Congress moves to aid Georgia’s troubled nuclear project, Politically Georgia, By Tamar Hallerman, WASHINGTON — Senators on Wednesday began laying the groundwork to aid the country’s only remaining new nuclear project under construction, the Augusta-area Plant Vogtle, less than a day before Georgia utility regulators are scheduled to rule on its fate.
The leaders of the tax-writing Finance Committee unveiled legislation that would guarantee the project roughly $800 million in federal tax credits, money Vogtle’s operators have long been counting on for their balance sheets.
The language, which Georgia’s congressional delegation has been lobbying hard for this year, would end the 2021 sunset date for the previously-promised nuclear production tax credits. Vogtle’s operators would receive the credits only after the new units go fully into operation.
The extension was needed since the project is not scheduled to be complete until 2022.
It is still unclear when both chambers of Congress will consider the legislation. Nuclear industry lobbyists have been pushing for lawmakers to consider the language as part of a must-pass government spending agreement later this week, but time on Capitol Hill is in short supply before the holiday break. U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson suggested Tuesday that Congress could wait until January and then make the credits retroactive…..http://politics.blog.myajc.com/2017/12/20/congress-moves-to-aid-georgias-troubled-nuclear-project/
US preparing ‘bloody nose’ attack on North Korea, New York Post, By Yaron Steinbuch, December 21, 2017 The US is preparing plans to deliver a “bloody nose” attack against North Korea to knock out its nuclear weapons program.
The White House has “dramatically” ramped up its military plans amid fears that diplomacy won’t thwart North Korean despot Kim Jong Un from making good on his threats, sources told the UK’s Telegraph.
One option is destroying a launch site before the rogue regime uses it for a new missile test, while another is targeting weapons stockpiles, according to the news outlet.
The Trump administration hopes that pre-emptive action would show the trigger-happy dictator that the United States is serious about stopping his bellicose pursuits and persuading him to negotiate.
The Telegraph cited three anonymous sources, one inside the administration and two former officials familiar with the White House thinking.
North Korea nuclear weapons up for grabs if regime falls,THE United States has revealed what would happen if it entered North Korea and what its first objective would be after entering. Debra Killalea and AFP news.com.auDECEMBER 19, 2017 WASHINGTON has told China how it plans to secure North Korea’s nuclear arsenal in the event of a Kim regime collapse.
The plan, which aims to avoid a clash between the rival powers, was revealed by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson last week and would see America enter North Korea searching for weapons.
During a talk to the Atlantic Council last week, Mr Tillerson said the Trump administration has provided assurances to Beijing that if US troops landed in North Korea they would do their job, but would not stay.
The comment aimed to reassure China that the United States would not occupy North Korea if the Kim regime fell.
Beijing views North Korea as a buffer state preventing the 28,500 US troops in South Korea from camping on its doorstep.
Mr Tillerson said the US and China “have had conversations about in the event that something happened — it could happen internal to North Korea; it might be nothing that we from the outside initiate — that if that unleashed some kind of instability, the most important thing to us would be securing those nuclear weapons they’ve already developed and ensuring that they — that nothing falls into the hands of people we would not want to have it.”
He said the US was not seeking regime collapse or that the country planned to send forces north of the demilitarized zone. …….
Beijing had refused US calls to discuss the possible collapse of its neighbour for years, but according to Mr Tillerson top US and Chinese military officials have finally met to discuss the once-taboo topic.
New York-based Political analyst and Asian specialist Sean King told news.com.au he wasn’t sure what to make out of Mr Tillerson’s remarks.
US could broaden its use of nuclear weapons, Trump administration signals
Wider role for weapons to counter ‘non-nuclear strategic attacks’ unveiled as part of Trump’s new security strategy, which also failed to address climate change, Guardian, Julian Borger , 19 Dec 17, The Trump administration signaled that it could broaden the use of nuclear weapons as part of a new security strategy, unveiled by the president on Monday.
The wider role for nuclear weapons against “non-nuclear strategic attacks” was one of several ways in which Trump’s approach differed from his predecessor. The threat of climate change went unmentioned. The word “climate” was used only four times in the National Security Strategy (NSS), and three of those mentions referred to the business environment. Americans were instead urged to “embrace energy dominance”.
Announcing the NSS, Donald Trump depicted his election victory and his presidency as an unprecedented turning point in US history……..
Under the slogan of “peace through strength”, Trump emphasised the military buildup he had ordered, involving what the president described (wrongly) as a record in defence spending, $700bn for 2018.
“We recognise that weakness is the surest path to conflict, and unrivaled power is the most certain means of defence,” he said.
The NSS policy document criticises the downgrading of the role of nuclear weapons in the US security strategy by previous administrations since the cold war, and suggested it had not prevented nuclear-armed adversaries expanding their arsenals and delivery systems.
“While nuclear deterrence strategies cannot prevent all conflict, they are essential to prevent nuclear attack, non-nuclear strategic attacks, and large-scale conventional aggression,” the NSS said.
“Non-nuclear strategic attacks” represents a new category of threat that US nuclear weapons could be used to counter, and points towards likely changes in the Nuclear Posture Review expected in the next few weeks…….
Hans Kristensen, the director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists. “It’s a taste of what will come in the Nuclear Posture Review. What is interesting is the broadening of the nuclear weapons mission against non-nuclear attacks. The question is – are we creating more pathways to potential nuclear war?”
Trump Drops Climate Threats from National Security Strategy, Scientific American, The president claimed yesterday that the true danger to U.S. security is not climate change, but regulations By Jean Chemnick, ClimateWire on December 19, 2017President Trump argued yesterday that the true threat to national security is not climate change but regulations that get in the way of U.S. economic and energy “dominance.”
Trump introduced his first National Security Strategy, in which he broke from the Obama administration in not listing climate change as a chief threat. His remarks at times sounded like an economic address, frequently veering into discussion of tax and trade, industrial deregulation, and a celebration of the stock market. Trump insisted that wealth and national security go hand in hand.
“Economic vitality, growth and prosperity at home is absolutely necessary for American power and influence abroad,” he said in an address that heavily focused on global competition over cooperation……
It was a sentiment that permeated the 56-page security strategy, and in particular the section titled “Embrace Energy Dominance,” which dealt with energy and climate issues…….
FAA names seven nuclear research labs as no-drone zones Drones are now prohibited from flying within 400 feet of the facilities.Engadget Mariella Moon, @mariella_moon 20 Dec 17The FAA has granted DOE’s request to make seven of its facilities no-drone zones — and they’re all nuclear research laboratories. Starting on December 29th, you can no longer fly your UAVs within 400 feet of Hanford Site in Franklin County Washington, Pantex Site in Panhandle Texas, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, Idaho National Laboratory, Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken South Carolina, Y-12 National Security Site in Oak Ridge Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Some of them are no longer operational — the Hanford site where plutonium was produced for the nuclear bomb detonated over Nagasaki, for instance, is now mostly decommissioned — but some are still active……https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/19/faa-nuclear-research-labs-no-drone-zone/
The legacy of the Radium Girls lives on through the ripples that their deaths created in labor law and our scientific understanding of the effects of radioactivity.
“Almost everything we know about radiation inside the human body, we owe to them,”
Radium Girls: The dark times of luminous watches
Jacopo Prisco, CNN 20th December 2017 A century ago, glow-in-the-dark watches were an irresistible novelty. The dials, covered in a special luminous paint, shone all the time and didn’t require charging in sunlight. It looked like magic.
One of the first factories to produce these watches opened in New Jersey in 1916. It hired about 70 women, the first of thousands to be employed in many such factories in the United States. It was a well-paid, glamorous job.
For the delicate task of applying the paint to the tiny dials, the women were instructed to point the brushes with their lips. But the paint made the watches glow because it contained radium, a radioactive element discovered less than 20 years earlier, its properties not yet fully understood. The women were ingesting it with nearly every brushstroke.
They became known as the “Radium Girls.”.
A miracle cure
Radium was discovered by Nobel laureate Marie Curie and her husband Pierre in 1898. It was quickly put to use as a cancer treatment.
“Because it was successful, it somehow became an all-powerful health tonic, taken in the same way as we take vitamins today — people were fascinated with its power,” said Kate Moore, author of “The Radium Girls,” in a phone interview………
A slow killer
When ingested, radium is particularly dangerous: “Chemically, it behaves very much like calcium,” said Jorgensen. “Since the body uses calcium to make bone, ingested radium is mistaken for calcium and gets incorporated into bone. So the major health risk of ingesting radium is radiation-induced bone necrosis and bone cancers. How soon they develop depends upon the dose, but at the very high doses that the Radium Girls were exposed to, just a few years.”
The luminous paint, which worked by converting the radiation into light through a fluorescent chemical, was one of the most successful radium-based products. By putting the brushes in their mouths, the Radium Girls were especially at risk — so why did they do it? “Because it was the easiest way to get a fine point on the brush, to paint on numbers as small as a single millimeter in width,” said Moore.
But the girls didn’t embrace this technique blindly. “The first thing they asked was (whether) the paint was harmful, but the managers said it was safe, which was the obvious answer for a manager of a company whose very existence depended on radium paint.”
Not all that glitters
When the luminous watches grew fashionable in the early 1920s, the world was already becoming aware of the risks of radioactivity. But radiation poisoning isn’t immediate, so years went by before any of the workers developed symptoms…….
Radium jaw
In the early 1920s, some of the Radium Girls started developing symptoms like fatigue and toothaches. The first death occurred in 1922, when 22-year-old Mollie Maggia died after reportedly enduring a year of pain. Although her death certificate erroneously stated that she died of syphilis, she was actually suffering from a condition called “radium jaw.” Her entire lower jawbone had become so brittle that her doctor removed it by simply lifting it out. “The radium was destroying the bone and literally drilling holes in the women’s jaws while they were still alive,” said Moore.
Yet it would take another two years before the company that owned the factory, the United States Radium Corporation, took any action at all, through an independent investigation commissioned mostly to investigate the declining business rather than the health of the workers.
In 1925 Grace Fryer, one of the workers from the original New Jersey plant, decided to sue, but she would spend two years searching for a lawyer willing to help her. She finally filed her case in 1927 along with four fellow workers, and made front-page news around the world.
The case, settled in the women’s favor in 1928, became a milestone of occupational hazard law. By this time, the dangers of radium were in full view, the lip-pointing technique was discontinued and the workers were being given protective gear. More women sued, and the radium companies appealed several times, but in 1939 the Supreme Court rejected the last appeal.
The survivors received compensation, and death certificates would start reporting the correct cause of death. The year before, the Food and Drug Administration banned the deceptive packaging of radium-based products. Radium paint itself was eventually phased out and has not been used in watches since 1968.
It’s hard to calculate how many women suffered health problems due to the ingestion of radium, but the certainly number in the thousands, according to Moore. Some of the effects would only be felt much later in life through various forms of cancer. With a half-life of 1,600 years, once the radium was inside the women’s bodies, it was there for good.
The legacy of the Radium Girls lives on through the ripples that their deaths created in labor law and our scientific understanding of the effects of radioactivity. “In the 1950s, during the Cold War, many agreed voluntarily to be studied by scientists, even with intrusive examinations because they had been exposed for prolonged periods of time,” said Moore.
The latest joint training operation practised infiltrating North Korea and removing nuclear weapons in the event of war.
According to South Korea news agency Yonhap the “Warrior Strike” exercise held at Camp Stanley involved hundreds of troops from both sides and ran from Tuesday to Friday.
Camp Stanley is an army camp located north of Seoul and has around 5000 soldiers.
The display comes as North Korea’s neighbours China and Russia also carried out an antimissile drill in Beijing last week. The joint five-day drill, which finished on Saturday, included servicemen from both militaries and was headed by top brass in the Russian and Chinese air force, Newsweek reported.
The latest joint exercise between Washington and Seoul follow joint aerial drills Vigilant Ace in South Korea earlier this month.
The five-day drill was meant to improve the allies’ wartime capabilities and preparedness, according to South Korea’s defence ministry said.
The Vigilant Ace exercises, which lasted five days, involved more than 230 warplanes and 12,000 soldiers from both sides.
United States troops also used the hi-tech F-35 Lightning IIs and F-22 Raptors.
South Korea is a key US ally in the region and relies on US military assistance for security against the North.
Troops from the two countries routinely train together, each time prompting outbursts from Pyongyang.
Meanwhile Russia warned against fresh preconditions for any potential US and North Korea talks. Deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov on Saturday warned of a risk of escalation after Washington toughened its stance on North Korea nuclear talks and US President Donald Trump accused Moscow of failing to help.
“It’s sad that this powerful element of demands for further pressure on Pyongyang has once again appeared in the American position,” he told RIA Novosti news agency.
“It’s high time to stop this race of threats, pressure, blackmail and presentation of preconditions and shift to a real search for a political solution.”
Mr Ryabkov said that both Pyongyang and Washington are now putting forward preconditions for talks and there is a “risk of uncontrolled escalation”.
His comments came one day after US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson backed away from an earlier offer of unconditional talks to end the stand-off with Pyongyang following White House pressure.
The fate of America’s only nuclear plant under construction will be decided Thursday, Washington Examiner, by Josh Siegel | Dec 18, 2017,The Georgia Public Service Commission on Thursday is set to decide the fate of Plant Vogtle, the only nuclear reactor under construction in the U.S., which is years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.
At Thursday’s hearing, a commission made of five elected officials, all Republicans, will vote on whether to permit Georgia Power’s new plan for the project, which includes an updated cost projection and construction timeline, or to cancel it.
Georgia Power is estimating $12.2 billion in costs for its 45.7 percent share of the project, and for the reactors to be producing electricity by 2021 or 2022.
This cost estimate is nearly double the company’s original projection, and the timeline is five years behind schedule. The cost of the project for Georgia Power and its co-owners exceeds $20 billion.
The commission’s decision will come days after the embattled nuclear industry learned that House and Senate Republicans as part of a tax reform package would not grant the extension of a key tax credit for new nuclear production that could have benefited the Southern Co. plant…….
The public power companies building the plant have asked the Public Service Commission to allow Georgia Power to recoup Vogtle’s new costs from customers. But commission staff filed a document this month arguing that customers would incur too high of a cost to justify the economics of the project.
“Assuming the project is completed, ratepayers would incur significantly higher revenue requirements and a reduced economic benefit while the company’s profits would increase,” wrote PSC staff consultants Phil Hayet and Lane Kollen, and Tom Newsome, the PSC staff’s utilities finance director.
Kurt Ebersbach, a senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center in Atlanta, who is advocating the commission oppose the plan, said the company’s expectations are unfair to ratepayers.
AP, News Corp Australia Network AMERICA’S top diplomat stepped back from his offer of unconditional talks with North Korea, telling world powers the nuclear-armed nation must earn the right to negotiate with the United States.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s declaration before the UN Security Council marked a stunning reversal after he proposed discussions with Pyongyang without preconditions earlier this week. That overture was almost immediately rebutted by White House officials.
Still, Mr Tillerson had planned to reiterate his call at a special UN ministerial meeting on North Korea at the council.
His prepared remarks suggested only that North Korea would have to undertake a sustained halt in its threatening behaviour before talks could begin. But Mr Tillerson changed the script. “North Korea must earn its way back to the table,” Mr Tillerson told the foreign ministers.
“The pressure campaign must and will continue until denuclearisation is achieved. We will in the meantime keep our channels of communication open.”
The debate over offering North Korea unconditional talks reflects the differences within the Trump administration as it runs out of time to prevent North Korea from perfecting a nuclear-tipped missile that can strike the US mainland. President Donald Trump has vowed to prevent such capability, with military action if necessary.
So far, US-led sanctions on North Korea and diplomatic isolation haven’t compelled Kim Jong Un’s government to stop its nuclear and missile tests, or to seek negotiations.
Asked overnight if he supported unconditional talks, Mr Trump did not answer directly. “Well, we’re going to see what happens with North Korea. We have a lot of support. There are a lot of nations that agree with us — almost everybody,” Mr Trump told reporters. He credited China — which accounts for about 90 per cent of North Korea’s external trade — with helping on pressuring North Korea, while Russia was not.
“We’d like to have Russia’s help — very important,” said Mr Trump. He raised it in a Thursday phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
At the UN Mr Tillerson called on China and Russia to go beyond UN-mandated economic sanctions. He said North Korean labourers were toiling in “slave-like conditions” in Russia for wages used to fund nuclear weapons, while China was still allowing crude oil to flow into North Korean refineries.
North Korea has conducted more than 20 ballistic missile tests during 2017 and its most powerful nuclear explosion to date. Its more recent missile test in late November fired a projectile that experts say could carry a nuclear warhead to the US Eastern Seaboard.
U.S. To Boost Saudi Nuclear Power Development. Lobe Log., DECEMBER 14, 2017, THOMAS LIPPMAN Almost a decade has passed since President George W. Bush promised that the United States would help Saudi Arabia develop commercial nuclear energy plants. When he visited Riyadh in May 2008, he pledged to sign a “memorandum of understanding,” or MOU, committing the United States to “assist the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to develop civilian nuclear power for use in medicine, industry and power generation” and “establish a comprehensive framework for cooperation in the development of environmentally sustainable, safe, and secure nuclear energy.”
In return, Saudi Arabia, a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, would also join the worldwide Proliferation Security Initiative, a U.S.-sponsored program to confront the threat of nuclear proliferation.
The text of that MOU has never been made public, and nothing much happened as a result of it until last week. Then, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, after meeting senior officials in the kingdom, urged the Saudis to choose a U.S.-based vendor, Westinghouse Electric Co., to participate in the nuclear energy program to which the Saudis have long been committed.
The Energy Department’s official statement about Perry’s talks with Khalid Al-Falih, Saudi Minister of Energy, Industry, and Mineral Resources, did not use the word “nuclear,” but numerous reports from the region said the Saudis heard Perry’s arguments for Westinghouse and were receptive to them.
“We heard that message that … ‘we want the United States to be our partner in this’,” Perry told the Reuters news agency. Westinghouse spokeswoman Sarah Casella said in a statement to Bloomberg News that “Westinghouse is pleased that Saudi Arabia has decided to pursue nuclear energy. We are fully participating in their request for information and are pleased to provide the AP1000 plant, the industry’s most advanced technology.” The Energy Department did not respond to several requests to go beyond its original statement or to confirm Perry’s reported remarks, but neither has it denied them.
There was a time when the words “nuclear” and “Saudi Arabia” in the same sentence would set off alarms all over Washington, because any such development in Saudi Arabia is bound to raise fears that the Saudis would use their program to develop nuclear weapons to counter what they fear is happening in Iran……….
Saudi Arabia has discussed nuclear development with China, Russia, and France, among other potential suppliers.
Under U.S. law, Westinghouse or any other U.S.-based vendor can sell material and technology to Saudi Arabia only after the two countries negotiate a nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a 123 Agreement for the section of the law setting the requirement. The U.S.-Abu Dhabi agreement is known in the industry as the “gold standard,” because the government of the United Arab Emirates agreed to forgo both ends of the nuclear fuel cycle–it will neither enrich its own uranium nor reprocess its spent fuel to extract the plutonium.
The Saudis have made clear that they do not want to accept the same restrictions because their country has extensive uranium resources, which they want to process domestically. In articles in the trade press in 2010, an executive of a Finnish firm that was consulting with the Saudis on their program said that it could eventually include enrichment of uranium.
That was a non-starter while Barack Obama was president, but reports of Perry’s commitment to expedite an agreement have ignited speculation that the United States is preparing to soften its terms to accommodate the Saudis on this point, especially because of the close ties that have developed between the Trump administration and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto ruler…….
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said in a statement that “The Trump administration’s willingness bend key rules and standards designed to restrict the spread of sensitive nuclear technologies that can be used to make nuclear weapons to in order to help U.S. companies profit from nuclear commerce with Saudi Arabia is disturbing and counterproductive.” He said Congress, “which will have to review any such agreement, should insist on the highest possible nonproliferation standards for nuclear commerce, especially in a troubled and unstable region.”……..https://lobelog.com/u-s-to-boost-saudi-nuclear-power-development/
https://thebulletin.org/cyber-security-nuclear-facilities-us-russian-joint-support-needed11354 15 DECEMBER 2017, Anna Wagner.In April 2016, operators at the Gundremmingen nuclear power plant in Germany discovered two computer viruses, W32.Ramnit and Conficker. The viruses had attacked office computers, removable drives, and visualization software used to move nuclear fuel rods. Fortunately, all critical systems at the plant were isolated from the Internet, and the viruses only caused “some disruption,” according to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director Yukiya Amano. He said, however, that the issue of cyber attacks on nuclear facilities “should be taken very seriously.”
The 2016 incident is not an isolated case. The nuclear industry encounters cyber threats on a daily basis, and it is only a matter of time until control systems are compromised.
Cyber security is obviously a controversial topic in US-Russian relations. The political climate, including Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013 and Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, has made the cyber domain a no-go zone for discussion. Cooperative efforts and confidence-building measures that were discussed in 2013 are long forgotten. Nevertheless, both states face an ongoing need to address this emerging threat and to work against third parties—such as terrorist groups—before a large-scale incident occurs. A scientific partnership focused on the civilian nuclear industry is a potential way to restart a cyber security dialogue in the future.
The United States and Russia have worked extensively, both bilaterally and multilaterally, on the enhancement of nuclear security domestically and globally. It has always been one of a few topics on which both states could find common ground. Assisting other countries, especially nuclear newcomers, by building capacity in the nuclear cyber security field can be the first step toward bilateral talks on this issue.
Cyber security at nuclear facilities. Cyber attacks are never entirely virtual, because they can have direct impacts on physical and human infrastructure. A malicious intrusion into control systems at a nuclear power plant, for instance, could cause a radiological accident or an intentional release of radioactive material. In a worst-case scenario, interference with the command and control of nuclear weapons could lead to unprecedented consequences, such as an unauthorized missile launch.
Civilian nuclear facilities require thousands of digital systems to support their operation. Software patches and updates are even more challenging than routine maintenance, and tech support usually comes from a single vendor. Contrary to popular belief, a computer system that is isolated from unsecured networks (or “air-gapped”) is not immune to cyber attacks, which can come from a compromised supply chain or from insiders. The Stuxnet computer worm, for example, destroyed about 1,000 Iranian centrifuges between 2009 and 2010, despite the fact that critical systems were air-gapped. The worm spread to these systems from infected USB thumb drives.
A number of states lack stringent requirements or national policies to protect nuclear facilities from cyber attacks. This is a dangerous situation, considering the growing number of incidents: for instance, the SQL Slammer worm that infected the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant in Ohio in 2003, the 2014 attack at the Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power plant that resulted in the leak of 10,000 workers’ personal details, and the 2015 intrusion into Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems of the Ukrainian power grid that caused outages for several hours. These cases not only show that security practices are in need of further improvements, but also reinforce a negative image of the nuclear industry.
Building a cyber framework by supporting other states. As leading powers in the nuclear domain, the United States and Russia play a special role in preventing an act of nuclear terrorism. Their long history of relations in this field has contributed to protecting and securing nuclear material around the world. Examples include a number of agreements on nuclear weapons control, lab-to-lab cooperation, the Megatons to Megawatts program, the Warhead Safety and Security Exchange agreement, and the Plutonium Production Reactor Agreement. The nuclear partnership continued to evolve until the recent deadlock over issues ranging from Ukraine to Syria.
Because of the renewed tensions, many agreements are collapsing or being revoked. Abandoning bilateral relations in the nuclear field sends worrying signals to other states. Fortunately, the United States and Russia still agree on curtailing Kim Jong-un’s nuclear ambitions, and there is still a glimpse of hope that the Iran nuclear deal will not be dismantled.
Building on previous nuclear cooperation, the US and Russia can enhance cyber nuclear security in other states where possible. By doing so, they can improve international security and facilitate the use of clean energy. Examples of potential activities and projects include:
Establishing a set of minimum standards or recommendations to help assess cyber personnel qualifications at newly built plants. Russia, for example, provides a national educational program for nuclear cyber security, while the United States has various training and certification programs for cyber security specialists working in the critical infrastructure sector. Protecting computer systems at a nuclear facility is a complicated task, and a country with no experience in the field can lack trained human capital.
Joint research on new developments in the field of computer security. For example, blockchain technology, originally developed to secure transactions made with the Bitcoin currency, is being introduced into the energy sector. Guardtime, a cyber security firm, is currently providing blockchain solutions to protect nuclear power plants in Great Britain and recently became one of the contractors chosento protect the energy sector in the United States.
Creating a communication link between Russian and US Computer Emergency Response Teams. This can provide coordination during large-scale incidents.
Technical exercises during scientific workshops. Such activities, led by the United States and Russia, can complement IAEA training and enhance the agency’s manuals. For instance, workshops can target topics such as patch management, detection of supply chain vulnerabilities, and the development of “human firewalls” to reduce the risk of human error. Working together on educational and training projects can help address pressing nuclear security challenges around the world and facilitate collaboration between Russian and US scientists.
A small step forward. The current political environment that surrounds cyber issues leaves slim prospects for a US-Russian dialogue. New developments in offensive cyber capabilities exacerbate the situation. Cyber weapons are perfect tools for an aggressor: They can damage critical infrastructure remotely and untraceably, with no casualties for the aggressor, at any given time. Bearing in mind the potential for a nuclear disaster triggered by a cyber attack, it would be beneficial for the United States and Russia to establish some sort of connection through support of other countries.
It is easy to overlook small cases, such as the malicious software discovered at the Gundremmingen plant last year, but they are evidence of the greater dangers that cyber attacks pose to nuclear facilities. A future incident could turn out to be a large-scale event, perhaps even one with irreversible consequences.
The United States and Russia have the best techniques for addressing these unique challenges. A cooperative exchange of expertise with other nations would be a small step toward stronger international security and a better-trained workforce in nuclear energy. Cyber defense is evolving, but so is the offense. The risks of nuclear terrorism are real. That is why the international community needs stronger policies to prevent terrorist groups from using cyber weapons.
Critics Of Plant Vogtle Say Georgia Doesn’t Need New Nuclear, WABE, MOLLY SAMUEL • Next week, Georgia regulators will decide on the future of the country’s only nuclear power construction project.
One big issue is how much completing the expansion at Plant Vogtle will cost, after years of delays, rising prices and the bankruptcy of the lead contractor – and how much of that cost Georgia Power ratepayers are likely to bear.
But another question is, does Georgia even need two additional nuclear reactors?………
the demand for energy didn’t grow as much as Georgia Power projected when it began the Vogtle expansion. The Great Recession took a bite out of business growth and the ensuing expected energy need. Increasing use of energy-efficient appliances has made a difference, too, according to energy consultant Matt Cox, CEO of the Greenlink Group.
“Georgia’s GDP has been growing pretty healthily for the past several years while our electricity consumption has not been doing the same,” Cox said.
According to Cox’s calculations, Georgia Power could get by without the Vogtle expansion. He said the company could boost energy efficiency, add more renewables and buy power from other companies.
Cox testified this week at the Georgia Public Service Commission’s hearings on Plant Vogtle on behalf of critics of the project…….
Georgia is the only state in the nation with active nuclear power construction. Earlier this year, South Carolina utilities canceled a similar expansion project. That leaves Vogtle as the only project left of what was supposed to be a “nuclear renaissance.”
“No one in their right mind would start a new nuclear plant from scratch today. It’s twice as expensive as other ways of providing the same energy needs,” said Peter Bradford, a professor at Vermont Law School who served on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. He also testified on behalf of Vogtle critics at the hearings this week.
“Even half-finished, it’s not at all clear that it isn’t cheaper to cancel and meet the needs some other way,” he said.
New Jersey’s electric utilities would be required to purchase credits from nuclear power plants to help rescue the industry under new legislation. U.S. News, By MICHAEL CATALINI, Associated Press, 15 Dec 17 TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — New Jersey‘s electric utilities would be required to pay for credits from nuclear power plants under legislation lawmakers unveiled Friday as part of an effort the state’s largest energy company says is needed to rescue a major source of power in the state’s energy grid.
PSEG said that its two nuclear plants account for between 40 and 50 percent of electricity production in New Jersey, but are in danger of becoming financially unviable within two years. They said that would cost the state 1,600 jobs.
The financial rescue effort, which has been done in other states like New York and Illinoisas well, has garnered significant opposition from consumer groups and environmental organizations.
“This bill is a direct subsidy from the ratepayers hidden in gobbledygook,” said New Jersey Sierra Club director Jeff Tittel………….
A TV, radio and online ad campaign has also emerged surrounding the issue in New Jersey, with PSEG financing commercials touting the value of nuclear power and the AARP backing ads showing people concerned over higher utility bills.
Westinghouse is looking for new markets after bankruptcy
Past deals barred uranium enrichment for overseas projects
The Trump administration is encouraging Saudi Arabia to consider bids by Westinghouse Electric Co. and other U.S. companies to build nuclear reactors in that country and may allow the enrichment of uranium as part of that deal, according to three people familiar with the plans.
Energy Secretary Rick Perry visited Saudi Arabia this month where the projects were discussed, according to two people. The people familiar asked not to be identified discussing the confidential negotiations.
Previous U.S. agreements have prohibited the enrichment and reprocessing of uranium, and that had scuttled negotiations to use U.S. technology in Saudi nuclear projects during the Obama administration. The administration is mulling easing that requirement now as a way to help Westinghouse and other companies win Saudi Arabian contracts, two people said.
A meeting to hammer out details of the nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a 123 Agreement for the section of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act that requires it, will be held at the White House Wednesday, two administration officials said.
A successful U.S. bid would help deliver on President Donald Trump’s promise to revive and revitalize the domestic nuclear industry, helping American companies edge out Russian and Chinese competitors to build new fleets around the world. Saudi Arabia plans to construct 16 nuclear power reactors over the next 20 to 25 years at a cost of more than $80 billion, according to the World Nuclear Association.
Westinghouse, the nuclear technology pioneer that is part of Toshiba Corp., went bankrupt in March, after it hit delays with its AP1000 reactors at two U.S. plants. After it declared bankruptcy, Westinghouse — whose technology is used in more than half the world’s nuclear power plants — said it shifted its focus to expanding outside the U.S.
Winning contracts in Saudi Arabia could provide a new market that Westinghouse needs and provide at least a partial vindication for the investment in the AP1000 technology.
“Westinghouse is pleased that Saudi Arabia has decided to pursue nuclear energy,” Sarah Cassella, a spokeswoman, said in a emailed statement. “We are fully participating in their request for information and are pleased to provide the AP1000 plant, the industry’s most advanced technology.”
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said weakening the prohibition against enrichment and reprocessing, often referred to as “the gold standard,” is disturbing given what he said was Saudi Arabia’s “sub-par nuclear nonproliferation record.”
“We shouldn’t compromise our longstanding efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons in order to play favorites with certain companies or countries,” he said in an email, calling the idea “disturbing and counterproductive.”
nuclear-news 