapt and survive.

July 22, 2026 Posted by | climate change, UK | Leave a comment

BEC showcases nuclear powered A.I data centre, Pioneer Park (and Radiation Free Lakeland protestors were there)

By Gareth Cavanagh

RESIDENTS of West Cumbria were given the chance to shape a nuclear-powered
AI data centre, at a consultation event on Tuesday. Early ideas and
ambitions for Pioneer Park were showcased to the public at The Peddler in
Whitehaven on Tuesday July 14.

BEC is planning the community impact of the
development and overseeing the production of a master-plan. Appointed to
the project by Cumberland Council and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
(NDA), BEC says it is committed to ensuring Pioneer Park improves the lives
of West Cumbrians.

Pioneer Park will see a Small Modular Reactor (SMR)
developed at Moorside, neighbouring Sellafield, the immense amounts of
energy it will generate will be used to power an innovative A.I data
centre. Attendees of the event heard that excess energy produced by the
nuclear reactor could support Sellafield in its decommissioning mission and
even power homes to support those in fuel poverty.

The nuclear industry and
Cumberland Council is also considering whether the development could be
used to lower the cost of energy for communities and improve efficiency for
community facilities. Chief Executive Michael Pemberton told Newsquest
Cumbria that BEC is an enabler for the project.

Activists from Radiation
Free Lakeland protested the event, holding placards and flags about the
potential impact on the River Ehen as well as the ‘false advertising’ of
clean energy. Marianne Birkby told Newsquest Cumbria that Radiation Free
Lakeland were protesting the event “to show some resistance to the plan
that’s been called clean energy, which is a nuclear powered A.I data centre
between Sellafield, the River Ehen and Beckermet. BEC tasked Mott MacDonald
and WSP with the creation of Pioneer Park masterplan in March. Mr Pemberton
said that although the Government asked for the master-plan to be completed
in 18 months, he challenged its authors to have it ready in six.

Carlisle News & Star 16th July 2026

July 22, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Activists protest outside Pioneer Park nuclear event.

 by Gareth Cavanagh

ACTIVISTS held a protest outside The Peddler in Whitehaven yesterday as nuclear sector figures shared their plans for ‘Pioneer Park’, an AI data centre powered by nuclear energy, with the public.

Land at Moorside, neighbouring Sellafield, has been central to new nuclear ambitions for a
number of years. There were once ambitions to develop a ‘clean energy hub’
on the land with a mix of energy-generation solutions, including a fleet of
small modular reactors (SMR).

Now named Pioneer Park, the proposal is to
develop an SMR site which will provide the energy for an ‘innovative’ AI
data centre. It is hoped the development will attract more than £12billion
in investment from business giants, provide a jobs boost and a space for
emerging industries to thrive.

But Radiation Free Lakeland, which protested
a consultation event about the proposals yesterday, argues that benefits of
the development would not outweigh the environmental impact, pointing out
the proximity of the land to the River Ehen as well as the village of
Beckermet.

Pioneer Park is set to be located on land at Moorside,
neighbouring Sellafield. The activist group said: “This area of green
fields and River Ehen Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) should be
a buffer zone between the sprawling Sellafield site and the surrounding
villages.”

They said that the nuclear industry is “using public money like
there is no tomorrow to try and make this buffer zone a further nuclear
sacrifice zone and AI data centre.”

A spokesperson for Pioneer Park’s
developers said that the site at Moorside “has been identified through
Government policy for nuclear power generation since 2011″. Their ambition
is “to build on west Cumbria’s internationally recognised strengths in
energy and engineering by bringing forward new nuclear development,
alongside complementary clean energy and technology projects, helping to
diversify the economy, support the ongoing decommissioning mission at
Sellafield, generate secure, low-carbon energy and create long-term
opportunities for local people.”

 Carlisle News & Star 15th July 2026, https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/26276371.activists-protest-outside-pioneer-park-nuclear-event/

July 19, 2026 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Norwegian rocks to protect Sizewell B on Suffolk coast

15th July, By Sarah Chambers,

Rock armour is being shipped over from Norway to provide temporary coastal flood protection for Sizewell B.

 Around 6,700 rocks – each weighing between
three and six tonnes – are being delivered to Sizewell C’s Temporary
Construction Area via the Port of Great Yarmouth. They will be used to
protect the nuclear power station during construction of the neighbouring
Sizewell C site.

 East Anglian Daily Times 15th July 2026,
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/26271343.norwegian-rocks-protect-sizewell-b-suffolk-coast/

July 19, 2026 Posted by | climate change, UK | Leave a comment

Faslane set for £15bn upgrade to ‘future-proof it for war-fighting’

15th July, By Gregor Young

MORE than £15 billion will be spent transforming Faslane over the next decade, the UK Government has announced.

HMNB Clyde, which houses the UK’s nuclear
submarines, will receive £15.1bn in a move expected to support thousands of
jobs. It is part of the £26bn Project Royal Oak investment programme into
critical UK naval bases which defence minister Luke Pollard said will
increase the “readiness, availability and lethality” of the Royal Navy.
On a visit to Faslane on Tuesday, he said it is the biggest upgrade of the
UK’s naval bases since the end of the Cold War.

The National 14th July 2026,
https://www.thenational.scot/news/26280622.faslane-set-15bn-upgrade-future-proof-war-fighting/

July 18, 2026 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The global small nuclear reactor bandwagon is led by Britain. It ought to fail, but will it?

14 July 2026 Noel Wauchope, https://theaimn.net/the-global-small-nuclear-reactor-bandwagon-is-led-by-britain-it-ought-to-fail-but-will-it/

Why on Earth does the Small Nuclear Reactor media bandwagon exist?

That’s a fair question, because it has been shown time and time again that small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) are not an economically viable way to provide electricity.

I can only conclude that there are other reasons for the present juggernaut of promotion of SMRs.

You may not have noticed the blithering onslaught of media promotion of SMRs going on over the past weeks, (interestingly, in conjunction with the political demise of Sir Keir Starmer). With the dramatic events in the Persian Gulf, and in climate extremities, dominating the media, a fuss about SMRs seems a small matter.

But it is not a small matter.

The global media juggernaut for SMRs is potentially essential for the survival of the global nuclear industry. If one nation sets up a multitude of, or even a few, small nuclear reactors, that will provide the necessary respectability for the industry – to be accepted as cheap. clean. safe, and embraced by local communities.

Hooray – Britain to the rescue!.

Now, there’s extraordinary excitement in both the British and overseas media. A current example:

The High Value Manufacturing (HVM) Catapult has launched a national consultation, to help UK industry capture the economic and industrial benefits of more than £100bn of expected investment in the country’s civil and defence nuclear programmes over the next decade. Industry, government, academia and regional partners are invited to contribute to the consultation through written submissions, stakeholder workshops and a programme of regional engagement running throughout 2026.

HVM Catapult doesn’t specifically state SMRs, but that’s where the UK media fervour is at. In a previous article, I have mentioned The Times, Telegraph, PR Newswire, Energy Live, Business Green, among the British enthusiasts. Internationally, there’s Construction News, Global Banking and Finance Review, World Nuclear News, Indux, and more.

What is new and remarkable about this UK SMR media fervour?

Well, there are two things. One is that it is all pitching the UK as the leader for the new nuclear renaissance. The other is that this will be a privately-led renaissance. Hence the importance of the “private” SGE £35bn plan for a fleet of SMRs across Britain, rather than the government supported Rolls Royce plan.

I digress here to point out that three nations have tried and failed to set up small nuclear reactors. Russia and China have each managed to develop one actually functioning small nuclear reactor. – in both cases – that took decades, and neither is working out very successfully – Russia – (Akademik Lomonosov floating NPP) and China (HTR-PM high temperature gas cooled reactor). The USA nearly got one happening – The Rise and Fall of NuScale: a nuclear cautionary tale.

So – at last it’s all going to happen ! And the UK is the leader – hip hip hooray! Except that the UK’s biggest SMR promoter, PM Keir Starmer is about to bow out at any moment. The policies of the heir apparent, Andy Burnham, are curiously unknown. He’s got a respectably Leftie background in supporting nuclear veterans, but I couldn’t find anything on his nuclear industry views. And, I’m inclined to think that he, or any new UK Prime Minister, would not be able to withstand the pressure of the cavalcade of vested interests in the nuclear industry. Those vested interests include not only all the UK and global stakeholders in the industry’s supply chain, but the fawning corporate media and the financially dependent universities.

There are some strong voices that speak out against this smr folly. Phil Johnstone and Andy Stirling of the University of Sussex have given a powerful condemnation of this SMR push – The hidden military pressures behind the new push for small nuclear reactors.

The nuclear industry was inaugurated in the early 1940s, specifically for creating an atomic bomb. That has continued to be its purpose for nearly a century, and it its sole real purpose today. Commercial “peaceful” nuclear power was set up as a temporarily successful fig leaf over that truly inhuman purpose. Temporarily successful, because it did provide efficient and seemingly cheap, seemingly clean, seemingly safe electricity for millions of people. We now know that not only are there long term costs – financial, environmental, health and safety costs – but that new big nuclear reactors are monumentally unaffordable.

In this 21st Century – how to make this industry look peaceful, clean, safe, and attractive to bright young career-oriented people? Well if that’s now an impossible task for dirty great Big nuclear reactors, how about a plethora of Small fig-leaves – Small Modular Nuclear Reactors.?

There may be a continued media deluge about UK’s golden SMR future, as promised by the dear soon-to- be-departed Starmer. But I doubt that there will be a deluge of investors keen to get on board the juggernaut. One saving grace of our capitalist society is that our financial writers tend to tell the truth about investment prospects. They might save the UK from this SMR folly. Then the nuclear lobby will have to really ramp up the war-mongering fever that already exists.

July 17, 2026 Posted by | Christina's notes, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

The risk of nuclear war is rising. This is what Burnham must do.

In his first Downing Street briefing, the incoming prime minister is going to learn some hard truths about his country’s ultimate deterrent

David Blair

The risks of nuclear war are rising. This is what Burnham must do. In his
first Downing Street briefing, the incoming prime minister is going to
learn some hard truths about his country’s ultimate deterrent. The ritual
for an incoming prime minister, unchanged for decades, has never been so
fraught with significance.

Soon after Andy Burnham enters No 10, he will be
taken to a secure room where Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the
Chief of the Defence Staff, will brief him on how to authorise a British
nuclear strike. At that moment, Burnham will join the handful of world
leaders with the individual power to inflict a greater measure of
destruction than has ever been wrought before.

Burnham will be inducted
into the dreadful – in the true sense of the word – and singular
responsibility of what Lord Hennessy, the constitutional historian, calls
the “purely prime ministerial function” of overseeing Britain’s
ultimate deterrent and deciding this country’s nuclear policy.

 Telegraph 13th July 2026, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/13/burnham-must-bolster-britains-nuclear-defences/

July 17, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Why is Britain spending huge amounts on nuclear militarism?

11th July, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) By Samuel Rafanell-Williams

NATO outspends Russia 10 to one on nuclear weapons, yet this has seemingly not bought adequate “security” for the nuclear alliance

 One mightexpect this to prompt a serious discussion and re-imagination of what
“security” means in the 21st century, and what role nuclear weapons
actually play in international affairs.

Nevertheless, “deterrence”
ideology still has firm purchase within the mind of the British political
and military establishment. This was confirmed by Keir Starmer’s Defence
Investment Plan (DIP), in which nuclear weapons spending was central.
Indeed, the Prime Minister announced the Defence Nuclear Enterprise would
receive a staggering £62 billion over the next four years. The investment
required in sustaining and renewing Britain’s nuclear programme is
enormous.

 The National 11th July 2026, https://www.thenational.scot/politics/26271804.britain-investing-huge-amounts-nuclear-militarism/

July 17, 2026 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »