Radioactive Real Estate: Finding a Forever Home for Nuclear Waste

To this day, WIPP only houses transuranic waste with medium radioactivity from nuclear defense projects — not, for example, waste from nuclear energy, or items with very high or low levels of radioactivity. There is no pilot plant for high-level materials in the U.S. at the moment or in the plans

Undark, 10 July 2024, BY SARAH SCOLES

Castoffs from U.S. nuclear weapons get buried at one site in New Mexico. But what happens when that facility fills up?

THE LAND around Carlsbad, New Mexico is spiked with oil and gas wells. Mines hoist up minerals. Hotel parking lots teem with twinning white work trucks, driven by employees who specialize in pulling material out of the Earth.

Amid these extractors, though, are others putting material into the planet: They work for a facility called the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, located about 40 minutes from downtown Carlsbad. At first glance, WIPP resembles a normal industrial site: A road sign near the entrance sports its inscrutable name, pointing toward tan warehouse-like buildings, evaporation ponds, and headframes for hoisting material.

Superficially, it looks like any other mine in the area. But that sameness belies the strangeness of what lies below ground: A huge subterranean salt deposit that stores nuclear waste from the country’s defense projects.

Once the repository is full, the salt will naturally undo the miners’ work: Tunnels and rooms will collapse, entombing the radioactive material and protecting life aboveground. WIPP has buried more than 14,000 shipments of nuclear waste since its start in 1999.

Twenty-five years after that opening, on a chilly March morning, a charter bus carries a crowd of people — some wearing cowboy attire, others in insulated vests zipped over dress shirts — into the parking lot. They congregate next to a semitruck laden with cylindrical cargo containers that sport radioactive warning labels. The labels, it turns out, are just for show. These containers are empty — staged for a photograph as part of WIPP’s 25th anniversary, and these guests have come to mark the occasion.

When the event starts, in a building plunked just before the security gate, Mark Bollinger, head of the Department of Energy’s Environmental Management Carlsbad field office, heads to a lectern.

“This,” he proclaims, “is a celebration.”

Others beg to differ. According to WIPP’s founding documents, the site should be winding down soon: It is a pilot plant — an experiment, a proof-of-concept — these critics argue, not a permanent one. The goal is to show that it is possible to safely store nuclear waste underground, shut the plant down, and seal it off. Initially, the timeline estimated disposal would stop in the middle of this decade, letting earth close around the waste. Over the course of WIPP’s operating life, and drawing on lessons learned here, the United States would identify and open new repositories for America’s nuclear waste.

That’s not exactly what has happened though.

Today, there are no concrete plans for new deep geologic repositories in the U.S. There are no established future sites for the medium-level nuclear waste that WIPP handles, nor for more dangerous radioactive waste, nor for the tens of millions of pounds of spent nuclear fuel from power plants. Indeed, much of the radioactive trash the country has created since the 1940s still lives in temporary storage, spread across the U.S. And officials now expect WIPP could remain open until the 2080s — decades beyond its originally conceived chronology.

The lack of permanent nuclear waste storage in the U.S. isn’t an engineering problem. “It’s not technically difficult,” said Allison Macfarlane, director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia, and former chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The solution, she says, is to bury it. The more radioactive, the deeper it goes.

Politically and culturally, however, convincing communities to permanently host nuclear detritus remains difficult, and WIPP is the world’s only operational example of a deep geological repository for nuclear waste — and the only one on the horizon. If officials are to find a post-WIPP solution for the mid-level nuclear waste being stored here — and the other kinds of radioactive discards — they’ll need to study how WIPP came to be, and why Carlsbad residents haven’t put up much of a fuss.

“In any future repository program,” said Matt Bowen, a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University and a former official with the National Nuclear Security Administration, “state and local officials are going to want to understand WIPP.”

THE IDEA that you could store nuclear waste in salt dates to the 1950s, when the National Academy of Sciences published a report about radioactive waste disposal, identifying places where nuclear waste could remain undisturbed. Subterranean salt deposits, the panel of experts concluded, were the best spots, geologically speaking.

“The great advantage here is that no water can pass through salt,” read the report. Cracks in the mineral would heal themselves, theoretically helping halt radioactivity’s flow up or down. Salt deposits are also typically in seismically inactive areas, so nothing should shake the dangerous drums. “Abandoned salt mines or cavities especially mined to hold waste are, in essence, long-enduring tanks,” it continued.

Other geologic options that have been floated include crystalline rock, shale or clay, shale over hard rock, and volcanic rock called tuff, all of which can isolate the waste from the outside environment.

More than a decade passed before officials implemented the academy’s suggestion, with the defense apparatus continuing to produce nuclear waste the whole time. But when they did move forward with preliminary work in the 1970s, they settled on a part of New Mexico underlain by a huge slab of salt from the long-gone Permian Sea. This salt is 2,000 feet thick, starting 850 feet underground. It seemed perfect.

But first they needed to convince the public.

Proponents and politicians navigated this in part by allowing independent oversight and research and giving the state of New Mexico some power over the process. In the 1970s, the state created a radioactive and hazardous waste committee in the legislature, to recommend legislation for WIPP and for the transportation of radioactive material. And in the 1980s Congress allocated money to mine two shafts through the salt and research the site and its safety, access that allowed the state of New Mexico to do its own, independent research.

That was part of a plan that politicians and policymakers in favor of WIPP had in this era, says former Rep. John Heaton, whose district housed the future site. Namely, that they wanted the public to “hang loose.”

“Let’s not go overboard,” Heaton said of the advice to the public at the time. It is no use thinking of only bad-case scenarios or scary what-ifs. Let’s instead, the advice went, wait for the facts to come in.

As those facts arrived, independent researchers learned about how waste containers corroded over time, and how the underground salt behaved at different temperatures. The research pointed to the long-term safety of the site, and waiting on the scientific results had worked: Carlsbad was on board, with opposition coming mostly from larger, more liberal cities like Santa Fe, where Heaton lives now. And while the project did face controversy and opposition from the state, by the time the project was getting started, more people were in favor of WIPP than against it.

By 1992, politicians had drawn up the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act, giving more than 10,000 acres to WIPP and laying out its parameters — including the total amount of waste the Department of Energy could “emplace” — a fancy word used to mean “put underground.” WIPP would house material dubbed “transuranic,” largely objects contaminated with radioactive elements heavier than uranium — in this case, mostly plutonium — soiled during nuclear defense work.

(To this day, WIPP only houses transuranic waste with medium radioactivity from nuclear defense projects — not, for example, waste from nuclear energy, or items with very high or low levels of radioactivity. There is no pilot plant for high-level materials in the U.S. at the moment or in the plans.)

TODAY, WIPP is not just a hole in the ground but a series of tunnels and rooms largely housing barrels filled with pieces of rebar, rags, clothing, empty containers of spray adhesive — remnants of the objects engineers and technicians used while working on nuclear weapons or defense research.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… “legacy waste” — radioactive trash created long ago when records were less detailed and methods less stringent than they are now. Some of it was simply put in containers and buried in shallow trenches, or even above-ground, on the nuclear labs’ property during the Cold War. Legacy material makes up much of WIPP’s contents, and much of what will be in its future deliveries.

…………………………….. CHECKS and balances have been fine-tuned since 2014, when WIPP experienced its greatest setback.

February that year was a bad month for the plant. First, a truck hauling salt caught fire underground, spreading soot on important equipment and smoke throughout the site — and endangering the 86 workers underground. Everyone made it the 2,000 feet to the surface, but several had to be treated for smoke inhalation.

Just over a week later, in a different part of WIPP, a drum of waste exploded, turning itself essentially into a dirty bomb, blasting out transuranic radioactive material in a fiery burst.

Twenty-two workers received doses of radiation, and a small amount of contamination escaped into the outside world — about 3 percent of the amount of radiation from a chest X-ray.

The dangerous drum had originally come from Los Alamos, where workers had mixed in the wrong kind of cat litter — a simple substance that typically helps stabilize nuclear waste. But in this case, instead of combining the hazardous substances with inorganic kitty litter, they had mixed it with “an organic kitty litter,” the instructions having gotten garbled. And organic material can react with nitrates, causing chemical reactions that release heat. The increasing heat bumped up the pressure inside the drum, until it burst.

………………………………………………… The 2014 accidents may have been the most significant in WIPP’s history, but yearly, smaller incidents also occur. “It’s difficult to operate this kind of facility,” said Hancock. “Nobody in the world has ever safely operated a deep geologic repository.”

And that is the difference between the real world and a report from a national academy about what kind of rock or mineral is safe: A place can be perfect in geological theory, but when operated by flawed humans, it will be subject to their mishaps and misjudgments.

………………………………………………………………………Critics, like proponents, want the legacy waste cleaned up, and safely. But they don’t trust WIPP with that last part. While the bigger cities in the region are unlikely to suffer ill effects from a disaster at the plant itself, trucks of nuclear waste pass through on their highways. And some residents are concerned about the safety of those trucks. Any vehicle traveling anywhere, carrying anything, can have an accident.

They are also worried about WIPP’s proximity to oil and gas activity…………………………………………………………………..

WIPP RECENTLY received its latest 10-year operating permit from the state of New Mexico. As part of the final agreement, the DOE agreed to look for a future waste-disposal site, in another state. “I think it will be a consent-based siting program,” said Bowen, of repositories to come. “I don’t think anybody wants to fight states.”

But it will be hard to find a new, permanent place — or other places for the other kinds of nuclear waste out there. “At some point in time, we’re going to have to start this effort of establishing another deep geologic repository,” said Bowen. WIPP, after all, took decades to open, so starting now could mean getting a new space in the 2040s or 2050s, with more waste piling up in the meantime. “We need to get going on that,” he continued. He’s hopeful things may get started in 2025.

And as with WIPP, the hardest part won’t be finding more salt spots, or deciding between volcanic rock and shale: It will be getting the people sitting in Washington and the people living atop those deposits to agree to something. “The affected public has to trust those who are implementing this process and those who are regulating this process,” said Macfarlane.

But the requirement goes the other way, she added: The implementers and regulators have to trust the public. That latter part often falls apart, she said………………………………………………………………

In the 1990s, Sandia National Laboratories convened linguists, scientists, and anthropologists, among others, to figure out how to separate WIPP from the people of the future. They came up with a plan involving signs and symbols: The site will be surrounded by huge earthen berms, metal objects and magnets buried within, meant to reflect radar beams and make this place register as magnetically anomalous. The perimeter will also host 25-foot-tall granite columns, engraved with warnings, and no-go markers will be buried up to six feet deep throughout the site. WIPP’s center, if someone gets that far, will host an information center that includes pictorial messages today’s humans hope will convey “leave this alone” to future ones.

“Other nuclear waste disposal sites must be marked in a similar manner within the U.S. and preferably world-wide,” read the multidisciplinary report. Its authors likely imagined there would be plans for such sites by now, and that WIPP would soon be getting its warnings. But it got, instead, a birthday party. https://undark.org/2024/07/10/radioactive-real-estate-nuclear-waste-forever-home/?utm_source=Undark%3A+News+%26+Updates&utm_campaign=1b7bb2c675-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5cee408d66-185e4e09de-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

July 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Reference, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

“Project 2025” is just “Project 1981”

Many sections of Project 2025 could easily have been pilfered from a Democratic think tank

DOD section additionally declares that the US “must regain its role” as the “Arsenal of Democracy” by further ramping up foreign arms sales, ……..despite Biden and Democrats similarly trumpeting the “Arsenal of Democracy” concept as it relates to Ukraine and other conflicts in which “Democracy is on the Line,” just like WW11

MICHAEL TRACEY, JUL 12, 2024,

“……………………………………………………………………………………. What percentage of despondent Dems who have this crippling fear of Project 2025 have actually read the document? I’m not going to claim to have read all 920 pages, but I did read the sections on the Department of Defense, State Department, and “Intelligence Community.” I would love to ask MSNBC anchors if they read these portions, because if they did, they should be celebrating the glorious reaffirmation of “bipartisan consensus” contained therein, rather than fulminating about some despotic nightmare.

Christopher C. Miller, who briefly served as Trump’s “acting” Secretary of Defense, writes in his Project 2025 contribution that the next Conservative Administration must “prevent Beijing’s hegemony over Asia,” including by “modernizing and expanding the US nuclear arsenal.”

……………Miller solemnly declares that in addition to China, “the United States and its allies also face real threats from Russia, as evidenced by Vladimir Putin’s brutal war in Ukraine, as well as from Iran, North Korea, and transnational terrorism.”

Countering these alleged threats, he concludes, “will require more spending on defense, both by the United States and by its allies.” Thus the fearsome Project 2025 envisions a future in which the march of US and “allied” militarization continues apace, just like it has during the Biden Administration.

…………………….Miller says US conventional force planning must be structured in such a manner as to “defeat a Chinese invasion of Taiwan,” so if what you deplore in this document is that bipartisan planning for war with China could accelerate under a second Trump Administration, that may be legitimate — but that does not seem to be what the liberals are whining about. Because the Biden Administration is currently doing the same thing!

Miller amusingly calls for the “acquisition community,” also known as arms manufacturers, to be granted greater flexibility in securing multi-year procurement contracts to spur the “innovation” required for the Defense Industrial Sector to adequately confront all the scary Emerging Threats around the world. Liberals in a state of terror can take solace that this multi-year procurement reform has already been well underway during the Biden Administration, largely to provide armaments for Ukraine (and Taiwan), and these legislative adjustments have been enacted with thoroughly bipartisan support, as usual.

“Replenish and maintain US stockpiles of ammunition and other equipment that have been depleted as a result of US support to Ukraine,” the document advises. Good news: that, again, is already happening, with new artillery factories popping up everywhere from Arkansas to Texas.

Miller’s DOD section additionally declares that the US “must regain its role” as the “Arsenal of Democracy” by further ramping up foreign arms sales, which he says have fallen to unacceptable lows under the Biden Administration — despite Biden and Democrats similarly trumpeting the “Arsenal of Democracy” concept as it relates to Ukraine and other conflicts in which “Democracy is on the Line,” just like WWII.

(Yawn.) Apparently there is firm agreement on this messianic imperative amongst the “Project 2025” crowd. The US has firmly retained its distinction as the world’s number one global arms exporter all throughout the Biden Administration, but this clearly isn’t enough for Project 2025. Weirdly, the MSNBC liberals don’t seem to be particularly troubled by that policy prescription.

Among the “byzantine bureaucracy” that Project 2025 wants to cut is those bureaucratic impediments which prevent the US from exporting arms across the world at an acceptably rapid pace. The Heritage Foundation pinheads also want to eliminate the practice by which the State Department notifies Congress about such arms sales, decrying this already-meager oversight opportunity as a terrible “hinderance” (sp).

As far as the DOD’s “intelligence” assets, Miller advises that they more fulsomely “align collection and analysis with vital national interests (countering China and Russia).” Can someone explain what Democrats find so “existentially” horrifying about this? They support the same exact thing, and in fact often argue that Trump is insufficiently committed to countering Our Big Bad Enemies.

If there’s an “existential threat” contained anywhere in this document, it’s the same one that Democrats are currently promoting at full-blast: a lurch into a hotter-than-Cold War with China and Russia. (Which was just bolstered once again at the Washington NATO Summit this week, having produced an official Declaration that came closer than ever before in designating China an official enemy, by accusing it of providing “material support” to Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.)

Miller wants to “increase the Army budget”; for the Navy, he wants to “build a fleet of more than 355 ships” as well as “produce key munitions at the maximum rate with significant capacity,” because the Navy must be urgently “prepared to expend large quantities of air-launched and sea-launched stealthy, precision, cruise missiles.” If any of this sincerely troubles hysterical Democrats, they would’ve been troubled by the budget-busting Defense expenditures that Biden has ushered in, building on the similarly budget-busting expenditures ushered in by the “dangerous” Trump. But of course they’re not troubled by any of this stuff………………………….

Trump and the mainline GOP seldom ever object to the principle of funding and supplying the Ukrainian war effort. (After all, Trump is the one who started sending Ukraine lethal weaponry in the first place.) They simply call for that funding to be streamlined with a greater emphasis on core military expenditures, rather than the “economic aid” that Democrats are generally more keen to tack on.

…………….Another key prescription in that policy brief was that the US should “descope” its involvement in Ukraine to only that which is necessary for “enabling the killing of Russians on the front lines. That means providing the necessary weapon systems and tactics to win — not to tie.”

If you notice, this proclamation amounts to House Republicans (the group most acutely responsive to Trump’s political influence and dictates) arguing that the Biden Administration has been insufficiently aggressive in supplying Ukraine with weapons. The final War Funding Bill that Trump backed in April thus included a requirement for the Biden Administration to send Ukraine longer-range missile systems, which was then followed by Biden’s authorization for Ukraine to strike territorial Russia with US-provided materiel.

……………..So what exactly are Democrats and liberals blabbering about when they screech that Project 2025 is an “existential threat”? Insofar as it relates to the Ukrainian war effort, which they also fanatically support, the document merely reinforces and solidifies the pro-war bipartisan consensus. (As usual.)

They should therefore be cheering the document, rather than screaming like banshees about it, but of course a rational policy analysis is not what Dems are aiming for with their present bluster. They just want a scary-sounding applause line for revving up anti-Trump voters by making them think Trump is getting ready to barrel into office with some crazed tyrannical plan, while omitting any mention that the “plan” is fully consistent with the foreign policy prescriptions they fervently support.

When it comes to what’s commonly referred to as the “Deep State” in MAGA parlance — aka, the “Intelligence Community” — Project 2025 contains virtually the opposite as what’s being suggested by hysterical libs. (Go figure). Fundamentally, the guidance calls for marginally re-organizing the Intelligence Services so as to empower them……………………………………………………………….

It would also be fascinating to hear exactly what Biden boosters find so objectionable about the document’s exhortation for the next Administration to double down on “ensuring Israel has both the military means and the political support and flexibility to take what it deems to be appropriate measures to defend itself against the Iranian regime and its regional proxies Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.” Yeah, nothing like that going on at the moment.

……. Many sections of Project 2025 could easily have been pilfered from a Democratic think tank………………………..

………………………………………………So yes, there’s plenty to be “alarmed” by in “Project 2025,” but none of it is particularly unique to Trump. Instead, it’s part and parcel of longstanding DC Conservatism, sometimes known as Con Inc., which will inevitably shape the personnel and policy framework of a forthcoming Trump Administration — just like it did with the previous Trump Administration. But of course that’s not the fear being stoked by anguished Dems, who are desperate to inspire the 10 millionth Mega Trump Panic in hopes of salvaging their current electoral prospects. …………………. https://www.mtracey.net/p/project-2025-is-just-project-1981—

July 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 2 Comments

Biden’s press conference and the war hysteria of American imperialism

Biden declared rhetorically, “Every American must ask for himself or herself: Is the world safer with NATO? Are you safer? Is your family safer?” The answer to these questions is clearly “no.”

The whole electoral process is dominated by the principle of oligarchy. All decisions, including on Biden’s personal fate, are made by a handful of billionaire donors, along with the figures who dominate the military-intelligence-state apparatus. The interests of the vast majority of the population, the working class, are entirely excluded.

Barry Grey @wswsgrey https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/07/13/tbzo-j13.html

The media commentary following US President Joe Biden’s press conference Thursday has been dominated by discussion over whether or not he proved himself capable of maintaining his position as the Democratic Party’s nominee in the 2024 elections.

Far more significant than the semi-senility of Biden, however, is the political madness expressed in his policies and his statements. But this is a madness shared by the entire ruling class political establishment, along with the corporate media.

Biden began the news conference with an eight-minute war-mongering rant, beneath the banner of NATO, the military alliance that is the spearhead of American imperialism’s global war. He declared the NATO summit in Washington a great success and credited himself with leading it.

The summit effectively ended the pretense that NATO is not directly at war with Russia by establishing a NATO Command based in Germany, placing NATO officers in Kiev, and agreeing to deploy long-range missiles in Germany capable of hitting major cities deep in Russia, including Moscow.

Referring to Putin, Biden declared, “Once again a murderous madman was on the march.” The only solution to countering this “monster,” Biden declared, is massive military escalation. In fact, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was provoked through the relentless expansion of NATO. It has been utilized, as Biden himself boasted, to increase the membership of the military alliance and bring it even further to Russia’s doorstep.

At one point, Biden declared in response to Ukraine’s use of weapons to attack Russian territory, that “we’ve allowed Zelensky to use American weapons in the near term,” but that it wouldn’t make “sense” for Ukraine to strike the Kremlin with them.

Not that a decision to use long-range weapons to attack Moscow would trigger nuclear war and the death of millions, if not billions, but that it does not, at present, make “sense,” that it “wouldn’t be the best use of the weapons he has.” No one in the media bothered to follow up by asking what Biden was doing to prevent the escalation of the war into a nuclear apocalypse.

In fact, the entire policy of the United States, endorsed by the other NATO powers at the summit, seems intended at provoking a response from the Putin government that would be used to justify a further escalation—including the direct deployment of NATO troops into the conflict.

At another point, Biden declared rhetorically, “Every American must ask for himself or herself: Is the world safer with NATO? Are you safer? Is your family safer?” The answer to these questions is clearly “no.” The entire policy of the Biden administration and the NATO powers is driving mankind to the brink. But no one in the press questioned the assertion that escalating global war is in the interests of the “American people.”

While Biden may be senile, his questioners at the conference are blighted by the disease of ignorance and stupidity. They were more concerned about the latest pronouncements of millionaire actor George Clooney and the Democratic Party’s donors than the consequences of the escalation of the war against Russia.

Virtually nothing was said either by Biden or the press about the ongoing genocide in Gaza. There was no mention of the recent article by The Lancet calculating the death toll of Gazans in the US/Israeli war at 186,000 or higher, i.e., at least 8 percent of the pre-war population. However, in response to the question that was asked, Biden reiterated his full support for Israel and made the lying statement, “I’m not building 2,000 pound bombs” for Israel. “They cannot be used in Gaza or any populated area without causing great human damage.”

But just two weeks ago Reuters published an article reporting that Biden has sent Israel more than 10,000 of the city block-destroying 2,000 pound bombs since October.

The press, what used to be called the “Fourth Estate,” is thoroughly integrated into the intelligence apparatus. There was no challenge to Biden’s presentation of the war in Ukraine and the need to “win” it.

Instead, David Sanger, the chief foreign affairs commentator for the New York Times, cited bellicose language directed against China in the NATO communiqué and demanded to know what NATO was doing to “disrupt” the relations between China and Russia and whether a reelected President Biden, three years on, would be able to “hold his own” in a meeting with President Xi.

The press conference had been described as a “make or break” moment for Biden following his debate debacle against Trump two weeks ago. Shortly after it concluded, five more House Democrats issued statements calling on Biden to end his candidacy in order to replace him with a Democrat who could defeat Trump in November. That brought the number as of Friday morning to 18, plus one sitting senator, Peter Welch of Vermont.

Socialist Equality Party presidential candidate Joseph Kishore noted in a statement published on X yesterday, “What is most striking in the discussions over Biden’s fate as the candidate of the Democratic Party in the 2024 elections is the absence of any actual policy differences. All factions support the massive escalation of imperialist war, which threatens catastrophe for all mankind.”

Kishore added:

Particular note should be made of the position of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other members of the Democratic Socialists of America, who have taken the most aggressive position in defense of Biden. Whatever their insincere and hypocritical criticisms of the genocide in Gaza, the DSA is fully behind the policy of American imperialism. It is nothing more than a faction of the Democratic Party.

If the Democratic Party does end up changing its candidate, it will not be to implement a change in policy, but to ensure that the extreme recklessness on display at Biden’s press conference is carried out in a more effective manner.

It is not a matter of glorifying the Democratic Party of the past, but it is worth recalling that in run-up to the 1968 elections, the intense conflict and crisis within the Democratic Party was bound up with conflicts over the course of the Vietnam War. No such differences exist today.

Within this political situation, the essential task for the working class is to articulate its independent interests, in opposition to the Democrats and the Republicans and the entire capitalist system.

The World Socialist Web Site and the Socialist Equality Party are sponsoring a rally and meeting on July 24 in Washington D.C. on the occasion of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress. The purpose of this rally is to set forward the political orientation and strategy for a mass movement against the Gaza genocide and US imperialism.

We urge all workers and youth to make plans to attend by filling out the form below [0n original]

July 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Joe Biden Just Signed a Popular, Bipartisan Nuclear Power Bill. Advocates Say It’s a Sign of Things to Come.

National Review 12th July 2024

With Congress gridlocked and President Joe Biden’s political career hanging by a thread, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass legislation promoting the development of nuclear power, providing a rare example of bipartisan unity and government action on an issue that lawmakers and policy wonks across the political spectrum agree on — but for different reasons.

President Biden signed the legislation on Tuesday with very little fanfare ………………………………………………

Senators Moore Capito (R., W.Va.) and Carper (D., Del.), and Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R., Wash.) and Pallone (D., N.J.) were among the ADVANCE Act’s champions.

……………………..The ADVANCE Act requires the NRC to speed up its review process for building nuclear reactors on existing nuclear sites, award a cash prize for successfully building next-generation nuclear technology, and create a plan for faster nuclear construction on abandoned or under-utilized properties known as brownfield sites.

…………………………….. Moving forward, Senators Tim Scott (R., S.C.) and Coons (D., Del.) proposed a measure earlier this year to remove the NRC’s mandatory-hearing requirement for uncontested nuclear-license applications.

Like the ADVANCE Act, the bill shows how the bipartisan enthusiasm for nuclear power, and the old-school dealmaking it brings, has only just begun.

July 12, 2024

July 14, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 1 Comment

U.S. Solar and Wind Power Generation Tops Nuclear for First Time

By Charles Kennedy – Jul 11, 2024, https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/US-Solar-and-Wind-Power-Generation-Tops-Nuclear-for-First-Time.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR36aY_qZHusiBuonQ8wnoYKA4biHRxGFjpdJPHNpgny-jFyIN5ZFM3NUL8_aem_2gvOQUW4tXrqTe8rUaH-xw

For the first time ever, U.S. electricity generation from utility-scale solar and wind exceeded nuclear power plants’ power output in the first half of 2024, according to data from energy think tank Ember quoted by Reuters columnist Gavin Maguire.

Electricity generation from solar and wind hit a record-high of 401.4 terawatt hours (TWh) between January and June 2024, surpassing the 390.5 TWh of power generated from nuclear power plants, Ember’s data showed.

Solar power generation jumped by 30% and electricity output from wind power rose by 10% in the first half of 2024, compared to the same period of last year.

In 2023, nuclear power accounted for 18.6% of U.S. electricity generation, while wind power output had a 10.2% share and solar accounted for 3.9% of total U.S. electricity output, according to data for 2023 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Ember has estimated that the share of wind and solar grew to 16% in 2023, when nuclear was still the largest source of low-carbon electricity in the U.S.

However, expanding renewable energy capacity and record solar and wind power generation helped solar and wind combined to top nuclear as the biggest low-carbon electricity source during the first half of this year.

Early in 2024, the EIA said that wind and solar energy would lead growth in U.S. power generation for the next two years.

As a result of new solar projects coming on line this year, the administration forecast that U.S. solar power generation will surge by 75%, from 163 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) in 2023 to 286 billion kWh in 2025. The EIA also expects that wind power generation will grow by 11% from 430 billion kWh in 2023 to 476 billion kWh in 2025.

In 2023, all renewable sources—wind, solar, hydro, biomass, and geothermal—accounted for 22% of total U.S. power generation.

July 13, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | renewable, USA | Leave a comment

Tracking Dissent: US Officials Who Have Resigned Over The War on Gaza

Kevin Gosztola

Until Israel’s assault on Gaza ends, this page will be a resource for tracking U.S. government officials and military officers who resign in protest

Support from President Joe Biden’s administration for the Israeli government’s war on Gaza has resulted in an unprecedented surge of dissent within United States agencies.

Several officials and military officers have resigned in opposition since the Israeli military launched a massive bombardment after Hamas fighters stormed Israel on October 7, 2023.

During the week of July 4, 2024, 12 individuals who resigned released a unified statement of opposition.

“America’s diplomatic cover for, and continuous flow of arms to, Israel has ensured our undeniable complicity in the killings and forced starvation of a besieged Palestinian population in Gaza,” the dissenters declared. “This is not only morally reprehensible and in clear violation of international humanitarian law and U.S. laws, but it has also put a target on America’s back.”

While outlining the “current crisis” and what they believe should be done, the dissenters appealed to their former colleagues to “amplify calls for peace” and hold their respective institutions accountable for the violence unfolding in Palestine.

“We recognize the systemic obstacles you face, both as you perform your work, and as you consider leaving it. We particularly embrace those of you representing America’s diversity who feel that your voices have been disempowered, ignored, and tokenized. We are with you, and we know that a better way is possible, but only when we are all brave enough to challenge institutions and outdated forces that attempt to silence us.”

The dissenters further declared, “We encourage you to keep pushing. In our experience, no decision point is too minor to challenge, so while you are in government service, use your voice, write letters to leaders in your agencies, and bring up your disagreements with your team. Speaking out has a snowball effect, inspiring others to use their voice.”

“There is strength in numbers, and we urge you to not be complicit. We encourage you to consult with your Inspectors General, with your legal advisors, with appropriate Members of Congress, and via other protected channels, to question the veracity and/or legality of specific actions or policies. There are resources, and you have advocates, including all of us, who can support you in speaking your truth,” they concluded.

Several of the dissenters are whistleblowers with firsthand knowledge of how Biden administration officials have enabled the Israeli government’s atrocities. All of them are courageous individuals, who have sacrificed their careers for peace, justice, and human rights.

Until the war ends, The Dissenter will keep this page updated and track U.S. officials and military officers who resign in protest. (If anyone is missing, please email newsletter@thedissenter.org)

Below is a list of all the people who have resigned from the U.S. government or military during the war on Gaza as of July 5 and in reverse chronological order.……………………………………………………………………………………

and more videos …………………………………………………more https://thedissenter.org/tracking-dissent-us-officials-resigned-over-war-on-gaza/

July 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Gaza, politics, USA | Leave a comment

July 16 – New Mexico anniversaries – of first nuclear weapons test, and of Church Rock radioactive waste disaster

high-beam-98-6254036?e=a70296a261 10 Jul 24

As far as anniversaries go, July 16 marks not one but two grave events. At 5:30 a.m. on July 16, 1945, J. Robert Oppenheimer led a secret cadre of scientists to detonate the world’s first atomic bomb in the Chihuahuan Desert of south-central New Mexico. The light was so bright that a local blind woman could detect, briefly, the burst of illumination, local newspapers read. That same light was potent enough to bleach brown cows. The unearthly heat, meanwhile, turned sand into glass. But despite what was known about radiation at the time, nobody from the public was evacuated.

Exactly 34 years later, and at almost exactly the same time, an earthen dam holding uranium mill waste collapsed, unleashing 1,100 tons of solid radioactive waste and 94,000 gallons of tailings into northwestern New Mexico’s Rio Puerco. The Church Rock spill would release three times more radiation into the environment than the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, most of it into the lands of the Navajo Nation. It was, as the Environmental Protection Agency deemed it, the largest radioactive spill in U.S. history. To my own shock and horror — and I’m certain the shock and horror of countless others — New Mexico’s governor at the time refused to declare the breach a federal emergency. Again, nobody was evacuated.

The two events are indelibly linked, not only by the day and time they share, but also by a kind of hubris unique to the nuclear age. By that, I mean a kind of hubris in which the lives and lands of New Mexicans were, and in many ways continue to be, deliberately disregarded. Thousands of people lived within a 50-mile radius of the Trinity Site. The waste at Church Rock? It flowed past some 1,700 homes.

For me, the date also marks just over one year since I began writing about nuclear affairs in New Mexico, the only “cradle-to-grave-state” in the nation. In that time, I’ve covered safety lapses in the plutonium pit factory at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the school-to-lab pipeline, allegations of fraud, waste and abuse at LANL, a secret autopsy program, legacy plutonium contamination and many other thorny issues.

July 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | history, USA | Leave a comment

Biden signs a big nuclear bill. Can it remake the industry?

EE News, By Zach Bright | 07/10/2024

President Joe Biden signed legislation Tuesday that aims to deploy advanced nuclear reactors more quickly, placing wind at the backs of companies feverishly striving to carve out a bigger niche for nuclear technology as a zero-carbon source of electricity.

The ADVANCE Act, aims to further streamline permitting for new reactor designs, give the Nuclear Regulatory Commission more resources, and promote deployment across the globe.

For the NRC, it’s a chance at redemption. The pace of permitting projects is regarded by nuclear advocates as a major impediment to any future nuclear renaissance. The latest injection of support from Congress builds on the agency’s ongoing effort to sift through applications and put easier safety assessments on faster tracks.

……. close observers of the industry cautioned that it comes down to implementation. A vacant seat on the five-member NRC means the pace of licensing the next generation of reactors could hinge on who occupies the White House in 2025.

Both Biden and former President Donald Trump — with much of the Republican Party in tow — tout a return to nuclear energy as a potential solution to U.S. energy and climate challenges. Biden’s Department of Energy has helped shore up existing reactors and cast a $1.5 billion lifeline to a shuttered nuclear plant in Michigan that aims to restart in 2025. At the global climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, last December, the United States pledged with more than 20 other countries to triple the world’s nuclear energy capacity by 2050.

The Trump administration also took actions aimed at developing and exporting U.S. nuclear technology.

Yet given the huge financial commitment required to build out the nuclear industry, Trump’s strategy is less clear today. During his previous four years in office, he wanted to eliminate the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office. And through political surrogates such as the Heritage Foundation, Trump’s backers have indicated they’d significantly pare DOE spending on nonfossil energy.

The DOE loan program provided support to the $30 billion Vogtle nuclear expansion in Georgia that slogged its way to completion earlier this year.

Changing its mission

The ADVANCE Act passed with bipartisan support. But it’s also the first significant nuclear legislation in almost two decades.

Since 2005, the last time Congress put its foot on the scale hoping to spur more nuclear projects, the energy mix has changed significantly. Natural gas is the largest source of electricity. Solar power is dominating new generation. Battery technology and more transmission are enabling remote wind power to travel longer distances. And investment in technology to pull more carbon pollution out of the air is advancing.

Westinghouse is no longer the only company developing nuclear technology at scale. And the leading companies developing smaller-scale nuclear reactors are rooted in the West Coast tech industry — not Pittsburgh.

The other tough reality is that building a new nuclear reactor from scratch has proven extremely expensive.

Under the ADVANCE Act, Congress directed the NRC to revise its mission statement to ensure it uses its oversight authority “in a manner that is efficient and does not unnecessarily limit” the use of nuclear energy.

……… the tweak to the commission’s mission statement marks a big change for nuclear scientists and public health advocates who say it makes advancing civilian nuclear energy a top priority of the agency.

“It essentially compromises the independence of the NRC’s regulatory authority by forcing the agency to have to consider the health of the nuclear industry in everything it does,” said Edwin Lyman, nuclear power safety director for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“If this mythology that nuclear power is completely safe — that it doesn’t need to be heavily regulated — takes hold, we could see a whole generation of really dangerous experimental nuclear facilities being licensed and built around the world,” Lyman continued. “And the first time that there’s a catastrophe, it’s going to set back the industry for decades.”……………………………… https://www.eenews.net/articles/biden-signs-a-big-nuclear-bill-can-it-remake-the-industry/

July 11, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 1 Comment

Texas Nuclear Power Plant Hit By Hurricane Beryl

Jul 08, 2024 , By Anna Skinner, https://www.newsweek.com/texas-nuclear-power-plant-hit-hurricane-beryl-1922433?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR29mvidVj1SSXxwkVTE1ZlgUDnniN1ns2WYungAgepziqraWPcHYqrf1Ng_aem_n7E5P5-vOaqLLjIkP0kOkg

Hurricane Beryl made landfall in Matagorda, Texas, on Monday morning as a Category 1 hurricane, prompting concern and preparations at a nuclear power plant just miles away.

Beryl strengthened into a hurricane last Saturday, becoming June’s easternmost major hurricane in the Atlantic. The storm underwent rapid intensification and, at one point, was categorized as a Category 5 hurricane. It has killed at least 11 people in the Caribbean and two people in Texas, according to The Associated Press.

The system has since weakened to a tropical storm with maximum sustained wind speeds of 70 miles per hour. Despite the weakening, the storm still had the potential for life-threatening impacts, prompting a slew of weather-related warnings for much of southeastern Texas on Monday, including a tropical storm warning, flash flood warning and a storm surge warning, among others.

The South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC), which is “one of the newest and largest nuclear power facilities in the nation” according to its website, has two nuclear units that provide energy to 2 million Texas homes. It is located in Bay City, which is near Matagorda. Storm-related warnings remain in place for Matagorda and Bay City as of Monday afternoon.

According to a satellite image from AccuWeather, STPNOC was directly in the path of the storm. It’s unclear what measures were taken at the facility to prepare for the severe weather, given that the company hasn’t provided an update to its website or social media pages. Newsweek reached out to STPNOC by email for comment.

Hurricane Harvey made landfall on the Texas coast on August 25, 2017, as a Category 4 hurricane.

“STP’s performance during 2017’s Hurricane Harvey helps make the case for nuclear power – thanks to a resilient Storm Crew, a robust design and solid severe weather plan,” the webpage said.

As of Monday afternoon, more than 2.7 million Texans were without power.

Beryl is the first hurricane of the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season and the second named storm. Tropical Storm Alberto made landfall in Mexico on the morning of June 20. Shortly after Beryl formed, the third named storm of the season—Tropical Storm Chris—formed quickly on June 30. Chris made landfall in Mexico that night, with wind speeds around 40 mph.

Multiple agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), have issued forecasts warning that 2024 will be an exceptionally strong year for hurricanes.

July 11, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, USA | Leave a comment

Newly Signed Bill Will Boost Nuclear Reactor Deployment in the United States

ENERGyYGOV JULY 10, 2024

President Biden signed the Fire Grants and Safety Act into law chalking up a BIG win for our nuclear power industry.

Included in the bill is bipartisan legislation known as the ADVANCE Act that will help us build new reactors at a clip that we haven’t seen since the 1970s. …………………………………

Incentivizing Competition

The ADVANCE Act builds on the successes of previous legislation to develop a modernized approach to licensing new reactor technologies. ……………………………..

The ADVANCE Act directs the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reduce certain licensing application fees and authorizes increased staffing for NRC reviews to expedite the process.

It also introduces prize competitions that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) can award to incentivize deployment.

These awards are subject to Congressional appropriations but will cover the total costs assessed by the NRC for first movers in a variety of areas, including the first advanced reactor to receive an operating or combined license. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/newly-signed-bill-will-boost-nuclear-reactor-deployment-united-states

July 11, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 1 Comment

US says not ready to resume nuclear talks with Iran under Pezeshkian

Iran International 8 July 24

The Biden administration is not ready to resume nuclear talks with Iran under the new president, the White House national security council spokesman said Monday.

In his presidential campaign, Iran’s president-elect Masoud Pezeshkian advocated engagement in constructive talks with Western powers to revive the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) and to lift the sanctions that he says have crippled the Iranian economy since the withdrawal of the US from the agreement in 2018.

Asked whether Pezeshkian’s election will change the US negotiating position, the White House’s John Kirby offered a blunt “no”…………………………………………….more https://www.iranintl.com/en/202407084339

July 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

US Mayors for Peace Call for Dialogue in a Time of Nuclear Danger

“If you don’t think nuclear weapons are a local issue, just ask the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”

QUENTIN HART. 5 July 24 https://www.thenation.com/article/world/hiroshima-nagasaki-nuclear-threats-rising-urgent-diplomacy-needed/

he 79th anniversaries of the US atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are coming up in August. Rather than commemorating those somber anniversaries as a grim reminder of the past, this year they serve as a foreboding warning of what may be to come.

The Russian war on Ukraine, with its attendant nuclear threats, and an intensifying array of antagonisms among nuclear-armed governments in Northeast Asia, the South China Sea, South Asia, and the Middle East have brought into sharp focus the increasing risks of nuclear war by accident, miscalculation, or crisis escalation, making new efforts to restart disarmament diplomacy an imperative.

Instead, we are seeing progress toward nuclear disarmament slide into reverse. The last remaining US-Russia arms control treaty is set to expire in 2026. The United States is planning to spend $2 trillion over the next 30 years to maintain and modernize its nuclear warheads and delivery systems, and a new multipolar arms race is underway, as all nuclear-armed states are qualitatively and, in some cases, quantitatively upgrading their nuclear arsenals.

Reflecting the urgency of this moment, at the close of its 92nd annual meeting in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 23, the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM) adopted a new resolution, titled,“The Imperative of Dialogue in a Time of Acute Nuclear Dangers.” This is the 19th consecutive year that the USCM has adopted a resolution submitted on behalf of US members of Mayors for Peace.

By adopting this resolution, the USCM, the official nonpartisan association of more than 1,400 American cities with populations over 30,000, has once again charted a responsible path. It “condemns Russia’s illegal war of aggression on Ukraine and its repeated nuclear threats and calls on the Russian government to withdraw all forces from Ukraine.” Importantly, it also calls on the President and Congress “to maximize diplomatic efforts to end the war in Ukraine as soon as possible.”

The resolution welcomes national security advisor Jake Sullivan’s June 2023 invitation to Russia to manage nuclear risks and develop a post-2026 arms control framework, and his signal of US readiness to engage China to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict. It further “encourages our government to pursue any offer made in good faith to negotiate a treaty among nuclear powers barring any country from being the first to use nuclear weapons against one another.”

In an important provision, the resolution “calls on the government of the United States to make good faith efforts to reduce tensions with the government of the People’s Republic of China, seeking opportunities for cooperation on such global issues as the environment, public health, and equitable development, and new approaches for the control of nuclear arms.”

And the resolution welcomes the September 10, 2023, Declaration of the G20 Leaders meeting in Delhi—including leaders or foreign ministers of China, France, India, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—that the “threat of use or use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible.”

Looking to the future, the USCM “calls on the Administration and Congress to reconsider further investments in nuclear weapons and find ways that our finite federal resources can better meet human needs, support safe and resilient cities, and increase investment in international diplomacy, humanitarian assistance and development, and international cooperation to address the climate crisis.”

As an elected official and original sponsor of this resolution, I understand just how precious human life is. It is our responsibility as leaders to ensure we leave this earth in a better place than we inherited it. It’s imperative that we look at the ways we utilize nuclear weapons and the threat thereof, and that we promote meaningful global dialogue to avoid nuclear war and create a culture of peace. I am proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with mayors across the globe as a member of the Mayors for Peace initiative that has led the way.

Mayors for Peace was founded in 1982 and is headed by the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Its 8,397 members cities in 166 countries and territories are working for a world without nuclear weapons, safe and resilient cities, and a culture of peace.

Our resolution calls on USCM member cities to take action at the municipal level, to raise public awareness of the growing dangers of wars among nuclear-armed states, the humanitarian and financial impacts of nuclear weapons, and the urgent need for good faith US leadership in negotiating the global elimination of nuclear weapons. Mayors for Peace has a wide range of resources available for mayors: for example, planting seedlings of A-bombed trees, hosting A-bomb poster exhibitions, and the annual Mayors for Peace Children’s Art Competition, “Peaceful Towns.”

Mayors are the elected representatives who are closest to the people. As my good friend, Frank Cownie, the former mayor of Des Moines, has remarked, “If you don’t think nuclear weapons are a local issue, just ask the Mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” It’s past time for the federal government to heed the advice of the nation’s mayors.

“The Imperative of Dialogue in a Time of Acute Nuclear Dangers” was sponsored by Mayor Quentin Hart of Waterloo, Iowa, and cosponsored by Mayor Jesse Arreguin of Berkeley, California; Mayor Lacey Beaty of Beaverton, Oregon; Mayor Brad Cavanagh of Dubuque, Iowa; Mayor Martha Guerrero of West Sacramento, California; Mayor Chris Hoy of Salem, Oregon; Mayor Elizabeth Kautz of Burnsville, Minnesota; Mayor Daniel Laudick of Cedar Falls, Iowa; Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway of Madison, Wisconsin; Mayor Andy Schor of Lansing, Michigan; Mayor Matt Tuerk of Allentown, Pennsylvania; and Mayor Victoria Woodards of Tacoma, Washington.

July 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA | 1 Comment

Pentagon keeps commitment to Sentinel nuclear missile as costs balloon

Defense news, By Stephen Losey 8 July 24

The military will continue developing its new LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile but has told the U.S. Air Force to restructure the program to get its ballooning costs under control.

Even a “reasonably modified” version of the Northrop Grumman-made Sentinel will likely cost $140.9 billion, 81% more than the program’s original cost estimate of $77.7 billion, the Pentagon said in a statement. If Sentinel continues on its current path without being modified, the likely cost will be about $160 billion, it said.

And the military expects restructuring the program will delay it by several years.

“There are reasons for this cost growth, but there are also no excuses,” William LaPlante, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, said in a conference call with reporters on Monday. “We fully appreciate the magnitude of the costs, but we also understand the risks of not modernizing our nuclear forces and not addressing the very real threats we confront.”

The Sentinel is intended to replace the Air Force’s half-decade old Minuteman III nuclear missile, which is nearing the end of its life. In January, the Air Force announced Sentinel’s future costs were projected to run over budget severely enough to trigger a review process known as a critical Nunn-McCurdy breach.

Such a review can sometimes lead to a program being canceled. LaPlante said Monday he decided to proceed with Sentinel after concluding it met several criteria, including that it is essential to national security and there were no cheaper alternatives that would meet the military’s operational requirements.

Big changes are coming for Sentinel, however. LaPlante rescinded the program’s Milestone B approval, which in September 2020 authorized the program to move into its engineering and manufacturing development phase. He also ordered the Air Force to restructure the program to address the root causes of the cost overruns and make sure it has the right management structure to keep its future price down.

The per-unit total cost for Sentinel was originally $118 million in 2020, when its cost, schedule and performance goals were set. When the Nunn-McCurdy breach was announced in January, those per-unit costs had grown at least 37% to about $162 million.

Hunter said the per-unit cost for the revised Sentinel program — which include components in addition to its missiles — is estimated to be about $214 million……………………………. more https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/07/08/pentagon-keeps-commitment-to-sentinel-nuclear-missile-as-costs-balloon/—

July 10, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Biden: ‘I’m Running the World’.

July 6, 2024

The comment by the sitting U.S. president in Friday’s interview has been ignored by the mainstream, but its megalomania is at the heart of why Joe Biden is defying his party and remaining in the race, writes Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

About midway through what was billed as the most consequential interview of Joe Biden’s political career, he uttered the most consequential words in the interview: “I am running the world.”

Those five words explain why he refuses to withdraw from the race and confirm what most Americans deny, but which most of the world knows: U.S. presidents act as if they were world emperors.

The interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos was supposed to be Biden’s chance to show the country he is mentally fit to remain in the presidency and run for a second term ………………………………………………………………….

PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Look. I have a cognitive test every single day. Every day I have that test. Everything I do. You know, not only am I campaigning, but I’m running the world. Not– and that’s not hi– sounds like hyperbole, but we are the essential nation of the world..

July 9, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | 1 Comment

Trump allies are peddling a catastrophic idea for U.S. nuclear weapon policy

Resuming live testing could spark an arms race and will reduce American security.

By Zeeshan Aleem, MSNBC Opinion Writer/Editor, 6 July 24

Allies and former advisers to former President Donald Trump are arguing that the U.S., for the first time in decades, should resume nuclear testing. They say it’ll advance American safety by ensuring that the U.S. has a decisive military and technological advantage over other nuclear powers. In reality, the U.S. — and the world — would be made more dangerous by the kind of arms race this could spark. And it seems plausible that if Trump were to win the White House he could adopt the policy because of the manner in which it aligns with the unilateral militance of the “America First” worldview.

Influential figures in Trump’s orbit are pushing the idea of breaking long-held norms and resuming live nuclear testing. Former Trump national security adviser Robert O’Brien wrote in Foreign Affairs in June that “Washington must test new nuclear weapons for reliability and safety in the real world for the first time since 1992” in order to maintain technical superiority over China and Russia. Christian Whiton, who served as a State Department adviser to President George W. Bush and Trump, told The New York Times that “it would be negligent to field nuclear weapons of novel designs that we have never tested in the real world.” And the Heritage Foundation, the right-wing think tank that’s backing Project 2025, widely considered a policy blueprint for Trump’s second term, is proposing that the federal government expand its capacity for immediate nuclear testing.

Since 1992, the U.S. has refrained from explosive nuclear testing and opted for other techniques, including expert appraisals and sophisticated modeling generated by supercomputers, to calculate the efficacy of its long-term stockpile and its newer weapons. That policy has helped nudge other countries away from pursuing live testing. Most countries don’t conduct live tests of nuclear warheads in adherence to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.

Multiple nuclear proliferation experts say that if the U.S. resumes explosive testing, other countries will have more incentive to do so. “Resuming U.S. nuclear testing is technically and militarily unnecessary,” wrote Arms Control Association executive director Daryl Kimball in response to O’Brien’s article. “Moreover, it would lead to a global chain reaction of nuclear testing, raise global tensions, and blow apart global nonproliferation efforts at a time of heightened nuclear danger.” Kimball’s argument is in line with President Joe Biden’s outlook. During his 2020 presidential campaign, Biden endorsed the U.S. continuing to abstain from explosive testing and said a resumption would be “as reckless as it is dangerous.” …………………………………………………………………………..more https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-nuclear-policy-election-rcna160459

July 8, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »