nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Why the US fixation on increased nuclear capability won’t deter China but could lead to instability and nuclear war

Bulletin By Andrew Facini | October 27, 2023

“……………………………………..In the span of two weeks, several major policy documents—including a bipartisan Congressional report on strategic posture and a Defense Department update on China’s estimated nuclear stockpile—have put the US nuclear posture vis-à-vis China front and center. The reports, which focus heavily on hardware and capability, contribute to a years-long deliberation with policymakers and analysts attempting to counter a perceived risk of tipping military balance in the Indo-Pacific. China’s nuclear weapons buildup is driving concerns among US allies and partners in the region over the aggression Beijing could possibly engage in, once its nuclear arsenal can “shield” the country from retaliation. The perceived threat is so intense that it has become a top national security concern in Washington.

Concerningly, however, the domestic debate about countering China’s growing arsenal has thus far dwelled almost exclusively on US capability—narrowly defining the problem and asking what combination of new nuclear missiles, increased forward-deployments, or friendly technology-sharing can maintain US dominance in a crisis and therefore deter China from taking aggressive steps. Unsurprisingly, the recommendations that followed ranged from adding more warheads to US missiles and building more nuclear submarines to—considered as important—adopting a posture of force-meets-force superiority at all levels against Chinese nuclear weapons in the Pacific.

But in aggressively pursuing capability surges alone, the United States may end up on the wrong side of the stability-instability paradox, risking escalation to nuclear war—intentional or not—through an overreliance on introducing untested or provocative technologies.

 Instead, a stronger US strategy for responding to the challenge posed by China’s growing arsenal should be for the United States to supplement military capability by building multiple levels of mutual understanding and routes toward risk reduction across the Pacific. These measures must be implemented urgently and certainly before a crisis forces China and the United States to seriously test their nuclear deterrence relationship.

Capability fixation drives instability. One counter-productive distraction from a multi-level, risk-reduction approach to China is found in the sustained call for the fielding of new systems like the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile (SLCM-N) and other tactical nuclear weapons ostensibly meant for battlefield use. Promoting these systems as a purported solution to future crises places incentives in all the wrong places and dangerously complicates the possible outcomes in a conflict.

For its part, the SLCM-N (which the White House has already rejected via its most recent Nuclear Posture Review but a hawks-dominated Congress funded anyway) is a seemingly straightforward proposal to replace some of the cruise missiles on submarines with nuclear-armed ones. But just by its presence, the SLCM-N would pave the way for all US cruise missiles deployed to the Pacific to be potentially armed with nuclear warheads. If this happens, Chinese political and military leaders would have to conservatively assume that any incoming US cruise missile is nuclear-armed, prompting a presumption of escalation and adding extreme pressures for a rapid nuclear counter-attack, even as the US missile is still en route. If a regional crisis erupts for which a conventionally armed Tomahawk sea-launched strike would be an appropriate response, US leaders would suddenly have very good reason to hesitate.

By all accounts, the expanded destructive capability of the SLCM-N would create a self-imposed constraint that risks cutting out a major swath of conventional escalation options by muddling intermediate systems like cruise missiles with a nuclear option. Making an entire rapid-response weapons platform (one already with broad new investments in the region) less usable in favor of implied nuclear escalation is precisely the scenario SLCM-N advocates are trying to head off.

Tactical nuclear weapons also complicate the deterrence equation in a broader sense. In a contested and alarming information environment, even cautious beliefs about escalation control would be rendered academic while mushroom clouds rise over a battlefield. Far better would be to drive up the threshold for nuclear use at any level and communicate that intention clearly through both policy and force posture decisions.

Even during the early years of the Cold War when emerging technologies were filling out more of the “middle rungs” of the escalation ladder with tactical nuclear capabilities, it was seen as critical to maintain and keep clear the distinction between the first battle in West Germany and the ultimate destruction of Washington and Moscow. In blurring the picture of how the first hours of a nuclear conflict with China would be managed by both sides, setting clear decision-making timeframes and thresholds ahead of time would prove to be a safer and stronger strategic posture, helping to reduce uncertainty and panic in a crisis……………………………………………………………………………………………

Now is the time to forge a better mutual understanding with Beijing, not to escalate tensions. Holding multi-level dialogues about intentions; building reliable, resilient communication channels; and fostering those hard-to-quantify personal connections that can quell dangerous arms-racing instincts—or at least add critical resistance to escalation in a crisis—should be emphasized alongside any examination of force posture. Some military policy changes—including weapons modernization—may be required to meet the moment, but the approach in Washington thus far has been badly constrained to the force-meets-force thinking which, if taken alone, will only multiply risks and add untested variables for the United States and its allies.

The need to understand Beijing and find pre-crisis paths to reduce tensions is ultimately much more important and urgent than any given weapons system or revised strategic posture. Doing that work will be difficult and require sustained investment in both civil society and government processes at the highest levels, but it is a necessary component of maintaining deterrence to avoid nuclear war. https://thebulletin.org/2023/10/why-the-us-fixation-on-increased-nuclear-capability-wont-deter-china-but-could-lead-to-instability-and-nuclear-war/ #nuclear #antinuclear #NoNukes

October 28, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Lawmakers urged to keep moratorium on new nuclear power plants in Illinois – avoid the fantasy of small modular reactors

The claim of benefits of small modular reactors are fantasies. Turning to nuclear energy will mean more radioactive waste along with other problems, and will not help our state fight climate change.

By  David Kraft, Oct 27, 2023  https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/10/27/23933226/illinois-moratorium-nuclear-power-plants-pritker-veto-small-reactors-renewable-david-kraft

During the fall session, the Legislature is expected to make a decision with enormous implications for renewable energy in Illinois.

Last spring, Gov. J.B. Pritzker wisely vetoed SB76, ostensibly to repeal Illinois’ 1987 nuclear power construction moratorium. In reality, pro-nuclear advocates introduced it promoting “small modular nuclear reactors” (SMNRs) — theoretical, untested “next generation” nuclear power plant designs.

The governor feared the bill would “open the door to the proliferation of large-scale nuclear reactors that are so costly to build that they will cause exorbitant ratepayer-funded bailouts” and provided “no regulatory protections or updates to address the health and safety of Illinois residents …”

They should not make the same mistake twice. Lawmakers should uphold the veto.

Pro-nuclear advocates describe the moratorium as an “arbitrary” and “outdated” “ban” on nuclear power. These claims are totally false. First, it’s a moratorium — a temporary, conditional halt — not a ban, conditioned on the federal government building an environmentally sound permanent disposal facility for the nation’s now-90,000+ tons of dangerous high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) before Illinois will allow construction of new reactors to make more of it.

The feds have yet to meet the legally mandated 1997 date to open a permanent disposal facility, and Illinois consequently has 11,000+ tons of HLRW sitting onsite lacking permanent disposal.

Absent this federal repository, the moratorium is not “outdated.” And since no new reactors have added to Illinois’ HLRW burden, it’s not “arbitrary” — it’s a success.

SB76 was really a Trojan horse. It ignored the reality about nuclear waste. It promoted the construction of small modular reactors, which was explicit in SB76’s introductory language, then inexplicably amended to remove that language; then amended again at the 11th hour, substituting language promoting a totally different kind of reactor. All of this resulted in the governor’s veto.

Now the pro-nuclear faction wants to override the veto. As a precaution they have also introduced SB2591 using the original SB76 language promoting SMNRs.

‘Fantasies’ about fighting climate change

Hoopla about the alleged “benefits” of small modular reactors are currently fantasies, mere nuclear industry marketing promises and wishful thinking because small reactors do not exist yet, and will not be available in commercially meaningful numbers until the mid-2030s, and then only if their proposed designs actually work.

SMNRs have been touted to strengthen local economies, provide job stability, support business and augment the tax base, thus leading to more funding for schools. Yet Illinois is already reaping all of these benefits at existing (and proposed) renewable energy facilities.

Illinois currently provides far more jobs in renewable energy and energy efficiency — a combined 105,591, as of 2021 — than at current nuclear plants — 3,726 as of 2022. The non-existent small modular reactors actually call for fewer operating staff.

Pro-nuclear advocates claim we need more nuclear to fight climate change, a claim challenged by two former Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairs, Gregory Jaczko and Allison Macfarlane, who have stated unequivocally that nuclear energy can’t be a silver bullet for climate change because it cannot replace other forms of power generation quickly enough to sufficiently reduce emissions

Other worrisome “devils in the details” not receiving Legislature debate include: proposals to build small modular reactors without protective containment buildings; elimination of emergency planning zones around reactors; and exemption from financial liability in case of accidents.

SMNRs are proposed by an industry that can’t build reactors on time, is rife with cost overruns, has recently endured three major nuclear-related corruption scandals and already cannot compete in Illinois’ energy market without needing $3.05 billion in ratepayer guaranteed bailouts.

Small modular reactors will mean more radioactive waste, continued radioactive emissions and accident threats, potentially higher electric rates and more nuclear bailouts. SMNRs are competitors, not complements, to renewable energy, for both market share and transmission grid access. They threaten Illinois’ renewable energy goals.

If the Legislature truly supports safe, renewable energy, it will not override the governor’s veto of SB76; and it will not support more nuclear plants in Illinois’ energy future.

October 28, 2023 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

USA and Australia oceans apart on nuclear-powered submarines

By Kym Bergmann, October 26, 2023  https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/were-oceans-apart-on-nuclearpowered-subs/news-story/be5a4f72abb23e5e2a9bab18f68b1b71

Listening to the Australian government and the local media, one would be entitled to think that it’s now a simple question of when will we receive nuclear-powered submarines, not if.

However, this is not the perspective of various parties in the US, with even the basic enabling legislation stuck in the Senate since June.

Called drily the “May 2023 DOD Legislative Package Regarding Proposed Sale of Virginia-class Boats Under AUKUS Agreement”, its aim seems to have been widely misunderstood in Australia.

Assuming that it is passed at some stage, it does not guarantee that we will be sold anything – it puts in place various measures and milestones that define how the process needs to work. Ultimately, the sale will still depend on the attitude of a future secretary of the Navy, who must advise congress for final approval.

One of the first things the legislation will do is clear the way for our government to transfer $3.326bn to the Pentagon coffers, seemingly with no visibility on how the US will spend it. We know the precise amount because it appears in a small footnote in the Defence Department’s annual budget papers. A change in the law is necessary because this transfer is unprecedented in US history and there are no existing mechanisms that allow it to happen.

There is also no mechanism for the money to be returned if the sale of submarines does not happen, and everyone from Defence Minister Richard Marles downwards has been mute about why we are handing over such a huge amount of money – something apparently volunteered by Australian officials during early negotiations. The intent is supposedly to strengthen US industry so that it reaches a point where it is producing so many Virginia-class submarines that some will be available for export.

Even determining when that point will be reached is speculative – and the legislation is no help because amendments include statements such as Australia will receive two submarines within 15 years, or they will be available for export when the US is launching them at a rate of three per year. Commentators have spoken of the need to be building them at two, or 2½ a year. The current pattern is barely 1½.

Nuclear-powered submarines are one of the most complex things ever constructed by humans, with about five million discrete components in each one. An 8000-tonne Virginia-class boat – the weight of 20 A380 passenger jets – requires a massive supply chain. Trying to ramp up production is a huge undertaking, which might work – but it also might not.

According to US officials, an extra 100,000 skilled workers are going to be needed in the next decade to meet even the two-per-year target. This is because the highest priority for the US Navy is the new Columbia-class ballistic missile firing submarines under construction. In addition, the Virginia-class – the first of which was launched in 2003 – is proving to be more maintenance intensive than expected, with close to 40 per cent of the current fleet tied up because of worker and spare parts shortages.

Some of this is spelled out in a section rather ominously titled: Limitation on Transfer of Submarines to Australia pending certification on domestic production capacity.

The government has no idea what to do, only a hope that it will all work out at a point in the distant future, preferably in a galaxy far away

The legislation also requires reporting requirements that appear incompatible with how our secretive Defence Department does things, with the connivance of the government. It says that within 90 days of passage, the Secretary of Defense – currently Lloyd Austin – must report to Congress on the cost, schedule, milestones and funding requirements involved in the sale of a Virginia-class submarine. This needs to be done in a way that will not adversely affect the capabilities of the USN. Since the US has a level of transparency we can only dream of, there are numerous other reporting requirements. One of these states: “A description of progress by the Government of Australia in building a new submarine facility to support the basing and disposition of a nuclear-attack submarine on the east coast of Australia.”

As Richard Marles has ruled out making a decision on the location of the base until next decade – after all, no one wants to live adjacent to a nuclear target with a consequent fall in house prices – it seems we will be in early breach of one of the conditions.

Another is that we will need to show that plans for other Australian military acquisitions will not be distorted – in other words the US is expecting to see evidence of a major increase in Defence spending, not just a vague promise.

If not before, this is likely to come to a head when the US asks for detailed plans for how we dispose locally of the highly radioactive SG9 reactors containing bomb grade material – U235 has a half-life of 704 million years – on Australian soil. At the moment, the government has no idea what to do, only a hope that it will all work out at a point in the distant future, preferably in a galaxy far away. Why we agreed to this provision when the US already has a system in place for decommissioning their own submarines is unknown.

In related news, a team in the UK led by BAE Systems has been awarded a $7.5bn contract for early work on the future AUKUS nuclear-powered submarine, with construction starting in the late 2030s.

This does not seem to involve Australia, indicating that we will either have to take whatever the British decide to sell us, or our specific modifications – such as for US weapons – will have to be made at a later point, increasing cost and risk. #Australia #auspol #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

 

October 26, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Rights Lawyers Release Legal Analysis of U.S. Complicity in Israel’s Unfolding Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza

 https://scheerpost.com/2023/10/25/rights-lawyers-release-legal-analysis-of-u-s-complicity-in-israels-unfolding-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/

By Center for Constitutional Rights

October 18, 2023, Geneva, Switzerland – On the heels of President Biden’s visit to Israel and as the Palestinian death toll in Gaza passes 3,300, expert attorneys from the U.S.-based Center for Constitutional Rights released a legal and factual analysis of Israel’s unfolding crime of genocide against the Palestinian people and U.S. complicity in this grave international law violation. The emergency briefing paper comes soon after the U.S veto of a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning both Hamas’s attack on Israel and all violence against civilians and calling for humanitarian access to Gaza. It also comes as President Biden seeks to secure additional, unconditional military support for Israel.

According to the emergency briefing paper, there is a credible case, based on powerful evidence, that Israel is attempting to commit or committing genocide in the occupied Palestinian territory, and specifically against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip. The United States has a duty under Article 1 of the 1948 Genocide Convention to prevent acts of genocide, an obligation that has been domestically implemented through U.S. criminal law. The legal and factual analysis provided by the Center for Constitutional Rights describes how, through its ongoing unconditional military, diplomatic, and political support to Israel, the United States is not only failing to prevent genocide, but is complicit. Under international law, the United States – and responsible U.S. citizens, including and up to the President – can be held accountable for their role in furthering genocide.

According to the International Court of Justice, “a State’s obligation to prevent [genocide], and the corresponding duty to act, arise at the instant that the State learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed.” States are required to take all measures “reasonably available to them” to prevent this risk from that moment onward, “if the State has available to it means likely to have a deterrent effect on those suspected of preparing genocide, or reasonably suspected of harbouring specific intent.” 

As scholars and observers increasingly warn of genocide, and as protestors rise up against Israel’s gravest atrocities against Palestinians since 1948, the Center for Consitutional Rights has been asked by Palestinian partners on the ground to offer this analysis as we strengthen our collective efforts towards accountability and freedom. The emergency briefing paper calls on the United States to take all necessary measures to secure a ceasefire, pressure Israel to end all military operations, end all U.S. military aid to Israel, and ensure the provision to Palestinians in Gaza of urgently needed basic necessities for life. The experts also stress in the briefing paper the urgent need to address the root causes of the current catastrophe, especially the 16-year closure of Gaza, the 56-year illegal occupation, and the apartheid regime across all of historic Palestine. 

The emergency briefing paper will be submitted to national and international stakeholders, including the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, and the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. It will also be sent to President Biden, Secretary Blinken, and other U.S. officials and relevant agencies.  Read the emergency legal briefing paper here. For more information, see our resource page. #USA #Israel #Palestine

October 26, 2023 Posted by | Israel, legal, USA | Leave a comment

Blinken Rejects Idea of Gaza Ceasefire Despite Massive Child Casualties

Blinken also claimed Hamas is preventing American citizens from fleeing the Gaza Strip.

By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com, .23 Oct 23,  https://scheerpost.com/2023/10/23/blinken-rejects-idea-of-gaza-ceasefire-despite-massive-child-casualties/

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Sunday rejected the idea of the US calling for a ceasefire in Gaza when confronted with the massive number of child casualties in Israel’s onslaught.

“UNICEF says 1,524 children have been killed in the Gaza Strip during these bombings. Why isn’t the US calling for at least a temporary ceasefire?” Margaret Brennan, the host of CBS News’s “Face the Nation,” asked Blinken.

Blinken claimed that the death of children on both sides hits him “right in the heart” but did not criticize Israel’s vicious bombing campaign. He pointed to US efforts to get Israel to allow aid trucks to enter Gaza through Egypt, and Brennan then asked why the US isn’t pushing for at least a temporary ceasefire.

“Israel has to do everything it can to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” Blinken said, referring to the October 7 Hamas attack. “Freezing things in place where they are now would allow Hamas to remain where it is and to repeat what it’s done some time in the future. No country could accept that,” Blinken said.

Blinken made a similar argument earlier this year when rejecting the idea of a ceasefire in Ukraine ahead of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, saying a pause in fighting would only benefit Russia. Now, it’s clear Ukraine’s counteroffensive has failed after months of brutal fighting and heavy Ukrainian casualties.

During the interview with Brennan, Blinken also claimed it was Hamas’s fault that American citizens in Gaza could not leave despite the fact that the enclave is under Israeli blockade and Egypt has not been letting people enter its territory from its one border crossing with Gaza.

“We’ve had people come to Rafah, the crossing with Egypt. And to date, at least, Hamas has blocked them from leaving, showing once again, its total disregard for civilians of any kind who are — who are stuck in Gaza,” Blinken said. “So really, the ball is in Hamas’ court, in terms of letting people who want to leave, civilians from third countries, including Americans get out of Gaza.”

Despite Blinken’s claim, reports in recent days have said dual citizens were told to go to the Rafah border crossing but were not allowed into Egypt. According to a report from NBC News, there are up to 600 Americans stuck in Gaza, and they say they’re not receiving help from the US to get out. “America’s not helping us, Biden’s not helping us, the embassy is not helping us,” Amir Kaoud, a Palestinian-American at the Rafah crossing, told NBC.

October 25, 2023 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Why NuScale Power Stock Got Thrashed on Thursday

Nasdaq October 19, 2023  Eric Volkman for The Motley Fool

A short-seller report gave investors plenty to worry about with NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR) stock on Thursday. On the back of that document, which criticized the nuclear reactor maker harshly at times, the company’s share price fell at double-digit rates. It ended the day nearly 12% lower, while the gloomy S&P 500 index only sank by 0.9%.

A short seller vented on NuScale

That morning, a firm called Iceberg Research published that NuScale Power report. This came not long after NuScale announced earlier this month that it had signed a contract to build a pair of its reactors for a U.S. company called Standard Power.

Iceberg poured freezing cold water on this arrangement, describing the deal as having no chance of being completed. In its view, Standard Power does not have the means to fulfill contracts of such size; it also said that Standard Power’s managing director, Adam Swickle, was found guilty of securities fraud some time ago.

While NuScale has what Iceberg describes as a “more credible contract” with Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, the short seller does not feel that NuScale has a good chance of completing it.

According to Iceberg’s analysis, NuScale has only 15 months or so left of cash to finance its operations — quite a narrow window for a dramatic turnaround in fortunes.

A short-seller report gave investors plenty to worry about with NuScale Power (NYSE: SMR) stock on Thursday. On the back of that document, which criticized the nuclear reactor maker harshly at times, the company’s share price fell at double-digit rates. It ended the day nearly 12% lower, while the gloomy S&P 500 index only sank by 0.9%.

A short seller vented on NuScale

That morning, a firm called Iceberg Research published that NuScale Power report. This came not long after NuScale announced earlier this month that it had signed a contract to build a pair of its reactors for a U.S. company called Standard Power.

Iceberg poured freezing cold water on this arrangement, describing the deal as having no chance of being completed. In its view, Standard Power does not have the means to fulfill contracts of such size; it also said that Standard Power’s managing director, Adam Swickle, was found guilty of securities fraud some time ago.

While NuScale has what Iceberg describes as a “more credible contract” with Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, the short seller does not feel that NuScale has a good chance of completing it.

According to Iceberg’s analysis, NuScale has only 15 months or so left of cash to finance its operations — quite a narrow window for a dramatic turnaround in fortunes.

Accusations of low-value equity

Iceberg doesn’t see a good way out with NuScale. It wrote in conclusion that “The company is struggling and we believe its equity has little to no value without government support.”

“Even if that support continues, the DOE’s usual policy is that costs have to be shared with the private sector, meaning that existing shareholders will be diluted,” the short seller added.

NuScale has not yet publicly responded to the report……. https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/why-nuscale-power-stock-got-thrashed-on-thursday #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 25, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

US Government & NewsGuard Sued by Consortium News

October 23, 2023  https://consortiumnews.com/2023/10/23/us-government-newsguard-sued-by-consortium-news/

The suit accuses NewsGuard of defaming Consortium News and the U.S. government of acting in concert with NewsGuard to violate the First Amendment. 

US & NewsGuard Sued for 1st Amendment Violations, Defamation in NY Federal Court

Court Papers: Media ‘Watchdog’ Joined With US Intelligence to Suppress Foreign Policy Dissent 

By Consortium News

The United States government and internet “watchdog” NewsGuard Technologies, Inc. were sued today in federal court in Manhattan for First Amendment violations and defamation by news organization Consortium for Independent Journalism, a nonprofit that publishes Consortium News.

Consortium News‘s court filing charges the Pentagon’s Cyber Command, an element of the Intelligence Community, with contracting with NewsGuard to identify, report and abridge the speech of American media organizations that dissent from U.S. official positions on foreign policy. 

In the course of its contract with the Pentagon, NewsGuard is “acting jointly or in concert with the United States to coerce news organizations to alter viewpoints” as to Ukraine, Russia, and Syria, imposing a form of “censorship and repression of views” that differ or dissent from policies of the United States and its allies, the complaint says.  

Watch the press conference announcing the lawsuit on Monday:

Read the entire complaint and the exhibits.

“The First Amendment rights of all American media are threatened by this arrangement with the Defense Department to defame and abridge the speech of U.S. media groups,” said Bruce Afran, Consortium News‘s attorney.

“When media groups are condemned by the government as ‘anti-U.S.’ and are accused of publishing ‘false content’ because they disagree with U.S. policies, the result is self-censorship and a destruction of the public debate intended by the First Amendment,” Afran said. 

NewsGuard uses its software to tag targeted news sites, including all 20,000+ Consortium News articles an videos published since 1995, with warnings to “proceed with caution,” telling NewsGuard subscribers that Consortium News produces “disinformation,” “false content” and is an “anti-U.S.” media organization, even though NewsGuard only took issue with a total of six CN articles and none of its videos.

The suit comes at a time when many in Congress and elsewhere have charged the U.S. government with using private entities and internet platforms as proxies to suppress free speech in violation of the First Amendment.

The complaint seeks a permanent injunction declaring the joint program unconstitutional; barring the government and NewsGuard from continuing such practices and more than $13 million in damages for defamation and civil rights violations.  

October 25, 2023 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

US vetoes UN Security Council action on Israel, Gaza

By Michelle Nichols, October 19, 2023

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 18 (Reuters) – The United States vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Wednesday that would have called for humanitarian pauses in the conflict between Israel and Palestinian Hamas militants to allow humanitarian aid access to the Gaza Strip.

The vote on the Brazilian-drafted text was twice delayed in the last couple of days as the United States tries to broker aid access to Gaza. Twelve members voted in favor of the draft text on Wednesday, while Russia and Britain abstained……………………………………………………………………

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Wednesday called for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire to allow for the release of hostages and humanitarian aid access to Gaza. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-vetoes-un-security-council-action-israel-gaza-2023-10-18/–*Israel #Palestine #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 24, 2023 Posted by | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

White House Seeks $105 Billion To Arm Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan

The Biden administration released details about its massive proposal to provide arms to Israel and Ukraine, as well as funds to build up military assets in the region surrounding China.

SCHEERPOST By Kyle Anzalone / Antiwar.com, October 21, 2023

On Friday, the White House rolled out its proposed $105 billion bill to arm Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. The legislation also includes funding for the border and humanitarian assistance. US officials say over $50 billion will go to American weapons manufacturers.

The Biden administration is proposing a massive aid package as it has struggled to get Congress to appropriate more funds for the proxy war in Ukraine. The largest portion of money is for Ukraine at $61.4 billion. The White House wants enough money for Ukraine to fund Kiev through the 2024 election.

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan described the aid as critical to American national security and demanded Congress pass the bill. “This budget request is critical to advancing America’s national security and ensuring the safety of the American people,” Sullivan said. “The world is closely watching what Congress does next.”

Israel will receive $14.3 billion in assistance, with $10.6 billion for air and missile defense support.The aid would be in addition to the $3.8 billion Tel Aviv from Washington in security assistance annually……………………………………………

The bill includes $7.4 billion for several initiatives to increase Washington’s military posture in the Indo-Pacific. That includes $2 billion in grants for foreign governments to buy American weapons. Taiwan will receive a portion of that money, although US officials did not provide a detailed breakdown.

Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Shalanda Young, explained that nearly half of the money will go to American arms makers. “This supplemental request invests over $50 billion in the American defense industrial base, ensuring our military continues to be the most ready, capable, and best-equipped fighting force the world has ever seen,” she said.

Young claimed that the spending would bolster the American economy and create jobs. However, a study indicated that military spending costs more jobsthan it creates……………..

A small number of Republican represenatives have hindered Congress from passing additional funds for Ukraine. The Biden administration hopes to push several GOP members of Congress to vote for the bill by combining funding for Taiwan, Israel, and the border with Ukraine.  https://scheerpost.com/2023/10/21/white-house-seeks-105-billion-to-arm-israel-ukraine-and-taiwan/ #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 24, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Ralph Nader: Biden Returns Empty-handed, Except for a Huge Bill for the American Taxpayers

Biden wants Congress to approve $14 billion for Israel to address the colossal failure of Netanyahu’s extremist coalition to protect its own citizens on the border.

By Ralph Nader / Nader.org  https://scheerpost.com/2023/10/22/ralph-nader-biden-returns-empty-handed-except-for-a-huge-bill-for-the-american-taxpayers/

If President Joe Biden were a pony, instead of a perennial warhorse (e.g., gung-ho for Bush/Cheney’s criminal destruction of Iraq), he would have his tail between his legs on his return from a one-day trip to Israel. He failed to achieve any immediate, critical objectives while the ongoing destruction of Gaza and the defenseless Palestinians continues.

Did Biden get Israel and Egypt to allow the exit of hundreds of American citizens fleeing the Gazan firestorm? No!

Did Biden open up corridors for humanitarian aid to the babies, children, women, elderly and other civilians in Gaza who had nothing to do with the October 7th Hamas homicide/suicide attack on Israelis? No!

To the contrary, earlier in the week he cruelly ordered his UN Ambassador to veto a widely supported resolution calling for a humanitarian ceasefire.

Did he forcefully double down on his earlier counsel to the Israeli government to obey the laws of war, then and now, being openly violated? No! He continued his silence after the Israeli Defense Minister ordered his soldiers with the genocidal command, “No electricity, no food, no fuel, no water…” That death sentence includes patients in hospitals who must endure the carpet bombing of this long-time blockaded tiny strip of desert land holding 2.3 million people. (See, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide).

Did Biden press for the exchange of Hamas’ hostages for the release of Palestinian prisoners, including young Palestinians, who have been in Israeli jails for years without due process or charges? No! Worse, Biden failed to object to the Israeli military stating that the release of over 200 Israeli hostages is a “secondary priority” to smashing Hamas and Gaza “into the Stone Age.” This policy flouts the moral codes of many venerable Judaic sages described in an October 19, 2023, New York Timescolumn by Mikahel Manekin titled “The Safety of the Hostages Must Come First.” Israel conducted two prisoners for hostages’ exchanges, one in 2004 and one in 2011.

Did Biden, in strong terms, tell the Israeli politicians that they have already exacted revenge many times over on the stateless people of Gaza – in civilian lives lost, injuries, related spread of disease, destitution and destruction? Did he say it is inhumane and counterproductive to bomb hospitals, clinics, schools, mosques, churches, apartment buildings, water mains, electric networks and ambulances, all of which is in violation of civilized norms and rules of war? Of course not. He greenlighted Israel’s genocidal warfare from the beginning of the Israeli assault and sent U.S. weaponry. He is enabling other actions of “co-belligerency” against the defenseless Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

Did he even get the 20 trucks of humanitarian aid waiting at the Rafah crossing – also bombed by the Israelis – from Egypt into Gaza before he left? No!

Biden did come back with a bill for the American taxpayers – who for decades have been forced to pay for these Israeli wars. Now Biden wants Congress to approve $14 billion for Israel to address the colossal failure of Netanyahu’s extremist coalition to protect its own citizens on the border. (Adding only $100 million for Palestinian relief).

That sum of money, to be authorized without any Congressional hearings or Congressional oversight, is greater than the combined annual budgets of the FDA, OSHA, NHTSA and the section of HHS, whose missions are to reduce the loss of hundreds of thousands of preventable American fatalities in the workplace, on the highways, and in the marketplace and the hospitals. (See, the 2016 peer-reviewed study from the John Hopkins University of Medicine).

Lastly, still not calling a ceasefire, Biden is disregarding his own military’s private advice against an Israeli ground invasion of Gaza as raising the risk of a larger war in the Middle East that would clearly be against the national interests of the American people and U.S. security.

He could have done what President Eisenhower did in 1956, when he demanded that the Israeli, British and French attack on Egypt stop immediately.

And stop, they did!

After all, the U.S. has some influence over Israel, to put it mildly. The U.S. endorses all Israeli aggressions (including Israel’s admission to bombing hundreds of sites in Syria, mired in its civil war and no threat, in addition to striking Damascus International Airport). All with U.S. advanced weapons, and billions of dollars in annual aid to Israel, a prosperous military, technological and economic superpower. In fact, Israel’s social safety net is better than that of the U.S.!

Biden provides total diplomatic cover in the U.S. with Washington’s automatic UN vetoes, and pressures allies to follow the party line.

Moreover, Biden seems unwilling to recognize the historical origins of this conflict that now has mighty Israel occupying, colonizing, brutalizing and stealing land and water from the twenty-two percent of the original Palestine left for millions of Palestinians under Israeli daily control.

Biden should take a moment in the Oval Office to read page 121 of the book “The Jewish Paradox” by Nahum Goldman (January 1, 1978), the head of the World Zionist Organization. He quotes the leading Founder of the Israeli state, David Ben-Gurion as candidly saying to him: “If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”

Today’s Israeli leaders refuse to demonstrate this degree of empathy. Instead, they provoke and deny the creation of a Palestinian state, envisioned by the Oslo Accords they signed in 1993, hurl the most racist epithets (“animals,” “vermin,” “snakes,”), and make sure the politicians in the U.S. Congress never utter the words “Palestinians also have a right to defend themselves” as violently subjugated victims of Israel the superpower.

Many members of Congress who demand giving Israel whatever money and weaponry it wants for whatever it does, violating human rights under international law in its illegal occupations and blockade, turn around and vote against the child tax credit, worker health and safety, universal healthcare, paid family leave and daycare for Americans. Their viciousness – as with the homicidal outburst of Gen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) against all Palestinians, and Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) a Harvard Law graduate, saying “As far as I’m concerned, Israel can bounce the rubble in Gaza…” set new levels of depravity.

A few Senators see it differently, especially Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) who noted “…it is no secret that Gaza has been an open-air prison” with “horrendous living conditions,” and that “children and innocent people do not deserve to be punished for the acts of Hamas.”

Little known is that Israel and the U.S. fostered and funded the rise of Hamas as a religious counterpoint to the secular Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). It was established in 1987 following the first intifada uprising. A 2009 The Wall Street Journal article titled: “How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas” noted:

“Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction…”

To Biden and the Congressional “howlers” for the death of civilian innocents, historical facts matter little. Hamas’ lethal attack on October 7th was preceded by far greater numbers of Israeli violent attacks over the past decades taking four hundred times the number of innocent Palestinian lives, injuries and other casualties than inflicted on innocent Israelis.

Israel’s carpet bombing of Gaza will take twenty times or more lives of innocent Palestinians than those killed by Hamas on October 7th with the casualty toll of direct fatalities and the loss of life from the devastation of life-sustaining water, food, medicine, shelter and other hospital/clinic emergency infrastructure.

Also conveniently forgotten is the detailed peace offer to Israel in 2002, by 22 member states of the Arab League to establish diplomatic and trade relations with a recognized Israel in return for its retreating to the 1967 borders and creation of a Palestinian two-state solution. The Israel extremists in Congress and President G.W. Bush declined even to respond to this proposal. (See, the March 29, 2002 New York Times article: Mideast Turmoil; Text of the Peace Proposals Backed by the Arab League).

It is incumbent on the supreme military superpower in the region to take the initiative for peace over the powerless victims under its thralldom. That country is, of course, high-tech Israel, bristling with the latest weapons and nuclear atomic bombs.

Both the brave Israeli human rights groups and those courageous human rights Israelis standing shoulder to shoulder over the years striving to conduct non-violent civil disobedience at the besieged Palestinian village level, only to be dispersed by Israeli soldiers, know the real obstacle to peace. It is the plan by the right-wing Israeli parties to annex the entire Palestinian West Bank (nearly attempted under Donald Trump) and forcefully drive Palestinians into Jordan and Egypt.

Joe Biden is skilled at shedding tears at memorials of grief in this country. But he runs dry when the recurring catastrophes befalling Palestinians beg for his presidential compassion and actual deeds.

He will not escape history’s judgment. #Israel #Palestine

October 24, 2023 Posted by | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Congress calls for third US nuclear submarine yard to meet American and AUKUS obligations


Defense Connecg, 20 OCTOBER 2023, By: Stephen Kuper

“………………………………….. the US Navy and its supporting industrial architecture, once the unassailable leader and security guarantor for much of the world and the global economy, is now a shadow of its former might.

This has left the US Navy and its global partners, including the Royal Australian Navy, to face an increasingly uphill battle to field a range of next-generation capabilities ranging from hypersonic weapons, through to advanced surface and submarine capabilities.

…………………..In response to these mounting concerns, the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States released an updated final report, titled, America’s Strategic Posture: The Final Report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, detailing the make-up of America’s critical strategic capabilities, namely the nuclear submarine fleet.

A third yard is critical to meet American and AUKUS obligations

Of particular importance for Australia is what is by now the well-documented lack of capacity in the existing US submarine construction yards to meet the stated minimum requirements identified by the US Navy.

The dual demands of replacing the remaining Los Angeles Class attack submarines and the Ohio Class ballistic missile submarines has already stretched the US defence industrial base to capacity, prior to the added layer of complexity required to support the trilateral AUKUS agreement.

……..The commission report suggests that the Pentagon, “increase shipbuilding capacity, by working with industry to establish or renovate a third shipyard dedicated to production of nuclear-powered vessels, with particular emphasis on nuclear-powered submarines”.

However, given the immense cost required to bring a third yard from either a green field or brown field site, government spending would be required the Pentagon has been told, this is particularly important when you account for the maintenance and sustainment requirements of nuclear-powered submarines on top of the construction phase.

Highlighting just how monumental this task is, the report states, “In the sea leg, the Navy is scheduled to construct one Columbia Class submarine per year and sustain the Ohio Class in parallel relying on the same infrastructure for both (manufacturing facilities, dry docks, etc). Additionally, this same workforce and industrial base also support Virginia Class submarine production.”

Such a balance isn’t without trade offs, with the Pentagon warning that, “As a result, the Navy must consider schedule trade offs between the two classes of submarines. The [Office of Management and Budget] as well as the Commission are skeptical that the current infrastructure can simultaneously support conventional and nuclear sustainment, modernisation, and construction as scheduled. The AUKUS agreement may place further stress on this capacity.”

………………………………………………………  the US Navy and its allies, including Australia, are facing stagnating or declining defence budgets (in real terms) as a result of increasingly costly technology-heavy platforms, coupled with continuing societal atomisation and disconnection from the principles of liberal democracy,…………………………………………………………..

Final thoughts

Importantly, in this era of renewed competition between autarchy and democracy, this is an uncomfortable conversation that needs to be had in the open with the Australian people, as ultimately, they will be called upon to help implement it, to consent to the direction, and to defend it should diplomacy fail……….  https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/industry/12977-congress-calls-for-third-us-nuclear-submarine-yard

October 24, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

St. Louis businessman charged with kickback scheme involving nuclear weapons parts

St Louis Post Dispatch, Katie Kull, Oct 19, 2023

ST. LOUIS — A local businessman is facing federal charges in Kansas after authorities say he sent kickbacks and bribes to an engineer at a nuclear weapons parts manufacturer in exchange for subcontracts.

Richard W. Mueller, 63, was indicted Wednesday on six federal charges, including wire fraud and lying to federal agents, after authorities said he paid Kansas engineer Michael Clinesmith more than $1 million in exchange for steering contracts to Mueller’s businesses over the course of a decade………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-courts/st-louis-businessman-charged-with-kickback-scheme-involving-nuclear-weapons-parts/article_7a7fff2c-6eb7-11ee-a26a-3f5922548456.html #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 24, 2023 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

NUSCALE POWER ($SMR): A FAKE CUSTOMER AND A MAJOR CONTRACT IN PERIL CAST DOUBT ON NUSCALE’S VIABILITY

As of now, there are only two operational SMR plants in the world — located in Russia and China — and both have experienced cost blowouts and delays. NuScale claims approximately 680 issued and pending global patents. But the company does not have an operational SMR and the only revenue it generates comes from the reimbursement of specific R&D activities.

Considering Fluor’s plan to divest its NuScale stake and the apparent lack of substantial activity at Entra1, one could speculate that Standard Power and Entra1 were brought in primarily to pump NuScale’s stock, just like many other SPACs. 

October 19, 2023 · by Iceberg Research

Main Findings

  • NuScale, a developer of small modular nuclear reactors (SMR), recently disclosed a huge contract with blockchain datacenter service provider Standard Power. The deal aims for a projected capacity of 1,848 MWe that we estimate is worth ~$37bn. This contract has zero chance of being executed as Standard Power clearly does not have the means to support contracts of this size. Its managing director Adam Swickle was found guilty of securities fraud in the past. Entra1 — NuScale’s commercial partner — is expected to help with the funding. The company was created in 2021 and it is very unlikely to be able to finance even a portion of this contract.
  • NuScale has a more credible contract with the Carbon Free Power Project (“CFPP”) for the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (“UAMPS”). CFPP participants have been supportive of the project despite contracted energy prices that never seem to stop rising, from $55/MWh in 2016, to $89/MWh at the start of this year. What many have missed is that NuScale has been given till around January 2024 to raise project commitments to 80% or 370 MWe, from the existing 26% or 120 MWe, or risk termination. Crucially, when the participants agreed to this timeline, they were assured refunds for project costs if it were terminated, which creates an incentive for them to drop out. We are three months to the deadline and subscriptions have not moved an inch.   
  • NuScale has around 15 months before its cash runs out. We fully expect further shareholder dilution, as completion of the CFPP remains an iffy prospect with its constant cost overruns. On 13 October 2023, former CFO Chris Colbert sold the last of his NuScale stake.  
  • We believe these commercial and financial struggles present hurdles NuScale won’t cross without continued support from the Department of Energy (“DOE”). This presents a double-edged sword. Even if that support continues, the DOE’s usual policy is that costs have to be shared with the private sector, meaning that existing shareholders will be diluted. 

Presentation of NuScale

NuScale Power Corporation, based in Portland, Oregon, has been developing small modular nuclear reactors (“SMRs”) since 2007. In May 2022, the company went public through a merger with SPAC Spring Valley Acquisition Corp. NuScale’s market cap stands at ~$1.2bn. This valuation combines both Class A and Class B shares, which can’t be traded unless converted to Class A. Fluor Enterprises Inc, NuScale’s parent company, holds 126 million Class B shares that represent 55.8% of NuScale’s voting power.

SMRs have power capacities of up to 300 MWe per unit while conventional nuclear reactors generate around 1,000 MWe. For example, NuScale’s design is 77 MWe. These SMRs come with lower upfront costs because of their smaller size. But this benefit is offset by lower economies of scale compared to conventional reactors. 

Over the last 16 years, NuScale has spent ~$1.6bn to develop its SMR tech, funded by a mix of SPAC money, government grants, and private investments. The Department of Energy (“DOE”) has contributed over $650m of grants to NuScale’s endeavors.

The company is going toe-to-toe with industry goliaths like Westinghouse, Rolls-Royce, EDF, etc. But it managed to snag the first-ever Standard Design Approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2020 – a 12-module plant at 50 MWe each. However, in August 2023, the company decided to switch the blueprint – a six-plant design featuring an uprated 77 MWe. NuScale is now waiting for the new design’s approval, which would take ~24 months according to the company.

As of now, there are only two operational SMR plants in the world — located in Russia and China — and both have experienced cost blowouts and delays. NuScale claims approximately 680 issued and pending global patents. But the company does not have an operational SMR and the only revenue it generates comes from the reimbursement of specific R&D activities.

As for customers, NuScale has two significant contracts. The first is a 462 MWe agreement with the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (“UAMPS”), a consortium that supplies wholesale electricity to around 50 municipalities, priced at $9.3bn. The second is a 1,848 MWe deal that was recently signed with blockchain datacenter service provider Standard Power, with an estimated value of ~$37bn.

New client Standard Power: Crypto mixed with nuclear energy – What could possibly go wrong?

On 6 October 2023, NuScale’s stock popped over 20%, after the company announced its largest-ever contract, to deliver 24 units of 77 MWe modules in 2029. As part of this agreement, NuScale’s commercial partner Entra1 would develop, manage, own, and operate these SMRs, while blockchain datacenter service provider Standard Power would be the end-user.

The deal’s total projected output is 1,848 MWe, four times the size of NuScale’s existing agreement with its other major client UAMPS, and translates to a staggering $37bn financial commitment. Considering there are only two operational SMR plants globally, one in China and the other in Russia, this agreement not only marks a significant achievement for NuScale but also holds the distinction of being the largest SMR contract ever.

Unsurprisingly, the sell-side cheerleaders have applauded this deal…………………………….

Both Standard Power and Entra1 present obvious credit and performance risks.

1) Standard Power

Standard Power was formed in 2018 to provide data centre services for blockchain mining and high performance computing applications. 

According to its LinkedIn page, the company operates with just 30 employees.

Searching the internet suggests that Standard Power’s most significant partnership to date was with Cipher Mining. In 2021, the company signed a hosting agreement with Cipher ‘to provide a total mining capacity of at least 200 MW’. This deal ultimately fell apart as the contract was terminated in February this year (see below on original).

In addition, Standard Power’s management team raises some serious red flags, especially when it comes to their managing director, Adam Swickle. 

Swickle has a track record that screams “investor beware”. He cut his teeth at notorious Wall Street firms like Stratton Oakmont and Meyers Pollock & Robbins — both infamous for pump-and-dump schemes and ultimately shuttered due to regulatory crackdowns.

In 2003, the SEC went after Swickle for setting up a fake foreign exchange trading house and making off with investors’ cash. As the CEO of United Currency Group, from May 2001 to December 2002, he conducted a fraudulent offering of securities based on misleading info. This included the company’s plans for an IPO, Swickle’s own background, and how corporate funds would be used. …………………………………………………………………………..

Taking these factors into consideration, it appears that Standard Power does not have the balance sheet to support this contract, both in the present and in the future.

2) ENTRA1

NuScale portrays Entra1 as having a “strong global pipeline of energy production projects” and a ““one-stop-shop” for the financing, investment, development, execution, and management of NuScale-powered projects and opportunities”, suggesting that Entra1 will finance the Standard Power contract. 

Entra1 was incorporated in Delaware in December 2021. But the firm has only one employee referenced on LinkedIn, its online presence is almost non-existent, its Twitter account is essentially a NuScale bulletin board, and its only announced deal is unsurprisingly, with NuScale.

At a recent Analyst/Investor Day event, it was disclosed that Wadie Habboush, the founder of Entra1, has a longstanding personal relationship with NuScale’s CEO, John Hopkins. Around 10 years ago, Habboush formed a joint venture with Fluor — NuScale’s controlling shareholder — for projects in the Middle East e.g., Iraq. We can’t see how experience working on Middle Eastern projects would be directly transferable to managing a $37bn mega-SMR project in the US.

Fluor, NuScale’s controlling shareholder, has been open about its intention to reduce its stake (55.8%) in the company. Its long-term plan is to own only 20%-25% of NuScale as per EVP Joseph Brennan on Fluor’s 3Q22 call. He further elaborated in 4Q22 that Fluor had “kicked off the strategic exercise” and the company would be in a better position to discuss that at the end of 1Q23. There were no updates on Fluor’s 2Q23 call.

Considering Fluor’s plan to divest its NuScale stake and the apparent lack of substantial activity at Entra1, one could speculate that Standard Power and Entra1 were brought in primarily to pump NuScale’s stock, just like many other SPACs. 

We believe that the contract with Standard Power has zero chance of being executed. Announcing a deal with such counterparties damages the credibility of a company in an industry where public trust is paramount. We doubt established players like Westinghouse would deal with a questionable client like Standard Power. 

The situation at the Carbon Free Power Project is much worse than what NuScale lets on

Unlike Standard Power, the Carbon Free Power Project (“CFPP”) started off as a sound counterparty.  The project was launched in 2015 by the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), as part of its long-term strategy to reduce carbon emissions and replace outdated coal-fired plants. If completed, the Idaho Falls plant will begin generating power in 2029, and will deploy six, 77-MWe modules to generate 462 MW of electricity by 2030. Its development and construction is funded under a cost-share agreement between the DOE and UAMPS.

Originally, between 2016 and 2020, NuScale priced the power at $55/MWh. Then, the price was raised to $58/MWh when the project was downsized from 12 reactor modules to just six (924 MWe to 462 MWe). By December 2019, 35 UAMPS members had signed on for 200 MW of power. But escalating costs have caused these numbers to shrink. As of March this year, there were 26 participants, and subscriptions dropped to ~120 MW (see appendix for table), representing 26% of the project’s total capacity.

The shocker came in January this year when new cost estimates pushed that figure up by 53%, setting it at $89/MWh. NuScale attributed the significant increase to a 75% rise in estimated construction costs, from $5.3bn to $9.3bn, caused by factors such as commodity price inflation and higher interest rates. The actual cost would be much higher, if not for more than $4bn in subsidies the project expects to get from US taxpayers, according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.


The good news for NuScale is that the participants extended their commitment and accepted the revised cost. On NuScale’s 1Q23 earnings call, CEO Hopkins stated, “Right now, we feel very comfortable with that $89 megawatt hour.” 

What was generally overlooked in the press is that the agreement includes conditions that essentially kick the can down the road, and endanger the project. The extension (Pg 4) states that NuScale must raise subscription levels from its current 120 MWe (26% of total capacity) to 370 MWe (80% of total capacity), on the earlier of the combined license application (“COLA”) submission, or 1 February 2024. ……………………………………………..

UAMPS member Idaho Falls laid out the stakes at its council meeting (Pg 4) in February. If NuScale fails to meet the subscription target, and costs continue to go up, so does the risk of project termination………………………………….

Key to the extension is this condition: participants will be refunded their costs if the 80% threshold is not reached. Now, with this new clause, they have a strong financial incentive to withdraw if NuScale fails to meet the subscription target. 

NuScale has around three months to the deadline but is nowhere near the 80%. In August 2023, the company told news outlet Power that “no changes have occurred since March”. At a September meeting of the Washington City power board, when asked about subscription progress, director Rick Hansen said (1:01:10-1:04:00) that “Not anybody that’s able to or willing to sign at this point.” He added. “We have lots of cheerleaders but not a lot of people that want to jump in the game at this point.” Interested parties want additional mechanisms to de-risk it, according to him. This suggests no one has signed on since March. 

The contract that has lent NuScale credibility is hitting a wall. The company seems to echo this sentiment, based on recent language in its 10-Q, which now adds: “While it is reasonably possible we will be required to pay these amounts, no accrual has been recorded in our financial statements.”…………………

Specifically, NuScale had a capped financial obligation’ of $83.5m to UAMPS. As of the end of June, this looming liability was around $37m.

Even if the project continues, NuScale’s $89/MWh commitment adds further financial risk. The nuclear reactor industry has a notorious history of cost overruns and delays during the construction stage. NuScale has not built a SMR yet so there’s no reason to believe the company will defy industry norms. For equity holders, this is uncomfortable, as they will bear the brunt of these performance shortfalls and costs.

NuScale’s heavy cash burn will lead to shareholder dilution

NuScale’s financial position appears increasingly shaky under the uncertainty hanging over the CFPP. The company has around 15 months of cash, based on its end-June cash balance of ~$215m, and LTM operating cash flow of negative $167m. That runway could stretch to ~26 months if the company maxes out its $150m at-the-market equity line, announced on 9 August 2023. But this does not account for potential CFPP cost repayments………………

We fully expect further shareholder dilution. Completion of the CFPP remains an iffy prospect, and given NuScale’s track record with cost overruns, that seems almost inevitable.

Against this backdrop, we noted that former CFO Chris Colbert has been selling his shares since May 2023, fully unloading his stake on 13 October 2023 – reaping total gross proceeds of ~$1.7m over this period. This could be a leading indicator of NuScale’s unspoken issues. …………

Conclusion

NuScale’s delusional contract with Standard Power seems more like an act of desperation to shore up investor confidence, rather than a strategic move. The company is struggling and we believe its equity has little to no value without government support. Even if that support continues, the DOE’s usual policy is that costs have to be shared with the private sector, meaning that existing shareholders will be diluted. 

Importantly, the DOE holds a non-exclusive worldwide license to NuScale’s intellectual property, according to financing agreements. This creates the possibility that the DOE could simply transfer this intellectual property to a more established player, if NuScale is unable to meet performance obligations. ……………………..

We are short NuScale……………………………

Appendix………….. https://iceberg-research.com/2023/10/19/nuscale-power-smr-a-fake-customer-and-a-major-contract-in-peril-cast-doubt-on-nuscales-viability/ #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 23, 2023 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear Reactors Restarting: Holtec’s Secret Plans Again Reveal Why New Mexicans Cannot Believe What the Corporation Says

 https://nuclearactive.org/ 20 Oct 23

Holtec International, a corporation with a license for a consolidated interim storage facility in southeastern New Mexico for 173,600 metric tons of irradiated nuclear fuel from atomic power plants, submitted a secret application to the Department of Energy seeking at least $2 billion dollars to restart Palisades, a closed nuclear reactor in Michigan.  Holtec’s request also includes plans to build small nuclear modular reactors, or SMRs, with electric generation capacity of 160 Megawatts, on site. 

In response to a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) made by Beyond Nuclear the public learned that Holtec also plans to restart the reactors not only at Palisades, but other shutdown nuclear power plants at Oyster Creek in New Jersey; Pilgrim in Massachusetts; Indian Point in New York, and another shutdown reactor in Michigan at Big Rock Point.  Holtec acquired the shutdown reactors under the false pretense to decommission them using ratepayer money, while at the same time submitting applications to DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy for taxpayer funding.  https://beyondnuclear.org/5775-2/

Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist at Beyond Nuclear based in Takoma Park, Maryland, and a member of the Don’t Waste Michigan board of directors, filed the FOIA with the State of Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.  The 967-page response included Holtec’s application to DOE.  #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 23, 2023 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Biden to America: “Give me $100 billion for perpetual wars in Ukraine and Gaza”

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 20 Oct 23

Last night President Biden doubled, tripled, quadrupled down on squandering US treasure on US provoked, enabled and perpetuated warfare. A piece of that cool hundred billion goes to Taiwan in furtherance of America’s potential nuclear confrontation with China in an area having not the slightest connection to American security interests. Combined with potential nuclear war with Russia that could erupt any day, Biden reminds me of a Samsonite strongman struggling to pull down the pillars of human existence.

But that hundred billion is D.O.A. as long as House Republicans continue their circular firing squad preventing any significant action in Congress on funding those perpetual wars Biden relishes with every second of his dwindling time in power. Keep fighting amongst yourselves Republicans, you’re gumming up the perpetual war works.

In his 51st year promoting US exceptionalism worldwide which is collapsing before our eyes, Biden remains blind to the horrific death toll his policies have promoted and enabled. Apparently, there will be no Biden epiphany inspiring him to pivot toward peace. Instead of going out in a blaze of glory, Biden risks us all going out in a blaze of mushroom clouds.

Only thing more frightening? There is no one remotely in contention for president likely to change Biden’s self-destructive war policies. #nuclear #antinuclear #nuclearfree #NoNukes

October 21, 2023 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »