Local colleges train students to work in a plutonium pit factory, but at what cost?

It carries a legacy of illness, death and environmental racism for countless others. History tells of a long practice of hiring local Hispano and Pueblo communities to staff some of the most dangerous positions.
History tells of a long practice of hiring local Hispano and Pueblo communities to staff some of the most dangerous positions, a practice that has its origins in the early years of the lab, as Myrriah Gómez describes in her 2022 book Nuclear Nuevo México.
- By Alicia Inez Guzmán Searchlight New Mexico, Jun 10, 2023 https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/local-colleges-train-students-to-work-in-a-plutonium-pit-factory-but-at-what-cost/article_068bd3b2-0589-11ee-b8ba-93e1230989e7.html
Every day, thousands of people from all parts of El Norte make the vertiginous drive up to Los Alamos National Laboratory. It’s a trek that generations of New Mexicans have been making, like worker ants to the queen, from the eastern edge of the great Tewa Basin to the craggy Pajarito Plateau. All in the pursuit of “good jobs.”
Some, inevitably, are bound for that most secretive and fortified place, Technical Area 55, the very heart of the weapons complex — home to PF-4, the lab’s plutonium handling facility, with its armed guards, concrete walls, steel doors and sporadic sirens. To enter “the plant,” as it’s known, is to get as close as possible to the existential nature of the nuclear age.
For 40 years, some 250 workers were tasked, mostly, with research and design. But a multibillion-dollar mission to modernize the nation’s nuclear arsenal has brought about “a paradigm shift,” in the words of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, a federal watchdog. Today, the plant is in the middle of a colossal expansion — growing from an aged building to what the safety board calls “a large-scale production facility for weapon components with the largest number of workers in its history.”
In short, the plant is slated to become a factory for making plutonium pits, the essential core of every nuclear warhead.
Four years ago, LANL began laying the groundwork for this expansion by searching out and shaping a highly trained labor pool of technicians to handle fissile materials, machine the parts for weapons, monitor radiation and remediate nuclear waste. The lab turned to the surrounding community tapping New Mexico’s small regional institutions — colleges that mostly serve minority and low-income students. The plan, as laid out in a senate subcommittee meeting, set forth a college-to-lab pipeline — a “workforce of the future.”
Taken altogether, Santa Fe Community College, Northern New Mexico College and the University of New Mexico’s Los Alamos campus have accepted millions of federal dollars for their role in preparing that workforce. They’ve graduated 74 people to date, many of whom will end up at TA-55.
As Kelly Trujillo, associate dean of SFCC’s School of Sciences, Health, Engineering and Math, put it, “A lot of these jobs are high-paying jobs and they allow [workers] to stay in their home, in the area that they love.”
The trade-offs, like so much involving LANL’s history in Northern New Mexico, are not without controversy. For many local families, the lab has been a gateway to the American dream. Its high wages have afforded generations of Norteños a chance at the good life — new houses, new cars, land ownership, higher education for their kids. To work there is to become part of the region’s upper crust.
It carries a legacy of illness, death and environmental racism for countless others. History tells of a long practice of hiring local Hispano and Pueblo communities to staff some of the most dangerous positions, a practice that has its origins in the early years of the lab, as Myrriah Gómez describes in her 2022 book Nuclear Nuevo México.
New Mexico’s academic institutions have for decades served as LANL’s willing partner, feeding students into the weapons complex with high school internships; undergraduate student programs; graduate and postdoc programs; and apprenticeships for craft trades and technicians. The lab heavily recruits at most local colleges, too.
Talavai Denipah-Cook can still remember LANL representatives plying her with promises of a high-paying job and good benefits at an American Indian Sciences and Engineering Society conference years ago. At the time, she was a student at a private high school in Española, and the future that they painted looked bright.
“I was like, ‘Wow, that sounds really intriguing.’ We don’t get that around here, especially as people of color,” said Denipah-Cook, now a program manager in the Environmental Health and Justice Program at Tewa Women United, an Indigenous nonprofit based in Española.
Then she remembered the words of her grandmother, a field nurse from Ohkay Owingeh, who once tended to Navajo Nation tribal members affected by uranium mining and saw the health impacts of radiation exposure firsthand.
“She used to tell me, ‘Don’t ever, ever work at Los Alamos National Labs.’”
‘The snake road’
For nearly eight decades, LANL’s repeated attempts to expand have run up against the plateau’s geography. During the Manhattan Project, the site proved problematic in terms of housing, transportation and access along the road that old-timers called el camino de la culebra — the snake road. In more recent years, the lab’s footprint has stretched to encompass a nearly 40-square-mile campus that abuts Bandelier National Monument, U.S. Forest Service lands, the cities of Los Alamos and White Rock, and San Ildefonso Pueblo.
One of its smallest areas, TA-55, sits at the north-central edge of campus. Within is “the plant” — a 233,000-square-foot building that ranks, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, as the only “fully operational, full capability plutonium facility in the nation.”
This is where plutonium and other irradiated materials are conveyed by a trolley system from a vault to rooms lined with gloveboxes, sealed and oxygen-free. Workers, their hands protected by bulky gloves, weigh and handle plutonium in all its forms — molten, metal and powder. They disassemble and inspect existing weapons from the stockpile; forge parts for nuclear batteries that help power spacecrafts; and perfect the dimensions of plutonium “hemishells” on hand-built machines. According to a retired machinist, each pit has to be so precisely crafted that the difference between it and others can vary no more than the width of a strand of hair.
A mass of certifications and protocols are required for every task; there is little margin for error. Should radiation escape its enclosure, a radiation control technician stands by with a Geiger counter to detect it and stop work immediately.
Plant employees earn an extra $20,000 of environmental pay — in order “to attract people, quite frankly, to work in our more challenging facilities,” said Stephen Schreiber, who works in weapons production as the technical director of the lab’s office of Science, Technology and Engineering.
When Joaquin Gallegos, the former chair of NNMC’s Biology, Chemistry and Environmental Sciences Department, recruited high school students to join the college pipeline, he cited the competitive salaries and drew upon his own family history: the aunts and uncles who worked at LANL while continuing to tend multigenerational land.
The lab “subsidized” their lifestyle and made it possible not to “sell out,” Gallegos said. “People who have 10 or 15 acres of agricultural land, that’s not enough to support a family. But if you work at the labs, you could still maintain that culture. You could still raise animals and maintain that as part of your family.”
Pendulum swings for pits
It’s been almost 75 years since LANL last produced plutonium pits at an industrial scale. In 1996, the lab was sanctioned to produce up to 20 plutonium war reserve pits a year for the W88 warhead. It produced 30 pits in a five-year period, until 2012 when all major plutonium operations were suspended, after four pieces of weapons-grade plutonium were placed side by side for a photo op — a positioning that could have caused a runaway neutron chain reaction and a flash of potentially fatal radiation.
“The lab has never had to be accountable for their promises,” said Greg Mello, of the Los Alamos Study Group, an influential anti-nuclear nonprofit based in Albuquerque. “Could they be a factory? Could they produce pits reliably? No. Not at all.”
LANL, regardless, was tapped as one of two sites — the other being South Carolina’s Savannah River plutonium processing facility — to produce no fewer than 80 pits annually by 2030, according to the Fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. The law authorized LANL to produce 30 pits per year by 2026.
What’s being proposed is so huge it has no precedent, said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, an anti-nuclear advocacy organization in Santa Fe.
“Here we have this arrogant agency that thinks it can just impose expanded bomb production on New Mexico,” said Coghlan, referring to the National Nuclear Security Administration, the lead agency for pit production. “They do not have credible cost estimates and they do not have a credible plan for production. But yet they expect New Mexicans to bear the consequences.”
The costs, according to the Los Alamos Study Group, will come to some $46 billion by 2036 — the earliest the NNSA says it can hit 80 pits per year at the two sites. It’s roughly the same amount of money it would take to rebuild every single failing bridge in America.
The NNSA estimates the lab will need 4,100 full-time employees, including scientists and engineers, security guards, maintenance, craft workers, and “hard-to-fill positions,” as LANL has dubbed the pipeline jobs.
It is the most costly program in the agency’s history. It is also destined, Coghlan and others say, to collapse under its own weight. Both Los Alamos and Savannah River are, according to federal documents, billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule.
Money, waste and risk
More than $20 billion is slated for paying personnel and underwriting the construction in and around TA-55, including parking structures, office buildings, facilities to process transuranic liquid waste, and demolishing and decontaminating hundreds of old gloveboxes and installing hundreds of new ones. Construction is taking place at night, while staff work toward meeting LANL’s new quota by day.
Safety and controlling risk are paramount, said Schreiber, the LANL technical director. “We really do instill that in our workers.” But observers at the Union of Concerned Scientists say the pace doesn’t bode well.
“When you have new employees who are not very experienced in a new facility running new procedures in a high-risk environment — trying to do it fast, trying to meet a quota — that’s a recipe for something bad to happen,” said Dylan Spaulding, a senior scientist in the nonprofit’s global security program.
New Mexico’s all-Democratic congressional delegation, whatever the controversies, supports the project wholeheartedly. It was Heinrich and South Carolina’s Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham who rallied behind pit production in their states — ushering it into law in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. Then-Congressman Ben Ray Luján helped shepherd money to the pipeline programs.
Radiation 101
Last spring, assistant professor Scott Braley taught two back-to-back introductory courses to 13 future radiation control technicians at NNMC. His lectures covered a host of topics: the history of “industrial-scale” radiation accidents worldwide, algebraic formulas to determine the correlation between individual cancer and workplace exposure, and maximum permissible doses for future workers like themselves. The rates are higher than for the general public, Braley explained, because, for one, radiation workers “have accepted a higher risk.”
Once they get their associate degree, NNMC graduates proceed to the second part of their training, in a Los Alamos classroom. There, they learn how to don and doff personal protective gear — a suit not unlike the one that recent NNMC graduate Karen Padilla said she once used to keep bees. Padilla, 42, participated in simulations of scenarios that she and others might one day face, learning the proper ways to detect radiation around trash and 55-gallon barrels of waste, for instance.
“Long-term, I don’t have really any fears about this because I feel like my instructors are doing a good job of helping me understand how to protect myself” and others, said Padilla. “I think ultimately that’s my job as a [radiation control technician], to protect people who are working, to make sure they’re not getting into something that could be harmful.”
Much of the college programs center around minimizing risk. And yet they present an ethical dilemma, said Eileen O’Shaughnessy, co-founder of Demand Nuclear Abolition.
“What does it mean to assume that exposure is acceptable at all? Because the thing about radiation is it’s cumulative and any amount is unsafe.”
Generations of Northern New Mexicans have faced the same time-worn question: Are the good jobs worth the trade-offs?
“You realize, yes, they are paying you well, but you’re being put in situations that you have no idea about,” said the retired machinist, with over two decades of experience working at the lab, much of it at the plant. He asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. “It’s the mentality at the lab,” he said. “They don’t really think that people that are techs are even really worth much.”
A powerful neighbor
Dueling perspectives reveal the chasms around the lab and, in particular, what some consider the Manhattan Project’s original sin: Its use of eminent domain to force Indigenous and Hispano people off their farms and sacred lands on the Pajarito Plateau. Its arrival, oral histories hold, spelled the end of land-based living.
“When did we stop farming to sustain ourselves?” Kayleigh Warren recalled asking a relative from Santa Clara Pueblo. The answer: “When the labs came in.”
Now an environmental health and justice program coordinator at Tewa Women United, Warren has borne witness to the region’s change in values. The lab has so deeply carved itself into Northern New Mexico’s psyche that imagining another future and means of survival has come to seem impossible.
As the single largest employer in northern New Mexico, LANL’s horizon of influence is vast. And with billions more dollars flooding in, its sway in almost every sphere seems only to grow.
Despite the lab’s omnipresence, economic gains have been relatively limited. While Los Alamos County has one of the highest median household incomes in the nation, the surrounding communities — including Española — are among the poorest in the state.
“LANL has been a bad neighbor,” Warren said. “If the economic benefits are so good for them to continue their work and expand, you would think the communities around here would be doing better. But we’re not.”
US govt provides yet another round of money grants to companies, including Westinghouse, to promote nuclear power development

Westinghouse, 6 other companies get DOE vouchers to help accelerate advanced nuclear technologies, https://www.utilitydive.com/news/westinghouse-general-atomics-advanced-nuclear-doe-energy-vouchers/684957/
Voucher recipients “do not receive direct financial awards. Vouchers provide funding to DOE laboratories to help businesses overcome critical technological and commercialization challenges,” DOE said.
The Department of Energy announced last week that it has awarded vouchers to seven companies “to accelerate the innovation and application of advanced nuclear technologies.”
According to DOE, voucher recipients “do not receive direct financial awards. Vouchers provide funding to DOE laboratories to help businesses overcome critical technological and commercialization challenges.” All voucher recipients have to cover at least 20% of any costs, DOE said.
Companies receiving the awards include the following:
Alpha Tech Research Corp. will collaborate with Argonne National Laboratory “to advance the development of a promising yttrium hydride-based moderator for its molten salt microreactor concept. The data will be used to inform the design and size of the reactor.”General Atomics will work with Oak Ridge National Laboratory “to examine the material behavior of irradiated silicon carbide composite samples. The data will help inform material behavior models required to license the use of silicon carbide-based structures in nuclear reactors.”
Ultra Energy will work with Oak Ridge National Laboratory “to organize and design high-temperature reactor testing to support the testing and further development of its new prototype detector that could help enhance the safe operation of commercial reactors once commercialized. Test results will demonstrate suitability of the prototype and allow for further development for commercial deployment.”- Westinghouse Electric Co. will work with PNNL and Idaho National Laboratory “to perform post-irradiation experiments on its chromium-coated accident-tolerant fuel cladding. The project will focus on corrosion and hydrogen behavior in the cladding from two different coating processes.”
- The vouchers were provided under DOE’s Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear initiative. Last week’s vouchers were the third round awarded in fiscal year 2023.
Missouri S&T will ask St. Louis-area residents their opinions about nuclear waste
St. Louis Public Radio | By Jonathan Ahl, July 5, 2023
Missouri University of Science and Technology wants to know what St. Louis-area residents think about nuclear waste. The school has received a $2 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to study the issue.
For decades, the federal government has explored the possibility of storing spent nuclear fuel at the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada, but the Energy Department now says that option is off the table.
This has led to S&T’s involvement as the leader of one of 13 teams across the nation conducting research for the agency.
The S&T team will assess and document the concerns of residents in the St. Louis area who live in the proximity of legacy waste sites where national defense-related nuclear material from World War II up to the Cold War is stored………………………………………………..
Usman said the project is equal parts science, education and public opinion polling. The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, St. Louis University and the University of Missouri will be part of Missouri S&T’s research.
The findings from all over the country that are collected will be sent to the Department of Energy as it decides how to proceed with finding locations for nuclear waste storage.
Missouri has one operating large nuclear reactor, owned by Ameren, in Callaway County. Missouri S&T has a small nuclear reactor on campus that is primarily used for educational purposes.
There are six nuclear reactor sites in Illinois, all in the central or northern part of the state. https://news.stlpublicradio.org/health-science-environment/2023-07-05/missouri-s-t-will-ask-st-louis-area-residents-their-opinions-about-nuclear-waste
Report Shows How Military Industrial Complex Sets Media Narrative on Ukraine

by EDITOR, July 3, 2023, By Bryce Greene / Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) https://scheerpost.com/2023/07/03/report-shows-how-military-industrial-complex-sets-media-narrative-on-ukraine/
Wealthy donors have long funded think tanks with official-sounding names that produce research that reflects the interests of those funders (Extra!, 7/13). The weapons industry is a major contributor to these idea factories; a recent report from the Quincy Institute (6/1/23) demonstrates just how much influence war profiteers have on the national discourse.
The Quincy Institute—whose own start-up funding came mainly from George Soros and Charles Koch—looked at 11 months of Ukraine War coverage in the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, from March 1, 2022, through January 31, 2023, and counted each time one of 33 leading think tanks was mentioned. Of the 15 think tanks most often mentioned in the coverage, only one—Human Rights Watch—does not take funding from Pentagon contractors. Quincy’s analysis found that the media were seven times more likely to cite think tanks with war industry ties than they were to cite think tanks without war industry ties.
With 157 mentions each, the top two think tanks were the Atlantic Council and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Both of these think tanks receive millions from the war industry. The Atlantic Council has long been the brain trust of NATO, the military organization whose expansion towards Russia’s borders was a critical factor in Russia’s decision to invade Ukraine. (See FAIR.org, 3/4/22.) Both think tanks receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, companies which have already been awarded billions of dollars in Pentagon contracts as a result of the war in Ukraine.
CSIS was revealed in a New York Times expose (8/7/16) to produce content that reflected the weapons industry priorities of its funders. It also “initiated meetings with Defense Department officials and congressional staff to push for the recommendations” of military funders.
Think tank media mentions related to US military support for Ukraine (Quincy Institute, 6/1/23).
In addition to showing think tanks’ enormous influence, the Quincy report highlights how difficult it is to trace just how much war industry funding these think tanks receive, and exactly whose interests they represent. “Think tanks are not required to disclose their funders,” study author Ben Freeman wrote, and “many think tanks list donors without indicating the amount of donations and others just list donors in ranges (e.g., $250,000 to $499,999).”
While the study was not aimed at establishing a causal connection between weapons industry funding and the think tanks’ positions, it acknowledges that funding typically plays a major role in shaping the institutions. “Funders,” Freeman wrote, “are able to influence think tank work through the mechanisms of censorship, self-censorship, and perspective filtering.” In other words, people with points of view antithetical to the funders likely would not last long in these think tanks.
Causal or not, there is a marked correlation between war industry funding and hawkish positions. “Think tanks with financial ties to the arms industry often support policies that would benefit the arms industry,” the report noted. For example, one Atlantic Council article (2/6/23) advocated against “any compromise with the Kremlin,” while another, titled “Equity for Ukraine” (1/16/23), argued that Ukraine has a “right to destroy critical infrastructure in Russia and plunge Moscow and other cities into darkness.”
Earlier this year, the president of the American Enterprise Institute—fifth on the list, with 101 mentions—was cited numerous times in the Wall Street Journal (e.g., 1/20/23, 1/25/23) arguing that “tanks and armored personnel carriers are essential,” and agreeing to provide them will “let Ukraine know that it can afford to risk and expend more of its current arsenal of tanks in counteroffensive operations because it can count on getting replacements for them.” AEI (6/9/23) has gone so far as to suggest that the US give tactical nuclear weapons to Ukraine, something that could easily escalate to all-out nuclear war.
The Quincy Institute did not find a single instance in which a media organization disclosed the fact that its source received funding from the war industry, obscuring how interested parties may be shaping coverage or promoting policy recommendations that directly benefit their funders.
The study found that for the few think tanks that receive little or no Pentagon contractor funding, positions on the war are dramatically different. With less influence from the war industry, the study found, these organizations emphasize “expository rather than prescriptive analysis, support for diplomatic solutions, and a focus on the impact of the war on different parts of society and the region.”
Human Rights Watch, which takes no war industry money, “was agnostic on the issue of providing US military assistance to Ukraine,” and instead “focused on human rights abuses in the conflict.” The Carnegie Endowment, which receives less than 1% of its funding from that industry, was never quoted advocating an increase in military spending or weapons sales during the Ukraine War.
One critical way that corporate news media manufactures consent for US foreign policy is by carefully selecting the sources and voices that they present, and narrowing the spectrum of debate. While this can take the form of uncritically repeating pronouncements from government officials, this research demonstrates that there are more subtle ways in which media outlets can push a corporate/state agenda under the guise of independent journalism.
High nuclear crimes don’t pay
by beyondnuclearinternational, By Linda Pentz Gunter
Politicians and executives snared for their roles in bribery and racketeering schemes
Breaking: On June 29, former Ohio Speaker of the House, Republican, Larry Householder, was handed down the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for his role in the high crimes described below. His co-conspirator, Matt Borges, the former Ohio GOP Chairman, was sentenced on June 30 to fiveyears in federal prison.
This is part one of a two-part story on bribery and corruption in the nuclear power realm and the questionable ethics of legal lobbying. The original article was published in its entirety in Capitol Hill Citizen, a print-only newspaper published by Ralph Nader. These articles are reproduced with kind permission of the editor. Part two will be published in the next few weeks. Capitol Hill Citizen comes out in print only. To subscribe or purchase single copies, click here.
It all began when Ohio nuclear power plant owner, FirstEnergy, began “bleeding cash” in a desperate effort to keep its aging and uneconomical Davis-Besse and Perry nuclear power plants solvent.
The effort bankrupted FirstEnergy subsidiary, FirstEnergy Solutions, then owner of the two nuclear plants. The shareholders wanted out. FirstEnergy threatened to close the plants. But Ohio House Republican, Larry Householder, had other plans.
Householder concocted a nefarious scheme to extract $61 million from the failing company to ensure his re-election and that of enough political allies to guarantee his return to the House Speakership.
This, in turn, would secure enough votes to ensure passage of a $1.3 billion bailout bill, known as HB6, that would rescue the two nuclear plants along with struggling coal plants.
And it worked. For a while.
Householder, who had previously held the Ohio House Speakership from 2001-2004, was duly re-elected to that position in January 2019. Millions of dollars also poured into the campaign war chests of 21 political candidates in order to stack the House with votes in favor of the bailout bill. It duly passed the House on May 29, 2019 and the Senate on July 17, 2019. But the July 23, 2019 Ohio House concurrence vote passed the bill by only one vote. And then it all unraveled.
On July 21, 2020, Householder and four others were arrested for what investigating US Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, David DeVillers, described as “the biggest criminal racketeering conspiracy in Ohio history.”
Householder, who was re-elected to the Ohio House shortly afterwards and refused to resign, was unanimously voted out as Speaker on July 30, 2020. Eleven months later the House voted 75-21 to expel Householder.
After a seven week trial, Householder and fellow conspirator, former GOP Chairman Matt Borges, were found guilty of racketeering conspiracy on March 9, 2023. The jury took just nine hours to reach their verdict. Householder was sentenced on June 29 to 20 years in prison — the maximum penalty. Borges was sentenced on June 30 to five years in federal prison. Both men said they would appeal.
The U.S. District judge in the case, Timothy Black, scolded Householder at sentencing, saying: “Beyond financial greed, I think you just liked power. You weren’t serving the people. You were serving yourself.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Emily Glatfelter described Householder as “the quintessential mob boss, directing the criminal enterprise from the shadows and using his casket carriers to execute the scheme”, in a sentencing memorandum to the judge.
FirstEnergy Corp. was also charged with conspiring to commit honest services wire fraud, but the company signed a deferred prosecution agreement that could see the charges dismissed. FirstEnergy also agreed to pay a $230 million monetary penalty.
But an ongoing civil lawsuit against FirstEnergy alleging insider trading and other offenses has brought documents to light released by Ohio Consumers’ Council that reveal the true depth and scope of involvement of its executives in the scheme to ensure passage of HB6.
Nevertheless, Householder defense attorney, Steve Bradley, argued during the trial that Householder was just “being a good politician” and is simply “good at fundraising”. Never mind that Householder hid the source of the $61 million by funneling it through a murky 501(c)(4) called Generation Now, then redirected around $500,000 of it to pay off his personal credit card debt, settle a lawsuit, and repair a Florida home.
The flow of dark money to Generation Now, which FirstEnergy has now admitted supplying, also paid for a disinformation campaign to suppress a public petition drive to repeal HB6, launched by a coalition called Ohioans Against Corporate Bailouts. ……………………………………………………..
It remains to be seen whether the fate of those politicians and corporate executives who fell prey to greed and deception and to whom punishment will now be meted out, will serve as an adequate deterrent against further such conduct.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2023/07/02/high-nuclear-crimes-dont-pay/
US Nuclear-Capable B-52 Bombers Fly to Korean Peninsula in Latest Provocation
by EDITOR, July 3, 2023, By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com
The bombers participated in a training exercise with US and South Korean fighter jets.
US nuclear-capable B-52 bombers flew to the Korean Peninsula on Friday in the latest US provocation against North Korea.
The South Korean Defense Ministry and the US military said the bombers participated in exercises and were joined by US and South Korean fighter jets………………………….
According to Air & Space Forces Magazine, Friday’s B-52 deployment marked the seventh time in the last six months that B-52s or B-1s have flown above or near the Korean Peninsula.
The US is planning to dock a nuclear-armed submarine in South Korea for the first time since 1981. President Biden and South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol announced the plan in April, but it’s not clear when the nuclear-armed submarine will arrive.
Because US nuclear-armed submarines can be patrolling waters anywhere in the world at any time and carry long-range missiles, from a strategic perspective, docking one in South Korea serves no purpose other than as a provocation toward North Korea. https://scheerpost.com/2023/07/03/us-nuclear-capable-b-52-bombers-fly-to-korean-peninsula-in-latest-provocation/
Senate passes $886 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA): No audits necessary

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 1 Aug 23
President Joe wants no audit of the billions in weapons of mass Ukrainian death provided in the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
His compliant Senate majority gave him every buck of the 886 billion bucks he requested to wage US exceptionalism round the world. Besides ravaging the life of millions in dozens of countries worldwide from bombs and sanctions, US foreign policy risks nuclear war with Russia and China over Ukraine and Taiwan respectively.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul’s amendment requiring audits and investigations of Ukraine aid was swamped 78 -20, with all Democrats voting to keep auditors away from the weapons giveaways. They are terrified an honest investigation would reveal how billions in weapons wind up with bad actors, get destroyed as soon as they’re introduced into the killing fields, and simply raise the Ukrainian death toll that can only be eliminated by negotiations.

America’s grotesque military budget should be reported in full on every front page, instead of disappearing from public consumption like invisible ink. On cable/network news, it’s the shame of America that dare not speak its name.
Every day countless Ukrainians die for US exceptionalism, and every day nuclear confrontation creeps closer.
US navy accused of cover-up over radioactive shipyard waste

The US navy is covering up dangerous levels of radioactive waste on a
40-acre former shipyard parcel in San Francisco’s waterside Hunters Point
neighborhood, public health advocates charge.
The land is slated to be
turned over to the city as early as next year, and could be used for
residential redevelopment. The accusations stem from 2021 navy testing that
found 23 samples from the property showed high levels of strontium-90, a
radioactive isotope that replaces calcium in bones and causes cancer.
The Environmental Protection Agency raised alarm over the levels, but the navy
in 2022 said its testing was inaccurate and produced a new set of data that
showed levels of strontium-90 lower than zero, which was dismissed by
environmental health experts as impossible.
Guardian 25th June 2023
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/25/us-navy-accused-radiocative-shipyard-waste
Nuclear Waste Transportation Draws Opposition in West

Concerns are growing in the west about nuclear waste transportation.
On Tuesday, the Snake River Alliance is holding a webinar on these concerns, heightened by the potential of a temporary waste facility opening in New Mexico.
Kevin Kamps is the radioactive waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear. He said these fears are combined with the recent train derailment of toxic waste in Ohio.
He said the federal government and nuclear power industry are rushing to create the New Mexico temporary waste facility.
“These dumps that are proposed are called consolidated interim storage facilities, which means it’s only temporary and the waste will have to move again,” said Kamps. “So it’s really wrongheaded. It’s going to automatically double transportation risks.”
In May, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a license for the temporary waste site in New Mexico.
The Biden administration says nuclear power is a key component for the country’s clean energy future. However, state officials in New Mexico have voiced their opposition to the facility.
Nuclear waste also is a concern in Idaho. Experiments are starting on new nuclear reactor designs such as small modular reactors at the Idaho National Laboratory.
However, Kamps pointed out that recent research found these SMRs generate two to 30 times the amount of radioactive waste as traditional nuclear reactors.
“So another downside of all this SMR talk,” said Kamps, “which unfortunately Idaho is on the cutting edge of.”
Kamps said he believes the country is living on borrowed time when it comes to the potential for disaster from nuclear power.
“We really should be transitioning into a renewable energy economy in this country,” said Kamps, “which is much safer, much more secure and actually much more cost effective than nuclear power.”
Amid China Tensions, US Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier, USS Ronald Reagan, To Make A Rare Vietnam Port Call
By Ashish Dangwal. Eurasian Times, June 24, 2023
Amid heightened tensions with Beijing in the South China Sea, the US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan is scheduled to make a rare visit to Danang, the port city in Central Vietnam, on June 25.
This visit by the USS Ronald Reagan marks only the third time a US aircraft carrier has made such a stop since the end of the Vietnam War.
According to an announcement by Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry, the USS Ronald Reagan, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, was scheduled to reach Da Nang on June 25 and remain there until June 30………….
Additionally, Vietnam recently hosted Japan’s largest destroyer, the Izumo, after joint exercises with the USS Ronald Reagan and other American vessels in the South China Sea.
………. The United States aims to enhance its bilateral relationship with Vietnam, especially considering Hanoi’s ongoing disputes with Beijing over territorial boundaries in the South China Sea. …………………………………………….. more https://eurasiantimes.com/amid-china-tensions-us-nuclear-powered-aircraft-carrier-uss-ronald-reagan-to-make-a-rare-vietnam-port-call/
A $31 Billion Missile Program! US Looks To Reintroduce Nuclear Sea-Launched Cruise Missile Costing Equal To 10 Virginia-Class Subs

By Parth Satam, June 23, 2023, https://eurasiantimes.com/a-31-billion-missile-program-us-looks-to-reintroduce-nuclear-sea-launched-cruise-missile-costing-equal-to-10-virginia-class-subs/
A section of US Congressmen are voting for reintroducing a costly and redundant nuclear program. Republican lawmakers in the House are adopting a measure to institutionalize the Sea-Launched Cruise Missile-Nuclear (SLC)The SLCM was denied funding in last year’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget and concluded to have no battlefield use in the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).
The Cold War-era concept envisages a cruise missile with a low-yield tactical nuclear warhead that can be fired from submarines, warships, or naval aircraft on a trajectory that makes it hard to track by radar.
According to a report in Defense News, the House Armed Services Committee “voted along party lines to amend the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with a provision that would create a program of record (PoR) for SLCM-N.”
A PoR is a listed ‘line item record’ in current and future defense acquisition plans that make them eligible for continued funding over the years.
Obscene Cost for a Useless Weapon
If the full HASC advances the Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) and passes the full floor vote in July, it would receive nearly $196 million as research and development funds.
However, political leaders and military experts advise against the astronomical costs and a futile capability, which they say can be invested elsewhere and be performed by other weapons systems.
Representative Courtney, a Democratic Congressman from Connecticut, who chairs the sea power subcommittee, cited May testimony from Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday stating that the warheads needed to make an SLCM-N program would cost at least $31 billion.
“The Navy can do a lot of other things with $31 billion. You can build 15 DDG destroyers with $31 billion, 10 Virginia-class submarines with $31 billion. You put nuclear warheads on these vessels, then you are changing the mission,” Courtney said.
Another Democratic Congressman, Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, argued that the US already has ballistic submarines in its fleet as well as lower-yield nuclear options from the air.
“It’s walking us down a path of spending enormous money on a capability that we don’t really need that will undermine our ability to build capabilities that we do (need) going forward,” said Smith.
Why Doesn’t the US Need the SLCM-N
Citing the need for flexibility and regional presence, the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) called for re-establishing a sea-launched cruise missile-nuclear capability.
President Biden’s FY 2022 budget continued funding SLCM-N, aiming to deploy it by the late 2020s. However, with the 2022 NPR identifying SLCM-N as “no longer necessary,” Biden’s 2023 budget request did not include SLCM-N funding.
The missile basically saddles important weapons platforms like submarines and warships with a mission set that can be undertaken by US Air Force (USAF) strategic bombers. It takes away the flexibility of employing diverse firepower options with a varied range of platforms.
“Should a geographic combatant commander intend to seek permission to use a nuclear weapon for tactical purposes, selecting bombers would offer more flexibility between mission sets and avoid committing to a weapons load-out decision as far in advance as would be necessary if SLCM-N were chosen” retired US Navy officer, Captain John Moulton writes in a paper.
In other words, an SLCM-N armed naval submarine or warship meets a very “narrow” mission set of destroying hardened enemy ground targets while sacrificing equally important tactical and strategic roles like hunting enemy submarines, destroying surface warships, mine laying or providing Intelligence-Surveillance-Reconnaissance (ISR).
Other currently nuclear weapons capable platforms like the B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress, B-1B Lancer, and the upcoming B-21 Raider envisaged for the same mission could also reach the warzone quickly.
The cost of revealing its position while firing an SLCM-N would also far outweigh the gains from hitting enemy ground targets with low-yield nuclear missiles, Moulton further explains. Moulton is a Senior Fellow at the Council on Strategic Risks’ Janne E. Nolan Center on Strategic Weapons.
The conditions that would justify using a tactical nuclear-tipped cruise missile would be very rare and would prevent a submarine or a naval vessel from performing optimally in a fluid battlefield situation.
In the Western Pacific, becoming part of a “joint force” in a mutually supporting pushback against a People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fleet inside China’s dangerous Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2/AD) zone is a new evolving orientation guiding the US Navy’s submarine arm, explained in a previous EurAsian Times analysis.
Lastly, the risks of unintended nuclear escalation are exponentially higher when an SLCM-N is fired since the country sustaining the attack – China or North Korea – might legitimately retaliate with a nuclear strike, triggering a devastating atomic exchange.
Experts have long pointed out how such exchanges cannot be “controlled” given the tensions and the miscalculation involved.
A US asset firing an SLCM-N also counts as a nuclear first strike, which shifts the diplomatic narrative in the Russian, Chinese, or North Korean favor. None of these countries have ever indicated they plan to use nuclear weapons as a warfighting tool. While China has a clear No-First Use (NFU) policy, Moscow and Pyongyang have maintained they will use nukes only when the physical security of their country faces an existential threat. The author can be reached at satamp@gmail.com
Nuclear-based fantasies are holding back real climate action

SMR Education Task Force, June 22, 2023, https://crednb.ca/2023/06/22/nuclear-based-fantasies-are-holding-back-real-climate-action/—
Today a network of groups across Canada announces the launch of the SMR Education Task Force to share under-reported facts about small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) with members of Parliament and provincial legislatures.
We begin with the latest report from Canada Energy Regulator (CER). This federal document, called Canada’s Energy Future, projects that enough new nuclear reactors (SMRs) will be operational by 2050 to more than double Canada’s existing nuclear electricity generation.
Canada currently has 19 operating power reactors, built over 58 years. The new report claims that we will build more than 50 new reactors in much less time.
This fantasy has no basis in reality. It is inconsistent with independent analyses by energy researchers not tied to the nuclear industry. One such study in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists makes it clear that SMRs have at best a marginal role to play in a truly effective climate action plan. SMRs fail the tests of timeliness and affordability – they take too long and cost too much.
In addition to Ontario and Alberta, the CER report imagines deploying SMRs in Quebec and British Columbia. This is news to citizens in those provinces. BC ratepayers have rejected nuclear power in the past, and Quebec phased out of nuclear power in 2012. With every reactor comes long-lived radioactive waste — including the structure itself, which is a provincial responsibility to safeguard for thousands of years after shutdown.
Yesterday, the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick (CRED-NB) sent a letter to Canada’s Natural Resources Minister reminding him that more than 120 civil society, public interest, faith-based and Indigenous groups across Canada have signed a statement warning that SMRs are a dirty, dangerous distraction from urgent climate action.
These groups understand that responding to the climate emergency does not require gambling on untested nuclear reactors. They know that energy efficiency measures and renewable sources cost at least 3 to 7 times less than nuclear power per tonne of carbon emissions avoided.
The groups oppose using public funds earmarked for climate action to support the nuclear industry’s eager experimentation with novel reactor designs. We are challenging the government to release the research and data that support its nuclear-based strategy.
Nuclear promoters, with long-standing allies embedded in the federal and provincial governments, are making unsubstantiated promises about SMRs in an audacious attempt to grab as much public funding as possible to keep their dying industry alive.
Worldwide, nuclear’s share of global electricity has dropped over the last 25 years from 17% to less than 10%. The International Energy Agency forecasts that more than 90% of all new electricity installations worldwide over the next 5 years will be non-hydro renewables.
The industry’s money-grab will succeed only if our public representatives remain uninformed about the facts. That is why we are pleased to announce the SMR Education Task Force and look forward in the months ahead to share information about SMRs based on independent science and research.
A nuclear site is on tribes’ ancestral lands. Their voices are being left out on key cleanup talks
KNKX Public Radio | By The Associated Press, June 23, 2023
Three federally recognized tribes have devoted decades to restoring the condition of their ancestral lands in southeastern Washington state to what they were before those lands became the most radioactively contaminated site in the nation’s nuclear weapons complex, the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.
But the Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Nez Perce Tribe have been left out of negotiations on a major decision affecting the future cleanup of millions of gallons of radioactive waste stored in underground tanks on the Hanford site near Richland.
In May, federal and state agencies reached an agreement that hasn’t been released publicly but will likely involve milestone and deadline changes in the cleanup, according to a spokesperson for the Washington State Department of Ecology, a regulator for the site. As they privately draft their proposed changes, the tribes are bracing for a decision that could threaten their fundamental vision for the site.
“As original stewards of that area, we’ve always been taught to leave it better than you found it,” said Laurene Contreras, program administrator for the Yakama Nation’s Environmental Restoration/Waste Management program, which is responsible for the tribe’s Hanford work. “And so that’s what we’re asking for.”
From World War II through the Cold War, Hanford produced more than two-thirds of the United States’ plutonium for nuclear weapons, including the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945. Production ceased in 1989, and the site’s mission shifted to cleaning up the chemical and radioactive waste left behind.
For these tribes, which have served as vital watchdogs in the cleanup process, the area’s history dates back long before Hanford, to pre-colonization. It was a place where some fished, hunted, gathered and lived. It’s home to culturally significant sites. And in 1855 treaties with the U.S. government in which the tribes ceded millions of acres of land, they were assured continued access.

The U.S. Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology have held confidential negotiations since 2020 on revising plans for the approximately 56 million gallons of radioactive waste stored in 177 underground tanks at Hanford. The discerning eyes of the tribal experts have been kept out, though EPA and Ecology have said there will eventually be opportunities for the tribes to meet with them about this.
The revisions are expected to affect an agreement among the three agencies that outlines the Hanford cleanup. Mason Murphy, program manager for the Confederated Tribes’ Energy and Environmental Sciences program, points out that the tribes also weren’t consulted in that original 1989 agreement.
“It’s an old scabbed-over wound,” Murphy said…………………………………………………….. https://www.knkx.org/government/2023-06-23/a-nuclear-site-is-on-tribes-ancestral-lands-their-voices-are-being-left-out-on-key-cleanup-talks
—
Riverkeeper celebrates bipartisan Assembly passage of bill to stop radioactive wastewater discharges into the Hudson River; Governor Hochul must sign.

Riverkeeper, the leading environmental organization dedicated to protecting the Hudson River, celebrates the Assembly taking the final legislative step after the unanimous bipartisan Senate passage of crucial legislation aimed at safeguarding the economic vitality of the Hudson River from the imminent threat of radioactive wastewater discharge at Indian Point by Holtec International, the firm responsible for decommissioning the nuclear power plant. With the legislation now at Governor Hochul’s desk, she must sign the bill immediately to prevent Holtec from releasing radioactive wastewater into the Hudson River.
“The unanimous bipartisan support in the Senate and the bipartisan vote in the Assembly sends a clear signal that New Yorkers of all stripes are opposed to Holtec’s plans. Governor Hochul must sign the legislation to draw a firm line against the use of our river as a dumping ground for radioactive waste and pave the way for a prosperous future for the Hudson River and its surrounding communities,” said Tracy Brown, President of Riverkeeper, “We cannot underestimate the impact of the public perception of a severely polluted Hudson River. Together we have made great strides in cleaning up the Hudson, which has supported increased water-based recreation and tourism. We cannot let outmoded “business-as-usual” polluting practices undercut that work and our goal of a clean and healthy Hudson for all.”
Riverkeeper thanks Assemblymember Dana Levenberg and Senator Pete Harckham for their relentless efforts in championing this important legislation, S6893/A7208. We also thank Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie and Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins for their leadership in ensuring the legislation received a vote.
Instead of allowing Holtec to discharge the wastewater, Riverkeeper together with a coalition of partners are calling for the secure on-site storage of the contaminated water on the Indian Point site for at least a period of 12.5 years. This would allow for one half life to elapse and reduce the radioactivity of the spent fuel pool water and protect the economic interests of the state, while alternative disposal methods are thoroughly evaluated. Riverkeeper is a member of the Indian Point Decommissioning Oversight Board and provides expertise on issues related to water quality, public health, and impacts to wildlife.
The overwhelming opposition from the public against Holtec’s profit-driven discharges has resonated across the state, as concerned citizens and communities rally together to protect the Hudson River as the vital resource it is.
Riverkeeper stands firm in its commitment to defending the Hudson River and urges Governor Hochul to immediately sign the legislation before Holtec proceeds with the release of radioactive wastewater.
Concerned citizens can take action by urging Governor Hochul to sign the legislation immediately.
New Mexico leaders fear nuclear waste could endanger oil and gas in the Permian Basin

Adrian Hedden, Carlsbad Current-Argus, 23 June 23 https://www.currentargus.com/story/news/2023/06/23/new-mexico-leaders-fear-nuclear-waste-holtec-endanger-oil-gas-fossil-fuel-permian-basin/70338508007/
State land managers in New Mexico doubled down on their opposition to a proposed project to store spent nuclear fuel at a site near the border of Eddy and Lea counties amid the Permian Basin oilfield.
The New Mexico Land Office owns and oversees operations on State Trust land, largely consisting of fossil fuel extraction in southeast corner of the state, generating revenue used to fund public schools, hospitals and other public services.
Sunalei Stewart, deputy commissioner of operations at the office said it owns mineral rights beneath Holtec International’s proposed project location.
He added that means the agency has the right to oppose and block the project which Commissioner of Public Lands Stephanie Garcia Richard signaled disapproval of due to concerns nuclear waste storage could impact other nearby industries like oil and gas.
Stewart’s comments came before the June 15 meeting of the New Mexico Legislature’s interim Radioactive and Hazardous Material Committing in Santa Fe.
“One thing about Holtec that not everybody appreciates, is that the land, the mineral estate is actually owned by the State Land Office,” said Stewart. “The surface is where the project will occur, but we own all of the mineral rights.”
Holtec International recently received a license from the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate the site on about 1,000 acres owned by the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance (ELEA), a consortium of the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs and Eddy and Lea counties.
The project would see up to 100,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel rods shipped via rail into southeast New Mexico for storage at the surface on a 40-year license, potentially reprocessed for more fuel or sent to final disposal if such a facility becomes available.
The U.S. does not have a permanent repository for disposal of the waste, igniting fears from New Mexico leaders that the Holtec site could become the “de-facto” resting place for the waste.
Stewart said the Land Office has existing oil and gas leases targeting the minerals beneath Holtec’s proposed location, and that multiple analysis conducted by the NRC failed to account for extraction activities.
“We have expressed a lot of frustration and concern,” Stewart said before lawmakers. “The assumptions for the safety analysis, the environmental analysis, all assumed there would be no oil and gas activity at the site, there would be no potash mining at the site, so sand and gravel at the site. There would be no mineral activity at the site.
“We remained very concerned about the project and how it could impact State Trust land specifically.”
The Permian Basin region, which southeast New Mexico shares with West Texas, is the U.S.’ most productive oilfield, generating up to 5.7 million barrels per day, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).
That industry was estimated to generate almost half of New Mexico General Fund revenue in the last fiscal year, according to the most recent state budget analysis – about $7 billion.
That industry and its economic support of the state could be imperiled, Stewart said, by Holtec’s proposal.
“This is really in the heart of the Permian,” he said of the proposed site. “If there was an accident, if there was an incident, we could be in a lot of trouble in terms of other operations that are out there. There are active wells out there.”
Committee Chair Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D-37) said the project would draw waste from about 70 sites in 35 states, which could lead to dangers along the route on the U.S. rail system.
She pointed to Senate Bill 53, sponsored by the committee’s Vice Chair Jeff Steinborn (D-36), that barred New Mexico from issuing various permits the Holtec site would need to operate such as for wastewater discharge or air quality impacts.
“From back east, they’re coming to New Mexico. Most of the time, they would not have to come through New Mexico,” said Ferrary. “Hopefully we can head that off with our legislation.”
Sen. Brenda McKenna (D-9) also voiced concerns for the transportation of the waste, arguing any accidents along the route could imperil New Mexicans or any nearby community.
“They have had accidents,” she said of Holtec. “I hope we will succeed in block in entirely.”
1
-
Archives
- November 2026 (64)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS






