Utah Taxpayers – NuScam nuclear power project costly and public kept in the dark
New Information Disclosed in Meeting Closed to Public Points to Major Budget Commitments, Delay Risks in UAMPS Power Project https://utahtaxpayers.org/new-information-disclosed-in-meeting-closed-to-public-points-to-major-budget-commitments-delay-risks-in-uamps-nuclear-power-project/
by Tax Watchdog | Aug 4, 2020 “We Need Public Hearings and We Need Public Votes”: UTA Calls for Full Transparency and Accountability Ahead of September 14th Deadline; Parallels Seen to Ohio, Illinois and South Carolina Nuclear Controversies Where Public Was Kept in the Dark.
SALT LAKE CITY – August 4, 2020 – Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) and NuScale Power held an “online town hall meeting” on July 21st, but there was just one problem: due to a quirk in Utah’s open meeting laws, the town was not invited. Not only did UAMPS/NuScale fail to be transparent in terms of the meeting about their controversial small modular nuclear reactor plans, but they also failed to disclose new and troubling information that emerged during the behind-closed-doors virtual session, according to the nonprofit Utah Taxpayers Association (UTA). UTA and Peter Bradford, a former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) member, warned that potentially higher costs, project delays, and other risks could be costly for UAMPS members and ratepayers.
A total of 34 municipalities in Utah, Idaho, New Mexico and California (see full list below) are participating in the UAMPS small modular nuclear project. Ratepayers will be locked into more than $100 million in commitments by a September 14th deadline and billions of dollars of risks later on if UAMPS members do not opt out of the project. The need for openness is particularly important while the nuclear industry is currently facing major credibility problems with scandals in Ohio, Illinois, and South Carolina.
On July 21st, UAMPS and NuScale held a so-called “online town hall meeting,” which was not made open to the media under a special Utah exemption for UAMPS for open meeting requirements. A video copy of the UAMPS/NuScale event was acquired after the fact. (The timecodes shown below refer to various points in the video.)
Rusty Cannon, Vice President, Utah Taxpayers Association, said: “The UAMPS project will lock in 27 municipalities in Utah and several in surrounding states for a share of billions of dollars in costs and unclear risk in the pursuit of a cluster of small modular reactors (SMRs) touted by Oregon-based NuScale Power, which repeatedly has delayed timelines and increased costs associated with its SMRs.”
Cannon added: “This risky project with massive cost escalations is being conducted largely out of the public eye. Most recently the public was barred from a late July online ‘town hall meeting,’ the content of which has since come to light and which raises serious concerns about what has not been disclosed to the general public. The Utah Taxpayers Association urges elected officials involved with UAMPS to disclose all relevant information to the public so decisions can be made in the open and city officials can be held accountable. We are urging city councils in Utah that are subscribed to the project to vote in a public meeting before the September deadline to withdraw from the project.”
Also speaking at today’s news event was Peter Bradford, a former member of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission who served as chair of both the New York Public Service Commission and the Maine Public Utilities Commission. He has been an expert witness in many cases involving nuclear power economics, and he has taught Nuclear Power and Public Policy at the Vermont Law School as well as Energy Policy and Environmental Protection at the Yale School of the Environment.
Peter Bradford said: “There is the very real possibility of large rate increases to the customers in these communities due to inadequate safeguards in this project. It is difficult to understand the case for taking on this risk given the certainty of cheaper clean energy alternatives as clearly shown by recent purchases of firm combinations of renewables, energy efficiency plus storage elsewhere in the West. The cost of lack of transparency plus unwise and secretive deals has resulted in the nuclear energy industry becomingembroiled in multiple debacles. UAMPS members and ratepayers should take heed and avoid making the same mistakes.”
Just what is UAMPS and NuScale failing to disclose to the public?
- RAPIDLY ESCALATING CONSTRUCTION COSTS. NuScale’s website currently explains to the public: “The estimated construction cost for the first NuScale 684 MWe (net) plant is about $3 billion.” However, during the July 2020 “town hall,” UAMPS contractor Bob Squires (MPR Associates) calls the project a “roughly $5 billion nuclear power plant development project with first of a kind technology.” (3:47:24) Even worse: NuScale’s 2020 Amended Budget & Plan of Finance projects a total cost of approximately $6.1 billion.
- MAJOR MISSED DEADLINES. In 2008, NuScale explained: “With timely application for a combined construction and operating license (COL), a NuScale plant could be producing electricity by 2015-16.” In 2019, UAMPS publicly announced that the NuScale nuclear power plant would begin construction in 2023, “with the first 60 MW module becoming operational in 2026 [and] [o]ther modules would come on-line soon thereafter.” However, during the non-public July “town hall,” Glenn Neises, nuclear director, Burns & McDonnell, announced for the first time that completion is now projected for June 2030, and the first module is not expected to become operational until June 2029. (3:22:25) And things could get even worse. Warning of possible new delays, Neises said: “I’d also like to stress that this is the current schedule and expect it to change as we see changes in funding, engineering moves forward, and as licensing advances.” (3:22:25)
-
- LOW-BALLED ENERGY PRICE. Doug Hunter, UAMPS CEO, said an undisclosed Economic Competitiveness Test (ECT) determined the UAMPS project power that could be generated would cost $55/MWh in 2018 dollars. (24:30) The UAMPS/NuScale estimate contrasts sharply with other independent utility projections (PacifiCorp’s estimate of $95/MWh and Idaho Power’s estimate of $125/MWh). Doug Hunter confirms this in answering a question as to why large investor-owned utilities are not pursuing this project: “Right now they’re still relying on existing capacity, most of them, to fill in energy with renewables because that happens to be the lowest IRP.” (2:28:20)
- DEPENDENCE ON UNPREDICTABLE FEDERAL SUBSIDIES. Mason Baker, UAMPS chief legal officer, admitted during the “town hall” that project organizers are now banking on a “massive increase” in the federal government’s contribution to UAMPS, a jump from $60 million to $1.4 billion. (48:30) UAMPS now acknowledges taxpayer subsidies are necessary to achieve the $55 per MW/h price point. (53:50) In effect, U.S. taxpayers are being asked to subsidize roughly 25 percent of the UAMPS SMR project to artificially hold down energy costs. However, taxpayer subsidies of this sort are both objectionable on their merits, entirely unpredictable as to passage, and subject to being withdrawn at any time.
- The Utah Taxpayers Association also noted that no town or city of more than 100,000 has opted into the UAMPS SMR project, which has not been successful in securing investments in it by investor-owned utilities. It is not apparent that any UAMPS member so far opting into the SMR project has been able to afford to do its own independent financial evaluation of the project, and, instead, may be over relying on assurances from the promoter, NuScale. Committing a municipal government to a long-term contract of this magnitude could result in massive sunk costs and higher rates and taxes on citizens.
- The following are the UAMPS members currently subscribed to the SMR project: Utah (Beaver City, Blanding, Bountiful, Brigham City, Enterprise, Ephraim City, Fairview City, Fillmore City, Heber City Light & Power, Holden Town, Hurricane City, Hyrum City, Kanosh Town, Kaysville City, Lehi, Logan City, Monroe City, Morgan City, Mt. Pleasant City, Murray City, Oak City, Paragonah Town, Parowan, Payson City, Santa Clara City, South Utah Valley Electric Service District, Spring City, Washington City, and Weber Basin Conservancy District); Idaho (Idaho Falls Power and Salmon River Electric Cooperative, Inc.); California (Lassen Municipal Utility District and Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative); and New Mexico (Los Alamos County). The total size of the subscriptions is 160.4 megawatts, with 133.4 megawatts going to the state of Utah.
The Utah Taxpayers Association is a non-profit 501(c)(4) organization that works to limit state and local taxes, making Utah an attractive place to live and do business. www.utahtaxpayers.org
Important note: The Utah Taxpayers Association has no position on nuclear energy. The Association’s interest in this matter is limited to the extent to which public business of interest to ratepayers/taxpayers is conducted in an open and transparent manner in order to ensure maximum accountability to the public.
Joe Biden’s pro nuclear plan ignores the nuclear waste question
|
Biden’s Clean Energy Plan Will Fix Everything and Nothing https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2020/07/31/bidens_clean_energy_plan_will_fix_everything_and_nothing_500581.html. By Oliver McPherson-Smith, July 31, 2020
The year 2020 has been one of upheaval and change, but the American love for the outdoors has remained constant. Unsurprisingly, climate change and protecting the environment are two key issues in this year’s election cycle. To pitch his vision for the future, former vice president Joe Biden has unveiled his revamped plan “to build a modern, sustainable infrastructure and an equitable clean energy future.” However, for a plan that takes aim at greenhouse emissions, the manifesto is filled with an excessive amount of hot air. Flashy spending targets and en vogue nomenclature are an unsustainable alternative to detailed policy.
The 7,000-word plan draws from the Democratic nominee’s initial climate plan, albeit renovated in light of the Coronavirus pandemic and the suggestions of Bernie Sanders and John Kerry. At the cost of $2 trillion, this new and improved version roams from rebuilding infrastructure to restoring wetlands, while constructing 1.5 million energy efficient homes and public housing units en route. It also sets the target of creating millions upon millions of jobs in industries as diverse as auto manufacturing and “climate-smart agriculture.”
The problem with these lofty ambitions is that they are often vague, and sometimes outright misleading. For example, the plan calls for the creation of an ”Environmental and Climate Justice Division” within the Department of Justice (DOJ). The plan doesn’t, however, detail why the lawyers and regulators in the DOJ, Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Energy are so beyond reform that taxpayers need to hire more bureaucrats. Rather than marshalling a platoon of Erin Brockoviches, this eco-vanity department with no clear rationale risks emulating the seriousness and legal rigor of Greta Thunberg.
Even the clearest promises are short on details. Take the aim to convert “all 500,000 school buses in our country — including diesel — to zero emissions.” In principle, clean school transportation from door to desk is an easy sell for most Americans, but who is going to convert the buses and how much of the $2 trillion budget will be eaten up by it? Detailing the practical implementation of these ambitions would take them from fantasy to fact.
In its most egregious moments, Biden’s Clean Energy plan plays dirty with reality. One of the plan’s ambitious objectives is to make the American power sector “carbon pollution-free” by 2035. To achieve this, the plan carves out a role for greater nuclear power, offering reliable, emissions-free energy for consumers.
But the plan conveniently omits how a Biden administration would manage the nuclear waste created in the process. The former vice president has been a long-time critic of the perpetually beleaguered Yucca Mountain nuclear repository, and some have credited him with axing the project during the Obama administration. So where will the waste be stored? Which community gets to host America’s inaugural “carbon pollution-free” nuclear dumping ground?
In its most egregious moments, Biden’s Clean Energy plan plays dirty with reality. One of the plan’s ambitious objectives is to make the American power sector “carbon pollution-free” by 2035. To achieve this, the plan carves out a role for greater nuclear power, offering reliable, emissions-free energy for consumers. But the plan conveniently omits how a Biden administration would manage the nuclear waste created in the process. The former vice president has been a long-time critic of the perpetually beleaguered Yucca Mountain nuclear repository, and some have credited him with axing the project during the Obama administration. So where will the waste be stored? Which community gets to host America’s inaugural “carbon pollution-free” nuclear dumping ground?
|
|
|
Florida’s nuclear power stations could be at risk in hurricane times
|
Hurricane Isaias projected to strafe eastern side of Florida over the weekend, S and P Global
HIGHLIGHTSUncertainty over where it may make landfall
Utilities and energy companies to keep close eye Houston — In a late July 31 advisory, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Hurricane Center said heavy rains associated with Hurricane Isaias could begin to affect south and east central Florida late Friday night and the eastern Carolinas by early next week, potentially resulting in isolated flash flooding. NOAA said the Category 1 hurricane was expected to reach the east coast of Florida on Saturday morning. It said that storm surge along the northeastern Florida coast could come late in the weekend, and spread northward along the remainder of the US East Coast through early next week. Florida Power & Light said July 31 it had a restoration workforce of more than 10,000 “ready to respond to Hurricane Isaias amid the global COVID-19 pandemic.” It said it will bring in crews from sister company Gulf Power and has secured more than 2,000 additional restoration personnel from nearly 10 states. “We are committed to restoring service in between bands of severe weather, as long as winds are below 35 MPH,” the company said. FPL owns the two-reactor, 1,600-MW Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station located two miles east of Homestead, Florida, and about 25 miles south of Miami. According to preliminary mapping of Isaias’ path, the Turkey Point facility may escape the storm’s more severe western rain bands on Saturday. FPL’s 1,880-MW St. Lucie Nuclear facility located further up the Florida coast on Hutchinson Island, may not be so lucky. The center of the storm eye could pass offshore of the St. Lucie facility early on Sunday morning. In a statement, Duke Energy Florida said it believed its customers in central and eastern Florida may experience weather-related outages. …… https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/073120-hurricane-isaias-projected-to-strafe-eastern-side-of-florida-over-the-weekend |
|
Australia gets anti-China propaganda, funded by USA, in cahoots with Falun Gong
Before becoming Australia’s Defence Minister, Linda Reynolds worked as a project director at Raytheon (weapons manufacturer).
Propaganda Wars: US state department funds anti-China news outlet in Australia https://www.michaelwest.com.au/propaganda-wars-us-state-department-funds-anti-china-news-outlet-in-australia/
by Marcus Reubenstein | Aug 4, 2020 Office bearers of US-backed Chinese language news service Decode China are linked with Falun Gong, the spiritual group that has spent millions backing Donald Trump through fake social media accounts. The same people are on the board of the National Foundation for Australia China Relations, raising scepticism about its ability to repair fractured relationships. Marcus Reubenstein investigates US state funding of anti-China media in Australia and links to global arms dealers via ASPI.
The US State Department is quietly funding a Chinese-language news service in Australia, a move more typically associated with China’s state media propagandists.
And two of the three office bearers of the news service, Decode China, are members of a taxpayer-funded independent board advising the Australian government on engagement with China.
Corporate records show Dr Wai Ling Yeung and Maree Ma became secretary and director, respectively, of Decode China Pty Ltd just eight weeks before Foreign Minister Marise Payne appointed them to the board of the National Foundation for Australia China Relations. The NFACR replaced the Australia China Council (ACC), which was set up by the Fraser government in 1978 and later chaired by former prime minister Gough Whitlam.
The retired Curtin University academic Dr Yeung is a vocal critic of the Chinese government, while Ma is the general manager of the Falun Gong-aligned, largely anti-Chinese government Vision Times newspaper. According to journalist and former Australian Falun Gong practitioner Ben Hurley, Vision Times is part of the apparatus of Falun Gong media in Australia, led by The Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television.
The spiritual group Falun Gong is banned in China and there is substantial evidence that its mainland Chinese followers are harshly persecuted by the Chinese government.
However, former practitioners say it’s a dangerous cult, whose leaders claim to have the power of levitation and tell followers that aliens from other planets are responsible for interracial marriage and mixed-race children.
Falun Gong-aligned media affiliates in the US have been accused of pouring millions of dollars into fake social media accounts and Facebook advertising, since banned, supporting Donald Trump. A recent investigation by the ABC’s Foreign Correspondent and Background Briefing programs revealed Falun Gong-affiliated media in the US have spent more than US$11.5 million in social media advertising to promote Trump.
ASPI lurking in the background Continue reading
USA’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission plans to weaken safety standards for smaller nuclear reactors
Smaller Nuclear Plants May Come With Less Stringent Safety Rules, npr, August 1, 2020
The NRC is considering whether to shrink emergency planning and evacuation zones around these newer reactors — from a 10-mile radius to, in some cases, the boundary of the plant site.
Nuclear energy critics say that would be a mistake.
“When you’re talking about a reactor that’s never been built or operated, you have to take with a big grain of salt the claims that it’s actually safer or more secure,” says Edwin Lyman at Union of Concerned Scientists.
He says the industry also wants to use weaker reactor containment shells, and in some cases they don’t want to have to keep an operator at the site.
Lyman thinks companies should build plants under current rules first. “You have to work out the kinks of these new plants,” he says. “And then over time you might be able to adjust your requirements accordingly. But you don’t do that at the get-go.”
A National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) official recently echoed some of Lyman’s concerns in comments sent to the NRC. The NNSA is a semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy.
Deputy Under Secretary Jay Tilden called the proposed rule a major departure from “the successful 42-year-old practice of using a 10-mile plume exposure emergency planning zone.” That existing regulation, he wrote, provides “the last layer of a defense-in-depth for low-probability, high-consequence accidents.” ………
Who flew drones over the nuclear reactors?
|
Mystery at Arizona’s Palo Verde nuclear plant: Who flew drones over the reactors? AZ Central,
Ryan RandazzoArizona Republic, Security guards at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix noticed something odd on a September night last year.Five or six drones buzzed over the perimeter fence of the nuclear plant— the largest power generator in the United States — 50 miles west of Phoenix. They went across the open desert where security guards practice “force-on-force” simulated combat drills to sharpen their skills to ward off an assault, over heavy-duty gates and arrived at the protected area around the concrete-domed reactors. They stayed for nearly an hour, and came back the next night for a repeat performance. Nobody except the drones’ pilots knows whether this was a case of hobbyists touring the plant out of curiosity, or something much more nefarious, intended to disrupt a massive power source for customers from Texas to California. And nobody in any official capacity seems to know who piloted the drones that night or the next……… Security guards at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix noticed something odd on a September night last year. Five or six drones buzzed over the perimeter fence of the nuclear plant— the largest power generator in the United States — 50 miles west of Phoenix. They went across the open desert where security guards practice “force-on-force” simulated combat drills to sharpen their skills to ward off an assault, over heavy-duty gates and arrived at the protected area around the concrete-domed reactors. They stayed for nearly an hour, and came back the next night for a repeat performance. Nobody except the drones’ pilots knows whether this was a case of hobbyists touring the plant out of curiosity, or something much more nefarious, intended to disrupt a massive power source for customers from Texas to California. And nobody in any official capacity seems to know who piloted the drones that night or the next……… Security guards at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix noticed something odd on a September night last year. Five or six drones buzzed over the perimeter fence of the nuclear plant— the largest power generator in the United States — 50 miles west of Phoenix. They went across the open desert where security guards practice “force-on-force” simulated combat drills to sharpen their skills to ward off an assault, over heavy-duty gates and arrived at the protected area around the concrete-domed reactors. They stayed for nearly an hour, and came back the next night for a repeat performance. Nobody except the drones’ pilots knows whether this was a case of hobbyists touring the plant out of curiosity, or something much more nefarious, intended to disrupt a massive power source for customers from Texas to California. And nobody in any official capacity seems to know who piloted the drones that night or the next……. The Palo Verde incidents are apparently not the first time something like this has happened. One NRC email discusses “several high-speed” drone overflights of the Limerick Generating Station in Pennsylvania approximately eight months prior. Another indicates there had been 42 drone incidents in three years. APS officials said some of those were at Palo Verde. What if the pilots meant harm?At least one person in the NRC was concerned last year that an airspace restriction from the FAA wasn’t sufficient. “I would point out that restricted airspace will do nothing to stop an adversarial attack and even the detection systems identified earlier in this email chain have limited success rates, and there is even lower likelihood that law enforcement will arrive quickly enough to actually engage with the pilots,” wrote Joseph Rivers, a senior security adviser with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who recently retired…… A columnist for Forbes went even further, speculating that the drones could have made three-dimensional maps of the power plant to assist a later attack. …… https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/energy/2020/07/31/drones-flew-over-palo-verde-nuclear-plant-arizona-pilots-unknown/5551928002/ |
|
|
South Carolina’s $9 billion nuclear fiasco – another legal saga develops, criminal investigation coming
3 years later: How the fallout from SC’s $9 billion nuclear fiasco continues Post and Courier, By Avery G. Wilks and Andrew Brown awilks@postandcourier.com abrown@postandcourier.com, Jul 31, 2020
- It has been three years since two of South Carolina’s largest electric utilities abandoned their $9 billion effort to build two nuclear reactors, but the legal, political and financial consequences continue to ripple across the Palmetto State.
The scuttled V.C. Summer expansion in Fairfield County is now widely considered one of the biggest business failures in the state’s history. The announcement of the project’s cancellation on July 31, 2017, shook South Carolina’s power industry, state government and business community.
The two homegrown S.C. utilities that partnered on the project were thrown into disarray. Investigations were initiated by state lawmakers, financial regulators and federal law enforcement officials.
The state and federal court systems were flooded overnight with lawsuits by investors, ratepayers, construction workers and lenders. The state regulatory system that backed the project for nearly a decade was called into question.
And more than 1.7 million utility customers with S.C. Electric & Gas, Santee Cooper and the state’s 19 local electric cooperatives realized they might be forced to pay billions of dollars more for a power plant that will never produce a watt of electricity.
Much has changed since Santee Cooper and SCE&G’s leaders suddenly announced the project’s collapse. But the saga isn’t over quite yet. Here is a breakdown of where things stand. Continue reading
Mystery over drone swarm above America’s largest nuclear power station
‘Drone Swarm’ Invaded Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant Last September — Twice Forbes Jul 30, 2020, David Hambling
Documents gained under the Freedom of Information Act show how a number of small drones flew around a restricted area at Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant on two successive nights last September. Security forces watched, but were apparently helpless to act as the drones carried out their incursions before disappearing into the night. Details of the event gives some clues as to just what they were doing, but who sent them remains a mystery.
Details of the events were obtained from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by Douglas D. Johnson on behalf of the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies (SCU) using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The SCU’s main interest is in anomalous aerospace phenomena, what other people term UFOs. In this case though the flying objects were easily identifiable as drones, although their exact mission and origin are unknown. Johnson passed the information to The War Zone who give a detailed account.
Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant is the largest in the U.S., producing over three gigawatts, 35% of Arizona’s total power capacity. It supplies electricity to Phoenix and Tucson, as well as San Diego and Los Angeles. It is a critical piece of strategic infrastructure; during the 2003 Iraq War, National Guard troops were deployed to Palo Verde to defend against a possible terrorist threat. In normal times, as with other nuclear installations, it is protected by armed security guards.
The armed guards, gates, fences and barriers were useless on the night of September 29th. According to the official report:
Officer noticed several drones (5 or 6) flying over the site. The drones are circling the 3 unit site inside and outside the Protected Area. The drones have flashing red and white rights [sic] and are estimated to be 200 to 300 hundred [sic] feet above the site. It was reported the drones had spotlights on while approaching the site that they turned off when they entered the Security Owner Controlled Area. Drones were first noticed at 20:50 MST and are still over the site as of 21:47 MST. Security Posture was normal, which was changed to elevated when the drones were noticed.”
The drones departed at 22:30, eighty minutes after they were first spotted. The security officers estimated that they were over two feet in diameter. This indicates that they were not simply consumer drones like the popular DJI Phantom, which have a flight endurance of about half an hour and is about a foot across, but something larger and more capable. The Lockheed Martin Indago, a military-grade quadcopter recently sold to the Swiss Army, has a flight endurance of about seventy minutes and is more than two feet across. At several thousand dollars apiece minimum, these are far less expendable than consumer drones costing a few hundred. All of which suggests this was not just a prank.
The next night events were repeated:…….
Despite this incident, two months later the NRC decided not to require drone defenses at nuclear plants, asserting that small drones could not damage a reactor or steal nuclear material. It is highly likely that such sites are still vulnerable to drone overflights.
Are such drones a genuine threat to nuclear facilities?…….
their ability to strike pinpoint targets to hit control systems and failsafes. While this would be unlikely to cause a Chernobyl, it might well shut the plant down, taking out 35% of Arizona’s electricity at a stroke. The successful attack on the Abqaiq facility last year, in which about twenty garage-built drones knocked out a heavily-defended oil facility in Saudi Arabia, should be a wakeup call that such unmanned precision strikes are not just the preserve of state actors any more………
the intruders, as well as establishing that Palo Verde lacks effective drone defenses, may now have highly detailed maps of the facility, showing the exact location of every valve, pipe, switch and control. Perhaps they simply aim to sell these on the dark web to anyone who will pay. Or perhaps they have something else in mind. Either way, it is an alarming demonstration of how easily drone intruders can now go anywhere anytime they wish. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2020/07/30/drone-swarm-invaded-palo-verde-nuclear-power-plant/#78cb15aa43de
Bill in USA Senate to help nuclear workers made ill by radiation exposure
Bill would expand access to comp for federal nuclear site workers https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20200731/NEWS08/912335900/Bill-would-expand-access-to-comp-for-federal-nuclear-site-workers#, Angela Childers, July 31, 2020
A bill introduced in the U.S. Senate Wednesday would help workers at federal radioactive sites obtain workers compensation for work-related cancers and other health issues.
S.B. 4363, introduced Wednesday by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Washington), would establish an occupational disease presumption for employees at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Radioactive Waste Management Complex.
The bill is aimed at helping cleanup workers at Washington State’s Hanford Nuclear Site and other nuclear sites more easily claim workers compensation benefits when they suffer from medical conditions as a result of exposure to toxic substances, Sen. Murray’s office said Thursday in a news release.
While the state of Washington created a presumption law for Hanford workers in 2018, the federal legislation would cover workers at other Energy Department nuclear sites. The Hanford site is a 560-square-mile federally operated site known for having manufactured plutonium used in one of the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945.
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in late 2018 over the state’s presumption law, claiming that the law discriminated against the federal government and its Energy Department contractors and aimed to directly regulate the federal government by imposing extra cleanup costs on the decommissioned site. However, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit in June 2019.
The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Problems in USA’s rush to put a nuclear reactor on the moon
America Wants to Put a Nuclear Power Plant on the Moon
What happens to all that highly enriched uranium in space? Popular Mechanics, BY CAROLINE DELBERT, JUL 30, 2020
- The U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) is looking for technology partners to help power the moon.
- This could begin a project that later includes powering a Mars surface mission.
- The Union for Concerned Scientists doesn’t want highly enriched uranium in space.
Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DoE) Idaho National Laboratory have a new design for a nuclear power plant they say could allow humans to more easily live on the moon. As part of a form plan, the scientists say they want to have the fission reactor, safe launch, and landing system ready by 2027
What are the challenges of generating nuclear energy on the moon?
Design Development Today reports that the Union of Concerned Scientists expressed, well, concerns:
“Edwin Lyman, director of Nuclear Power Safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit, said his organization is concerned the parameters of the design and timeline make the most likely reactors those that use highly enriched uranium, which can be made into weapons. Nations have generally been attempting to reduce the amount of enriched uranium being produced for that reason.”
While the Idaho National Laboratory and the DoE broadly are pushing for “advanced” reactor technology in terms of issues like modularity and safety, the “parameters of the design and timeline” they refer to—in this case advocating for a small, reliable, space-friendly design in just 6 years—almost definitely rules out the modular reactors being developed and certified now.
To fully test and regulate these reactors—and design the special edition to send to the moon in this timeframe—is probably impossible. To rush any nuclear approval is a terrible idea, not just for safety, but also for a public that’s already shy about nuclear energy.
Technology like thorium fuel is still far from ready for the market….
USA Department of Energy enthuses about Highly Enriched Uranium in space. Not everyone agrees
As I’ve mentioned before on this site, the oh so confident macho nuclear enthusiasts don’t need to do precautions, even though USA is in the thick of the pandemic. Only the 2 token women have the brains to wear masks.
US Ramps Up Planning for Space Nuclear Technology AIP, 31 July 20, NASA and the Department of Energy are expanding their collaboration as part of a broader White House push to develop nuclear power systems for space applications. The initiative comes as NASA faces key decisions on what fuel sources and technology development paths to pursue.
Now, NASA, DOE, and the White House want nuclear power to play a much larger role in space exploration as plans take shape for a sustained human presence on the Moon and subsequent crewed journeys to Mars……….
The American Nuclear Society hosted a debate on the topic at its annual meeting in June. While the society has generally supported the use of space nuclear power and propulsion in the past, it has decided to develop a position statement by spring 2021 on whether to favor the use of LEU.
Among the participants was Rep. Bill Foster (D-IL), a former Fermilab physicist, who argued that proceeding with HEU ( Highly Enriched Uranium) would set a dangerous precedent. “If all of the spacefaring nations start using HEU reactors in space, then this would involve utilization of a significant amount of weapons grade material,” he remarked…….
Alan Kuperman, a policy scholar affiliated with the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project, pointed to U.S. efforts since the 1970s to minimize the use of HEU in civilian applications, arguing they are “based on the logic of no exceptions.”
“If we say, ‘well, we’re going to have exceptions,’ then other countries are going to say, ‘well, we want exceptions too,’ and then the whole thing falls apart,” he remarked……..https://www.aip.org/fyi/2020/us-ramps-planning-space-nuclear-technology
Donald Trump on nuclear proliferation and global heating – he’s incompetent about both
Trump Says Nuclear Proliferation Is Scarier Than Climate Change. He’s Failing at Both. Mother Jones
“Enlightened leadership would be treating both as emergencies.”
WILL PEISCHEL 31 Jul 20, On Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump set off a furor when he told Axios reporter Jonathan Swan that during a recent call with Vladimir Putin, he hadn’t bothered to mention US intelligence suggesting that Russia had offered bounties to Taliban fighters for killing American service members. Trump said that instead, the two leaders had discussed nuclear nonproliferation efforts—and then he inexplicably pivoted to downplaying the threat of climate change.
“If we can do something with Russia in terms of nuclear proliferation, which is a very big problem, bigger problem than global warming, a much bigger problem than global warming in terms of the real world, that would be a great thing,” he said told Swan.
Bringing up global climate change—which already affects the lives of millions—was apparently an arbitrary tangent to the conversation. Even if it wasn’t, experts say attempting to rank the two existential threats against each other isn’t exactly a useful way to gauge either of them. …….
New START, a weapons treaty between Russia and the United States to limit nuclear stockpiles, is slated to expire in early 2021. The treaty contains a provision allowing it to be extended for five years, activated by signatures from both presidents. “If there was seriousness to his remarks, he could do that with the stroke of a pen,” Pomper says. Pomper also criticized Trump for abandoning the Iran nuclear deal and for his failed efforts to scale back North Korea’s weapons programs. On top of that, the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs is serving only in an acting role. “Basically, it’s hard to find a situation in the nonproliferation arms control world where it’s gotten better after this administration,” Pomper says. “I’m kind of at a loss for words.”
Efforts to confront global climate change—the smaller problem, according to Trump—are in a similar state. That’s perhaps less surprising, given Trump’s long record of dismissing global warming as a Chinese hoax. We’re already dealing with the consequences. “We’re seeing droughts and wildfires,” says Astrid Caldas, a senior climate scientist with Union of Concerned Scientists. “Here we are with the ninth tropical storm this year, about to be named, if it happens. This usually doesn’t happen until September.” And though climate change was a known existential threat long before Trump entered the picture, Caldas says the administration’s stewardship has done additional damage. “The denial of climate change and calling it a hoax, the whole administration rolling back of environmental regulations and the pulling out of the Paris Agreement,” she says, “all of these things signal that there is not a concern about people’s well being.” https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2020/07/trump-says-nuclear-proliferation-is-scarier-than-climate-change-hes-failing-at-both/
Iran’s Khamenei refuses talks with U.S., says Trump wants them only for election propaganda
Iran’s Khamenei Rejects Talks With U.S. Over Missile, Nuclear Programs, RFERL, 30 Jul 20
| Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has ruled out negotiations with Washington over Tehran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs, calling the United States “Iran’s main enemy.”
“America’s brutal sanctions on Iran are aimed at collapsing our economy…..Their aim is to limit our influence in the region and to halt our missile and nuclear capabilities,” Khamenei said on July 31 in a live speech on state television…….. Khamenei said he would not agree to negtiations with the United State that were aimed only at boosting Trump’s reelection hopes. “This old man in charge, he apparently made some propaganda use out of his negotiations with North Korea. Now he wants to use (talks with Iran) for the (November 3 U.S. presidential) election,” he said. …… https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-s-khamenei-rejects-talks-with-u-s-over-missile-nuclear-programs/30758648.html |
Legal case settled over nuclear plant Vogtle
JEA Settles Litigation Over Nuclear Plant Vogtle, WJCT News 89.9, By BILL BORTZFIELD • JUL 30, 2020 JEA has ended its attempt to get out of a deal it made to buy electricity from a Georgia nuclear power plant that has seen billions of dollars in cost overruns.
Thursday afternoon Jacksonville’s public utility announced it has settled litigation and all related claims with the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia (MEAG Power) in its dispute over the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, which is commonly referred to as Plant Vogtle.
In settling the case, JEA acknowledged the contract is “valid and enforceable.”…….
Earlier this week JEA’s board unanimously agreed to have JEA’s legal team attempt to reach a settlement….. https://news.wjct.org/post/jea-settles-litigation-over-nuclear-plant-vogtle
That followed a U.S. District judge’s June ruling against JEA in the lawsuit, saying the contract Jacksonville’s utility set up for the nuclear power plant is still valid.
USA’s budget for nuclear weapons goes up and up
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION:
Information on the Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request and Affordability of Nuclear Modernization Activities, Government Accountability Office
GAO-20-573R: Published: Jul 30, 2020. The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration is in the middle of a long-term effort to modernize the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile.
DOE’s 2021 budget estimate for nuclear modernization activities for FYs 2021-2025 is $81 billion—$15 billion more than its 2020 budget estimate for the same period.
Such an increase may require cuts in other national defense programs to keep the defense budget within spending limits.
What GAO Found
The Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is in the midst of a long-term effort to modernize the U.S. nuclear weapon stockpile and its supporting production infrastructure. NNSA’s modernization plans and budgets are communicated to Congress on an annual basis primarily through two key documents—the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan (SSMP) and DOE’s budget justification—together referred to as NNSA’s nuclear security budget materials. GAO reviewed four areas related to the affordability of NNSA’s modernization activities as described in these budget materials:
Funding for nuclear modernization activities. Congress funds NNSA’s nuclear modernization activities through the Weapons Activities appropriation account, which falls under the National Defense budget function along with other NNSA, DOE, and Department of Defense (DOD) appropriations related to the common defense and security of the United States. Discretionary defense spending for fiscal year 2021 may not exceed a certain statutory limit, or else a sequestration—a cancellation of budgetary resources—would be triggered. Therefore, a proposed increase for a given program under the National Defense budget function may need to be offset by reductions in other defense programs to keep the defense budget within statutory spending limits………https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-573r#summary
-
Archives
- September 2026 (269)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS








