Perry Plans Nuclear-Energy Talks With Saudis, Sources Say https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-26/u-s-energy-chief-is-said-to-plan-nuclear-deal-talks-with-saudis, By Ari Natter , Jennifer Jacobs , and Jennifer A Dlouhy February 27, 2018,
Talks come as U.S. considers allowing Saudi uranium enrichment
· Energy Secretary Perry delays India trip for visit to London
Energy Secretary Rick Perry will travel to London to discuss nuclear energy with officials from Saudi Arabia on Friday as the Trump administration pursues a deal to build reactors in the kingdom, according to two people familiar with the plans.
Perry scrapped a trip to New Delhi to accommodate meetings at the White House this week, creating an opening for him to lead an inter-agency delegation to London, said the people, who asked not to be named to discuss administration strategy.
The administration is considering permitting Saudi Arabia to enrich and reprocess uranium as part of a deal that would allow Westinghouse Electric Co. and other American companies to build nuclear reactors in the Middle East kingdom.
The meetings in London between Perry and Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Energy and Industry Khalid Bin Abdulaziz Al-Falih are seen as a critical step in months of ongoing discussions over a potential nuclear cooperation agreement, bringing together key deal makers from each country.
Some American agreements with other countries have prohibited the enrichment and reprocessing of uranium in exchange for the use of nuclear technology, and that had scuttled negotiations for Saudi projects during the Obama administration.
16 Power Plants
The administration is mulling whether to ease that requirement now as a way to help Westinghouse and other companies win Saudi contracts. Saudi Arabia plans to construct 16 nuclear power reactors over the next 20 to 25 years at a cost of more than $80 billion, according to the World Nuclear Association.
The Energy Department confirmed the cancellation of Perry’s India trip but a spokesman did not reply to a question about the London talks.
Any agreement they reach must be approved by Congress, which will have 90 days to weigh in. The potential deal has drawn opposition from anti-nuclear proliferation advocates and some lawmakers, such as Senator Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat.
On Monday, Markey asked the Trump administration to detail its efforts to sign a nuclear cooperation agreement with the Saudis and share information about U.S. negotiations with the country.
“Congress remains in the dark about what exactly is being considered, why we may be re-evaluating our nonproliferation objectives and standards, and how and when this information is being conveyed to Saudi Arabia and other countries around the world,” Markey said in a letter to Perry and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is expected to visit the U.S. in March.
February 28, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
marketing, politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA |
Leave a comment
No to a permissive US-Saudi nuclear deal, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Victor Gilinsky, Henry Sokolski , 22 Feb 18,
A US-Saudi nuclear agreement is said to be in the works. The reported deal would allow Saudi Arabia to buy US nuclear power reactors and—because of Saudi resistance to stricter terms—would be “flexible” on Saudi uranium enrichment and on reprocessing of spent reactor fuel. The trouble with flexibility regarding these critical technologies is that it leaves the door open to production of nuclear explosives.
More disappointing, although perhaps not surprising, is that the proposed agreement has the support of more than a few nuclear policy experts outside government. They make a familiar argument regarding nuclear exports: If the United States insists on stricter terms—terms that bar enrichment and reprocessing—the Saudis will turn to Russia or China for nuclear technology, granting these countries greater influence in the Middle East. The United States has been down this road before, in the cases of Iran and India, and it didn’t turn out well. A permissive US-Saudi nuclear agreement would be strategically dangerous for the United States and the region. Congress should not approve such a deal.
What’s driving the administration to cut such an agreement? Let’s set aside the Energy Department’s claims that the Saudis need nuclear power plants and that Westinghouse has a chance to get the business for the United States. First, the Saudis have cheaper energy options—natural gas and renewables. This is clear from the decision of the similarly situated United Arab Emirates not to build more nuclear plants beyond four reactors already planned or under construction. Second, Westinghouse—now bankrupt—has no chance to get the business, and in any case it is no longer a US-owned company. The Saudis, if they did go forward with developing nuclear energy, would do business with the South Koreans, who are successfully completing a proven reactor design next door in the United Arab Emirates.
If buying American is not the key driver of this deal, what is? The Saudis, to maintain theoption of using in its plants US parts whose export is controlled by law, want an umbrella agreement. But they obviously have more in mind than nuclear energy. They compete with Iran for influence in the Middle East, and they are obsessed with this rivalry. They are convinced that they need to match Iran’s nuclear potential. That means being within arm’s reach of a Bomb. These circumstances shouldn’t surprise anyone, and in fact one of the main reasons to restrain Iran is precisely to avoid such a scenario. If Saudi Arabia opts for nuclear weapons, Turkey and Egypt may be close behind. Taking into account Israel’s nuclear arsenal, the Middle East could turn into a nuclear cauldron.
One must also consider the longer-term consequences of allowing “flexibility” in a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia. Nuclear plants proposed for the Middle East, or now being built, will last many decades. But will governments in the region last that long? The Saudi kingdom—despite recent, overhyped steps toward modernity such as allowing women to drive—is an anachronism. However firmly entrenched the kingdom appears in the person of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, it could disappear overnight, as almost happened in the fundamentalist attack on the Grand Mosque in 1979.
……… nuclear power’s weapons potential is, if anything, more worrisome than ever. It does not make sense for the United States to promote nuclear energy internationally………. https://thebulletin.org/no-permissive-us-saudi-nuclear-deal11534
February 24, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics international, Saudi Arabia, weapons and war |
1 Comment
Congress skeptical of Saudi nuclear energy demands, AL-Monitor Bryant Harris February 21, 2018
After years of informal negotiations, the United States is facing mounting pressure to reach a civilian nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia or risk getting shut out of the Gulf kingdom’s lucrative energy market.
But Riyadh’s refusal to give up on certain capabilities that could be used in a nuclear weapons program has caused concern among lawmakers that the Donald Trump administration may be too keen to strike a deal.
Under Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Congress must review any agreement to supply a foreign state with US nuclear technology. While the Trump administration has yet to publicly rule out any concessions, Saudi insistence on retaining the right to enrich uranium and to reprocess plutonium faces significant roadblocks on Capitol Hill.
“I think we have made clear — not that it was necessary — that a 123 agreement that in any way contemplated an enrichment program is going to face a lot of opposition in Congress,” a congressional source familiar with the debate told Al-Monitor. “So I just don’t think that the executive branch is going to go there.”……….
Energy Secretary Rick Perry visited Saudi Arabia and discussed Riyadh’s solicitation for bids to build its first two nuclear reactors late last year. Soon after, Bloomberg reported that the administration was actively considering a 123 agreement that would grant the Saudis wide latitude to pursue uranium enrichment and plutonium reprocessing.
Nonproliferation champions in Congress have been pushing back since. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the Saudi ambassador last month that he would force a floor vote and debate on any proposed 123 agreement with Riyadh.
“It seems crazy to loosen important nonproliferation standards just to try to secure an uncertain commercial deal,” Markey told the Journal………
“Members of the Saudi royal family have suggested that they may have an interest in nuclear weapons at some point in the future,” Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association, told Al-Monitor. “There is considerable concern in Congress about any nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia that does not somehow make it harder for the Saudis to acquire enrichment and reprocessing technology in the future.”
……….. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/02/congress-skeptical-saudi-nuclear-energy-demands.html#ixzz57rsqvui8
February 22, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA |
Leave a comment
Kerry: Saudi Arabia, Egypt wanted US to bomb Iran https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180219-kerry-saudi-arabia-egypt-wanted-us-to-bomb-iran/ February 19, 2018
Former US Secretary of State John Kerry said the late Saudi King, Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, and ousted Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, asked the United States to bomb Iran.
Speaking at a panel discussion at the Munich Security Conference yesterday, Kerry said Mubarak personally told him that “the only thing to do with Iran is to bomb it”.
According to the former US official, the discussion took place in September 2013 when a number of countries in the region were increasingly concerned over Iran’s nuclear programme.
Kerry added that Washington responded at the time that Tehran had already begun enriching nuclear fuel, and that a military strike will not stop this development.
As US Secretary of State in former President Barack Obama’s administration, Kerry was one of the main drafters of the nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries which in July 2015. The deal allows for the lifting of decades of sanctions imposed on Tehran in exchange for it ceasing its nuclear programme.
Earlier in January, US President Donald Trump gave the deal’s European partners four months to “either fix the deal’s disastrous flaws or the United States will withdraw”. However, European allies along with other signatories to the agreement, Iran, China and Russia categorically rejected the request.
February 22, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
Why Trump Might Bend Nuclear Security Rules To Help Saudi Arabia Build Reactors In The Desert, NDTV, 20 Feb 18, The issue is a test of President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and his self-professed bargaining prowess.
World |
© 2018 The Washington Post |
Steven Mufson, The Washington Post | Updated: February 20, 2018 Next month, Saudi Arabia will announce the finalists of a sweepstakes. The prize? Multibillion-dollar contracts to build a pair of nuclear power reactors in desolate stretches of desert along the Persian Gulf.
For Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, the reactors are a matter of international prestige and power, a step toward matching the nuclear program of Shia rival Iran while quenching some of the kingdom’s domestic thirst for energy.
For the Trump administration, the contest poses a thorny choice between promoting U.S. companies and fighting nuclear proliferation. If the administration wants to boost the chances of a U.S. consortium led by Westinghouse, it might need to bend rules designed to limit nuclear proliferation in an unstable part of the world. That could heighten security risks and encourage other Middle Eastern countries to follow suit.
“If the Saudis were to get an agreement without restrictions, it would set a dangerous precedent in the region and [be] a significant break with American nuclear policy for the last 50 years,” said Jon Wolfsthal, a consultant on nuclear weapons who was a director for arms control and nonproliferation at the National Security Council under President Barack Obama.
The issue is a test of President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and his self-professed bargaining prowess. Trump, his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry have made pilgrimages to Riyadh to cozy up to the young crown prince and win big contracts for U.S. firms. Yet little has come to fruition.
Now, as Mohammed prepares to visit the United States in March, the Saudi deadline looms for Westinghouse, which is winding its way through bankruptcy and is eager to find customers for its much-praised AP1000 design. Without a diplomatic deal, Westinghouse and a South Korean group, which uses U.S. parts and technology and would be bound by the same rules, could be sidelined in favor of Russian or Chinese state companies.
The key rules governing nuclear sales to Saudi Arabia are spelled out in a document known as a 123 agreement, named after a section in the 1954 Atomic Energy Act.
The United States has 123 agreements with 23 countries, Taiwan and Euratom, a group of 27 nations. The 123 agreement for Saudi Arabia imposes limits on uranium enrichment and the reprocessing of spent fuel, both of which could be used to produce material for nuclear bombs.
Saudi Arabia has argued that it should be free to mine and enrich its own uranium deposits, as long as it abides by the international Non-Proliferation Treaty,which bars the diversion of materials to a weapons program. The China National Nuclear Corp. has signed preliminary agreements with the Saudis to explore nine potential uranium mining areas. Former intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal told Reuters in December that Saudi Arabia would “have the same right as the other members of the NPT, including Iran.”
Mohammed, who harbors ambitions for an invigorated, more diverse Saudi economy, invited foreign firms to submit proposals last fall. In mid-November, executives from the world’s five leading nuclear reactor design and construction firms – including the Pennsylvania-based Westinghouse – made presentations to Saudi officials.
Khalid Al-Falih, Saudi Arabia’s energy and natural resources minister, told Reuters on Dec. 20 that he aims to sign contracts by year’s end.
The push to provide nuclear power to Saudi Arabia has divided U.S. policymakers.
Henry Sokolski, the executive director of the nonprofit Nonproliferation Policy Education Center who served in President George H.W. Bush’s Pentagon, asked, “How do we feel about the stability of the kingdom? The reactors are bolted to the ground for a minimum of 40 years and a maximum of 80 years. That’s enough for the whole world to change.”
But others say that if the United States doesn’t build the reactors, then Russia’s Rosatom or the China Nuclear Engineering and Construction Group will, providing fewer safeguards against proliferation and eroding U.S. diplomatic strength in the region.
“I would prefer to have America’s nuclear industry in Saudi Arabia than to have Russian or China’s, so I think it’s useful that we’re reengaging with the Saudis. We should try to get the best restraints on enrichment and reprocessing, including a ban for some significant length of time, say 20 or 25 years,” said Robert Einhorn, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former State Department adviser for nonproliferation and arms control. “We should show some flexibility.”
The need to build nuclear reactors in Saudi Arabia, which has the world’s largest petroleum reserves, isn’t obvious. The kingdom says it wants to curtail the burning of oil to generate electricity at home. Doing so would free up more oil for exports, the kingdom’s main source of revenue.
Saudi electricity consumption doubled between 2005 and 2015. During the peak summer months, when temperatures soar past 120 degrees Fahrenheit, the kingdom burns about 700,000 barrels of oil a day for air conditioning. Add industrial and transportation use, and Saudi Arabia’s domestic crude consumption has neared 3 million barrels a day, more than a quarter of its total output.
Solar is another option. The Saudis could also tap its plentiful supplies of natural gas, much of which is flared and wasted.
Prestige is another lure for Saudi Arabia. Its smaller oil-rich neighbor, the United Arab Emirates bought four South Korean-model nuclear reactors now under construction.
“If ever there was a place that could take care of own energy needs without nuclear, it’s the UAE,” said F. Gregory Gause, a professor of international affairs at Texas A&M University. “I think it becomes a prestige thing, like international airports.”
But the UAE also signed a 123 agreement in January 2009 that is called the gold standard. It agreed not to enrich or reprocess – although a passage says it could reconsider if others in the region start doing so. It plans to buy uranium from the United States and ship spent fuel to Britain or France for reprocessing.
For Saudi Arabia, the UAE’s gold standard set a high bar. “During the Obama administration, we were at an impasse,” said Gary Samore, a former White House arms control coordinator now at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. “We wanted them to make a commitment similar to what Abu Dhabi did. We never overcame that issue in our negotiations.”
………… In the end, the fate of the U.S. proposal will circle back to the political and diplomatic efforts to forge a 123 agreement.
February 22, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA |
Leave a comment
The world’s largest oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, is exploring the use of nuclear energy for domestic energy consumption as part of its transition away from an oil-based system.
“We are looking at a number of countries that have nuclear technology for peaceful purposes… so that we can save the oil and export it in order to generate revenue,” Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir said at the Munich Security Conference.
February 17, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Saudi Arabia, spinbuster |
Leave a comment
Robin Emmott, Thomas Escritt 18 Feb 18 MUNICH (Reuters) – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel could act against Iran itself, not just its allies in the Middle East, after border incidents in Syria brought the Middle East foes closer to direct confrontation……… https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-israel-iran/netanyahu-says-israel-could-act-against-irans-empire-idUSKCN1G20C8?feedType=RSS&feedName=newsOne
February 17, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Israel, politics international, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
The Pentagon said it wouldn’t use depleted uranium rounds against ISIS. Months later, it did — thousands of times. WP, By Thomas Gibbons-Neff February 16, 2017
Months after the Pentagon said it wouldn’t use a controversial type of armor-piercing ammunition that has been blamed for long-term health complications, U.S. aircraft fired thousands of the rounds during two high-profile air raids in Syria in November 2015, the Pentagon acknowledged Wednesday.
The use of the ammunition, a 30mm depleted-uranium bullet called PGU-14, was first reported by a joint Air Wars-Foreign Policy investigation on Tuesday. The roughly 5,265 rounds of the munition were fired from multiple A-10 ground attack aircraft on Nov 16, 2015, and Nov. 22, 2015, in airstrikes in Syria’s eastern desert that targeted the Islamic State’s oil supply during Operation Tidal Wave II, said Maj. Josh Jacques, a U.S. Central Command spokesman.
When loaded with depleted-uranium bullets, the A-10s fired what is called a “combat-mix,” meaning the aircraft’s cannon fires five depleted-uranium rounds to one high explosive incendiary bullet.
The strikes, which involved 30mm cannon fire, rockets and guided bombs, destroyed more than 300 vehicles, mostly civilian tanker trucks, the Pentagon said at the time. The two incidents were championed by the Pentagon, and footage of trucks being destroyed was posted online. The Pentagon said that no civilians were present during the bombardment because fliers had been dropped before strafing runs warning those in their trucks to flee.
Before the November strikes, the Pentagon said it would not use depleted-uranium munitions in the campaign against the Islamic State. In response to a query from a reporter in February 2015, Capt. John Moore, a spokesman for the U.S.-led anti-ISIS coalition in Iraq and Syria said in an email that “U.S. and Coalition aircraft have not been and will not be using depleted uranium munitions in Iraq or Syria during Operation Inherent Resolve.” ….https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/02/16/the-pentagon-said-it-wouldnt-use-depleted-uranium-rounds-against-isis-months-later-it-did-5265-times/?utm_term=.6e94c644b90b
February 14, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
depleted uranium, Syria, USA |
Leave a comment
Bellona 12th Feb 2018, In a major blow to one of Russia’s most ambitious international nuclear
deals, three investors backed out of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant,
leaving Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom adrift on how to finish
the $20 billion station.
Russian President Vladimir Putin touted progress
on the plant as recently as November during a state visit to the Turkish
capital, and the Kremlin propaganda news network RT pushed the narrative
that the plant’s first reactor would be finished ahead of its scheduled
2023 launch date.
That was all thrown into doubt last week when a Turkish
consortium, representing 49 percent of the funding for the Akkuyu plant’s
construction, backed out of the deal, citing a failure to agree on a number
of project’s “commercial conditions,” Russian and Turkish news
outlets said. Rosatom is now in talks to secure other investors, but the
corporation wont’ say by how long the loss of half the project’s
financing will delay the station’s launch, or by how much the project’s
price tag is likely to increase as a result of the back out.
http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2018-02-investor-pullout-leaves-rosatom-at-sea-with-its-nuclear-project-in-turkey
February 14, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
marketing, Russia, Turkey |
Leave a comment
How a Saudi nuclear reactor could accelerate an arms race. https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21736575-kingdoms-nuclear-ambitions-make-little-economic-sense-how-saudi-nuclearThe kingdom’s nuclear ambitions make little economic sense, 8 Feb 18
IN THE desert 220km (137 miles) from Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), a South Korean firm is close to finishing the Arab world’s first operational nuclear-power reactor. The project started ten years ago in Washington, where the Emiratis negotiated a “123 agreement”. Such deals, named after a clause in America’s export-control laws, impose tough safeguards in return for American nuclear technology. When the UAE signed one in 2009, it also pledged not to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel into plutonium. Both can be used to make nuclear weapons. Arms-control wonks called it the gold standard of 123 deals.
Saudi Arabia only wants bronze. The kingdom has its own ambitious nuclear plans: 16 reactors, at a cost of up to $80bn. But, unlike the UAE, it wants to do its own enrichment. Iran, its regional rival, is already a step ahead. The most controversial provision of the nuclear deal it signed with world powers in 2015 allows it to enrich uranium. Iran did agree to mothball most of the centrifuges used for enrichment, and to process the stuff only to a level far below what is required for a bomb. Still, it kept the technology. The Saudis want to have it, too.
Lawmakers in Washington are worried. Granting the Saudis such a deal could prompt other countries, such as the UAE, to ask for similar terms. It may undermine global efforts at non-proliferation. Indeed, critics of the Iran deal fear that a Saudi enrichment programme would compromise their effort to impose tighter restrictions on Iran. But Donald Trump, America’s president, is less concerned. He has close ties with the Saudis. He has also pledged to revitalise America’s ailing nuclear industry. Among the five firms bidding for the Saudi project is Westinghouse, an American company that filed for bankruptcy last year. It would not be able to join the project without a 123 agreement.
Even some critics of the proposed deal concede that it may be the least bad option, because it would give America influence over the Saudi programme. The kingdom has other suitors. One is Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear-power company, which is pursuing a frenetic sort of nuclear diplomacy in the Middle East. In December it signed a $21.3bn contract to build Egypt’s first power reactor. Jordan inked a $10bn deal with the Russians in 2015. Despite their differences, particularly over Syria, the Saudis are keen to have closer ties with the region’s resurgent power. King Salman spent four days in Moscow in October, the first such visit by a Saudi ruler.
Yet nuclear energy does not make much economic sense for the kingdom. Saudi Arabia burns 465,000 barrels of oil per day for electricity, forgoing $11bn in annual revenue. But the last nuclear reactors will not go online until the 2030s. They will generate less than one-sixth of the 120 gigawatts needed during periods of peak demand. In a country with vast deserts, it would make more sense to use gas and invest in solar energy. Today the kingdom generates almost none: its largest solar farm, at the headquarters of the state oil company, powers an office building.
February 9, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, Saudi Arabia |
Leave a comment
Ian Jails ‘Nuclear Spy’ For Six Years, Radio Free Europe 4 Feb 18 Tehran’s prosecutor says an unnamed person has been sentenced to six years in prison for relaying information about Iran’s nuclear program to a U.S. intelligence agent and a European country.
Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi told judiciary news website Mizan that the Iranian court also ordered the confiscation of the money the convict allegedly received for the information.
Dolatabadi said the alleged spy met the U.S. agent nine times and provided him with information about “nuclear affairs and sanctions.”
The convict also provided the information to a European country, the prosecutor added, without providing further details.
In December, Dolatabadi said Iran’s Supreme Court had upheld a death sentence against Ahmadreza Djalali, an Iranian-Swedish academic convicted of providing information to Israel about Iran’s nuclear and defense plans and personnel.
Djalali, a researcher at Stockholm’s Karolinska Institute, has denied the charges.
Iran insists its nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes, while the United States and other countries claim it has been trying to develop nuclear weapons………
Baquer Namazi, a retired UNICEF official, and his son Siamak are serving 10-year prison sentences.
A United Nations human rights group and the United States have called for their immediate release. https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-jails-nuclear-spy-six-years/29017635.html
February 5, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Iran, Legal |
Leave a comment
Iran says Trump’s hostility to nuclear deal scares investors, http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/iran-trumps-hostility-nuclear-deal-scares-investors-52826053
Iran says President Donald Trump’s hostility to the 2015 nuclear deal is dampening foreign investment in the energy sector despite the lifting of sanctions.
Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh told reporters on Sunday that the uncertainty over the future of the agreement, which Trump has repeatedly threatened to scrap, is scaring off potential investors.
Trump re-certified the deal in January but said he would not do the same in May unless it is fixed.
Iran hopes to attract more than $150 billion to rebuild its energy industry after years of sanctions. Last year it signed a $5 billion gas deal with France’s Total SA and a Chinese oil company to develop a massive offshore gas field.
February 5, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Iran, politics international, USA |
Leave a comment
CT machines can now be hacked to boost radiation and cause ‘severe damage’ to patient, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev researchers warn that medical imaging devices aren’t properly protected against cyberthreats. Tech Republic By Conner Forrest | January 30, 2018
- Medical imaging device (MID) manufacturers and healthcare providers must work harder to protect these machines from cyberattacks. — Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2018
- An attackers could compromise a computer behind a CT machine, increase the radiation levels and cause “severe damage” and harm to a hospital patient. — Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2018
In a new report detailing cyberattacks on medical imaging devices (MIDs), researchers at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) Malware Lab noted that attackers could hack a computed tomography (CT) device and cause “severe damage” to a patient.
In the paper— Know Your Enemy: Characteristics of Cyber-Attacks on Medical Imaging Devices—researchers explain that many medical devices like CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines don’t receive regular updates and are easy to exploit. For CT machines, an attacker could compromise the computer that controls it and up the radiation levels to hurt a patient. Attackers could also disable or block MIDs during a ransomware attack, according to a BGU press release.
Many traditional industries, such as healthcare, often rely on legacy tools as a means of remaining compliant or avoiding the arduous task of migrating data. Unfortunately, if these tools aren’t patched, they could easily be attacked and leveraged for financial gain……… https://www.techrepublic.com/article/ct-machines-can-now-be-hacked-to-boost-radiation-and-cause-severe-damage-to-patient/
January 31, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Israel, safety |
Leave a comment
Mike Pence confirms US intention to withdraw from Iran nuclear deal, The US vice president’s visit to Israel has prompted anger from Palestinians over US policy in the Middle East. The Independent ,By Ken Thomas, January 23 2018 US vice president Mike Pence has reiterated to Israeli leaders that the Trump administration plans to pull out of the landmark 2015 Iran nuclear deal unless the pact is amended.
The remarks came as Mr Pence wrapped up his visit to Israel. On Monday, he repeatedly referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, speaking alongside the country’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He also used a high-profile speech to the parliament to announce plans to speed up the timing of the opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem, moving it from Tel Aviv, by the end of 2019.
On Tuesday, Mr Pence met with Israeli president Reuven Rivlin and vowed the United States would counter the Iranian nuclear threat………https://www.independent.ie/world-news/mike-pence-confirms-us-intention-to-withdraw-from-iran-nuclear-deal-36520699.html
January 24, 2018
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Iran, politics international, USA |
Leave a comment
nuclear-news 