U.S. sailors in nuclear reactor part of USS Ronald Reagan allegedly used drug LSD
|
US Navy investigates sailors working in nuclear department of USS Ronald Reagan for taking LSD, Telegraph 7 NOVEMBER 2018 The US Navy has confirmed it is investigating 15 sailors working mainly in the nuclear reactor department of the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan for allegations of LSD abuse.Lt. Joe Keiley, spokesman for the Seventh Fleet, based in Japan, said that two sailors are already heading to court-martial accused of using, possessing and distributing the hallucinogenic drug, while three are waiting to see whether they will be charged as well.
Another 10 sailors were administratively disciplined. Of the 15, 14 worked in the nuclear department. News of the LSD ring was first reported by The Wall Street Journal in February, but Lt Keiley confirmed that the initial investigation had resulted in charges. When the allegations were first reported, the Seventh Fleet – beset by a series of problems – issued a statement saying that “the Navy has zero tolerance for drug abuse and takes all allegations involving misconduct of our sailors, Navy civilians and family members very seriously.”…….. The Seventh Fleet has been plagued by problems over the past year. In 2017, two ships – the USS John S. McCain and the USS Fitzgerald – were involved in separate collisions with commercial vessels, killing 17 sailors. In August 2017 Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin, commander of all US naval forces in the eastern Pacific, was fired as the result of a “loss of confidence in his ability to command,” the Navy said.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/07/us-navy-investigates-sailors-working-nuclear-department-uss/ |
|
|
Trump’s Energy Secretary Rick Perry accidentally told the truth about Yucca Mt, contradicting Trump
Think Progress 31st Oct 201*Yucca Mountain** One thing that unites Nevadans is opposition to President Donald Trump’s effort to turn the state into a huge nuclear waste dump. That’s why many
were surprised when Trump suggested he might abandon that policy after
touring the state recently with GOP Senator Dean Heller, who is in a tight
reelection race against Democrat Jacky Rosen.
But Trump’s Energy Secretary, Rick Perry, admitted on Friday the administration still supports
building the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository outside of Las Vegas.
In doing so, Perry effectively spoiled Trump’s effort to help Heller, as
Jon Ralston, editor of the Nevada Independent, explained to Bloomberg:
“Poor Rick Perry didn’t get the memo and accidentally told the
truth.”
https://thinkprogress.org/rick-perry-accidentally-told-the-truth-about-dumping-nuclear-waste-in-nevada-roiling-senate-race-c3945ba499d9/
North Korea warns it might return to developing nuclear weapons, if USA does not end sanctions
North Korea warns of returning to nuclear policy, News 24 2018-11-04 North Korea has warned the US it will “seriously” consider returning to a state policy aimed at building nuclear weapons if Washington does not end tough economic sanctions against the impoverished regime.
For years, the North had pursued a “byungjin” policy of simultaneously developing its nuclear capabilities alongside the economy.
In April, citing a “fresh climate of detente and peace” on the peninsula, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un declared the nuclear quest complete and said his country would focus on “socialist economic construction”.
But a statement issued by the North’s foreign ministry said Pyongyang could revert to its former policy if the US did not change its stance over sanctions.
“The word ‘byungjin’ may appear again and the change of the line could be seriously reconsidered,” said the statement carried by the official KCNA news agency late on Friday.
Sanctions
At a historic summit in Singapore in June, US President Donald Trump and Kim signed a vaguely-worded statement on denuclearisation.
But little progress has been made since then, with Washington pushing to maintain sanctions against the North until its “final, fully verified denuclearisation” and Pyongyang condemning US demands as “gangster-like”.
“The improvement of relations and sanctions are incompatible,” said the statement, released under the name of the director of the foreign ministry’s Institute for American Studies.
“What remains to be done is the US corresponding reply,” it added.
The statement is the latest sign of Pyongyang’s increasing frustration with Washington……..
In an interview with Fox News on Friday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reiterated that sanctions will remain until Pyongyang carries out it denuclearisation commitments made in Singapore, adding he will meet with his North Korean counterpart next week. https://www.news24.com/World/News/north-korea-warns-of-returning-to-nuclear-policy-20181104
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to resume nuclear talks with North Korea this week
Pompeo Resuming Nuclear Talks with N. Korea This Week, VOA, November 04, 2018 Ken Bredemeier,
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says he is resuming denuclearization talks with North Korea this week in New York, meeting with Pyongyang’s second in command, Kim Yong Chol.
Progress on ending Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons programs has slowed in the months since the Singapore summit in June between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, when the two leaders signed a general statement calling for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
But Pompeo called the coming talks “a good opportunity” to move toward specifics of when and how North Korea might end its nuclear weapons program. The United States is seeking to finalize a deal by the end of Trump’s first term in office in January 2021.
Pyongyang said Friday it would “seriously” consider resuming its nuclear testing if U.S. economic sanctions against North Korea are not lifted, but Pompeo, in an interview on Fox News Sunday, dismissed the threat……..
Pompeo said there would be “no economic relief until we have achieved our ultimate objective,” the end of North Korea’s nuclear program.
The United States has said it would maintain the sanctions against North Korea until it has reached “final, fully verified denuclearization…….https://www.voanews.com/a/pompeo-resuming-nuclear-talks-with-n-korea-this-week-/4644158.html
Trump administration heads for the dodgy science of the radiation sceptics
| Is a Little Radiation Good For You? Trump Admin Steps Into Shaky Science, Discover Magazine, By Nathaniel Scharping | October 5, 2018
For decades, studies have shown that even low doses of radiation are harmful to humans. This week, the Associated Press reported that the Trump administration may be reconsidering that. The Environmental Protection Agency seemed to be looking at raising the levels of radiation considered dangerous to humans based on a controversial theory rejected by mainstream scientists. The theory suggests that a little radiation might actually be good for our bodies. In April, an EPA press release announced the proposal and included supporting comments from a vocal proponent of the hypothesis, known as hormesis. It prompted critical opinion pieces and sparked worry among radiation safety advocates.
The debate cuts to the heart of the debate over the effects of low doses of radiation and reveals how difficult it is to craft clear guidelines in an area where scientific evidence is not clear cut. Radiation DebateWhen radiation damages our DNA, the body steps in to make repairs. Hormesis suggests that hitting the body with a little more radiation should kick our defensive mechanisms into overdrive. According to proponents of the theory, this results in the production of anti-oxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds that reduce our risk for cancer and heart disease, among other things. That’s why hormesis backers want the EPA to raise the level of acceptable radiation, pointing out that it would also save millions in safety costs. It sounds convincing, and proponents have dozens of studies to point to that they say back up their claims. But, “Large, epidemiological studies provide substantial scientific evidence that even low doses of radiation exposure increase cancer risk,” says Diana Miglioretti, a professor in biostatistics at the University of California, Davis in an email. “Risks associated with low-doses of radiation are small; however, if large populations are exposed, the evidence suggests it will lead to measurable numbers of radiation-induced cancers.” Long-term studies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing survivors show higher cancer risks. Marshall Islanders exposed to radiation from atomic bomb tests suffered a higher risk of thyroid disease. And patients who get CT scans, which deliver a dose of radiation equal to thousands of X-rays, saw cancer risks go up afterward. Researchers also found that radiation from childhood CT scans can triple the risk of leukemia and, at higher doses, triple the risk of brain cancers as well. Another found that low-dose radiation increased the risk of breast cancer among some some women. And large-scale reviews of the evidence for hormesis find that it is decidedly lacking. Two studies, one in 2006 by the National Research Council, and another in 2018 by the National Council and Radiation Protection and Measurements looking at 29 studies of radiation exposure find no evidence for hormesis, and reiterate that the evidence points toward radiation being bad for us even at low doses. Scientific UncertaintyIt’s difficult to study low doses of radiation, though, and that’s where much of the controversy comes from. At doses below a few hundred millisieverts (mSv), a radiation unit that accounts for its effects on the body, it becomes extraordinarily hard to separate out the effects of radiation from other things like lifestyle or genetics. Research on the effects of these small radiation doses often use data sets involving thousands of people to compensate for the minimal effect sizes, but even then it’s often not enough to be certain what’s happening. “Data collected at low doses (defined by the scientific community [as] exposures less than 100 mSv) suffers from a ‘signal to noise’ problem which limits our ability to conclusively state effects one way or another,” says Kathryn Higley, head of the school of nuclear science and engineering at Oregon State University in an email. A single CT scan delivers anywhere from 1 to 15 mSv, but some patients need many scans during the course of their treatment, increasing the total dose. Workers cleaning up after the Fukushima meltdown received radiation doses above 100 mSv in some cases. And current U.S. standards limit radiation workers to no more than 50 mSv of exposure per year. Many studies indicate that there are dangers at that level, but it’s often an assumption. Those studies base their suppositions on what’s called the linear no-threshold model, which extrapolates more reliable data from studies of higher doses of radiation to lower doses. Though it may be an educated guess, for decades large-scale studies have indicated this is true. ……….. The EPA in recent days appeared to back away from the suggestion that it supported hormesis. The agency released a statement in response to the APstory affirming that it intends to continue using the linear no-threshold model when constructing radiation guidelines, something that contradicts Calabrese’s comments in the April press release. “The proposed regulation doesn’t talk about radiation or any particular chemicals. EPA’s policy is to continue to use the linear-no-threshold model for population-level radiation protection purposes which would not – under the proposed regulation that has not been finalized – trigger any change in that policy,” said an EPA spokesman in response to a request for comment. Radiologist Rebecca Smith-Bindman says the vast bulk of the evidence suggests even small amounts of radiation are harmful. We shouldn’t base our policies on an unproven theory, she adds. “There is extensive evidence that ionizing radiation will cause cancer,” says Smith-Bindman, a professor of radiology at the University of California, San Francisco in an email exchange. “These data come from a range of different sources, including epidemiological data (such as studies of patients who have received diagnostic and therapeutic radiation and from environmental exposures and accidents), from animal studies and from basic science studies. While it is more difficult to precisely quantify the exposures — which will vary by many factors, such as age at exposure, and source of radiation, etc. — there is no uncertainty among the scientific community that radiation will cause cancer.” She says that pointing to issues with the linear no-threshold model misses the point. Though it may not be totally accurate at very low doses, she says it’s unfair to use that uncertainty to cast doubt on data about radiation where there’s solid evidence. …….. Miglioretti says “Based on the large body of evidence to date, I believe that revising the regulations to increase allowable radiation exposure limits will lead to an increase in the number of radiation-induced cancers in this country.” That’s in line with what multiple experts Discover contacted believe — that radiation can harm even at low doses and raising limits would endanger the public, though the increase in risk would likely be small. It’s not clear at the moment whether the EPA proposal to raise limits will pass, though it does follow in the footsteps of other Trump administration proposals to weaken safety standards. At the moment, it’s unclear what the effects on the public if the EPA raises radiation limits. “Perhaps it might make nuclear power plants less expensive to build. It might lower the cost of cleanup of radioactively polluted sites,” says David Brenner, director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University in an email. “But [it] begs the question of whether cleanup to a less rigorous standard is desirable.” http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2018/10/05/epa-trump-administation-radiation-guidelines/#.W99ZFtIzbGg
|
The Twin Threats of Climate Change and Nuclear Annihilation- new documentary with Noam Chomsky
New Documentary by ChomskySpeaks.org with Noam Chomsky Challenges Establishment over Twin Threats of Climate Change and Nuclear Annihilation https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-documentary-by-chomskyspeaksorg-with-noam-chomsky-challenges-establishment-over-twin-threats-of-climate-change-and-nuclear-annihilation-300743226.html
Renowned public intellectual calls out Democrats and Republicans for escalating nuclear dangers and decries Republican Party “dedicated to the destruction of life” NEWS PROVIDED BY
ChomskySpeaks.org
Nov 02, 2018 BOSTON, Nov. 2, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — Executive Producer Randall Wallace and Director Patrick Jerome launch the online documentary, “Noam Chomsky: Internationalism or Extinction” on the website: http://ChomskySpeaks.org. Based on a lecture by the public intellectual who is often described as the “most quoted living intellectual,” the documentary brings both the activist energy and desperate concerns of climate change and nuclear escalation that are causing mass extinctions.
Against these dire realities, Noam Chomsky surveys “the internationalism” of inter-state cooperation and social movements as solutions. He notes the complicity of both Democratic and Republican parties in escalating nuclear tensions and nuclear proliferation. At the same time, he condemns the Republican Party for profit-driven policies leading to climate-altering, carbon pollution. The documentary is a compelling and urgent warning explaining such ideas and tools as “the Anthropocene,” “the Doomsday Clock,” “species extinction,” “internationalism,” “denialism,” “non-proliferation,” “NATO expansion,” “climate accords,” and “climate debt” among many others.
Many non-partisan organizations collaborated in organizing the original lecture upon which the documentary is based; several also supported the production of the documentary as a starting point for further analysis. These included peace movement organizations in collaboration with the Boston-based movement-building center, encuentro5 (http://encuentro5.org) and the democracy movement’s Liberty Tree Foundation for the Democratic Revolution (http://LibertyTreeFoundation.org). The video adds to their efforts at expanding the public conversation about vital issues of the day. A grant from the Wallace Action Fund supported the documentary.
Chomsky concludes his lecture with sober reflection on the urgent challenges facing humanity: “The tasks ahead are daunting and they cannot be deferred.” Media Contact:
Suren Moodliar
617-968-0880
204337@email4pr.com SOURCE ChomskySpeaks.org, Related Links http://chomskyspeaks.org
U.S. Supreme Court upholds right of 21 young people to sue federal government about climate change inaction
Independent 4th Nov 2018 , The Supreme Court has refused to halt a novel lawsuit filed by young
Americans that attempts to force the federal government to take action on
climate change, turning down a request from the Trump administration to
stop it before trial.
The suit, filed in 2015 by 21 young people who argue
that the failure of government leaders to combat climate change violates
their constitutional right to a clean environment, is before a federal
judge in Oregon. It had been delayed while the Supreme Court considered the
emergency request from the government.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/climate-change-lawsuit-trump-us-young-people-children-supreme-court-allows-julia-olsen-a8616136.html
Donald Trump ready to reimpose all nuclear sanctions on Iran
Trump set to reimpose all nuclear sanctions on Iran The Hill, BY REBECCA KHEEL – 11/02/18 The Trump administration plans to reimpose the last set of sanctions lifted under the Iran nuclear deal early next week, administration officials announced Friday.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confirmed in a call with reporters that the administration will grant waivers to eight “jurisdictions” when it reimposes oil and gas sanctions on Monday.
“This part of the campaign about which we’re speaking today is simple: It is aimed at depriving the regime of the revenues that it uses to spread death and destruction around the world,” Pompeo said.
“We expect to issue some temporary allotments to eight jurisdictions, but only because they have demonstrated significant reductions in crude oil and cooperation on many other fronts and have made important moves toward getting to zero crude oil importation.”
Pompeo did not specify which eight jurisdictions are getting waivers, saying a list would be released Monday. Asked if the use of the word “jurisdiction” meant that the European Union, a group of 28 countries, is getting waiver, Pompeo said the E.U. is not being granted a waiver.
In May, Trump announced that he was withdrawing the United States from what he once called the “worst deal ever negotiated.”…………
Friday’s announcement drew immediate condemnation from those who supported the nuclear deal.
“These sanctions are a slap in the face to the Iranian people who have been squeezed between the repression of their government and the pressure of international sanctions for decades,” Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said in a statement. “Impoverishing ordinary Iranians will not hurt the regime or achieve any of America’s security interests, but it will set back the Iranian people’s aspirations for years to come.” https://thehill.com/policy/defense/414526-trump-set-to-reimpose-all-nuclear-sanctions-on-iran
Former SCANA accountant tells how nuclear financial document was “doctored”
SCANA accountant says CEO put her on medical leave over complaints about nuclear project, Independent Mail, COLUMBIA — In newly unsealed documents, a former SCANA employee says the utility’s then-chief executive, Kevin Marsh, put her on “special medical leave” after she went to him with concerns about a failing, $9 billion nuclear project.
Carlette Walker, once SCANA’s vice president of Nuclear Finance Administration, also testified that, in 2015, her bosses filed misleading testimony under her name with state regulators about how much the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station expansion project would cost.
Carlette Walker, once SCANA’s vice president of Nuclear Finance Administration, also testified that, in 2015, her bosses filed misleading testimony under her name with state regulators about how much the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station expansion project would cost.
“While I was out, they wrote testimony under my name, and they filed testimony under my name with the (lower cost) number that I had fought against,” Walker said in an April 24 deposition.
Walker’s full sworn statement — parts had been released before with sections blacked out, or redacted — was made public Thursday as the S.C. Public Service Commission began its weeks-long hearing into the nuclear-related power rates of SCE&G, SCANA’s electric subsidiary.
A spokesman for SCE&G said the utility would not comment except during the PSC hearing.
Previously, most of the pages of Walker’s 187-page deposition had been at least partially blacked out at SCE&G’s request. However, PSC hearing officer David Butler ruled Wednesday the entire document should be made public.
In her deposition, Walker said she had projected the cost to finish the floundering project was about $500 million higher than contractors had estimated. But, she said, her SCANA bosses submitted the contractors’ lower numbers — which she considered unrealistic — to regulators in her name while she was out of work on leave, taking care of her sick husband.
Another former SCE&G employee, Ken Browne, said in his deposition the contractor’s cost projections were based upon productivity rates that V.C. Summer construction workers never had attained. Work was going so slowly, the project could have taken far longer — until 2030 — to complete, Browne said.
According to Walker’s deposition, when Browne objected internally to SCE&G using the lower cost submitted to the PSC, under Walker’s name, he was “pretty much cussed out by (SCE&G outside attorney) Mitch Willoughby and put in his place, and so he just shut up.”
In the formerly redacted portions of her deposition, Walker said she went to both then-SCANA CEO Marsh and current CEO Jimmy Addison — then the company’s chief financial officer — with concerns about the nuclear project in the fall of 2015………. https://www.independentmail.com/story/news/2018/11/02/v-c-summer-nuclear-station-fiasco-scana-accountant-put-leave/1856615002/
Reclassifying nuclear wastes as “Low Level”
DOE proposes reclassifying high-level nuclear waste, could send more to WIPP A proposal to re-characterize high-level nuclear waste could bring more waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
The U.S. Department of Energy posted a notice in the federal register in October, requesting public comment on the potential change.
If approved, the DOE would change how it labels high level waste (HLW), allowing some of the waste resulting from processing nuclear fuel to be characterized as either low-level or transuranic (TRU) waste.
If the waste is deemed low-level, it can be disposed of at the generator site, or in a surface-level facility………
When the HLW is held at the site, the federal government pays for the facility’s utilities, costing tax payers billions of dollars a year, Heaton said.
Some of that money could be saved, he said, if the waste was moved.
“A lot of would pass the waste acceptance criteria at WIPP,” Heaton said. “It would extend the life of WIPP for sure. ………
Don Hancock, director of the Nuclear Waste Program at the Southwest Research and Information Center said the proposal is not only illegal, but hypocritical.
He said HLW is defined numerous times in laws passed by the U.S. Congress, and the DOE’s proposal would circumvent congressional powers.
“What it seems like they’re proposing is illegal,” he said. “They say they get to rewrite the law, not Congress. They’re a lot of opposition to this nationally.”
Hancock also said that if waste is truly less dangerous than previously thought, it could be safely kept where it is.
If it’s more dangerous to keep the waste at the generator sites, Hancock said the DOE should petition for more repositories.
All HLW must be sent to a geologic repository, per federal law, excluding WIPP which is licensed for TRU waste.
Aside from re-characterizing HLW as TRU waste, Hancock said the proposal was also intended to get around the law requiring HLW to go underground, by re-characterizing it as low-level waste.
“There was a consensus that there should be multiple geologic repositories,” Hancock said. “There should be multiple places in the U.S. where you can have safe repositories. That didn’t happen.”
Adrian Hedden can be reached at 575-628-5516, achedden@currentargus.com or @AdrianHedden on Twitter. https://www.currentargus.com/story/news/local/2018/11/02/doe-reclassifying-nuclear-waste/1831914002
America’s new nuclear warhead designs – and what they cost.
Here’s when all of America’s new nuclear warhead designs will be active — and how much they’ll cost, Military Times, 3 Nov 18, By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — Estimates for the cost of America’s nuclear warheads have gone up in the last year, as the government prepares to develop and maintain as many as nine new systems in the next 25 years.
The National Nuclear Security Administration’s fiscal 2019 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan, released Thursday lays out the investments that could be needed for the NNSA over the next two and a half decades.
The NNSA is a semiautonomous department within the Department of Energy. While the Defense Department manages the delivery systems of the nuclear force — ships, planes and missiles — NNSA oversees the development, maintenance and disposal of nuclear warheads.
However, NNSA costs are not just about the warheads, as requirements range from upgrading aging infrastructure, to increasing the production of plutonium pits, to securing facilities. The agency expects capital investments during this period could require spending between $61.1 billion and $90.7 billion, for example.
And the overall cost of replacing America’s nuclear arsenal will be much higher when factoring in the development of new cruise missiles, intercontinental ballistic missiles and bomber aircraft.
Kingston Reif of the Arms Control Association said the report “highlights the enormous scope of work already on NNSA’s overburdened plate, and the additional work that the Nuclear Posture Review proposes to pile on top.”
He pointed to a chart in the report showing NNSA’s budgetary estimate for the next 25 years has grown significantly in the year since the FY18 estimate — by about $75 billion over the previous estimate.
“NNSA claims that this increase ‘is generally affordable and executable,’ but that’s wishful thinking,” Reif said, noting previous concerns raised by the Government Accountability Office that NNSA could not meet its requirements with its planned budget.
The cost increase is partly driven by the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review. Released early this year, the NPR called for two new nuclear warhead designs as well as an overall recommitment to the nuclear triad………….https://www.militarytimes.com/smr/2018/11/02/heres-when-all-of-americas-new-nuclear-warhead-designs-will-be-active-and-how-much-theyll-cost/
A world on nuclear hair-trigger, if USA withdraws from INF Treaty?
Would INF Withdrawal Recreate a Nuclear Hair-Trigger World? Junk enough arms control treaties, and the Cold War balance of terror will reign once again—this time with China in the mix. Foreign Policy, BY MICHAEL HIRSH, OCTOBER 23, 2018, “………The INF Treaty, signed in 1987, was a keystone of those early efforts to ease tensions. It sought to end the hair-trigger calculus embedded in the missiles that ringed the perimeter of the Soviet bloc, giving both sides scant minutes of warning before Armageddon. The INF Treaty was, as then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan said, the first nuclear treaty to eliminate, not just limit, nuclear arms. The United States and the Soviet Union pledged to destroy and permanently forswear all of their nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (300 to 3,400 miles).
Now, Washington plans to withdraw from the INF Treaty, according to U.S. President Donald Trump, who says that Russia has violated the agreement for years. Coupled with the prospect of no extension to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, Washington may thus be opening the door to a return of a terrifying past. The Trump administration is not just threatening to roll back a slew of protections and safety precautions; it is also quite consciously restarting the arms race, with a full nuclear modernization plan that could cost up to $1.6 trillion over 30 years, according to an October 2017 report from the Congressional Budget Office and other accounts. The Russians and Chinese will undoubtedly respond, but with the cessation of treaty-authorized inspections, governments will be far more in the dark about what the other side is building.
……….Together, these moves could eventually leave the world facing a new kind of balance of terror, and on several different fronts. It’s no longer just about Washington and Moscow. China, which was for much of the Cold War a nuclear minnow and remains a much smaller nuclear power than the United States or Russia, has now stockpiled thousands of missiles, including tactical, cruise, medium-range, long-range, and intercontinental ballistic missiles launchable from air, land, and sea. That arsenal includes the mobile-launched Dongfeng-41, believed to be the world’s longest-ranged missile at a projected 7,500 miles.
Until now, Beijing has been restrained about tipping those missiles with nuclear warheads: It keeps an estimated 250 to 300 warheads, about as many as France. But that could begin to change if tensions rise and no treaty is in place to contain them.
…….. without treaty restrictions, a Pacific balance of terror could prove as unpredictable as what prevailed between Moscow and Washington during the darkest days of the Cold War.
The Trump administration claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin is responsible for the INF Treaty’s failure. In February 2007, Putin declared that the treaty no longer served Russia’s interests. Ever since, Russia has been violating it, claiming that its missile deployments are justified by U.S. missile defense. Even so, the violations have been relatively small-scale, mainly involving the construction of about 40 to 50 prohibited SSC-8 cruise missiles, said Matthew Bunn, a nuclear arms specialist at Harvard University’s Belfer Center. Bunn noted that the United States is also technically violating the treaty by taking a sea-based missile launcher, the Aegis, and putting it ashore. “If the shoe was on the other foot, we’d be screaming about that,” he said.……….HTTPS://FOREIGNPOLICY.COM/2018/10/23/WOULD-INF-WITHDRAWAL-RECREATE-A-NUCLEAR-HAIR-TRIGGER-WORLD/
Closures of coal and nuclear plants will not trouble the grid, says USA’s Largest power grid operator
Largest power grid operator dismisses the threat of coal and nuclear plant closures, Washington Examiner, by Josh Siegel, November 01, 2018
The operator of the largest power market in America released a report Thursday finding that its electricity supply would hold up against a range of threats, providing evidence against the Trump administration case for preserving coal and nuclear plants.
“The PJM system is reliable today and will remain reliable into the future,” the grid operator, PJM Interconnection, said in an eight-page summary of a much-anticipated report slated for full release in December.
Andrew Ott, president and CEO of PJM, amplified that assertion later Thursday during a press conference in Washington D.C.
“The grid is more reliable today than it’s ever been,” Ott said.
PJM covers a large territory representing 65 million people in 13 states from Illinois to Virginia.
The report weighs against the Trump administration’s interest in using emergency power to keep coal and nuclear plants alive.
“We think government intervention is unnecessary,” Ott said. “Nothing in our report would say there is a specific need for a specific fuel source. We are fuel neutral.”
The White House has reportedly considered asserting a national security justification for providing coal and nuclear plants with subsidies to keep them from retiring. The effort has stalled, but critics, who say action would upset competitive power markets that reward the lowest cost resource – and also raise electricity rates – fear the administration could try to revive the idea through different mechanisms.
Ott testified to Congress last month that the grid operator’s analysis shows that coal and nuclear closures in the region he covers scheduled for 2021 and 2022 can happen without causing a problem to the grid.
PJM has previously said its grid is “more reliable than ever” and that any federal intervention “would be damaging to the markets and therefore costly to consumers” by raising electricity prices.
……….. FERC, a panel of independent energy regulators, last year rejected a previous version of the Trump administration’s plan to provide special payments to uneconomic coal and nuclear plants that could store 90 days of fuel on-site. But it directed regional transmission operators such as PJM to submit information on resilience challenges in their markets, in anticipation of potential future action FERC could take on its own.
FERC is considering the comments before determining how or whether to act. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/largest-power-grid-operator-dismisses-the-threat-of-coal-and-nuclear-plant-closures
USA’s National Nuclear Security Administration under scrutiny, over plutonium pits
Watchdog groups seek review of plutonium plan http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/watchdog-groups-seek-review-of-plutonium-plan/article_52eb4d8b-05bf-5715-9c8f-233132157ca0.html, By Andy Stiny | astiny@sfnewmexican.com,– 2 Nov 18
Climate change denialism- and the reality
New UN Report Warns of Impending Catastrophe as World Warms, Glaciers Melt, DAHR JAMAIL, TRUTHOUT PART OF THE TRUTHOUT SERIES CLIMATE DISRUPTION DISPATCHES NOVEMBER 2, 2018 “………….Denial and Reality
In a recent interview, Donald Trump, who had called human-caused climate change “a Chinese hoax,” said it is real, “but I don’t know that it’s manmade.” He also said the climate will “change back again” — whatever that means.Meanwhile, the ongoing denialism continues unabated in his administration. Climate change information was removed from an important planning document for a national park in New England, with the rationale that it was deemed a “sensitive” topic.
The North Carolina government did not like the science about sea level rise, so literally passed a law banning policies based on such forecasts. The state, of course, is still recovering from flooding from Hurricane Florence.
Meanwhile, Trump’s EPA has abandoned restrictions against hydrofluorocarbons, a chemical that has been linked to climate change. OPEC announced it is predicting a massive increase in oil production over the next five years — enough so that it will offset CO2 reductions from electric cars. On that note, it was recently exposed that the state of Texas, already the leading emitter of greenhouse gasses in the US, has approved 43 petrochemical projects along the Gulf Coast since 2012 — projects that add millions of tons more of greenhouse gas pollution.
Stunningly, despite the terrifying weather events and dire predictions of what’s to come, it has come to light that the Trump administration is aware of and accepts a projected 7-degree rise in global temperatures by just 2100. This came out in a draft statement issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which was written to justify Trump’s decision to freeze federal fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks built after 2020. “The amazing thing they’re saying is human activities are going to lead to this rise of carbon dioxide that is disastrous for the environment and society,” Michael MacCracken, who served as a senior scientist at the US Global Change Research Program from 1993 to 2002 told The Washington Post. “And then they’re saying they’re not going to do anything about it.”
The Trump administration’s stance on climate change is essentially that we’re doomed, so what’s the point in cutting greenhouse gas emissions?
With regard to the alarming UN climate report, the White House basically shrugged it off, claiming that emissions in the US have dropped since 2005. This is a true statement, but does not explain the reason for that, which is a historic shift away from coal-fired electricity and toward renewables and natural gas.
Fortunately, reality is striking back.
A group of 17 bipartisan state governors representing states that comprise half of the total US GDP has vowed to both fight climate change and fight Donald Trump on the issue. They recently pledged $1.4 billion to support electric cars and institute new policies geared toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Stunningly, even Bloomberg, a business news outlet, is running stories with titles like “New Climate Debate: How to Adapt to the End of the World.”
And of course, the language coming out of the UN is a sign that the international community is beginning to understand the full weight of climate change’s implication.
Alas, this realization has not yet been met with the policy response it deserves. The author of a key UN report on the dangers of breaching the 1.5°C global warming limit recently said that the world is “nowhere near on track” to keep warming below even that already arbitrary level.https://truthout.org/articles/new-un-report-warns-of-impending-catastrophe-as-world-warms-glaciers-melt/
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (102)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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
nuclear-news 