TVA says sale of Bellefonte nuclear plant to Haney would be illegal until regulators approve deal, TVA defends decision to scrap sale of nuclear plant
February 5th, 2019, by Dave Flessner
The Tennessee Valley Authority says it cannot complete the sale of its Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant to developer Franklin L. Haney because Haney doesn’t have a license yet to operate the unfinished twin-reactor plant in Alabama.
In a 25-page legal brief filed in federal court Monday, TVA attorneys contend that any sale to Haney would be illegal under the Atomic Energy Act since Haney is trying to acquire and eventually operate the nuclear plant without a properly approved permit.
Haney’s company, Nuclear Development LLC , was the top bidder for Bellefonte at a TVA auction of the abandoned plant in November 2016. But Nuclear Development only filed a license transfer application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to take over TVA’s construction permit on the Bellefonte plant on Nov. 13, 2018 — two weeks after the sale was originally supposed to close and only 17 days before an extended deadline for the sale on Nov. 30.
TVA told Haney the day before the Nov. 30 sale was supposed to be completed that it could not sell Bellefonte as a nuclear plant without approval of the license transfer by the NRC. In the sales agreement with Haney, TVA said “federal law at all times govern the validity, interpretation and enforceability” of the sale………..
The legal fight over whether TVA must now sell the Bellefonte plant to Haney is moving in some uncharted waters since the NRC has not previously transferred a deferred construction permit on a nuclear plant to a private individual or a company that has not previously operated a nuclear plant. NRC spokesman Scott Burnell said last month that the NRC staff is still reviewing Haney’s application to take over the deferred construction permit.
Although no active construction has occurred at Bellefonte in nearly a decade, TVA has maintained the plant in deferred status…………
Aided by more than $2 billion in production tax credits for new nuclear generation allocated for Bellefonte and the prospect of $5 billion or more in federal loan guarantees for the project, Haney claims he should be able to finish the reactors at a cost allowing him to deliver power as much as $500 million a year cheaper for electricity users.
But Haney, a former Chattanooga real estate developer who now lives in south Florida, has no previous experience owning or operating a nuclear plant. Haney has amassed a fortune over the past four decades buying, developing and leasing properties to TVA, the Internal Revenue Service and other government agencies and airports, along with hotels, office buildings and other developments.
Haney said he is assembling a team of top engineering, design and construction firms with experience in the nuclear power industry to finish building Bellefonte.
Haney, who contributed more than $1 million to President Trump’s inaugural fund through a limited partnership known as HFNWA and once hired Haney’s personal attorney Michael Cohen to help with the Bellefonte project, has applied for federal loan guarantees for Bellefonte. The U.S. Department of Energy is still considering Haney’s loan application……… https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/breakingnews/story/2019/feb/05/tva-says-bellefonte-illegal/488049/
February 7, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
legal, USA |
Leave a comment
My Turn: New Hampshire must say no to nuclear war, https://www.concordmonitor.com/NH-must-say-no-to-nuclear-war-23265489 By MINDI MESSMERFor the Monitor 2/6/2019 School children are no longer participating in duck-and-cover drills, but Americans and the public officials who represent them are becoming increasingly aware that the risks of a nuclear war, which could be started intentionally or accidentally, have not gone away.
Events here at home and abroad have brought renewed attention to this issue. Americans have suddenly realized that U.S. presidents have authority to order a nuclear weapon strike without consulting anyone. Just one phone call and hundreds of U.S. nuclear missiles can be launched in less than 10 minutes. Meanwhile, national security experts are speculating about a renewed nuclear arms race as the U.S. and Russia develop new nuclear weapons and the U.S. prepares to withdraw from arms control treaties, including the landmark 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty that President Ronald Reagan signed with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Both sides accuse the other of violating the treaty.
Cities and towns across New Hampshire and the country – including Durham and New London, N.H., Baltimore, Los Angeles and Portland, Maine – are passing resolutions calling on the United States to limit the risk of nuclear war by changing U.S. policies. About a dozen other New Hampshire cities are considering following suit. California and the U.S. Conference of Mayors have passed similar resolutions. Organizations including the Unitarian Universalist Association, Union of Concerned Scientists, Federation of American Scientists and Physicians for Social Responsibility have joined the call.
The resolutions recommend a number of steps that would make nuclear war less likely. Most importantly, they call on the U.S. to state that it will never use a nuclear weapon first; no U.S. president should ever start a nuclear war.
The N.H. General Court may be the next to take a position on this issue. The State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee in the N.H. House will hold a hearing today on HCR 7, a resolution introduced by Rep. Chuck Grassie that calls on the U.S. to establish a “no first use” policy.
If enacted, the measure would throw New Hampshire’s support behind legislation, introduced in Congress last week by House Armed Services Committee Chair Adam Smith and Senate Armed Services Committee member Elizabeth Warren, to make it U.S. policy not to use nuclear weapons first.
As the world’s most powerful country, the only reason the U.S. needs nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack on America or its allies. The threat that the U.S. may use its nuclear weapons first is counterproductive and could prompt a pre-emptive strike from a nuclear-armed adversary if it feared a U.S. nuclear launch was imminent.
Knowing that the U.S. could respond to a nuclear attack with its own nuclear strike, however, is a real deterrent; that is the message a no-first-use policy would send to the rest of the world.
When cities and states enact resolutions like the one before the N.H. Legislature, it sends a strong message to Washington decision-makers, both in Congress and the White House, that they must act for the safety of all Americans.
(Mindi Messmer of Rye is an environmental scientist working with the Union of Concerned Scientists and a former N.H. state representative.)
February 7, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
|
Bloomberg, By Edvard Pettersson, February 6, 2019, Boeing Co. was accused of negligence tied to a wildfire that tore through Malibu, California, in November and that purportedly started on the grounds of the nearby, disused Rocketdyne testing site.
A group of homeowners sued Boeing along with Edison International, the parent of the utility they say was at fault in igniting the fire, on Tuesday in Los Angeles. They claim Boeing failed to properly manage the vegetation on the Santa Susana Field Laboratory and allowed the fire to spread to surrounding neighborhoods.
The Woolsey fire killed 3, burned about 100,000 acres and destroyed 1,500 structures in and around Malibu. Southern California Edison has said an electrical substation on the Boeing property suffered an outage two minutes before the fire was first reported.
…… The case is LaPlante v. Southern California Edison, 19STCV03419, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-06/boeing-sued-for-negligence-in-wildfire-that-devastated-malibu
|
|
February 7, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
legal, USA |
Leave a comment
Guy Who Wants to Eliminate Radiation Limits Will Lead EPA on Radiation, https://www.care2.com/causes/guy-who-wants-to-eliminate-radiation-limits-will-lead-epa-on-radiation.html By: Kevin Mathews, February 3, 2019, About Kevin, Follow Kevin at @care2
When Trump supporters chant “make America great again,” I have difficulty imagining that any of them are longing for the days when radiation exposure went unregulated. Nevertheless, that’s precisely the direction the EPA is headed with its latest appointment.
Brant Ulsh, a health physicist working for a consulting firm, will serve as both a scientific advisor to the EPA and as the new leader of the Radiation Advisory Committee. Ulsh is a controversial choice because he is considered the nation’s most outspoken critic of radiation levels.
His papers and positions put him at odds with the overwhelming majority of the scientific community that believes coming into contact with even low levels of ionizing radiation poses a significant cancer risk. He claims the science is too outdated and insufficient to warrant the existing government standards.
“Once again the Trump administration is moving to the fringe for its scientific advice, choosing someone who could undercut foundational protections from radiation,” wrote the Natural Resources Defense Council in a statement regarding Ulsh’s appointment. “We need sound science to dictate health protections, not dangerous theories.”
If you’re wondering what angle Ulsh is working, he admits to it in his own papers. Evidently, he’s concerned that our radiation regulations put “unnecessary burdens” on corporations. Funny how the conservatives in power always seem more concerned with the extra money rich companies pay to keep people safe than actual public safety.
For what it’s worth – and it should be worth a lot, EPA head Andrew Wheeler – just last year the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements reviewed 29 studies that reconfirmed a correlation between low level radiation exposure and an increased risk of cancer.
As a scientific advisor to the EPA and the head of the Radiation Advisory Committee, Ulsh could play a pivotal role in rolling back the standards that dictate acceptable amounts of radiation. Since humans can’t detect when they’re exposed to radiation, we rely on enforcement of these limits to keep us safe.
Make no mistake – this appointment isn’t accidental. There are countless scientists who could have led the Radiation Advisory Committee that accept the existing scientific consensus on radiation levels. To choose an outlier like Ulsh is to 
look for someone to deliberately take the agency in a different direction.
In fact, thanks to an Associated Press story from last year, we know that the EPA was already making plans to throw out regulations on radiation, so having a scientist like Ulsh bring his own opinions could be the ideal vehicle in order to accomplish that agenda.
At the risk of being hyperbolic, at this point, I think we’ve got to ask ourselves: is the Trump administration just trying to kill us? They’re appointing fossil fuel lobbyists to oversee climate change, corporate polluters to worry about clean water, chemical bigwigs to regulate pesticides and now a pro-radiation guy to set radiation standards.
Is nothing sacred? Does the Trump administration feel no obligation to keep the American people safe? If the EPA is so confident that scientists are wrong and radiation isn’t actually harmful, maybe it should start by experimenting at the White House before unleashing it on the public at large.
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
secrets,lies and civil liberties, spinbuster, USA |
2 Comments
Rare Ice Phenomenon Forced a Shutdown at a N.J. Nuclear Reactor, Fortune, By JIM EFSTATHIOU JR. and BLOOMBERG ,February 1, 2019
The arctic blast wreaking havoc across much of the U.S. was cold enough to shut down a nuclear reactor, thanks to a rare phenomenon called frazil ice.
Public Service Enterprise Group shut one unit at its Salem nuclear plant in southern New Jersey early Thursday after intake screens froze over, restricting the flow of water needed to cool the reactor, according to spokesman Joe Delmar. A second unit at the station on the Delaware river was powered down because of the same problem.
The 60-foot (18-meter) tall intake screens rotate in and out of the water, preventing debris like floating wood from entering the plant. Under extreme conditions like this week—overnight low temperatures at the station fell into the single digits—the frazil ice can accumulate on the screens, blocking the flow. That caused water circulators to shut down and prompted Newark-based Public Service to take the plant offline………http://fortune.com/2019/01/31/ice-shutdown-new-jersey-nuclear-reactor/
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
climate change, USA |
Leave a comment
US Navy awards $15.2bn to build two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers Naval Technology, 4 Feb 19, The US Navy has awarded a $15.2bn contract modification to Huntington Ingalls Industries’ (HII) Newport News Shipbuilding division to build two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.
The multi-ship contract comes after the US Navy expressed its intention to pursue a block-purchase of two Ford-class aircraft carriers in a bid to save money.
According to the Navy, the deal is expected to deliver savings of more than $4bn to the government.
Under the contract, HII will provide the detail design and construct the Gerald R Ford-class nuclear-powered aircraft carriers Enterprise (CVN 80) and CVN 81.
Newport News Shipbuilding president Jennifer Boykin said: “Today’s announcement is a triumphant step toward returning to a 12-ship aircraft carrier fleet and building the 355-ship Navy our nation needs.
“Most importantly for us, it provides stability into the year 2032 for our workforce and for our supplier businesses across the US.”………https://www.naval-technology.com/news/us-navy-nuclear-powered-aircraft-carriers/
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ad53e9d3-58ca-4bae-bb07-066ea9255afa, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, 1 Feb 2019
A divided Commission at the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on January 24 approved the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events rulemaking (Final Rule). The NRC began the rulemaking in December 2016 as part of its efforts to evaluate and implement, if necessary, regulatory changes in response to the Fukushima Daichi event in March 2011. In somewhat of a surprise, the majority of Commissioners last week rejected large portions of the proposed rule submitted by the NRC staff over two years ago. The rationale for changing the Final Rule demonstrates a renewed emphasis on applying backfit analyses. Continue reading →
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, USA |
Leave a comment
Brant Ulsh, skeptic on radiation limits, to head EPA radiation panel, Japan Times, 2 Feb 19, WASHINGTON – The Environmental Protection Agency has appointed a scientist who argues for easing regulations on lower-level radiation exposures to lead the agency’s radiation advisory committee.
Acting EPA head Andrew Wheeler on Thursday announced the appointment of Brant Ulsh, a health physicist, as one of the EPA’s science advisers and the panel’s chairman. Ulsh has been a leading critic of the EPA’s decades-old position that exposure to any amount of ionizing radiation is a cancer risk.
In a paper he co-wrote last year, Ulsh and a colleague argued that the position was based on outdated scientific information and forced the “unnecessary burdens of costly clean-ups” on facilities working with radiation.
The EPA under President Donald Trump has targeted a range of environmental protections, in line with Trump’s arguments that overly strict environmental rules have hurt U.S. businesses. Environmental and public health advocates say the rollbacks threaten the health and safety of Americans.
Some environmental groups and scientists have criticized what they say is the administration’s openness to an outlier position on radiation risks.
“Once again the Trump administration is moving to the fringe for its scientific advice, choosing someone who could undercut foundational protections from radiation,” Bemnet Alemayehu, a staff scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council environmental advocacy group, said in a statement Friday. “We need sound science to dictate health protections, not dangerous theories.”
EPA spokesman John Konkus declined comment Friday, referring a reporter to a news release announcing the appointment.
Ulsh did not immediately respond to an email Friday asking for comment, including whether he intended to use the advisory position to encourage reconsideration of the EPA’s no-tolerance policy on lower doses of radiation exposure……… https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/02/02/world/science-health-world/brant-ulsh-skeptic-radiation-limits-head-epa-radiation-panel/#.XFdRStIzbGg
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, radiation, USA |
Leave a comment
150 Congressional Republicans Represent Fossil Fuel Companies Instead of Their Communities https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/01/30/150-congressional-republicans-climate-deniers-fossil-fuel-companies?utm_source=dsb%20newsletter ,
January 30, 2019 by ClimateDenierRoundup.Last week,
we mocked the fossil fuel industry’s use of an outlet it owns to brag about perverting democracy — but we didn’t actually call out the politicians in the industry’s pocket.
Lucky for us, the Center for American Progress Action Fund did just that this week. A new analysis from CAP tallies up the climate deniers in the 116th Congress. As it turns out, there are a lot: 150.
But that’s actually an improvement from last year, when there were 180. Of those 180, 47 are no longer serving: 22 were defeated in 2018, 16 retired, five resigned, and four went to other positions.
United States 150 out of 335 United States Members of Congress are climate deniers, collecting $68,359,582 in dirty money.
Top recipients
Mitch McConnell (R) – $3,018,793
Jim Inhofe (R) – $2,111,110
John Cornyn (R) – $3,444,515
Ted Cruz (R) – $3,372,000
Kevin Brady (R) – $1,753,762
The number of climate deniers receiving fossil fuel funding elected to the 116th Congress. Credit: Center for American Progress Action Fund
This may explain why the industry was so keen last week to assert the influence their money has. As it turns out, taking the cash may actually be a bad move for a candidate, since fossil-fuel funded candidates lost 30 seats in the 2018 elections (not factoring in the myriad of other factors at play, of course).
And make no mistake — it is the fossil fuel industry that demands denial, not average Americans. CAP Action Fund cites polling that shows a majority of Americans, including Republicans, know that climate change is real, that it is making weather more extreme, and that we should take action to reduce fossil fuel use.
Exact numbers obviously depend on the poll, but by and large it’s safe to say that a majority of all Americans, including some 55 percent to 66 percent of Republicans, support various types of climate action, including the policies in the Green New Deal.
What drives politicians to take positions opposed by the majority of people who vote for them? Well, money, of course. That’s why the report comes with a nifty interactive that shows you how many of each state’s members of Congress are in denial, as well as how much money they’ve received directly from the fossil fuel industry.
Mitch McConnell and Jim Inhofe top the list at $3 million and $2 million in dirty money over their careers, while the lifetime average among the 150 deniers is a scant $455,731 — which certainly sounds low. But that doesn’t include money spent on outside PACs and support.
The Kochs, for example, planned to spend $400 million on the 2018 election. That doesn’t include the additional money the Kochs spend bankrolling fake news operations like the Daily Caller. And even that’s hardly the only fossil fuel propaganda outlet! For example, there’s the Western Wire, where two of their writers, who also work as public relations strategists representing Exxon, recently posed as reporters to try and get information about one of the Exxon cases.
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
climate change, politics, USA |
Leave a comment
Nuclear waste burial fund grows to $43 billion, but DOE has not buried an ounce of spent fuel https://www.sgvtribune.com/2019/02/01/billions-pile-up-in-nuclear-waste-burial-fund-but-no-permanent-storage-solution-on-the-horizon/
Radioactive waste still stuck at San Onofre and other reactors across the nation By TERI SFORZA | tsforza@scng.com | Orange County Register, February 1, 2019 A U.S. Department of Energy fund to pay for the eventual disposal of nuclear waste has been earning $1.5 billion in interest each year — totaling a whopping $43.4 billion in 2018 — even as millions of pounds of radioactive waste pile up all over America in want of a permanent home.
The DOE piggy bank, dubbed the Nuclear Waste Fund, is invested in securities and earmarked for permanent disposal of spent fuel generated by commercial reactors such as San Onofre and Diablo Canyon. The fund’s most recent audit shows its value actually is down from 2016’s $46 billion.
That much money can buy a lot of things — except, apparently, permanent disposal of the nation’s nuclear waste.
For half a century, the fate of spent nuclear fuel has been marked by paralysis as officials squabble over what to do: build a deep geological repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, approve temporary private storage in New Mexico and Texas, or leave it at the 75 reactor sites where it was created.
The fight means mounting liabilities for taxpayers. The U.S. Government Accountability Office says delays in taking custody of commercial spent nuclear costs the federal government another $500 million every year.
The Nuclear Waste Fund was created in the last century, when nuclear power was viewed as the nation’s future. To encourage its development, the federal government passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, promising to accept and dispose of commercial nuclear fuel and high-level waste by Jan. 31, 1998.
In return, the utilities that owned the nuke plants would make quarterly payments into the disposal fund.
The utilities held up their end of the bargain — pumping about $750 million a year into the fund — but the DOE did not. And nearly 40 years on, it has not accepted an ounce of commercial nuclear waste for permanent disposal.
So the utilities operating nuclear plants found themselves stuck with this waste, and sued the DOE for breach of contract. Along the way, a federal judge said the DOE cannot charge for a service it not only isn’t providing, but won’t provide for many decades — and, in 2014, utilities all across America finally stopped paying into the Nuclear Waste Fund.
Their ratepayers probably didn’t much notice. The fee for consumers was tiny (about one-tenth of 1 cent for each nuclear-generated kilowatt hour), translating to some 20 cents a month on the average electric bill. But it added up.
Even after spending about $11 billion on the possibly dubious Yucca Mountain project, and even after fee collection ceased, the Nuclear Waste Fund continues to earn that $1.5 billion a year in interest.
And the government’s — and, thus, taxpayers’ — liabilities grow.
Costly delay
The DOE has paid out $6.9 billion to utilities for sticking them with the waste through 2017 — money that has been used to construct temporary storage on plant sites, such as the “concrete bunker” that has been so controversial at the shuttered San Onofre plant.
The DOE estimates it will pay another $28 billion or so for the storage debacle before it’s all over. The nuclear industry believes DOE’s bill will be much higher — closer to $50 billion.
None of that money comes from the Nuclear Waste Fund. Rather, it will come from the pockets of taxpayers, whether or not they got power from nuclear energy.
Grinding into action?
Two private companies are seeking federal licenses to open temporary storage sites in Texas and New Mexico for America’s commercial nuclear waste. The annual interest earned by the Nuclear Waste Fund — $1.5 billion — could be used to pay for private interim storage without further congressional appropriation, according to the Congressional Research Service.
But fierce opponents in New Mexico vow to keep the nation’s nuclear waste out of their backyards.
Meanwhile, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued the final volumes of its Yucca MountainSafety Evaluation Report and concluded that a deep geologic repository there would comply with safety and environmental standards once it’s permanently sealed.
But “scientific confidence about the concept of deep geologic disposal has turned out to be difficult to apply to specific sites,” the Congressional Research Service said. “Every high-level waste site that has been proposed by DOE and its predecessor agencies has faced allegations or discovery of unacceptable flaws, such as water intrusion or earthquake vulnerability, that could release unacceptable levels of radioactivity into the environment.
“Much of the problem results from the inherent uncertainty involved in predicting waste site performance for the 1 million years that nuclear waste is to be isolated under current regulations.”
And a newly elected congressman representing the San Onofre area has formed a new task force to push the issues of waste disposal and safety onto the front burner. The new group will feature some of the fiercest critics of Southern California Edison’s San Onofre Community Engagement Panel, a volunteer group advising Edison on the plant’s tear-down.
“We cannot allow the status quo to continue indefinitely,” said U.S. Rep. Mike Levin, D-San Juan Capistrano.
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
USA, wastes |
Leave a comment
Russia withdraws from Cold War-era nuclear weapons treaty with US https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-02/russia-withdraws-from-cold-war-era-nuclear-weapons-treaty/10774536 Russia has suspended a Cold War-era nuclear weapons treaty, President Vladimir Putin said, after the United States accused Moscow of violations and said it would withdraw from the arms control pact.
Key points:
- Russia will start work on new missiles, including hypersonic ones
- US and Russia both allege the other has violated the INF treaty
- China urges dialogue amid fears of nuclear arms race
The Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty prevents the two superpowers from possessing, producing or test-flying ground-launched nuclear cruise missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres.
The United States announced it will withdraw from the INF treaty in six months unless Moscow ends what it says are violations of the pact, but Russia denied violating the treaty.
“The American partners have declared that they suspend their participation in the deal, we suspend it as well,” Mr Putin said during a televised meeting with foreign and defence ministers.
Mr Putin said Russia will start work on creating new missiles, including hypersonic ones, and told ministers not to initiate disarmament talks with Washington, accusing the United States of being slow to respond to such moves.
“We have repeatedly, during a number of years, and constantly raised a question about substantiative talks on the disarmament issue,” Mr Putin said.
“We see that in the past few years the partners have not supported our initiatives.”
The US alleges a new Russian cruise missile violates the important pact, signed by former leaders Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.
The missile, the Novator 9M729, is known as the SSC-8 by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).
Russia said the missile’s range put it outside the treaty, and accused the US of inventing a false pretext to exit a treaty it wants to leave anyway so it can develop new missiles.
Russia also rejected the demand to destroy the new missile.
During the meeting with Mr Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused the US of violating the INF and other arms deals, including the non-proliferation treaty.
Mr Putin said Russia would not deploy its weapons in Europe and other regions unless the US did so.
Fears of new arms race
The row over the INF treaty is yet another twist in Russia’s worsening relations with the United States and the West, with tensions over Russia’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine as well as allegations of it meddling with the presidential election in the US and being behind a nerve agent attack in Britain.
The treaty’s suspension has drawn a strong reaction from Europe and China.
European nations fear the treaty’s collapse could lead to a new arms race with possibly a new generation of US nuclear missiles stationed on the continent.
In a statement, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the bilateral treaty was important to maintain “global strategic balance and stability”.
“China is opposed to US withdrawal action and urges the United States and Russia to handle their differences properly through constructive dialogue,” the statement said, warning that unilateral withdrawal could trigger “negative consequences”.
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
China, politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
US Sen. Warren: Ban US first strike nuclear weapons option https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/US-Sen-Warren-Ban-US-first-strike-nuclear-13585408.php February 3, 2019 BOSTON (AP) — U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren wants to make sure the United States never uses nuclear weapons first.
The Massachusetts Democrat has introduced a bill with Democratic U.S. Rep. Adam Smith of Washington that would make it the official policy of the United States not to use nuclear weapons first.
The lawmakers say the United States currently retains the option to be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict, even in response to a non-nuclear attack.
They said banning the use of nuclear weapons for first-strike purposes would “reduce the chances of a nuclear miscalculation.”
Fellow Massachusetts Democratic U.S. Sen. Edward Markey and U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, have also sponsored a bill that would bar the president from launching a nuclear first strike without congressional approval.
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
Should legislators help save Ohio nuclear plants? NO: FirstEnergy bailout would be crony capitalism at its worst Columbus Dispatch, 4 Feb 19, Crony capitalism is never acceptable and should be always met with public outrage. But more-covert pay-to-play schemes that affect Ohio’s long-term economic health are particularly egregious. Take for instance the campaign-contributions scheme from FirstEnergy Solutions over the past year. While transactions to more than a dozen of Ohio policymakers may seem normal to the average voter, recent activity in Columbus reveals a much more calculated operation that seemly puts FirstEnergy’s nuclear agenda ahead of Ohio’s future.
In April 2018, FirstEnergy Solutions filed for bankruptcy in the wake of massive financial problems arising from the company’s competitive power-generation fleet. The company announced it would shut down its Ohio nuclear plants over a three-year period because continued operation wasn’t profitable. FirstEnergy had been unsuccessfully pursuing bailouts from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio since 2014 and seeking a nuclear subsidy in the legislature since 2016 without success.
So it scrambled desperately for a lifeline, hatching a plan to offer sizable campaign donations to candidates hoping to gather up political allies to support its demand for $300 million a year to keep its plants operational.
What did FirstEnergy cough up for its legislative lifeline? For starters, the company gave $172,000 in total to Ohio House candidates, many of whom had no legislative or energy-industry experience. It also donated $565,000 to the Republican Governors Association, an amount more than five times what the company gave to Governor Mike DeWine’s Democratic counterpart.
We can clearly see the pay, but what exactly was the play? Conveniently, on the first day of the new General Assembly a standing committee on power generation was established, setting the stage to justify passage of a nuclear bailout and help out FirstEnergy. Additionally, FirstEnergy recently announced a debt-restructuring agreement with its creditors. Not coincidentally, this surprise development came on the tails of securing state-lawmaker support to bail out FirstEnergy.
This situation is pay-to-play politicking at its worst, flying in the face of the new administration’s promises to be the most innovative administration in Ohio’s history. Part of an innovation agenda should include rejecting political favoritism toward uncompetitive and less technologically advanced nuclear power plants. Ohioans need to know that FirstEnergy’s attempt to influence a bailout for its failing nuclear plants isn’t just bad ethics. It’s also awful public policy.
Incidentally, natural gas is fueling jobs and consumer cost savings across America. This is especially true in Ohio, …………https://www.dispatch.com/opinion/20190203/column-should-legislators-help-save-ohio-nuclear-plants-no-firstenergy-bailout-would-be-crony-capitalism-at-its-worst
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics, USA |
Leave a comment
UN Nuclear Watchdog Warns Against Meddling Over Iran, Bloomberg By Jonathan Tirone, February 2, 2019,
………Late Wednesday, at a private reception for diplomats, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano lashed out at efforts to hamstring an organization that’s been at the forefront of nuclear security for decades, according to two foreign officials who were there. Without naming Israel and the U.S., the career Japanese diplomat made it clear those countries were the source of his ire, they said.
“The agency’s independence must not be undermined,” Amano said, according to the IAEA’s website. “If attempts are made to micro-manage or put pressure on the agency in nuclear verification, that is counterproductive and extremely harmful.”
An IAEA official said on Saturday that the U.S. wasn’t Amano’s intended target. He declined to specify which countries prompted the rebuke.
Three years into an agreement that was meant to be a hallmark of the Obama administration, in which Iran agreed to curb its nuclear activities in return for sanctions relief, IAEA inspectors say Tehran is in full compliance.
That hasn’t stopped the Trump administration from backing out of the agreement, piling on new penalties and trying to use the agency to turn the screws with help from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Iran Abides Nuclear Limits
Enriched uranium has remained below thresholds agreed under deal
President Donald Trump’s hardline stance on Iran has heightened tensions with the other signatories to the agreement: China, France, Germany, Russia and the U.K. It’s also sowed divisions between the White House and America’s spy agencies, with Trump castigating his own intelligence officials this week for being “passive and naive when it comes to the dangers of Iran.”
Netanyahu went to the U.S. Congress to lobby against the agreement before it was signed and has continued to criticize the deal since, arguing that it won’t prevent Iran from attaining nuclear weapons……..
fake newscast in Israel came as Iran’s deputy foreign minister was in Vienna for talks with the IAEA, which is trying to keep the accord from unraveling.
Iran’s leadership has said the country’s ready to re-start its enrichment program using more advanced technology if the agreement fails. The country is considering making the kind of nuclear fuel used in naval propulsion, implying it could enrich uranium closer to the levels needed for weapons.
Meanwhile, the European Union is moving to help countries evade the sanctions that the Trump administration imposed to stop countries from trading with Iran.
On Thursday, the 28-member bloc finalized a new financial mechanism for bypassing the U.S. restrictions. The special purpose vehicle, called the Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges, will be headquartered in Paris and staffed with German leadership.
The vehicle will have a positive “impact on trade and economic relations with Iran, but most importantly on the lives of Iranian people,” a draft of the joint communique seen by Bloomberg says.
The U.S. mission to the IAEA in Vienna said in an emailed response to questions that the watchdog “can continue to count on the full support of the United States” as it carries out its “important mandate in Iran.” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-01/fake-news-goes-nuclear-as-iaea-sees-u-s-israel-meddling-on-iran
February 4, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Iran, politics international, USA |
Leave a comment
