Ratepayer ripoff: $19 billion nuclear plant for Virginia
Virginia group says new nuclear plant would be boondoggle, WP, By Alan Suderman | AP July 12 RICHMOND, Va. — If Dominion Virginia Power goes ahead with plans to build a $19 billion nuclear plant, it would be one of the biggest ratepayer rip-offs in the history of producing electricity, a consumer group said in comments filed Tuesday.
In the comments filed with state regulators, the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council argue that Dominion Virginia Power should stop spending money on a potential new plant because it will unfairly burden the company’s customers while enriching its investors.
“The rich get richer and the ratepayers get poorer,” said Mark Cooper, a senior fellow for economic analysis with the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School who was hired by the VCCC as an expert witness……..
The attorney general’s office estimates that the cost of building North Anna 3, which wouldn’t be completed until 2029, would raise residential rates by 25 percent.
The Virginia State Corporation Commission’s three commissioners would have to give approval for Dominion to build North Anna 3. If approved, the company would be guaranteed a profit on all reasonable and prudent construction costs.
Cooper said the potentially large and steady cash flow from building North Anna 3 is what entices Dominion to continue to pursue the project. But he said customers would unfairly have to pay at least $6 billion more than is necessary to comply with potential federal emission rules. That would rank the project as “one of the grossest examples of enrichment by a utility” in the “entire history of energy production,” Cooper said. ………https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-group-says-new-nuclear-plant-would-be-boondoggle/2016/07/12/67986070-485e-11e6-8dac-0c6e4accc5b1_story.html?postshare=491468349029908&tid=ss_tw
At film sreening of “Indian Point” New Yorkers express their nuclear anxieties
New Yorkers express fears of Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant at documentary screening, Crains, 11 July 16
A discussion with a nuclear operator and anti-nuclear protesters kicked off a two-week screening of Indian Point at Lincoln Center
The film offers a look inside the power plant, located 35 miles from midtown Manhattan on the Hudson River. In addition to speaking with several anti-nuclear advocates, director Ivy Meeropol gained unprecedented access inside the highly guarded plant for her 94- minute documentary.
On July 8, Meeropol and the film’s subjects, including Indian Point senior control room operator Brian Vangor, science journalist Roger Witherspoon, activist Marilyn Elie and former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Gregory Jaczko answered New Yorkers’ anti-plant questions after the first screening of the film at Lincoln Center’s 85-seat Howard Gilman Theater. The film will have five showings daily until July 21.
With more than 50 million people living in close proximity to the facility, the Indian Point Energy Center’s continued operation has stoked a great deal of controversy in the surrounding community, including a vocal anti-nuclear contingent concerned that the kind of disaster that happened at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant could happen in New York.
“How do we close Indian Point down as soon as possible?” one concerned citizen asked after the film screening.
“We don’t,” Witherspoon said. “The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) is the only one who has the authority to do that.”
Meeropol was quick to explain that her film was “not about whether nuclear power is good or bad.” Instead she sought to understand the impact of the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster on New York.
“The relevant questions to me [while making this film] were: Do we continue operating aging plants, especially one like Indian Point, which is situated in the middle of the largest population of any nuclear power plant in the nation, and if so, who or what organization will make sure these plants are run safely?” the director said…….http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20160711/ENTERTAINMENT/160719993
Republicans trying to roll back the Iran nuclear agreement
Iran Nuclear Deal Faces Triple Threat in Congress on Anniversary http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-12/iran-nuclear-deal-faces-triple-threat-in-congress-on-anniversary Kambiz Foroohar kambizf
-
Three measures seek to derail agreement signed a year ago
-
Iran says it still waiting for full benefits from the accord
Republican lawmakers are pushing three measures to roll back a nuclear agreement with Iran, while the Obama administration’s lead negotiator for the accord defended its implementation one year after the deal was struck.
Three bills dealing with the agreement, under which Iran agreed to curtail its nuclear program in return for an easing of economic sanctions, are scheduled for a vote this week in the House of Representatives, where Republicans have a majority. The measures would then go to the Senate, which may not take them up before September.
One of the proposals would impose new sanctions on Iran over any sponsorship of terrorism or human rights violations. Another would bar the purchase from the Islamic Republic of “heavy water,” a non-radioactive byproduct of both the manufacturing of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. The third would block Iran’s access to the U.S. financial system, including the use of the dollar.
All three measures have been met with promises of a veto from the White House. Without the Iranian accord, “we would have been forced to confront the reality of how to address Iran’s nuclear program in a world where diplomacy had failed,” Stephen Mull, the State Department’s lead coordinator for Iran nuclear implementation, said Tuesday at a Bipartisan Policy Center conference in Washington.
‘No Better Deal’
“There was no better deal to be had,” Mull said. “If Iran continues to meet its obligation and we walk away, we walk away alone. ”
While the U.S. remains concerned about Iran’s missile program, support for terrorism and human rights violations, within the confines of the nuclear agreement, “this deal is working,” Mull added.
After a decade of isolation under U.S.-led international sanctions, Iran is now seeing greater interest from businesses and banks in its $370 billion economy. However, Iranian officials complain that six months after the economic sanctions were eased, the country has yet to witness the financial benefits many predicted.
“Iran has a lot of homework to do,” Mull said.The three bills expected to be voted on this week in the House are in addition to a measure introduced to derail Boeing Co.’s agreement last month to provide 109 aircraft to Iran’s national airline, a deal valued at more than $17.6 billion. That would be the biggest business transaction between the two countries since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the U.S. hostage crisis.
In issuing its veto threat this week, the White House emphasized that the legislation would undermine the viability of the nuclear agreement.
The deal “is critical to ensuring that Iran’s nuclear program is and will remain exclusively peaceful, which is profoundly in the national security interest of the U.S. and the international community,” according to the statement.
Department of Energy not able to meet deadline on demolishing Hanford’s Plutonium Finishing Plant
DOE wants deadline extension for Hanford PFP demolition, TriCity Herald, 11 July 16
DOE could start demolition in fall
In talks with regulators on setting new deadline
BY ANNETTE CARY acary@tricityherald.com The Department of Energy will not be able to meet a legally binding deadline to have Hanford’s Plutonium Finishing Plant demolished by the end of September, but demolition might be ready to start then.
DOE is in talks with its regulators, the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Environmental Protection Agency, to set a new Tri-Party Agreement deadline, said DOE spokesman Mark Heeter during a media tour of the nuclear reservation Monday.
The new deadline that DOE has proposed has not been made public.
DOE had long said that its contractor, CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Co., would start tearing the main portion of the plant down in the spring of 2016 to meet the September deadline. Now it says demolition will start in the fall.
Preparing the plant for demolition has been some of the most hazardous work performed at any of DOE’s cleanup sites, say officials on the project. The plant is the largest, most complex plutonium facility in the DOE cleanup complex, and parts of it were heavily contaminated with plutonium, including a form of plutonium that easily disperses into the air……..
Demolition of the plant will be done carefully with the building pulled apart “piece by piece,” Heeter said. What remains of the building will be disposed of either at a central Hanford landfill for low-level radioactive waste or eventually shipped to a national repository in New Mexico, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, for waste contaminated with plutonium.
Old nuclear waste from Manhattan Project contaminating Niagara County
Radioactive hot spots pepper Niagara County, Investigative Post, July 05 By Dan Telvock The first hint of radioactive waste near John Grace’s home in Lewiston came from his son who carried a radiation meter for his government job. The meter would beep every time his son drove over the gravel driveway.
“He said ‘something’s not right here,’ ” said Grace, who lives at 738 Upper Mountain Road.
Turns out, he was right.
Gravel in the driveway was first tested some 40 years ago by the federal Department of Energy and found to have radiation levels some 70 times greater than what’s found in the local natural environment. The driveway was still hot when tested again three years ago by the Environmental Protection Agency.
“I just said ‘you’ve got to be kidding me,’” Grace said. “They said it was all around Niagara County.”
Indeed, this radioactive material is prevalent throughout the region.
Government documents show that state health and environmental officials have known for almost four decades that at least 60 properties throughout Niagara County and Grand Island, including the driveway near Grace’s home, are contaminated with radioactive material that resembles gravel. The radioactivity at these properties ranges from three to more than 70 times what people are naturally exposed to in the local environment, according to state and federal documents……..
Although the exposure to the radioactive waste does not pose an immediate health risk, the EPA and the National Academy of Sciences have concluded there is no safe level of radiation.
Furthermore, the group of attorneys and environmental engineers investigating some of the contaminated properties in Niagara County disagree with the state’s position that the waste does not pose a significant risk………
Radioactive hotspots identified
This story is based on a review of more than 8,000 pages of government documents requested under the Freedom of Information Law, property inspections with a radiation detector, and interviews with more than a dozen experts, attorneys, residents and government officials.
The federal Department of Energy and state Department of Health identified 100 hot-spots in Niagara County and Grand Island almost four decades ago. The federal government cleaned up about a third of the properties after determining the radioactive waste was linked to nuclear weapons development through the Manhattan Project. The remaining contaminated properties were left untouched at the time because the federal government believed the material was linked to commercial metallurgical companies, which have since closed……….http://www.investigativepost.org/2016/07/05/radioactive-hot-spots-pepper-niagara-county/
Beyond Nuclear calls for answers on safety probe into Palisades nuclear power
Beyond Nuclear Wants Answers in Latest Palisades Probe http://wkzo.com/news/articles/2016/jul/09/beyond-nuclear-wants-answers-in-latest-palisades-probe/ , July 09, 2016 by Gary Stevens TAKOMA PARK, MD (WHTC) – The most outspoken opponent of the Palisades nuclear power plant wants answers.
Following a report by WWMT-TV on Friday of an investigation over several security officers at the Covert facility being placed on administrative leave, the group Beyond Nuclear on Saturday sent a “backgrounder” to media outlets that provides “significant additional context, information and documentation” about “current and long-standing security and fire risks at Palisades.”
Lead spokesman Kevin Kamps added in a statement that, “Beyond Nuclear also plans to file a Freedom of Information Act request at the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission as soon as possible regarding this matter, in order to make the NRC investigations into ‘fire inspection anomalies’ … at Palisades accessible and transparent to the concerned public.”
An unnamed employee admitted to the television station concerns about security at the plant due to the absence of the guards. Officials of Entergy, the operator of the plant, told WWMT that they are looking into the matter but “denied any change of security levels in or around” the 45-year-old facility. “An investigation identified anomalies within the site’s fire tour records, and we have implemented strong interim actions to make sure we have appropriate staffing levels and that fire tours are conducted properly,” Entergy Senior Communications Specialist Val Gent told WWMT, who refused to give other specifics, citing the ongoing investigation.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission admits that a probe is ongoing and defended not notifing the media before the television station was alerted by an unnamed employee about the matter, saying that there was never an immediate concern about public safety. NRC inspectors at the plant “continue to monitor this issue,” agency spokeswoman Viktoria Mitlyng told WWMT, and she added that a public statement will be issued when the investigation is complete.
Beyond Nuclear has been the most outspoken in asking the NRC to decommission the Palisades plant due to its age and its operation.
Mayors For Peace call on next US President and Congress to reduce nuclear weapons spending
There Are 15,000 Nuclear Weapons Still Posing an Intolerable Threat to Humanity
These mayors are trying to change that. The Nation By Mayor Frank Cownie, 8 July 16 The members of Mayors for Peace, an international organization of cities dedicated to eliminating nuclear weapons, are keenly aware that these devices were designed to wipe cities off the map. As the mayor of Des Moines, I can expect that my city is an unlikely target, but the same cannot be said for many of my counterparts. Cities around the world are utterly unprepared to respond to a catastrophe of that scale. Prevention is the only cure. Yet the presidential candidates have said little about how they would address the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons.
Motivated by growing concern about rising international tensions and a disquieting presidential campaign, the United States Conference of Mayors (USCM), at its recent annual meeting in Indianapolis, unanimously adopted a strong resolution put forward by members of Mayors for Peace, warning that “the nuclear-armed countries are edging ever closer to direct military confrontation in conflict zones around the world,” and calling on the next president of the United States “to pursue new diplomatic initiatives to lower tensions with Russia and China and to dramatically reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear stockpiles.”
The USCM is the nonpartisan association of American cities with populations over 30,000, and resolutions adopted at its annual meetings become official policy. The USCM has annually adopted resolutions introduced by Mayors for Peace since 2006. This resolution was cosponsored by 22 of my counterparts, including New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser. (See below for full list of sponsors.)
Cautioning that “more than 15,000 nuclear weapons, most orders of magnitude more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs, 94% held by the United States and Russia, continue to pose an intolerable threat to cities and humanity,” and that “the largest NATO war games in decades, involving 14,000 U.S. troops, and activation of U.S. missile defenses in Eastern Europe are fueling growing tensions between nuclear-armed giants,” the USCM resolution “calls on the next President of the United States, in good faith, to participate in or initiate…multilateral negotiations for the elimination of nuclear weapons as required by the 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.”
The resolution commends President Obama for visiting Hiroshima and concluding negotiations with Iran, but notes that “the Obama Administration has laid the groundwork for the United States to spend one trillion dollars over the next three decades to maintain and modernize its nuclear bombs and warheads, production facilities, delivery systems, and command and control,” and that “federal funds are desperately needed in our communities to build affordable housing, create jobs with livable wages, improve public transit, and develop sustainable energy sources.”
The USCM resolution “calls on the next President and Congress of the United States to reduce nuclear weapons spending to the minimum necessary to assure the safety and security of the existing weapons as they await disablement and dismantlement, and to redirect those funds to address the urgent needs of cities and rebuild our nation’s crumbling infrastructure.”……….
The full text of the resolution can be read here. https://www.thenation.com/article/there-are-15000-nuclear-weapons-still-posing-an-intolerable-threat-to-humanity/
America’s major taxpayer liability – the Department of Energy
How the Department of Energy became a major taxpayer liability http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/05/how-the-department-of-energy-became-a-major-taxpayer-liability.html Mark Fahey | @marktfahey Wednesday, 6 Jul 2016 If you were to guess which government agency has had to pay out the most in court in recent years, the Department of Energy probably wouldn’t come to mind.
And according to the department itself, the bloodletting as far from over. The DOE has failed to make good on some of its most important contractual obligations for years, and its private partners have been collecting billions in damages.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 requires that the DOE dispose of nuclear waste being produced at civilian energy plants around the country, which in turn pay fees for a long-term storage facility. The department’s contracts with dozens of energy companies said it would start disposing of the waste in 1998.
The companies held up their end, feeding about $750 million into the Nuclear Waste Fund each year. But the department did not manage to set up any facility to receive the waste, forcing energy companies to store it themselves on-site.
All those partial breaches of contract haven’t come cheap. As of the end of 2015, the DOE has paid $5.3 billion for failing to fulfill its obligations, and even if it manages to start disposing of waste in the next 10 years, it could still be on the hook for nearly $24 billion in additional liability.
“Because the United States has no facility available to receive spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, it has been unable to begin disposal of SNF from utilities as required by the standard contract with utilities,” said a DOE spokesperson in an email. “Significant litigation claiming damages for partial breach of contract has ensued as a result of this delay.”
At the end of 2015, the DOE had settled 35 lawsuits and resolved 33 with judgments, with 19 cases pending, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A court ruling halted the collection of storage fees in 2014, but energy companies are still seeking to recoup the money they’re spending every year on waste storage. Even after settlements for back pay are reached, the department is usually required to reimburse those costs going forward.
The hang-up has been in finding a location for the centralized storage facility. For decades, Yucca Mountain in Nevada was the only location that could legally be considered, despite fierce opposition from state and local groups. The Obama administration eventually abandoned the site as “unworkable” in 2011.
At the recommendation of the administration’s Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC), the department is now pursuing a “consent-based” approach, meaning that the DOE will seek the approval of relevant communities before construction, rather than trying to force all of the country’s spent nuclear waste on a pre-decided site in Nevada.
“The administration concurs with the conclusion of the BRC that a fundamental flaw of the 1987 amendments to the NWPA was the imposition of a site for characterization,” wrote then-Energy Secretary Steven Chu in the department’s most recent guiding strategy document from January 2013. “In practical terms, this means encouraging communities to volunteer to be considered to host a nuclear waste management facility.”
The DOE plans to have a pilot interim storage facility by 2021, initially to accept waste from reactor sites that were shut down years ago. Limiting the government’s massive liabilities is a major focus of the department’s strategy, according to the document.
The question isn’t whether the DOE will continue to have to pay out an exorbitant amount of money, but just how exorbitant that sum will end up being. The department itself projects that its total liabilities based on previous payouts will ultimately come to $29 billion in 2015 dollars, but that’s assuming it manages to start accepting waste in the next decade.
Neither the Department of Energy nor the Department of Justice could provide a list of related judgments and settlements so far, and the DOE said an updated liability estimate will not be available until its fiscal 2016 financial report comes out later this year.
“The department is currently developing a consent-based siting process for storage and disposal of SNF [spent nuclear fuel] and HLW [high-level radioactive waste],” said the department spokesperson. “Since January, DOE has held a series of public meetings and received feedback on how best to develop this process.”
The energy industry does not seem optimistic about a quick solution. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, the department’s total liabilities could stretch to more than $50 billion. But that’s a more pessimistic figure that assumes a “total default” by the DOE.
The DOE’s own documentation for the Yucca Mountain project forecasts that if it failed completely and waste had to stay at the current sites indefinitely, it would cost between $75 billion and $82 billion in 2015 dollars over the first 100 years (including the cost of decommissioning Yucca).
Jay Silberg, a prominent energy industry attorney, said his estimate for total liability is closer to the $50 billion figure.
“I think that number is going to bear out, because I unfortunately don’t have much faith that the government will do what they promised to do in 1982,” said Silberg. “We all hope they can get their act together, but whether that will actually happen and whether it will be at large enough scale to remove the fuel piled up on these sites, I don’t have a lot of confidence in that.”
Toxic vapors affecting Hanford nuclear workers – effort being made to limit this problem
Hanford nuclear contractor makes offer to cut vapor exposure, Bellingham Herald, 8 July 16
The contractor that operates radioactive waste storage tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation has proposed that employees who move tank farm waste perform their shifts on nights and weekends to reduce exposure to chemical vapors, after dozens of employees said they were sickened from vapors associated with the tanks. BY NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS Associated Press SPOKANE, WASH.
The contractor that operates radioactive waste storage tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation has proposed that employees who move tank farm waste perform their shifts on nights and weekends to reduce exposure to chemical vapors, after dozens of employees said they were sickened from vapors associated with the tanks.
Washington River Protection Solutions this week asked unions to approve making evenings, nights and weekends the standard shifts for employees who transport the waste and work close to waste tanks. The request came a month after union leaders demanded that work that could release vapors be limited at the sprawling facility during the day when many more employees are present.
More than 8,000 people work at Hanford, but only about 700 have jobs involving waste transport and regular tasks at the waste tanks. Tank farm work involving the movement of nuclear waste is suspected in the release of the non-radioactive chemical vapors.
More than 50 Hanford workers in recent months have sought medical examinations for possible exposure to chemical vapors. Some reported smelling suspicious odors and some experienced respiratory problems. Nearly all were cleared to return to work……….
Hanford for decades made plutonium for nuclear weapons, work that generated a massive inventory of nuclear waste that is stored in 177 underground tanks. The site is now dedicated to cleaning up the waste, a process expected to last decades and cost billions of dollars. WRPS is a contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy, which owns the Hanford site near Richland, Washington.
The union coalition had also asked management to supply air respirators for all work performed within the Hanford zones that contain steel-lined waste tanks. Some of the tanks are protected by single steel walls while newer ones have double walls.
Workers must already wear respirators while near the single-wall tanks known to emit vapors………http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/article88411777.html#storylink=cpy
Generous subsidies proposed for Upstate New York nuclear plants
NY regulators propose generous Upstate nuclear subsidies By Tim Knauss | tknauss@syracuse.com SYRACUSE, N.Y. – State utility regulators today released a proposal to subsidize Upstate nuclear plants with annual payments totaling an estimated $482 million a year.
The proposal from the Public Service Commission staff seems likely to please nuclear plant operators, who say their facilities deserve subsidies for providing carbon-free power, and to infuriate anti-nuclear advocates who want more resources devoted to wind and solar.
The public has a brief window to comment — until July 18 – an indication that the PSC is likely to rule on the proposal at its Aug. 1 meeting.
Exelon Corp., which owns three of the four Upstate nuclear reactors, recently told the commission that the facilities might close unless subsidies were approved by September.
The proposal unveiled today recommends that the PSC sign 12-year agreements with nuclear operators, as Exelon had previously recommended.
The subsidies would be set administratively by the PSC. According to estimates provided in the proposal, the subsidies would start at $17.48 per megawatt-hour for the first two years and rise gradually to $29.15 per MWH in years 11 and 12.
At the expected combined output of 27.6 million MWH for the Upstate nukes, the total cost would be $482 million a year during the first two years, rising to $805 million per year for the final two years…….http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2016/07/ny_regulators_proposed_generous_upstate_nuclear_subsidies.html
America’s aggressive $1 Trillion Nuclear Weapons Plan
The Doomsday Forum”: Senior Military, Nuclear Weapons Officials Convene… America’s “$1 Trillion Nuclear Weapons Plan”. Take out Russia, Iran and North Korea? By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, July 08, 2016 On June 21, 250 top military brass, military planners, corporate military-industrial ”defense” contractors, top officials and scientists from the nuclear weapons laboratories as well as prominent academics gathered at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Albuquerque, New Mexico to discuss, debate and promote the Pentagon’s One Trillion Dollar Nuclear Weapons program.
Russia is threatening the Western World. The objective is to develop the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons (i.e. nuclear war as a means of self-defense).
The event organized by “The Strategic Deterrent Coalition” (a non profit organization) was funded by Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Orbital ATK, BAE Systems among other generous donors.
Among the main speakers (see program here) were Adm. Cecil Haney, Commander of the US Strategic Command (STRATCOM), Lt. Gen. Jack Weinstein, Dep. USAF Chief of Staff for Nuclear Integration, Gen. Robin Rand, Commander, Air Force Global Strike Command, Gen. (ret.) Frank Klotz, Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), as well senior officials from America’s top weapons labs including Sandia, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore. Representatives from the UK, Canada, Denmark and the Republic of Korea (ROK) were also in attendance……..
Propaganda: Sensitizing “Top Officials”
The SDC’s “educational endeavor” largely consists in building a consensus in favor of pre-emptive nuclear war (within the Armed Forces, the science labs, the nuclear industry, etc). It’s is a form of “internal propaganda” intended for senior decision makers (Top Officials) within the military as well as the weapons industry. The emphasis is “building peace” and “global security” through the “pre-emptive” deployment of nukes (Air, Land and Sea) against four designated “rogue” countries, which allegedly are threatening the Western World.
The debate was coupled with veiled threats pointing to the possible use of nuclear warheads on a first strike basis against Russia, North Korea and Iran:……
Hillary Clinton –whose election campaign is also supported by Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman et al favors the first strike use of nuclear weapons:
… “the nuclear option should not at all be taken off the table. That has been my position consistently.” (ABC News, December 15, 2015)
“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.” (ABC “Good Morning America.”, quoted by Reuters, April 22, 2008)
The World is at a dangerous crossroads. A new arms race has been launched. It’s planning horizon is thirty years. The money allocated by the US federal government to the development of America’s pre-emptive nuclear war arsenal is of the order of one trillion dollars, that is the preliminary estimate, an astronomical amount (which could be increased):…..
The nuclear weapons plan constitutes a multibillion dollar bonanza, ironically, for the military industrial contractors which generously financed the Symposium: ”…Air Force nuclear weapons replacements and upgrades are expected to cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Much of that money would go to the sponsors of this symposium.”
This important event –which consists in building a consensus in favor of a possible first strike pre-emptive US nuclear attack against Russia, China, Iran and North Korea– has barely been covered by the mainstream media….http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-doomsday-forum-senior-military-nuclear-weapons-officials-convene-americas-1-trillion-nuclear-weapons-plan/5534549
FPL has delayed construction plans of two new nuclear generators at Turkey Point
FPL’s plan to not charge customers $22 million in fees is approved, Miami Herald
FPL has delayed construction plans of two new nuclear generators at Turkey Point
The $22 million in fees is money FPL is permitted to collect for planning and construction of nuclear plants
Because of the construction delay, the utility doesn’t want to collect the fees in 2017
BY MARY ELLEN KLAS Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau TALLAHASSEE , 8 July 16
The Florida Public Service Commission on Wednesday unanimously approved a request from Florida Power & Light to take a one-year break from charging customers in advance for planning and construction of its proposed new nuclear power plant.
The decision is expected to save customers $22 million in nuclear cost recovery fees that regulators typically approve to allow the company FPL to charge for planning and construction of the company’s proposed nuclear units at its Turkey Point site on Biscayne Bay. Since 2008, FPL has charged customers $282 million in advance for the construction, under the advanced nuclear cost recovery fee it helped to push through the Legislature in 2006……..
The decision to stop charging customers follows the decision by FPL to delay nuclear construction. After eight years of planning, FPL announced in April it was postponing construction on units 6 and 7 of its nuclear fleet until at least 2020. It said, however, it would continue to pursue a federal license that would clear the way for construction. The company has yet to receive federal approval to construct the plant.
The delay means two next-generation reactors initially projected to go online as early as 2018 and 2020 likely would not fire up for perhaps another decade. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article88228052.html
Frivolous lawsuits aimed to attack climate scientists
Climate scientists are under attack from frivolous lawsuits, Skeptical Science Lauren Kurtz 7 July 2016 Today’s climate scientists have a lot more to worry about than peer review. Organizations with perverse financial incentives harass scientists with lawsuit after lawsuit, obstructing research and seeking to embarrass them with disclosures of private information.
On June 14th, an Arizona court ruled that thousands of emails from two prominent climatescientists must be turned over to the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E), a group that disputes the 97% expert consensus on human-caused climate change and argues against action to confront it. E&E and its attorneys are funded by Peabody Coal, Arch Coal, and Alpha Natural Resources, coal corporations with billions of dollars in revenue.
Formerly named the American Tradition Institute, E&E has been described as “filing nuisance suits to disrupt important academic research.”
E&E originally attacked Dr. Michael Mann, whose research shows a dramatic increase in recent temperatures in a graph popularly known as the “hockey stick.” In 2011, the group sued under Virginia open records laws to obtain six years of Dr. Mann’s emails from the University of Virginia—over 10,000 messages in total. The Virginia Supreme Court denied E&E’s claims and ruled that academic research correspondence should be protected because release would cause “harm to university-wide research efforts, damage to faculty recruitment and retention, undermining of faculty expectations of privacy and confidentiality, and impairment of free thought and expression.”
E&E did not relent. Despite losing in Virginia, the group brought another open records case in Arizona to demand the same six years of emails—this time from Dr. Mann’s coauthor, University of Arizona professor Dr. Malcolm Hughes. Additionally, E&E sued for thirteen years of emails from UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) leadauthor Dr. Jonathan Overpeck, also at the University of Arizona.
In court filings, E&E acknowledges it seeks emails that, in its words, “embarrass both Professors Hughes and Overpeck and the University.” These smear tactics serve no role in scientific discourse, but are an attempt to distract, disrupt, and intimidate legitimate researchers.
n an ongoing federal case, the conservative group Judicial Watch—which claims climatescience is a “fraud science”—has sued the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for thousands of climate scientists’ emails related to a 2015 climate change study published in Science. Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX), who accusedNOAA of having an “extreme climate change agenda,” unsuccessfully sought the same emails last year.
In addition to the Arizona case, E&E attorney Christopher Horner paired with another fossil fuel industry funded-group, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, to sue for the emails of climate communications professor Dr. Edward Maibach. While Dr. Maibach sought to intervene in the litigation, the judge ruled that he lacked jurisdiction. Thousands of pages of Dr. Maibach’s emails were released, and plaintiffs posted them to the internet with quotes pulled out of context and commentary calling him and other climateresearchers “frauds,” “snake oil salesman,” and worse.
Click here to read the rest http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-scientists-under-attack-frivolous-lawsuits.html
Delaware Riverkeeper Network’s legal challenge against New Jersey nuclear permits
Permit needed for 2 N.J. nuclear plants to operate challenged By Bill Gallo Jr. | For NJ.com , 8 July 16 One of the state’s leading environmental groups is calling for a new hearing on the state’s decision to grant a water-use permit which allows the continued operation of two nuclear reactors.
The Delaware Riverkeeper Network filed a legal challenge with the Department of Environmental Protection Friday.
A five-year permit granted by the DEP June 30 lets PSEG Nuclear to continue to draw billions of gallons of water from the Delaware River to cool its Salem 1 and Salem 2 reactors in Salem County.
The Delaware Riverkeeper Network and other environmental groups had opposed the permit sought by PSEG Nuclear for the reactors at its Artificial Island generating site in Lower Alloways Creek Township.
Officially known as the New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit, without it Salem 1 and 2 might have been forced to shut down.
“We are disappointed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s failure to recognize the ongoing hazards of permitting the continued use of outdated technology at Salem when there are other proven eco-friendly technologies available,” said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper.
When operating at full power, Salem 1 and 2 draw in about 3 billion gallons of water a day from the Delaware River, circulate it through the plants’ open-cycle cooling systems and return it to the river.
The amount of marine life killed through this process is unacceptable, environmental groups say……..
Friday’s filing was submitted to the DEP’s Office of Legal Affairs in Trenton.
Van Rossum said the goal is to get the DEP to require a closed-cycle cooling system or require PSEG Nuclear to use updated technology that would rival a closed-cycle system to protect fish and water quality.
Environmentalists claim that billions of fish are killed each year either through being caught on screens at plant water intakes or by being sucked through the plants’ cooling system…….. http://www.nj.com/salem/index.ssf/2016/07/environmental_group_challenges_dep_water-use_permi.html
Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant radioactively leaking into Lake Ontario
Nuclear Power Plant Found Leaking Into Lake Ontario, We Are Anonymous, July 7th, 2016 | by Alek Hidell “……The latest nuclear plant to have been discovered to have a leak is the Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant in Oswego, New York. The plant is run by energy corporation Entergy. A visible sheen was observed spreading out for miles from the site of the plant, making it undeniable that the leak wasn’t coming from elsewhere. It was discovered by a Coast Guard Auxiliary air crew. A section of Lake Ontario had to be cordoned off, preventing the leak from spreading further.
Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, made the following statement: “It appears about 20 to 30 gallons that leaked were then drained through the plant’s discharge drain system to the lake. The company has placed oil-absorbent pads on the turbine building roof and has also stopped all circulating water pumps to eliminate any further discharges.”
It is not much of a comfort to know that the government is contributing to the cleanup. With decades of research and knowledge about the dangers of nuclear power, the government continues to build them, with five new plants under construction as of 2015. I don’t believe any of us need to be reminded of the dangers of nuclear power after the recent Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant meltdown.
After the earthquake and subsequent tsunami, the reactors and their cooling system shut down. This resulted in nuclear materials being dumped into the Pacific ocean. Traces of the radiation are being found along the California coastline. And as you’d expect, the official inquiry found that despite the earthquake and tsunami, the meltdown was preventable and a result of a failure to maintain vital systems.
New York is no stranger to leaky nuclear plants; the Indian Point nuclear plant has been shut down at least 14 times since 1973. The most recent closing of the facility took place in 2015, when two fuel rods lost power. When you look at the incidents of closure at Indian Point, as well as every other nuclear plant, it becomes obvious that the fundamental problem is a crumbling infrastructure. Much like our roads and bridges, nuclear power plants, especially ones built before the 1980s, are falling apart…….http://anonhq.com/nuclear-power-plant-found-leaking-lake-ontario/
-
Archives
- October 2026 (120)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
