Since renewable sources of energy are getting more promising in the country, and domestic gas production has risen, it is time to close the door on nuclear projects and rely more on other sources of energy.
Replace nuclear with renewables http://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/editorial/replace-nuclear-renewables May 22,2019 Head of the Lower House’s Energy and Mineral Resources Committee Haytham Ziadin raised recently, and rightly so, the viability of the plan to build a nuclear plant to satisfy the energy needs of the country. Ziadin went as far as calling for ending altogether all plans to build such a plant, and called them simply as squandering of badly-needed funds.
The comments of the head of the Lower Houses’ Energy and Mineral Resources Committee must be seen against the backdrop of an earlier ambitious plan to construct a huge nuclear plant, by signing first an agreement to do so with Russia’s Rosaton agency in 2015 for this purpose that would cost $10 billion at a time when the country is dry of funds and nearly broke! The defunct nuclear plant project would have generated only 2,000 Megawatts of electricity anyway. The cancelled deal was replaced by a less ambitious project to build smaller nuclear reactors.
In retrospect though, the idea to go nuclear in the country was marred with strong objections from several well-informed sources in the country, which raised the spectrum of its safety and the non-availability of sufficient amounts of water anywhere in the country for cooling purpose.
The economic feasibility of any such project was always on the minds of various shades of opinion on a national nuclear plant. When Aqaba was dropped as a site for this purpose due to strong objections from different circles, the sponsors of the nuclear plant project shifted their attention to other regions of the country, despite the fact that water resources are scant and the country can ill-afford depleting whatever is left of precious water on a dubious nuclear plant.
An increasing number of developed countries with a wide experience in nuclear energy have begun to phase out nuclear energy plants for safety reasons, among them Germany, so why would Jordan opt to go the other way?
When all is considered, the limited financial resources available to the country, in addition to rising safety hazards associated with nuclear plants, Ziadin and like-minded cautious people are right in objecting to the construction of even small nuclear reactors.
According to the Minister of Energy and Minerals Resources Hala Zawati, the country is now producing 11 per cent of our electricity by renewable energy sources and is projected to produce no less than 20 per cent of its energy needs by solar and wind sources of energy by 2021.
On balance, whatever benefits that nuclear plants may have for Jordan, they are outweighed by lack of financial resources, high safety risks associated with nuclear plants, shortage of water resources in all parts of the country and the lack of an appropriate geographic area for any such nuclear project.
Since renewable sources of energy are getting more promising in the country, and domestic gas production has risen, it is time to close the door on nuclear projects and rely more on other sources of energy.
  Israel vs. Russia: The Middle East War That Could Become a Nuclear Train WreckYes, this could happen. The National Interest, by Michael Peck 20 May 19, As always with the Arab-Israeli (or Iranian-Israeli) conflict, the real danger isn’t the regional conflict, but how it might escalate. In the 1973 war, the Soviets threatened to send troops to Egypt unless Israel agreed to a cease-fire. The United States responded by going on nuclear alert. |
|
Trump says US has not reached out to Iran for talks Times of Israel 20 May 19,
UN voices concern over fiery rhetoric from Tehran and Washington, says it’s mediating with officials on both sides to calm situation…….
The White House announced Sunday that it will unveil the first phase of its long-awaited Mideast peace plan at the conference in Bahrain in late June, saying it will focus on economic benefits that could be reaped if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved. The plan envisions large-scale investment and infrastructure work, much of it funded by wealthy Arab countries, in the Palestinian territories.
But officials say the June 25-26 conference will not include the core political issues of the conflict: final borders, the status of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees or Israeli security demands.
The Palestinians have said they will not send representatives to the conference. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-may-20-2019/
Concerns about a possible conflict have flared since the White House ordered warships and bombers to the region to counter an alleged, unexplained threat from Iran that has seen America order nonessential diplomatic staff out of Iraq……
mposing sanctions while seeking talks is like “pointing a gun at someone and demanding friendship,” said Iranian Gen. Rasool Sanaeirad, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency.
That comment was echoed by Majid Takht-e Ravanchi, Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations.
“They want to have the stick in their hands, trying to intimidate Iran at the same time calling for a dialogue,” Ravanchi told CBS. “What type of dialogue is this?”…..https://www.apnews.com/04eabdee60dc4a399b22a2c6a5f0c672
 The Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign: A prelude to war with Iran? Bulletin of the Atomic Scentists By Dina Esfandiary, May 6, 2019 The Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran has picked up pace. Last month, the administration designated the Revolutionary Guards as a terror organization. Last week, it cancelled waivers from US sanctions that allowed some countries to buy Iranian crude oil, aiming to force Iranian oil exports to zero, and only renewed some of the waivers that allowed foreign countries to engage in civil nuclear cooperation with Iran—key to the functioning of the Iran nuclear deal. This week, the White House stated that a routine deployment of and aircraft carrier strike group to the Persian Gulf was in fact intended to “send a clear and unmistakable message” to Iran.
To date, however, the maximum pressure campaign has failed to change Iranian behavior. In fact, it seems designed to push Iran to leave the deal and set the scene for military confrontation…….. The 2015 nuclear agreement, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), specified that three Iranian facilities—the Fordow enrichment plant, the Arak heavy water reactor, and the Bushehr nuclear power plant—would be converted with the help of foreign countries. The nuclear deal requires both Fordow and Arak to be converted into research facilities; also, Iran needs waivers to continue buying fuel from Russia for the Bushehr plant. There was no fact-based argument in favour of not renewing the nuclear waivers; they enable foreign suppliers and engineers both to work to convert the Iranian facilities so they can’t be used in a nuclear weapons program, and to have insight into Iranian civilian nuclear efforts because of their presence on the ground and access to the facilities. On 3 May, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Ford announced the renewal of the waivers allowing work to continue on Arak, Fordow, and Bushehr facilities, but only for 90 days, rather than the previous 180. The decision to renew the waivers is welcome to those who hope all remaining parties to the nuclear deal will continue to implement it. But the engineers involved in converting Iranian facilities will not be able to make significant progress in such a short time. This short extension move effectively kicks the can down the road for 90 days. Apparently, the Trump administration did not want to risk looking lenient by renewing all nuclear waivers and so revoked two. The first allowed Iran to ship excess heavy-water to Oman, while the second permitted it to ship excess enriched uranium—any amount above a 300-kilogram limit—in exchange for natural uranium. The JCPOA states that excess enriched uranium can be either down-blended (converting uranium enriched to anything above 3.5 percent back to low enriched uranium) or sold. The US decision prevents Iran from selling the excess enriched uranium, only leaving Tehran with the option of down-blending it……… It is unclear what the Trump administration aims to achieve with its “maximum pressure” campaign. Ceasing the oil waivers only restricts Iran’s ability to purchase much needed humanitarian goods for a population that Secretary Pompeo repeatedly states the administration “stands with.” The renewal of the waivers allowing work to continue on Iran’s nuclear facilities is wise, but the shortening of the timeframe will mean that the administration will merely have to revisit the issue in 90 days. The work contemplated under the Iran nuclear deal can’t possibly be completed within three months. What’s more, far from “tightening restrictions on Iran’s program,” preventing it from shipping or selling excess nuclear material abroad seems designed to interfere with Iran’s efforts to implement its commitments under the JCPOA. Reframing a routine deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln strike force to the region only serves to unnecessarily heighten tensions and foster the potential for miscalculation. The only reason to do any of this is to push Iran into a corner, paving the way toward military confrontation—something few want because it will achieve little. https://thebulletin.org/2019/05/the-trump-administrations-maximum-pressure-campaign-a-prelude-to-war-with-iran/?utm_source=Bulletin%20Newsletter&utm_medium=iContact%20email&utm_campaign=TrumpMaxPressure_05062019 |
|
|
|
Nuclear options, EU countries face a deadline to save a deal with Tehran that neither
 party wants to lose, https://www.ft.com/content/1de937ae-7526-11e9-bbad-7c18c0ea0201 Michael Peel , 13 May 19 Iran’s threat to ramp up its nuclear programme sent a shudder through European capitals last week. Now EU countries face a deadline to save a landmark atomic deal with Tehran that neither party wants to lose.
The accord is likely to be raised when the bloc’s foreign ministers gather for a regular meeting in Brussels on Monday. On the table will be Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s ultimatum issued on May 8, the anniversary of the US withdrawal from the agreement. He warned that the Islamic republic would revive atomic activities restricted under the accord, unless EU countries and fellow agreement-backers China and Russia compensate it for economic benefits lost when Washington unilaterally reimposed sanctions. The conundrum for EU states is that they have very little leeway or leverage to do more.
Efforts to sustain EU-Iran commercial dealings have been hobbled because most big companies have turned away from Tehran for fear of possible US retaliation. The pressure is growing for the Europeans to launch operations of a new company known as Instex, which is backed by France, Germany and the UK to facilitate trade with Iran.
Another idea from Tehran watchers is for European countries to lobby the US to restore waivers that allow countries including China to continue importing Iranian oil. That seems a long shot, given the failure of personal overtures by EU leaders to persuade the Trump administration to stay in the nuclear deal in the first place.
So much for the bad news. EU diplomats looking for positives say they at least have a bit of time, as escalation of the crisis seems not to be in the interests of either Iran or the EU for now. Mr Rouhani and his ministers have tempered their ultimatum with calibration, flagging that it will be at least two months and possibly several more before a possible breach of the deal’s limits.
Another perhaps surprising source of European hope is President Donald Trump. While his lieutenants John Bolton, national security adviser, and Mike Pompeo, secretary of state, back the US “maximum pressure” campaign on Tehran and have shown little interest in negotiations, the president has at least paid lip service to the possibility of dialogue. Last week he spoke repeatedly of his hope that Iran would make contact for talks. ]Such a call seems highly unlikely. But it is another sign that there is still room in this turmoil for diplomacy, rather than an inevitable slide to nuclear deal disintegration — and potentially even destructive conflict.
|
No one in the sun- and gas-soaked Middle East needs nuclear power https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2019/05/09/no-one-in-the-sun-and-gas-soaked-middle-east-needs-nuclear-power/?utm_content=bufferd1c88&utm_medium=Twitter+(via+Buffer)&utm_source=twitter.com/fdd&utm_campaign=@FDD+via+Buffer+feed
Mark Dubowitz. Chief Executive, Henry Sokolski, 12 May 19
The best way to stop the development of these lethal tools is the total application of the NPT, to which all countries must subscribe, he said.
The Iranian delegate criticized the U.S. nuclear aid to Israel, which reflects its double standards for the possession and development of atomic technology.
Israel must be forced to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and submit to inspections of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he stressed…… https://www.plenglish.com/index.php?o=rn&id=41815&SEO=iran-supports-nuclear-non-proliferation-treaty
It may become impossible to tell if Iran starts making a nuclear bomb, https://www.newscientist.com/article/2202247-it-may-become-impossible-to-tell-if-iran-starts-making-a-nuclear-bomb/ By Debora MacKenzie, 10 May 19,
The most ambitious effort ever to peacefully stop a country getting a nuclear bomb hangs by a thread this week. On 8 May Iranian president Hassan Rouhani announced that his country would start stockpiling low-enriched uranium and heavy water – a potential step towards building nuclear weapons.
The move was in response to US sanctions, despite Iran’s compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which aims to limit the country’s potential bomb-making nuclear activities.
JCPOA imposed an unprecedented inspections regime on Iranian nuclear plants, which has been testing novel monitoring technology that could severely limit the spread of the bomb.
The deal does not stop Iran making enriched uranium to fuel its nuclear power plant, or heavy water for a reactor it was building at Arak. But it prevents it stockpiling either or enriching uranium further towards weapons-grade, and says Arak must be re-designed to produce less of another bomb fuel, plutonium.
The incentive for Iran was a lifting of trade sanctions, imposed after it was found to have covertly enriched uranium in the early 2000s. Since then the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has judged Iran to be in compliance with the deal.
But one year ago, US president Donald Trump pulled out of the JCPOA, saying he was unhappy with the deal. The US re-imposed trade sanctions and threatened countries that did business with Iran with severe trade penalties. Since then Iran’s oil exports have since fallen from 2.5 to 1 million barrels a day.
Now, Rouhani’s pledge means Iran will stop exporting low-enriched uranium and heavy water, which was mandated by the JCPOA, so Iran could continue production without exceeding caps on stockpiles.
The build-up of the materials will not immediately violate the JCPOA. But Rouhani added that if European countries do not, in 60 days, find some way for banks and importers to do business with Iran without suffering US sanctions, Iran will start enriching uranium further – and build Arak to existing specifications. That will be the end of the JCPOA, as Iran resumes its path to a bomb.
We may not even know if it does. The JCPOA provides three levels of safeguards in Iran. It gets the standard inspections the IAEA does in all countries with nuclear plants; additional inspections agreed in 1997 and voluntary for IAEA member states; and extra, unprecedented inspections, including continuous monitoring using novel technology.
James Acton of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, says that without the JCPOA, Iran gets only the basic inspections – which it successfully evaded in the past. Without extra inspections the IAEA cannot draw credible conclusions about the absence of undeclared activities in Iran, says Acton.
In theory inspectors outside Iran could watch for krypton-85, a tell-tale gas emitted when plutonium is extracted from heavy water reactors. But Acton is not even sure Iran would attempt to keep that secret. The idea of having nuclear weapons is to deter attack – and as Dr. Strangelove observed, it isn’t much of a deterrent if no one knows you have it.
Iran Snap Nuclear Inspections Jump as Tensions With U.S. Rise, Bloomberg,By Jonathan Tirone, May 11, 2019,
Snap inspections at Iranian nuclear facilities jumped last year, underscoring the wide-reaching ability of international monitors to access potential sites that could feed clandestine research.
The finding was included in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s latest Safeguards Implementation Report, which is circulating among nuclear-security officials as the specter of another Middle Eastern conflict rises. Europe in particular has found itself squeezed between hostile governments in Washington and Tehran after the U.S. left the nuclear deal and slapped sanctions on Iran.
According to a copy of the restricted report published this week and obtained by Bloomberg News, inspectors deployed in Iran conducted a record number of so-called complementary accesses for a third year running in 2018. Almost 400 inspectors spent some 1,867 person-days combing Iranian sites and triggered more than three surprise visits a month………https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/iran-snap-nuclear-inspections-jump-as-tensions-with-u-s-rise
to cease complying with portions of the nuclear deal it signed with Western powers in 2015, though it didn’t withdraw from the agreement altogether. But the announcement increases already escalating tensions with the U.S. Nick Schifrin talks to Takht Ravanchi, Iran’s ambassador to the UN, about why Iran made the decision now and whether it can trust President Trump.Judy Woodruff:
Today, Iran announced it plans to stop complying with portions of the nuclear deal it signed with Western powers in 2015. Iran stopped short of withdrawing from the deal altogether.
But, as Nick Schifrin reports, the announcement increases already escalating tensions with the United States.
Nick Schifrin:
The Iran deal made a fundamental trade: Iran restricted its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
One year ago today, the Trump administration withdrew from the deal, and has since reimposed sanctions. For the last year, Iran complied with the deal, but, today, Iran said it would not abide by all the deal’s restrictions….. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/irans-ambassador-to-the-un-blames-u-s-bullying-for-decision-on-nuclear-treaty
|
PRESIDENT KENNEDY GAVE ISRAEL A STRONG WARNING ABOUT ITS NUCLEAR REACTOR IN 1963
A telegram from Kennedy dated July 4, 1963, congratulates Eshkol on assuming the prime ministership after David Ben-Gurion’s resignation and recounts talks between Kennedy and Ben-Gurion about inspections at the reactor in Dimona.
“As I wrote Mr. Ben-Gurion, this government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as Israel’s effort in the nuclear field,” the telegram said. The telegram was declassified in the 1990s but was not widely available until last week when the National Security Archives, a project affiliated with George Washington University, posted it on its website…….https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/President-Kennedy-gave-Israel-a-strong-warning-about-its-nuclear-reactor-in-1963-589107 |
|
U.S. Issues New Sanctions as Iran Warns It Will Step Back From Nuclear Deal, NYT, By David E. Sanger, Edward Wong, Steven Erlanger and Eric Schmitt, May 8, 2019
WASHINGTON — Iran’s president declared on Wednesday that he would begin to walk away from the restrictions of a 2015 nuclear deal, and the Trump administration responded with a new round of sanctions against Tehran, reviving a crisis that had been contained for the past four years.
The escalation of threats caught the United States’ allies in Europe in the crossfire between Washington and Tehran. And while the announcement by President Hassan Rouhani of Iran did not terminate the landmark nuclear accord that was negotiated by world powers, it put it on life support.
Britain, France and Germany all opposed President Trump’s move a year ago to withdraw the United States from the accord that limited Iran’s capacity to produce nuclear fuel for 15 years. Ever since, the Trump administration has ramped up a pressure campaign against Iran’s military and clerical leaders, including blocking global oil exports and expediting warships and B-52 bombers to the Persian Gulf this week to face down what officials described, without evidence, as a new threat by Tehran against American troops in the Middle East.
European officials had promised to set up a bartering system to evade American sanctions imposed against Iranian oil. But that effort has largely failed, even as Iran complied with its obligations under the agreement, from production limits to inspections.
On Wednesday morning in Tehran, Mr. Rouhani declared he had run out of patience.
“The path we have chosen today is not the path of war, it is the path of diplomacy,” he said in a nationally broadcast speech. “But diplomacy with a new language and a new logic.”
Rather than exit the deal entirely, Mr. Rouhani announced a series of small steps to resume the production of nuclear centrifuges and to begin accumulating nuclear material.
Mr. Rouhani also set a series of carefully calibrated deadlines for European leaders — essentially forcing them to either join the United States in isolating Iran or uphold the nuclear deal that world powers spent years negotiating with Tehran.
He said the Europeans had 60 days to assure that Iran could “reap our benefits” under the nuclear accord, by making up for lost oil revenues and allowing the country back into the international financial system.
If the Europeans agree, they will be subject to sanctions by the United States. If they dismiss Mr. Rouhani’s claims, he says Iran will take more dramatic steps.
Hours later, the White House announced that it was taking additional measures to squeeze Iran’s economy by imposing sanctions on its steel, aluminum, iron and copper sectors. Iran’s industrial metals industries account for about 10 percent of its exports, according to a Trump administration estimate.
Mr. Trump said in a statement that the move “puts other nations on notice that allowing Iranian steel and other metals into your ports will no longer be tolerated.”
Under John R. Bolton, the national security adviser who has long advocated pressing for regime change in Iran, the White House has been urging ever-escalating sanctions…….Hours later, the White House announced that it was taking additional measures to squeeze Iran’s economy by imposing sanctions on its steel, aluminum, iron and copper sectors. Iran’s industrial metals industries account for about 10 percent of its exports, according to a Trump administration estimate.
Mr. Trump said in a statement that the move “puts other nations on notice that allowing Iranian steel and other metals into your ports will no longer be tolerated.”
Under John R. Bolton, the national security adviser who has long advocated pressing for regime change in Iran, the White House has been urging ever-escalating santions……Hours later, the White House announced that it was taking additional measures to squeeze Iran’s economy by imposing sanctions on its steel, aluminum, iron and copper sectors. Iran’s industrial metals industries account for about 10 percent of its exports, according to a Trump administration estimate.
Mr. Trump said in a statement that the move “puts other nations on notice that allowing Iranian steel and other metals into your ports will no longer be tolerated.”
Under John R. Bolton, the national security adviser who has long advocated pressing for regime change in Iran, the White House has been urging ever-escalating sanctions…….https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/us/politics/iran-nuclear-deal.html
|
At the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, the Saudi government is constructing a small nuclear research reactor. The Argentine-designed reactor will produce just tens of kilowatts of energy, a tiny fraction of what Saudi Arabia needs. But it’s a sign of things to come — the kingdom’s plans include gigawatts of energy from nuclear plants for both electricity and desalination. Saudi Arabia’s plans appear, on paper, to be entirely peaceful. But some arms control experts are concerned that its nuclear energy ambitions may also be part of its ongoing rivalry with Iran, which already possesses dual-use technology that could aid in the production of a nuclear bomb. The U.S. and others such as South Korea and China are pushing ahead with plans to help Saudi Arabia’s civilian nuclear program. “The big, big question in the background,” says Sharon Squassoni, a nuclear expert and professor at George Washington University, “is do we have enough controls in place that we can trust [Saudi Arabia]? Since they’ve been pretty clear about their intentions should things go bad with Iran.” Right now, Saudi Arabia generates its electricity with fossil fuels. But the government predicts that oil will be more valuable as an export. So about a decade ago, Saudi Arabia began pursuing an ambitious plan to start a nuclear energy program. Even after the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, Squassoni says, Saudi Arabia kept at it. “Most countries were walking away from nuclear, but they decided, ‘Look, this is our long-term plan,'” she says. Squassoni says she’s a bit flummoxed by Saudi Arabia’s continued interest in nuclear, given its high cost and the ease with which the country could adopt renewable energy sources like solar. But the interest may make a lot more sense, she says, when considering Saudi Arabia’s rivalry with Iran. Iran’s nuclear program has had military dimensions in the past, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Today, Iran remains in possession of thousands of centrifuges that can be used to enrich uranium. Depending on the level of enrichment, that uranium can be used either as fuel for nuclear reactors — or to make the cores of nuclear bombs. Since 2015, the IAEA has closely monitored Iran’s centrifuges as part of an international agreement that freezes Tehran’s enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief. But Iran’s nuclear capabilities clearly make Saudi Arabia nervous. Speaking last year on CBS’ 60 Minutes, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman warned that if Iran ever got a nuke, Saudi Arabia would too. “Without a doubt if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible,” he said. Saudi officials say the new research reactor under construction outside of Riyadh has nothing to do with nuclear bombs. In a statement to Bloomberg News last month, Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Energy, Industry and Mineral Resources said the reactor’s purpose was “strictly peaceful.” “The project is fully in compliance with the IAEA and international framework governing the nuclear energy and its peaceful use,” the statement said. The Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C. did not respond to an NPR request for comment. From a technical standpoint, this new reactor is too small and too low-power to be of any use in bomb-making, according to Aaron Stein, director of the Middle East program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute in Philadelphia. “This is not something that a country would engage upon for a weapons program,” he says. In fact, even large civilian nuclear power plants can’t be used easily to make bombs. But Saudi Arabia has remained quiet on whether it wants its own centrifuges in addition to power plants. Such centrifuges might be legal, as they are used to enrich uranium for electricity production, but Stein says a Saudi decision to pursue that technology “would send alarm bells throughout the region.” “I think it would be interpreted as a move to hedge, and to consider building nuclear weapons down the line,” Stein says. The Trump administration has been looking at a nuclear cooperation deal with Saudi Arabia. Squassoni says such a deal should be carefully crafted. She hopes the U.S. will seek assurances that Saudi Arabia will not pursue civilian technologies that could allow it to make a bomb. |
|
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
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
nuclear-news 