Trump: best protection for Ukraine’s nuclear power is US takeover.

President Trump has told President Zelensky that an American takeover of
nuclear power in Ukraine would offer the “best protection” for the
country’s infrastructure. The White House said Trump had “moved
beyond” the minerals deal for American companies to extract oil, gas and
rare metals that had been proposed as a way to protect Ukraine from future
Russian aggression. That deal was suspended after Zelensky’s disastrous
meeting last month with Trump and JD Vance, the vice-president, in the Oval
Office. It envisaged US control over natural resources and infrastructure
such as ports, but did not mention nuclear power.
Times 19th March 2025 https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/trump-best-protection-for-ukraines-nuclear-power-is-us-takeover-9l0xsxqjj
SCOTUS Ruling Could Shape the Future of Nuclear Waste Storage.

Samuel Lawrence Foundation, 20 Mar 25
The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing a case that could have major implications for how nuclear waste is stored across the country—including the 3.6 million pounds of radioactive waste at San Onofre. At the center of the case is whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the authority to license private interim storage facilities, such as the one proposed in Andrews County, Texas, which would hold high-level nuclear waste away from reactor sites. Texas has challenged this decision, arguing that the NRC is overstepping its legal bounds and that waste management should remain under federal oversight.
This case matters to us because San Onofre’s waste remains in thin-walled metal canisters near a rising ocean, with no long-term plan for safe containment. If the Supreme Court rules against private storage, it could limit future options for moving this waste to a safer location. Meanwhile, if the Court upholds the NRC’s authority, it could pave the way for private companies to take a larger role in nuclear waste management—raising serious questions about safety, oversight, and accountability. As we continue to fight for a real solution for San Onofre, this decision will play a critical role in shaping what’s possible. Stay tuned for more updates as this case unfolds.
With Trump’s ‘Thumbs Up’, Netanyahu restarts Gaza genocide.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 21 Mar 25
Over 400 killed, 500 injured in massive Israeli bombing of Palestinians sheltering in tents from earlier Israeli bombings.
Trump was notified in advance and gave the typical US green light to proceed. In under 2 months Trump has funneled $12 billion in genocide weapons including many 2,000 lb. bombs to fuel Netanyahu’s latest genocide campaign.
Trump is anxious for all the Palestinians in Gaza to be dead and gone so he can begin his massive real estate development there to create a ‘Greater Israel.’
The massive Israeli bombing comes 2 weeks after Netanyahu blocked all humanitarian aid from reaching Gaza. Whether killing Palestinians slowly with no food, fmedicine or killing them quickly with 2,000 lb. US bombs, Netanyahu and Trump cover the gamut of ghoulish death in Gaza.
Idle Lepreau nuclear plant threatens to post worst operational year in 4 decades

Refurbishing only half the nuclear plant was a mistake, utility president admits
Robert Jones · CBC News : Mar 21, 2025
An end-of-the-fiscal-year breakdown at Point Lepreau is worsening what may turn out to be the poorest operational year on record for the 42-year-old plant.
The nuclear generating station was shutdown on Monday after a malfunctioning cooling fan was deemed to need immediate repair. That fix is expected to take almost until the end of the month
“Work is underway to repair an issue with the cooling fan and motor assembly,” D’Arcy Walsh, an N.B. Power spokesperson, said in an email. “We expect the station to return to service by the end of next week.”
A scheduled maintenance shutdown last spring, followed by the discovery of a major issue last summer in Lepreau’s generator, previously had the plant offline from early last April to mid-December. The latest problem is dragging the year’s low productivity further
Not including the years Lepreau was offline between 2008 and 2013 for a $2.5-billion refurbishment, the plant’s least productive year was in 1995, when it underwent work on sagging pressure tubes in its reactor and operated for just over 100 days.
Downtime at Lepreau is expensive for N.B. Power and has been cited as the primary cause for its current financial problems.
In February, N.B. Power president Lori Clark told MLAs the fortunes of the utility are largely dependent on how well, or poorly, the nuclear plant performs…………………….
Since it returned from refurbishment in late 2012, Lepreau has suffered a number of problems and has been taken offline for maintenance and repairs for more than 1,100 days in total.
More than one third of that downtime has occurred just in the last three years.
It has been estimated by the utility to cost between $1 million and $4 million per day when Lepreau is idle, depending on the time of year and the cost of generating or buying replacement power……………………………https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/idle-lepreau-nuclear-plant-threatening-worst-operational-year-nb-1.7490177
Hold Southern California Edison (SCE) Accountable: From Wildfires to Nuclear Waste.

Samuel Lawrence Foundation, 20 Mar 25
On March 5, 2025, Los Angeles County filed a lawsuit against Southern California Edison (SCE) over the devastating Eaton Fire, which killed 17 people and destroyed over 9,000 structures. The lawsuit alleges that SCE’s failure to maintain its infrastructure led to the disaster—echoing a long history of negligence by the utility. From wildfires to nuclear waste, Edison has repeatedly put profit over public safety, avoiding accountability for the risks it imposes on millions of Californians. The parallels to nuclear waste stored at San Onofre are striking: just as SCE’s equipment failures have fueled deadly fires, their reckless handling of 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste at San Onofre poses an existential threat to our coastal communities.
This lawsuit highlights the urgent need to hold SCE accountable—not just for wildfire destruction but for the dangerous waste sitting on our shoreline. Our fight continues to demand oversight, responsibility, transportability, and real solutions for San Onofre’s ticking time bomb before disaster strikes again. We are optimistic that LA County will see justice in this fight against Edison.
“We will not back down:” Court tells Greenpeace to pay billion dollar damages bill to oil and gas company

The case has been mired in controversy from the outset with many jurors holding unfavourable views of the protests and it was reported that more than half the jurors selected to hear the case had ties to the fossil fuel industry.
the US decision is a good indicator about what may be in store for Australia.
Royce Kurmelovs, Mar 20, 2025,
https://reneweconomy.com.au/we-will-not-back-down-court-tells-greenpeace-to-pay-billion-dollar-damages-bill-to-oil-and-gas-company/
A jury in the US has hit Greenpeace with $US660 million ($A1.04 billion) in damages for defamation and other claims for the green group’s part in a campaign led by First Nations people against an oil pipeline in 2016 and 2017.
The Standing Rock protests marked a major turning point in the movement against new oil and gas infrastructure, when the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe led a campaign against the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline.
Right wing organisations and groups mobilised in response to the protests that became a flashpoint in the broader fight over climate change, with sweeping anti-protest laws rolled out across the United States.
The case against Greenpeace is the latest reaction to the protest with Dallas-based oil and gas company, Energy Transfer Partners, alleging it lost $70 billion as a result of the campaign. It pursued Greenpeace in the courts alleging defamation and incitement of criminal behaviour against the project.
The lawsuit relied upon a US-specific statute, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), that was initially written to target the mob, but has since been used to prosecute international football federation FIFA for corrupt conduct and ExxonMobil for its role in attacking the science of climate change.
By seeking hundreds of millions in compensation against an organisation that played a minimal role in the protests, legal experts have described the litigation known as “strategic litigation against public participation”, or a “SLAPP Suit”. These are cases brought by large corporation to shut down public criticism or protest about a company’s activities.
The case has been mired in controversy from the outset with many jurors holding unfavourable views of the protests and it was reported that more than half the jurors selected to hear the case had ties to the fossil fuel industry.
Greenpeace made multiple attempts to move the hearings to another venue over concerns it would not get a fair hearing but were denied.
Following the verdict, Greenpeace International Executive Director Mads Christensen linked the decision to a broader corrosion of the right to protest in the US under the Trump administration.
“We are witnessing a disastrous return to the reckless behaviour that fuelled the climate crisis, deepened environmental racism, and put fossil fuel profits over public health and a liveable planet,” Christensen said.
“The previous Trump administration spent four years dismantling protections for clean air, water, and Indigenous sovereignty, and now along with its allies wants to finish the job by silencing protest.”
“We will not back down. We will not be silenced.”
David Mejia-Canales, a senior human rights lawyer from the Human Rights Law Centre, said the US decision is a good indicator about what may be in store for Australia.
SLAPP suits are not new in Australia, but the US lawfirm representing oil company Santos in the recent Munkara decision that ruled against the Environmental Defenders Office used an approach similar to US-style RICO litigation.
Coalition leader Peter Dutton has already pledged to defund the Environmental Defenders Office after the ruling in Munkara found its lawyers had behaved improperly, but has recently proposed to formally introduce RICO-style laws into Australia if elected.
Mejia-Canales said it was early days on the opposition leader’s proposal that seemed “a bit of a thought bubble” but said that should these laws be introduced, they had “potential to be abused”.
“In a way, the Greenpeace decision in the US is peering a little bit into our own future,” he said. “What we are seeing happening in the US today might be happening here tomorrow.”
“If these RICO type laws get introduced in Australia, they’re not doing it for the greater good or the greater purpose, it’s to stop us critiquing these massive companies whose behaviour leads to a whole lot of criticism and we should be able to do that safely.”
The Human Rights Law Centre is working to draft a bill that would introduce a set of principles for Australian courts to follow when confronted by a SLAPP litigation.
Canada Pours Nearly $450M into New Nuclear Subsidies

March 18, 2025 The Energy Mix, Author: Jody MacPherson
Canada has announced around C$450 million in new subsidies for nuclear energy, including the reallocation of funds collected from industrial emitters of greenhouse gases, in what the government frames as a bid to enhance energy security and reliability.
Ottawa will lend AtkinsRéalis, formerly SNC-Lavalin Group, C$304 million over four years to finance the development and modernization of a new Canadian deuterium uranium (CANDU) nuclear reactor named MONARK, Energy and Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said in a news release.
But a leading nuclear critic told The Energy Mix the new subsidies will be far from sufficient to bring the new design to life, and the new design is years if not a decade or more away from going into service………………………………………….
Nuclear Cost Concerns
But nuclear is also by far the most expensive way to generate electricity, Susan O’Donnell, an adjunct research professor at St. Thomas University who studies energy transitions in Canada, told The Mix. Ottawa’s funding is “nowhere near the amount” needed to fully develop and build reactors, she said, adding that it will take years to develop the MONARK design toward applying for a licence to build.
O’Donnell pointed to two similar reactors that just came online in Georgia, United States, at a cost of US$35 billion, compared to just $4 billion for the equivalent solar capacity.
“The big nuclear reactors were almost nine times more expensive than solar,” said O’Donnell. “It makes no sense.”
More Federal Cash for SMRs
Canada is also directing $55 million from Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Future Electricity Fund (FEF) to Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington New Nuclear Project for three new small modular reactors (SMRs) that together could power about 900,000 average Ontario homes……………
The SMRs destined for Darlington were designed by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, based out of North Carolina, and would require enriched uranium fuel, which Canada cannot produce domestically, reported the Globe and Mail. Wilkinson told the Globe that Canada’s options for enriched uranium include the United States or Russia, and that Canada could develop that capability if necessary, but it was not preferable.
While collaborating on nuclear projects with the U.S. might help eliminate tariffs, he added, “we’re unlikely to be spending an enormous amount of time collaborating with a party that is treating us like an adversary.”
First Nations Concerns
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission held its second set of public hearings just over a month ago for the first of the three reactors planned for Darlington. The hearing included presentations from the chiefs of four First Nations—Curve Lake, Hiawatha, Mississaugas of Scugog Island, and Alderville—calling for a new collaborative relationship built on respect, trust, and partnership.
Chief Kelly LaRocca of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation said “the current relationship is not working effectively.”
Additional Funding Announced
Further funding will also go to SaskPower’s SMR pre-development program. The FEF increased its program funding from $24 million to $80 million.
More federal subsidy support is also destined for Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Ontario. ……..
https://www.theenergymix.com/canada-pours-nearly-450m-into-new-nuclear-subsidies/
Radioactive Mussels May Pose Threat to Food Chain in Pennsylvania

By Tom Howarth, Science Reporter (Nature) Jan 07, 2025, https://www.newsweek.com/radioactive-mussels-food-chain-bioaccumulation-pennsylvania-2011149?fbclid=IwY2xjawJG4pxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXBgrVgNhUUy1s_U9SLYXUIeD-gugNuUk75xBSTL9AG1vQ6REzIVWJiVGw_aem_0EvCj7mKrreGjCLuSViY1Q
Radioactive contamination in freshwater mussels is potentially affecting the food chain in Pennsylvania, including iconic animals such as bald eagles and possibly even humans.
A study published last year by scientists from Penn State University found elevated levels of radium in mussels downstream from a waste treatment facility in Franklin, Pennsylvania. Now, experts are raising the alarm over the secondary impacts on the ecosystem.
While the facility no longer discharges oil and gas wastewater into the Allegheny River, its legacy of pollution persists, with radioactive material bioaccumulating in the ecosystem.
Why This Matters
The findings highlighted that radioactive materials could be climbing the food chain, affecting not just aquatic life but also land animals, birds and people. Bald eagles, a species reintroduced to Pennsylvania in 1983, are among those at risk. Their diet includes muskrats, a primary predator of freshwater mussels, which are now confirmed to carry radium.
Although freshwater mussels are not consumed by humans, other species higher in the food chain may serve as a bridge for contaminants to eventually affect people. Local fishing activity in the Allegheny River also raises questions about indirect exposure to radioactive material.
Exposure to high levels of radium can result in adverse health conditions like anemia, cataracts, fractured teeth, cancer (especially bone cancer) and death, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says.
What To Know
Freshwater mussels act as ecological barometers because of their fixed locations and long life spans.
In this study, researchers found that mussels downstream of the waste treatment facility had absorbed radioactive particles into their soft tissue and hard shells. Mussels closest to the discharge site perished from salinity, while those farther away adapted but at a cost—they absorbed contaminants instead.
The study also compared the mussels’ radioactivity to Brazil nuts, which naturally absorb radiation from the soil. While a typical 28-gram serving of Brazil nuts contains 0.47 to 0.80 microsieverts, the maximum radioactivity found in a single mussel was 63.42 μSv.
While the International Atomic Energy Agency recommends an annual exposure limit of 1,000 μSv—far exceeding the amount found in even the most radioactive mussel—the findings are concerning because of the potential for radiation to accumulate within food chains over time.
What People Are Saying
Evan Clark, the waterkeeper at Three Rivers Waterkeeper, told Newsweek: “One concern that I immediately thought of after reading [the study] was bioaccumulation. Mussels live pretty close to the bottom of the food chain, eating a lot of algae and bacteria—they are unselective filter feeders.
“Muskrats are one of the larger consumers of freshwater mussels, eating hundreds and hundreds in a lifetime. Those muskrats are going to be eaten by bald eagles, and those bald eagles are only recently making a strong comeback into western Pennsylvania.”
Katharina Pankratz, a co-author of the study, said in a statement: “Depending on the contaminant and its chemistry, if it is small enough to pass through the gills of the mussel, it has the potential to accumulate in their tissue or precipitate within the hard-shell structure. This information may help shape future regulations for wastewater disposal to surface water, especially in regions where mussels are harvested for food.”
Nathaniel Warner, the study’s corresponding author, said in the statement: “Mussels that were closest to the water discharges died off. Further downstream, the mussels found a way to tolerate the salinity and radioactive materials and instead absorbed them into their shells and tissues.”
What Happens Next
The study’s findings could inform future policies on wastewater management, its authors said. While the waste treatment facility in Franklin is no longer discharging waste into the waterways, its impacts still linger and could do so for some time.
Key questions, such as how much radioactive material is accumulating up the food chain, remain.
Trump offers to take control of Ukraine’s nuclear plants in call with Zelensky
President Donald Trump proposed that the United States take control of Ukrainian nuclear power plants to protect them from Russian attacks during a Tuesday call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Zelensky said Kyiv was “ready” to pause attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure, a day after Moscow agreed to halt similar strikes on Ukraine.
By: FRANCE 24, Video by: James VASINA, 19 Mar 25
Donald Trump told Volodymyr Zelensky Wednesday that the United States could own and run Ukraine‘s nuclear power plants as part of his latest bid to secure a ceasefire in Russia‘s invasion of its neighbour.
The Ukrainian president said following their call that Kyiv was “ready” to pause attacks on Russia’s energy network and infrastructure, a day after Vladimir Putin agreed to halt similar strikes on Ukraine.
Zelensky also said he had discussed Trump’s power plant takeover plan.
“We talked only about one power plant, which is under Russian occupation,” Zelensky, who was on an official visit to Finland, said during an online briefing, referring to the plant in Zaporizhzhia…………………………………………………………………..
Trump “discussed Ukraine’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants” and said Washington could be “very helpful” in running them,” National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a joint statement.
“American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure,” it said…………………………………… https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20250320-trump-ukraine-nuclear-power-plants-zelensky
Red light for the greenway

A wildlife corridor plans to connect two Superfund sites at the former Rocky Flats plutonium plant and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal that once produced chemical weapons. Locals fear residual contamination could spread.
John Abbotts, March 14, 2025, https://thebulletin.org/2025/03/red-light-for-the-greenway-locals-oppose-wildlife-corridor-at-plutonium-contaminated-rocky-flats-site/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Plutonium-contaminated%20wildlife%20corridor%3F%20Colorado%20locals%20say%20no&utm_campaign=20250317%20Monday%20Newsletter
n September, the city council of Westminster, Colorado voted not to fund a pedestrian bridge and underpass at the Rocky Flats site due to concerns about residual soil contamination from plutonium and other hazardous materials. In the process, the city council withdrew about $200,000 in financial support for the development of the project, known as the Rocky Mountain Greenway.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed the greenway to connect wildlife refuges at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal through hiking trails via the Two Ponds refuge to Rocky Flats, with plans to eventually connect to the Rocky Mountain National Park. But the plan is controversial: Both Rocky Flats and the Arsenal are still on the US Environmental Protection Agency’s National Priorities List, identified since 1987 as “Superfund” cleanup sites that contain residual contamination.
The US Army established the Arsenal to produce chemical weapons to support World War II efforts, and in the 1990s, the federal government leased part of the Arsenal to Shell Chemical Co. to manufacture fertilizer and pesticides. In 1952, the Atomic Energy Commission began operations at Rocky Flats as a federal atomic weapons facility, producing plutonium triggers for hydrogen bombs. (A hydrogen bomb or H-bomb uses fission in the primary—uranium or plutonium—to trigger the secondary into a fusion reaction that combines two atomic nuclei to form a single heavier nucleus, releasing a much larger amount of energy.) Operations started largely in secret at Rocky Flats, located in a sparsely populated area 16 miles upwind and upslope of the city of Denver. But in the late 1970s, the public became more informed about plant operations, and the movement opposing atomic weapons began to focus on the facility, organizing protests and civil disobedience actions.
By the late 1980s, when the federal cleanup program at both sites had been initiated, work had already begun on the new Denver International Airport on Rocky Mountain Arsenal lands, and the Denver suburbs had steadily spread west toward Rocky Flats. Accordingly, there was consensus at each site that expedited cleanup would most effectively protect the metropolitan area, and cleanup standards were looser than “unrestricted use” to develop national wildlife refuges at each site. The consequences were residual contamination, especially at Rocky Flats, where there was no limit on how much plutonium remained below six feet of soil in an industrial area fenced off from the public and with the surrounding land converted to a wildlife refuge. This “cleanup on the cheap” at Rocky Flats, plus a record of cover-ups of accidents at the site, created continuing distrust and controversy over post-remediation uses near Rocky Flats. Cities and citizens opposed different proposals for re-use, even over the issue of public access to the refuge. Now there are concerns that the proposed greenway—a trail between the two tracts—may facilitate cross-contamination, taking radioactive material from the Rocky Flats site to the chemically hazardous Arsenal property, and vice versa.
Contamination—then a raid
Each of the two Rocky Mountain sites has a controversial history. At Rocky Mountain Arsenal, chemical contaminants have been identified as organochlorine pesticides, akin to DDT and its chemical cousins, of which Rachel Carson warned in her classic 1962 book Silent Spring. Other contaminants at the site include heavy metals, organophosphate, and carbamate pesticides—with each of these pesticide classes known to be neurotoxic—along with a potpourri of other chemical contaminants in groundwater.
As for Rocky Flats, a 1972 paper from radiochemist Edward Martell and one of his colleagues at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado reported that just east of the site boundary levels of radioactive plutonium 239 and americium 241 ranged “up to hundreds of times that from nuclear tests.” In 1969, a highly visible fire at the site’s plutonium processing facility sparked off-site monitoring; at the time, the fire was assumed to be the source of the detected contamination. Later, the Atomic Energy Commission was forced to admit that a 1957 fire in a separate plutonium recovery building or leaks from drums containing plutonium-contaminated waste were more likely the source of off-site soil contamination.
When the Rocky Flats facility was still operating, it accepted contaminated metal from another Atomic Energy Commission facility. In the process of treating and burying the waste, Rocky Flats released tritium into a nearby stream, contaminating the drinking water source for the city and county of Broomfield, five miles west of the facility. The contamination occurred for more than a decade leading up to 1970; the tritium remained undetected until 1973.
In 1986, amendments to Superfund legislation expanded the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to oversee the cleanup of contaminated federal facilities. The following year, the agency designated Rocky Mountain Arsenal as a Superfund site.
Then, in June 1989, the FBI and EPA raided the Rocky Flats plant in response to allegations of multiple environmental crimes at the site. After an investigation, plutonium production ended, the EPA designated Rocky Flats a Superfund site in the same year. In 1992, Rockwell International, the contractor in charge of managing the site, pleaded guilty to environmental crimes and paid a fine of $18.5 million.
Contested cleanup plans
The regulatory agencies responsible for environmental cleanup—the EPA’s Region 8 office, based in Denver, and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment—have certified cleanup as partially complete at each site. The “responsible parties” are now the US Army for the Arsenal and the US Department of Energy for Rocky Flats.
At the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, cleanup extended to 10 feet below the surface, considered a sufficient depth to prevent burrowing animals from spreading the widespread chemical contamination there. In 2010, the regulatory agencies determined parts of the Arsenal sufficiently remediated to serve as a National Wildlife Refuge and transferred the management of the designated property to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. That service transferred a small herd of bison from a national range in Montana, and bison continue to inhabit the refuge.
The Army retains responsibility for a central area, along with smaller contaminated locations covered for monitoring and groundwater remediation. In 2019, the Colorado Department of Public Health sued Shell and the Army in the US District Court for hazardous chemicals from the Arsenal leaking into groundwater. The suit alleged that unsafe levels of organochlorine pesticides, heavy metals, chlorinated and aromatic solvents, and chemical agent degradation products and manufacturing byproducts had been found in groundwater. Litigation on that case is still ongoing.
At Rocky Flats, the controversy over the site’s past activities extended into its cleanup, with some opponents characterizing the proposed plans as “bait-and-switch.” Early in the cleanup process, the Energy Department funded an advisory committee that, in turn, established a “future site uses” working group. One of the working group’s recommendations was for residual plutonium contamination to be cleaned down to background level, to protect future area residents, no matter how long it would take. However, state officials assessed that a speedy cleanup that converted some areas into a National Wildlife Refuge was the desirable approach to protect outer metropolitan areas expanding toward the site boundaries.
The Energy Department and the site’s federal and state regulators agreed to limit the total costs of remediation and established a residual plutonium contamination limit in the top three feet of soil and a higher limit between three and six feet. (There was no contamination limit below six feet.) These limits were sufficient to qualify outer areas of Rocky Flats as a National Wildlife Refuge, and those areas were released to the Fish and Wildlife Service in 2006. Since then, the controversy has remained because the residual contamination is too high for unlimited uses of Rocky Flats.
Opposing the greenway
The city of Westminster is now the third municipal government to express concern over residual contamination at Rocky Flats. In 2016, the town of Superior, north of the site, voted to withdraw from the Rocky Mountain Greenway, a Federal Lands Access Program grant and project. The city and county of Broomfield followed suit in October 2020, unanimously approving a resolution for the withdrawal from the greenway. The Broomfield city council hired an environmental consultant to conduct soil sampling along the proposed Greenway, and the resolution expressed concern over the high levels of plutonium detected in the soil. After the resolution, the city stated that it would not contribute the $105,000 that was supposed to go to the Greenway project and would not allow Greenway-related construction work on Broomfield property.
The city of Broomfield also opposed another post-cleanup proposal—the Jefferson Parkway Highway Authority—described on its web page as a “privately-funded, publicly-owned regional toll road.” The proposed road would pass just outside the wildlife refuge, which was the eastern boundary of the former plutonium facility. The parkway authority had no plans to sample soil nearby until both Broomfield and a citizens advisory board recommended doing so before construction began. The authority then started sampling and, in September 2019, reported a sample containing 264 picocuries of plutonium per gram. (A picocurie is one trillionth of a curie, a measure of radioactivity.) This was much higher than the maximum limit of 50 picocuries per gram for surface contamination within the former industrial zone. Although this was the only sample above the limit, given the authority’s earlier resistance to sampling, the community lost faith in the project’s safety.
The Broomfield city council voted unanimously in February 2020 to withdraw from the Jefferson Parkway Association, removing a $70,000 annual payment in the process. In 2022, the county of Jefferson and city of Arvada sued Broomfield in response, claiming the parkway could not continue without that county’s continued participation. But a Colorado District Court judge dismissed that suit in December 2023, urging the parties to negotiate over Broomfield’s participation. The city and county of Broomfield expressed satisfaction with that decision, and the parkway’s future was described as “uncertain.”
In an escalatory move, in January 2024, the Colorado state chapter of the Physicians for Social Responsibility and five other groups filed a federal lawsuit in Washington D.C., seeking to prevent the greenway from coming through Rocky Flats. The plaintiffs sought to enjoin the US Federal Highway Administration, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and their respective cabinet departments (Transportation and Interior), from constructing an eight-mile trail through the most heavily plutonium-contaminated area of the wildlife refuge. (The filing assumed that the greenway would proceed from Westminster, but that city’s most recent decision to withdraw funds seems to require a different route.) According to the complaint, the city of Boulder has suggested since at least 2016 that the greenway path avoid Rocky Flats entirely.
The presiding judge, Timothy J. Kelley, denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in September 2024. The case now awaits trial.
So far, concerns over Rocky Flats and its wildlife refuge have already limited public access to the refuge. Since April 2018, the Denver School District, the largest in the area, has forbidden its nearly 100,000 students from visiting Rocky Flats on field trips. Other school districts, including Boulder’s, had previously issued similar orders to protect their students.
It is still uncertain how the Trump administration will regard public participation, public protest, and the rule of law at Rocky Flats and other Superfund sites. The new Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, is the former chief executive of a fracking company based in Denver, a known climate change denier, and was on the boards of EMX Royalty, a Canadian company that seeks royalties from extractive mineral mining, and Oklo, Inc., which designs small modular nuclear reactors. Wright is now responsible for overseeing atomic weapons production, cleanup of former weapons facilities, and US energy policy in general. How Wright will interact with Colorado peace activists and environmental protection groups concerned about the defunct plutonium-contaminated weapons facility at Rocky Flats is unclear. But the fight over the future of this legacy site appears far from over.
Walt Zlotow: Trump pushing Ukraine peace for simple reason: he has no cards to play either.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 17 Mar 25
At his Oval Office kerfuffle with Ukraine President Zelensky, President Trump told Zelensky he had to make peace with Russia. This followed Zelensky’s plea for more US weapons to keep the war going till Ukraine prevails. Trump disabused him of that notion by saying “You have no cards to play”, colloquial for ‘Make peace, not war.’
Trump knows he has no cards to play as well in the ongoing peace negotiations in Saudi Arabia. That’s why he is anxious to end the war. He knows predecessor Biden made a catastrophic mistake provoking the war over 3 years ago. He knows Ukraine is on the brink of military collapse in spite of the $175 billion in weapons Biden poured into Ukraine that has merely turned it into a failed state. Trump knows Biden sabotaged the imminent peace treaty Putin and Zelensky were prepared to sign ending the war in its first 2 months.
He wants none of that disastrous Biden war policy attached to his foreign policy resume.
Every American, every Ukrainian, every Russian should support the Trump peace initiative that could end the war, bring security to the region, allow reconstruction of the 80% of what’s left of Ukraine, provide resumption of normal US Russia diplomatic relations. Most importantly, it will end the risk of this war going nuclear, a threat hanging over peoplekind every one of the 1,120 days of this totally unnecessary, lost war.
Trump didn’t change sides. He’s not abandoning an ally. He’s not a Russian agent. He’s not a traitor. Unlike Biden, he’s merely a realist who looked at his empty hand, saw Russian President Putin was holding 4 aces, and decided to walk away lest another 100,000 Ukrainians are needlessly sacrificed for America’s lust to control European geopolitics.
On this issue President Trump deserves our support.
Canada to review the purchase of US-made F-35 fighter jets in light of Trump’s trade war
By ROB GILLIES, March 16, 2025
TORONTO (AP) — Canada’s new Prime Minister Mark Carney has asked Defense Minister Bill Blair to review the purchase of America’s F-35 fighter jet to see if there are other options “given the changing environment,” a spokesman for Blair said Saturday.
Defense ministry press secretary Laurent de Casanove said the contract to purchase U.S. military contractor Lockheed Martin’s F-35 currently remains in place and Canada has made a legal commitment of funds for the first 16 aircraft. Canada agreed to buy 88 F-35’s two years ago.
Carney, who was sworn in on Friday, has asked Blair to work with the military “to determine if the F-35 contract, as it stands, is the best investment for Canada, and if there are other options that could better meet Canada’s needs,” de Casanove said……………………………………………………………………………………………………..more https://apnews.com/article/f35-canada-trump-0d3bf192d3490d87570d48475ff2c3a6
Court upholds two legal challenges to the Chalk River Radioactive Megadump.

Gordon Edwards, 14 Mar 25
The radioactive megadump planned for Chalk River (an “engineered mound” intended to contain about one million tonnes of so-called “Low-level” radioactive waste in a permanent landfill-like toxic waste dump just one kilometre from the Ottawa River) was planned by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) and approved by CNSC.
Three legal challenges against this decision were launched in the Federal Appeals Court. The first had to do with the inadequacy of the safety case and the lack of adequate monitoring of the contents of the megadump. The second had to do with the failure to consult the Indigenous Algonquin peoples as required by the “Duty to Consult” and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The third challenge had to do with the failure to consider alternative sites for such a toxic waste facility to provide adequate protection for endangered species.
Although the first challenge was not successful, the good news is that the second and third challenges were upheld by the court and CNSC and CNL will have to re-open the regulatory process to correct the inadequacies that have been noted. This does not mean that the existing megadumo has been forbidden but that more work must be done by both the proponent and the regulator to satisfactorily address these inadequacies.
The success of the third challenge was only announced yesterday.
The Federal Court overturned the Species at Risk permit for the nuclear waste facility planned for Chalk River, just 180 km up the Ottawa River from Ottawa.
The project proponent, CNL, said that the construction would harm, harass, or kill the endangered Blanding’s Turtle and 2 endangered bat species.
The Court found that CNL did not consider all reasonable alternative locations, and CNL admitted that it picked Chalk River even though it was less favourable for protecting species at risk than two other viable sites.
This violated s. 73(3)(a) of the Species at Risk Act, which says that “all” reasonable alternatives that would reduce the impact on species at risk must be considered and the best solution must be adopted.
There’s a lot to parse, but essentially, Justice Zinn agreed about the first 2 issues (not all reasonable locations were considered, and the best option was not chosen), but disagreed about the others (bat boxes, wildlife corridors, bird nests, the Monarch).
The win on the location issue is huge, of course. If they have to pick a new location, they have to start over from scratch and none of the other issues matter. See para 48 (of the decision) for some good reasoning by Zinn J:
“During both the hearing and public consultation with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, CNL conceded that it would only consider non-AECL properties if no suitable AECL-owned site was identified. This admission confirms that CNL’s default approach was to confine its search to AECL lands unless compelled to broaden it. This methodology is directly at odds with the statutory mandate under paragraph 73(3)(a). The Minister failed to reconcile this self-imposed limitation with the statutory requirement for a comparative assessment of ecological impacts on protected species. I am of the view that, even if a non-AECL site posed greater logistical challenges, such as increased transportation distances, the Act would still require CNL to consider it if it offered reduced harm to at-risk species. Administrative or logistical difficulties do not absolve the project’s proponent of its duty to evaluate such alternatives under paragraph 73(3)(a), even if those factors later justify rejecting them.”
Unfortunately, this does not mean that ECCC will not approve the permit for Chalk River. The decision is being sent back for redetermination, as is normal in admin law cases. From Zinn’s interpretation of the statutory language, it’s hard to see how it could be approved for Chalk River, given CNL’s deficient siting process, but Zinn seemed to be aware of these massive implications and tried to avoid these repercussions. He goes out of his way to say that it could be possible for ECCC to approve the permit for Chalk River if 1) they give appropriate justification for only looking at AECL sites (para 50) and 2) interpreted “best option” differently than ECCC has in the past, to include non-species-at-risk factors, and justified this different interpretation (paras 57-61).
Uranium fever collides with industry’s dark past in Navajo country

Mining.com, Bloomberg News | January 14, 2025
A few miles south of the Grand Canyon, thousands of tons of uranium ore, reddish-gray, blue and radioactive, are piled up high in a clearing in the forest.
They’ve been there for months, stranded by a standoff between the mining company that dug them deep out of the ground, Energy Fuels Inc., and the leader of the Navajo Nation, Buu Nygren.
Back in the summer, Energy Fuels had triggered an uproar when it loaded some of the ore onto a truck, slapped a “radioactive” sign over the taillights and drove it through the heart of Navajo territory.
Radioactive is an alarming word anywhere, but here in Navajo country, surrounded by hundreds of abandoned uranium mines that powered America’s nuclear arms race with the USSR and spewed toxic waste into the land, it causes terror. Those fears have only grown the past couple years as nuclear power came back in vogue and sparked a uranium rush in mining camps all across the Southwest.
So when the news made it to Nygren that morning, he was furious. No one had sought his consent for the shipment. He quickly ordered dozens of police officers to throw on their sirens, fan out and intercept the truck.
The dragnet turned up nothing in the end — the truck snuck through — but the hard-line response delivered a warning, amplified over social media and ratified days later by the governor of Arizona, to the miners: Stay out of Navajo country.
Cut off from the lone processing mill in the US — all the main routes cut through Navajo territory — executives at Energy Fuels stockpiled it by the entrance of the mine. When the heaps of crushed rock grew too sprawling, they pulled the miners out of the tunnels and turned the drilling machines off…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Animosity towards mining companies runs high on Navajo land. It’s visible everywhere. On huge roadside billboards and small office signs, in fading pinks and yellows and jet blacks, too. They read “Radioactive Pollution Kills” and “Haul No” and, along the main entrance to Cameron, a hard-scrabble village on the territory’s western edge, “No Uranium Mining.”
A few miles down the road, big mounds of sand streaked gray and blue rise, one after the other, high above the vast desert landscape. They are the tailings from some of the uranium mines that were abandoned in the territory last century.
To Ray Yellowfeather, a 50-year-old construction worker, the tailings were always the “blue hills,” just one big playground for him and his childhood friends.
“We would climb up the blue hills and slide back down,” Yellowfeather says. “Nobody told us they were dangerous.”
Years later, they would be cordoned off by the Environmental Protection Agency as it began work to clean up the mines. By then, though, the damage was done. Like many around here, Yellowfeather says he’s lost several family members to stomach cancer. The last of them was his mother in 2022.
Yellowfeather admits he doesn’t know exactly what caused their cancer but, he says, “I have to think it has to do with the piles of radioactive waste all around us.” It’s in the construction material in many of the homes and buildings and in the aquifers, too. To this day, drinking water is shipped into some of the hardest-hit areas.
The US government has recognized the harm its nuclear arms projects have done to communities in the Southwest. In 1990, Congress passed a law to compensate victims who contracted cancer and other diseases. It paid out some $2.5 billion over the ensuing three decades. The EPA, meanwhile, has been in charge of the clean-up of the abandoned mines. Two decades after the program began, though, only a small percentage have been worked on at all.
This is giving mining companies an opportunity to curry favor in tribal communities by offering to take over and expedite the clean-up of some mines.
…………………………………………………………………………..the EPA released a detailed study on Pinyon Plain. In it, the agency found that operations at the mine could contaminate the water supply of the Havasupai, a tribe tucked in such a remote corner of the Grand Canyon that it receives mail by mule. The report emboldened Havasupai leaders to step up their opposition to the mine, adding to Chalmers’s growing list of problems.
For the Navajo, the risks that come from the hauling of uranium through its territory are far smaller — so negligible as to be almost non-existent, according to Chalmers. Nygren is unmoved. The Navajo have heard such reassurances many times before, he says, only to pay dearly in the end.
Nygren grew up near a cluster of old mines right along the territory’s Arizona-Utah border, which makes the whole Energy Fuels affair “incredibly personal,” he says. His voice grows louder now and his tone more emphatic, indignant. To him, the Energy Fuels incursion feels no different than all the abuses committed over the course of decades by the US government and the mining companies that supplied it with a steady stream of uranium.
“We played a big role in the national security of the United States and we played a big part in the Cold War, providing energy for nuclear weapons. We’ve done our part. And now it’s time for the US to do its part by cleaning up these mines and respecting our laws.” https://www.mining.com/web/uranium-fever-collides-with-industrys-dark-past-in-navajo-country/
-
Archives
- April 2026 (114)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

