Nuclear power unaffordable in USA, Russia, India, France, even China, but NO SOLUTION TO WASTES
|
Germany: Nuclear phaseout or renaissance? https://www.dw.com/en/germany-looking-for-final-repository-for-nuclear-waste-global-outlook/a-56449115– 5 Feb 21,
Germany’s nuclear phaseout will be completed by the end of 2022. Safe final repositories for nuclear waste still haven’t been found, but some countries are still building new reactors. Does nuclear have a future? There are currently 413 nuclear reactors in operation in 32 countries around the globe. According to the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR), nuclear power accounted for about 10% of global electricity demand in 2019, the highest share being 17.5% in 1996. Most reactors were built between 1968 and 1986, mainly in Europe, the United States, the former Soviet Union and Japan. The global average age of these reactors is 31 years.
|
|
|
Canadian local community group opposes nuclear waste dump on farming land
South Bruce nuclear dump opponents address Minto council . Group: site near Teeswater would mean transporting waste through neighbouring communities, https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/south-bruce-nuclear-dump-opponents-address-minto-council/ , Wellington Advertiser, Patrick Raftis, February 4, 2021 MINTO – A group fighting a proposal to locate an underground dumpsite for radioactive nuclear waste in neighbouring South Bruce brought its concerns to council here on Feb. 2.
“Over 50 years ago the nuclear industry told the government to let them start producing nuclear power and they would have a solution for the waste within five years,” said Michelle Stein of Protect Our Waterways – No Nuclear Waste (POWNNW), during a council video-conference meeting.
“But they didn’t. Now they have a problem.”
Stein explained POWNNW was formed last February after an announcement that 1,300 acres of prime farmland had been purchased and optioned by the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO).
NWMO is proposing to locate a deep geologic repository (DGR) in South Bruce to contain high-level radioactive nuclear waste from all of Canada’s nuclear reactors.
Stein said the radioactive waste from Canada’s reactors is “safe where it is right now.
“But politically, it’s no longer acceptable and the government and the public are demanding a solution before they grant the nuclear industry permission to expand.”
Stein continued, “There’s a lot of money on the line. So the industry has set up [NWMO], which is funded and directed by the nuclear industry and the best idea they’ve come up with is to take this highly radioactive nuclear waste that is dangerous for over 100,000 years and bury it under prime farmland in the municipality of South Bruce.”
The proposed site near Teeswater was selected, said Stein, because “that’s where they found owners willing to sell them land” and “South Bruce was one of the municipalities who offered to learn more in exchange for money – lots of money.
“A lot of the money is spent on promoting the project, but there’s also donations to local organizations and community projects,” she noted.
Stein told council l the proposed site “has the Teeswater river running through it, wetlands at the edge of the Greenock Swamp, springtime floodplain and the town of Teeswater is close enough to see, with its elementary schools and the Teeswater Gay Lea plant.”
Stein called the proposed South Bruce repository “an experiment,” noting there are currently no operating DGRs for high level nuclear waste on the planet.
She noted an almost complete, but not yet licensed, DGR in Finland is presently the closest to coming on line.
According to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, said Stein, the Waste Isolation Plant Pilot (WIPP) in New Mexico is the only operational DGR in the world.
It accepts only low/intermediate nuclear waste, not high level, and is located in a desert, 35 kilometres from the nearest town and surrounded by a controlled safety zone encompassing more than 10,000 acres.
“The only thing we can really learn from this project is that accident happens and you can’t predict human error,” said Stein.
She added that in 2014 the WIPP “became radio actively contaminated by explosion of an underground drum of nuclear waste due to human error.”
Stein said the 2014 incident was “a mistake that took three years and $500 million to clean up.”
She pointed out establishing a DGR in South Bruce would massively increase the amount of nuclear waste being transported through a wide region.
“Currently they are around five loads of high level waste being moved per year, but an operating DGR would increase that to one or two shipments per day. These loads would be transported through surrounding communities,” she stated.
“And what does this mean for agriculture? Will consumers want to purchase products produced next to a nuclear dump? Will people want to buy freezer beef or chicken raised on or beside a nuclear dump?”
With the NWMO publicly stating it is looking for a “willing host,” Stein said POPNNW wants to see a clear benchmark that defines the term.
The group is lobbying for a standard that would require a two-thirds vote in favour of the proposed DGR, using a community referendum with a clear yes or no question, supervised by an independent third party.
Councillor Ron Elliott asked Stein what her group believes would be a better solution to burying the waste.
“You’re recommending we can’t get rid of the nuclear waste underground. What do you recommend we do with it? Because it’s there, we’ve got nuclear waste to get rid of,” said Elliott.
Stein replied, “At this time we’re recommending they go with rolling stewardship, which is keeping it above ground in a monitored state until they come up with a real solution.”
“So wouldn’t that be more dangerous?” asked Elliott
“Building a DGR doesn’t remove it from above ground. It still needs to be above ground (in containment pools) for 30 years before it can even be moved,” said Stein.
“What is a safe recommendation?” Elliott persisted.
“At the end of the day the nuclear industry has had over 50 years to come up with an idea and they haven’t,” Stein responded.
“To be honest, most of us have only been thinking about it for a year. But to accept the wrong solution is in fact no solution at all.”
Bill Noll, another member of the POPNNW delegation, said Ontario Power Generation has stated nuclear waste has been stored safely above ground for 60 years “and it can be stored longer.”
Noll said the group would like to see Canada wait for the results from the planned Finnish DGR in 2024 before going ahead with one here.
“Let them experiment for a couple of decades while we keep it above ground safely and then maybe we can consider whether or not the DGR is safe,” said Noll.
Deputy mayor Dave Turton asked Stein if local officials in South Bruce responded to the group’s concerns.
“Are they listening to you?” he asked.
Noll replied, “We are up against the wall to some degree. Our council is very much interested to see some economic development in the area, and we certainly understand and appreciate that, and so they’re very much in tune with the agenda being put forward by the NWMO.”
Mayor George Bridge thanked the group for sharing information with council.
In desperate economic plight, two Japanese towns willing to host nuclear waste dump
It’s sad that small Japanese towns are being forced to these lengths to protect their economic stability.
Two Japanese Towns Want to Host an Underground Nuclear Waste Dump 5 Feb 21, https://earther.gizmodo.com/two-japanese-towns-want-to-host-an-underground-nuclear-1846200890 Dharna Noor
No matter how you feel about nuclear energy, nuclear waste is generally something you want to stay as far away from as possible—unless you’re two villages on the Hokkaido, Japan’s second-largest island. The two small fishing towns, Suttsu and Kamoenai, are competing to become the site for a high-level radioactive waste storage site as a means to stay afloat economically. But not everyone is so thrilled about the prospect.
According to national data, Japan has generated more than 19,000 tons of highly toxic atomic waste since it began using nuclear power in 1966. To keep it away from people, back in 2000, the country passed the Designated Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act to open a call for an underground waste repository for some of it.
At the time, unsurprisingly, no municipalities to sign up to host the toxic stuff. The trepidation only grew when in 2011, an earthquake and tsunami triggered an explosion at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, releasing an unprecedented amount of radioactive contamination into the ocean. It was the most severe nuclear accident since Chernobyl.
But now, times are desperate in Japan’s small villages. Fishing, once a booming industry, is in decline. Many young people are moving into cities where economic prospects are better. As a result, populations are shrinking. Suttsu currently has a population of 2,885, down from nearly 5,000 in 1980, and Kamoenai is home to just more than 800. As Bloomberg noted, both towns were also hit hard by the economic downturn of the covid-19 pandemic last year.
Agreeing to host the nuclear storage facility would be a major boost for either town. By agreeing to preliminary research into hosting the nuclear storage facility, municipalities can rake in up to $19 million in government subsidies over two years. If that first stage goes well, another $66 million becomes available in exchange for a four-year field survey and preliminary drilling. If that goes smoothly, the town would go through a 14-year evaluation period, unlocking even more funding. In total, the potential prize for agreeing to host the facility could be up to $37 billion in investments. So in October, both towns’ officials came forward as potential candidates.
But of course, the prospect of living near an atomic waste dump has sparked opposition from concerned residents of both towns. Nuclear waste can contain toxic elements like uranium and plutonium. Anti-nuclear advocates in Suttsu even pushed for a referendum on the village’s application, but the municipal assembly voted it down. Japanese government officials said their review process is airtight and would protect locals, but in an interview with the magazine Aera, Yugo Ono, a geology professor at Hokkaido University, said the earthquake risk is high and could lead to the stored waste leaking.
It’s sad that small Japanese towns are being forced to these lengths to protect their economic stability. But at some point, Japan will need to put its nuclear waste somewhere. Let’s just hope when it does, it does so safely.
Deploying weapons in space crosses a threshold that cannot be walked back.
weaponizing space could become a classic case of trying to solve one problem while creating a much worse problem.
It’s time for arms control planning to address the issues raised by this drift toward militarization of space. Space is a place where billions of defense dollars can evaporate quickly and result in more threats about which to be concerned. China and Russia have been proposing mechanisms for space arms control at the United Nations for years; it’s time for the U.S. to cooperate in this effort.
Deploying weapons in space crosses a threshold that cannot be walked back.
The US should negotiate a ban on basing weapons in space, BY JOHN FAIRLAMB, — 02/04/21, https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/536774-the-us-should-negotiate-a-ban-on-basing-weapons-in-space
The Biden administration is assembling a deep bench of personnel with experience negotiating arms control agreements and already has agreed with Russia to extend the New Start Treaty. It’s clear the administration intends to initiate another look at the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review and the massive buildup in nuclear weapons begun by the Trump administration. While it’s good that the Biden administration intends to resume negotiations to continue nuclear force reductions, the specter of placing weapons in space is another area that requires a serious arms control effort.
Now that separate space organizations have been established, major military commands are advocating to develop new capabilities. Pentagon buzzwords characterize space as a “contested domain” and some consider actual war-fighting in space to be inevitable. Some advocates argue that the U.S. should strive for technological superiority in space to ensure our dominance of that critical domain.
The history of technological advancement in weapons systems shows that any advantage gained usually lasts fewer than five years and guarantees a cycle of ever-increasing cost and new perceptions of threat. Already, there are weapons that can be targeted against space-based assets from non-space domains. Russia and China are believed to have deployed ground-based capabilities to attack satellites, and India joined this club last year by using a ground-based missile to bring down a satellite.
Although it isn’t clear how the Biden administration will shape space policy, during his confirmation hearing, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin seemed to signal a shift away from a more muscular approach and back to a focus on space resiliency and protecting U.S. space assets. As one analyst concluded, the language Austin used signals the Biden team wants to “start to lean away from … the pugilistic aspects of what’s been articulated [by the Trump administration].” Responding to a question about what his advice would be to the U.S. Space Command concerning military space operations, Austin stressed measures to protect U.S. assets that don’t include offensive options for taking the fight to adversaries. While not a fully articulated space policy, this is a welcome change of tone after the past few years of heavy breathing about waging war in space.
If the U.S. and other nations continue the current drift toward organizing and equipping to wage war in space, Russia, China and others will strive to improve capabilities to destroy U.S. space assets. Over time, this would greatly increase the threat to the full array of U.S. space-based capabilities. Intelligence, communications, surveillance, targeting and navigation assets already based in space, upon which the Department of Defense (DOD) depends for command and control of military operations, increasingly would be at significant risk. As a consequence, weaponizing space could become a classic case of trying to solve one problem while creating a much worse problem.
For example, buried in the DOD 2020 budget is $150 million for research into putting missile defense assets in space to attack enemy nuclear missiles in the boost phase. If the U.S. or another nation does deploy weapons in space, it would be the first country to do so and likely would be a disaster for strategic stability. To ensure the credibility of their nuclear deterrents, Russia, China and others could be expected to respond by deploying additional and new types of long-range ballistic missiles, as well as missiles employing non-ballistic trajectories that are harder to hit. Russia and China also would strive to improve their ability to destroy U.S. space-based interceptors, which would greatly increase the threat to the full array of U.S. space assets.
It’s time for arms control planning to address the issues raised by this drift toward militarization of space. Space is a place where billions of defense dollars can evaporate quickly and result in more threats about which to be concerned. China and Russia have been proposing mechanisms for space arms control at the United Nations for years; it’s time for the U.S. to cooperate in this effort.
In 2015, Frank Rose, assistant secretary for arms control, verification and compliance in the State Department, called for arms control in space at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum workshop on space security. But, he said the Obama administration opposed a 2008 Russian and Chinese proposal to ban all weapons in space because it was unverifiable, contained no prohibition on developing and stockpiling space arms, and did not address ground-based space weapons such as direct ascent anti-satellite missiles.
Instead of just criticizing others’ proposals, the U.S. should join in the effort and do the hard work of crafting a space arms control agreement that deals with the concerns we have and that can be verified. A legally binding international treaty banning the basing of weapons in space should be the objective.
Let’s be clear: Deploying weapons in space crosses a threshold that cannot be walked back. Given the implications for strategic stability, and the likelihood that such a decision by any nation would set off an expensive space arms race in which any advantage gained would likely be temporary, engaging now to prevent such a debacle seems warranted.
John Fairlamb, Ph.D., is a retired Army colonel with 45 years of government service, much of it in joint service positions formulating and implementing national security strategies and policies, including two four-year details in the Department of State and as the political-military affairs adviser for a major Army command. His doctorate is in comparative defense policy analysis.
At last, UK government will investigate birth defects amongst children of nuclear test veterans
Mirror 3rd Feb 2021, Thousands of sick children and adults have finally been offered government research into whether their DNA was damaged by Cold War nuclear bomb tests.
An estimated 155,000 descendants of National Servicemen who took part in atomic weapons tests in the 1950s now report 10 times the normal rate birth defects, and are five times more likely to die as infants. Now Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer has promised to consider thorough research into whether they suffer a genetic legacy from Britain’s radiation
experiments.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thousands-offered-research-dna-damage-23436272
Research into radiocesium in forests after the Fukushima disaster: Concerns and some hope
Dynamics of radiocesium in forests after the Fukushima disaster: Concerns and some hope
Scientists compile available data and analyses on the flow of radionuclides to gain a more holistic understanding, FORESTRY AND FOREST PRODUCTS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, 5 Feb 21, HTTPS://WWW.EUREKALERT.ORG/PUB_RELEASES/2021-02/FAFP-DOR020221.PHP
Research News After the Chernobyl disaster of 1986, the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (FDNPP) disaster was the second worst nuclear incident in history. Its consequences were tremendous for the Japanese people and now, almost a decade later, they can still be felt both there and in the rest of the world. One of the main consequences of the event is the release of large amounts of cesium-137 (137Cs)–a radioactive “isotope” of cesium–into the atmosphere, which spread farther away from the power plant through wind and rainfall.
Considering the massive threat posed by 137Cs to the health of both humans and ecosystems, it is essential to understand how it has distributed and how much of it still lingers. This is why the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has recently published a technical document on this specific issue. The fifth chapter of this “Technical Document (TECDOC),” titled “Forest ecosystems,” contains an extensive review and analysis of existing data on 137Cs levels in Fukushima prefecture’s forests following the FDNPP disaster.
The chapter is based on an extensive study led by Assoc. Prof. Shoji Hashimoto from the Forestry and Forestry Products Research Institute, Japan, alongside Dr. Hiroaki Kato from the University of Tsukuba, Japan, Kazuya Nishina from the National Institute of Environmental Studies, Japan, Keiko Tagami from the National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Japan, George Shaw from the University of Nottingham, UK, and Yves Thiry from the National Agency for Radioactive Waste Management (ANDRA), France, and several other experts in Japan and Europe.
The main objective of the researchers was to gain a better understanding of the dynamics of 137Cs flow in forests. The process is far from straightforward, as there are multiple elements and variables to consider. First, a portion of 137Cs-containing rainfall is intercepted by trees, some of which is absorbed, and the rest eventually washes down onto the forest floor. There, a fraction of the radiocesium absorbs into forest litter and the remainder flows into the various soil and mineral layers below. Finally, trees, other plants, and mushrooms incorporate 137Cs through their roots and mycelia, respectively, ultimately making it both into edible products harvested from Fukushima and wild animals.
Considering the complexity of 137Cs flux dynamics, a huge number of field surveys and gatherings of varied data had to be conducted, as well as subsequent theoretical and statistical analyses. Fortunately, the response from the government and academia was considerably faster and more thorough after the FDNPP disaster than in the Chernobyl disaster, as Hashimoto explains: “After the Chernobyl accidents, studies were very limited due to the scarce information provided by the Soviet Union. In contrast, the timely studies in Fukushima have allowed us to capture the early phases of 137Cs flow dynamics; this allowed us to provide the first wholistic understanding of this process in forests in Fukushima.”
Understanding how long radionuclides like 137Cs can remain in ecosystems and how far they can spread is essential to implement policies to protect people from radiation in Fukushima-sourced food and wood. In addition, the article also explores the effectiveness of using potassium-containing fertilizers to prevent the uptake of 137Cs in plants. “The compilation of data, parameters, and analyses we present in our chapter will be helpful for forest remediation both in Japan and the rest of the world,” remarks Hashimoto.
When preventive measures fail, the only remaining option is trying to fix the damage done–in the case of radiation control, this is only possible with a comprehensive understanding of the interplay of factors involved.
In this manner, this new chapter will hopefully lead to both timely research and more effective solutions should a nuclear disaster happen again.
UK’s Infrastructure Planning Inspectorate recommends against development of Wyfa nuclear project
Planning Inspectorate 4th Feb 2021, Following the recent withdrawal of the application, and in the interests of openness and transparency, we have taken the decision to publish the
Examining Authority’s Recommendation Report. In the light of the ExA’s
findings and conclusions, the ExA under s105 of the PA2008 recommends the
Secretary of State for Business, Environment and Industrial Strategy does
not grant the Wylfa Newydd Project Development Consent Order.
Cuba signs up to another nuclear disarmament treaty
|
Cuba reaffirms its commitment to nuclear disarmament, https://www.plenglish.com/index.php?o=rn&id=64148&SEO=cuba-reaffirms-its-commitment-to-nuclear-disarmament Havana, Feb 4 (Prensa Latina) Cuba reaffirmed its commitment to nuclear disarmament by signing on Thursday the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
According to the Cuban Foreign Ministry’s website, the country’s ratification expresses its support for the complete and effective prohibition of all explosive tests, other sophisticated methods and subcritical trials.
With the action, Cuba also confirms its condemnation of the rise in expenditures to enhance such experiments, while calling for the closure of the facilities used for such purposes and their associated infrastructure.
Cuba is a State Party to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions.
The CTBT, once in force, will contribute along with those deals to the efforts for the total, transparent and irreversible eradication of those artifacts, the source referred. Cuba belongs to the first densely populated zone in the world to be declared a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone. In addition, Cuba reaffirms the validity of the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, adopted at the 2nd Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, held in Havana in 2014. |
|
Two Ohio state Republican Senators aim to remove subsidies to nuclear power plants
State Senators Jerry Cirino of Kirtland and Michael Rulli of Salem have introduced Senate Bill 44. Cirino says it does not repeal or replace House Bill 6. It just removes the subsidy provision, which he says will lower electric bills.
“We are eliminating, in the bill, $130 million plus per year that if HB6 was left intact, would be going to the nuclear facilities,” Cirino said. “So we’re taking that away and they’re on their own to figure out how to operate better and what they can do with the federal government.”
PJM Interconnection is a Regional Transmission Organization that coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity across 13 states including District of Columbia and Ohio.
They are offering pricing support to energy operators, but Cirino says it would be difficult for PJM to provide this support to operators accepting these subsidies.
Cirino says he supports nuclear power and says the plants will remain open with federal support that can help them continue to operate without the subsidy.
The Senate Energy Committee will have hearings about Senate Bill 44 beginning next week.
Read the bill as proposed:…………https://www.wksu.org/government-politics/2021-02-05/senate-bill-introduced-to-remove-power-plant-subsidies
America’s new strategy for space nuclear power pays little consideration to safety aspects
America’s New Strategy for Space Nuclear Power, By Zhanna Malekos Smith. Wednesday, February 3, 2021
Among the flurry of executive orders and proclamations signed during his final weeks in office, President Trump issued two directives that have received little fanfare—about space. One directive concerns enhancing the cybersecurity of GPS satellites. The other is perhaps more exciting: It focuses on exploring Mars and the moon.
Pandemic causes Britain’s Trident nuclear submarine replacement to be delayed by another year
Announcement raises new questions as to whether UK’s current ageing fleet can be relied on, Guardian, Dan Sabbagh Defence and security editor. Fri 5 Feb 2021
Official documents released at the end of last year quietly confirmed that the current phase of the Dreadnought programme had been put back to March 2022, although the update was not highlighted and it was only spotted by a pressure group.
An SNP member of the defence select committee has now called for it to hold an inquiry into the Trident replacement programme, complaining about a lack of transparency.
An annual update on nuclear replacement, released to MPs before Christmas, said that “recognising the high levels of uncertainty caused by the pandemic” and its impact on supply chains, “delivery phase 2 will continue until March 2022”.
It did not say that this amounted to a one-year delay to the sprawling programme. This was spotted by David Cullen, of the Nuclear Information Service, who recalled a promise made a year earlier to conclude the work in March 2021.
“Covid is going to be with us for a while, and nobody will be surprised if there are other delays to Dreadnought,” Cullen said, arguing that the relative secrecy suggested “this isn’t the behaviour of a department that is confident it can deliver on its promises”.
The Dreadnought programme, first approved by Labour in 2007, has been repeatedly delayed by governments since. The first submarine was initially due to come into service in 2024, then 2028, and now the “early 2030s”, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) says……….
Britain prefers to shroud its nuclear programme in secrecy, but there have been accidents in the past. In 1998 HMS Vanguard, carrying 96 nuclear warheads and 135 crew, plunged into a deep dive following a power failure between Cornwall and the south of Ireland. The crew only managed to regain control through a backup power system.
In February 2009, Vanguard collided with a French nuclear submarine, Le Triomphant, in a freak accident in the Atlantic. Details were initially hushed up, before it was leaked to a newspaper. Fortunately the accident happened at a relatively low speed. Ministers were told that at the time that nuclear safety had not been compromised.
Martin Docherty-Hughes, an SNP member of the defence select committee, said: “It is simply unacceptable that we need to parse UK government statements for half phrases and words which the MoD could be using to cover its own backside.” He said he would be writing to the chair of the committee to demand an inquiry…… https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/04/trident-nuclear-submarine-replacement-delayed-by-year
Economics’ failure over destruction of nature presents ‘extreme risks’
Economics’ failure over destruction of nature presents ‘extreme risks’
New measures of success needed to avoid catastrophic breakdown, landmark review finds
Guardian 2nd Feb 2021. The world is being put at “extreme risk” by the failure of economics to take account of the rapid depletion of the natural world and needs to find new measures of success to avoid a catastrophic breakdown, a landmark review has concluded.
education were urgently needed, he said.
similar Treasury-sponsored review in 2006 by Nicholas Stern is credited with transforming economic understanding of the climate crisis.
change – provided opportunities for the international community to rethink an approach that has seen a 40% plunge in the stocks of natural capital per head between 1992 and 2014.
Unprecedented number of France’s nuclear reactors to go offline, and strikes continue.
From Feb. 6, six French reactors will have started 2021 maintenance, with five more to come this month, an unprecedented 11 reactors starting maintenance before March.
Reactors set for 10-year overhauls in 2021…………
S&P Global Platts Analytics assumes February output to average around 46 GW, a new record low for that month, before recovering above last year’s monthly averages………
wo strikes, an incident at Paluel and a return to milder and at times windy weather affected nuclear output in the second half of January.
Strikes continue
Another 24-hour strike was scheduled to start Feb. 9 at 2000 GMT, EDF said on its transparency website Feb. 4.
EDF workers are protesting against planned restructuring of the French state-owned utility, splitting nuclear and other operations.
Ongoing discussions with the European Commission about the details of the planned reform of the ARENH price mechanism have delayed a first presentation of those plans envisaged in January.
EDF currently has to sell 100 TWh of nuclear generation at Eur42/MWh to domestic suppliers.
The reform aims to lift prices as well as volumes………. https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/020521-french-nuclear-retreats-from-12-month-high-amid-early-start-to-2021-maintenance
New Iran envoy shows Biden is serious about reviving nuclear deal
|
New Iran envoy shows Biden is serious about reviving nuclear deal
Robert Malley appointment marks abrupt break with Trump administration’s approach to Tehran, Ft.com, DAVID GARDNER – 4 Feb 21, In the 2008 US presidential election campaign, Barack Obama suddenly pushed out Robert Malley, a top adviser on the Middle East. Mr Malley’s supporters tried to face down a barrage of attacks by rightwing pro-Israel groups. But the Obama team capitulated after it became public that he had met with Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip. No matter that such meetings were intrinsic to Mr Malley’s previous job with the International Crisis Group, an NGO devoted to preventing or defusing conflict. He was seen as a political liability. Fast forward to President Joe Biden, Mr Obama’s vice-president, who has just appointed Mr Malley as US special envoy for Iran. Once more, he was pilloried by the pro-Israel right, Gulf Arab officials and some Iranian-Americans, who claimed he is biased against Israel and “Iran’s ideal candidate for the position of American envoy”. This time a counter-barrage, from a foreign policy elite studded with unimpeachably pro-Israel figures, was ready to fire back. The smears against Mr Malley were swiftly countered. The attempt to sabotage the appointment by detonating a proxy war over the Biden team’s Iran policy failed.
…………. The Malley appointment, alongside Mr Biden’s selection of seasoned diplomats involved in the 2015 nuclear deal, such as Antony Blinken as secretary of state and William Burns as CIA director, is a strong statement of intent. It could hardly be more different to the outgoing US envoy for Iran, Elliott Abrams, one of a cohort of Trump aides who acted more as lawyers for Israel than mediators. https://www.ft.com/content/eae24633-844a-4bb5-b5a9-28deead96a
|
|
|
Cyberattack on nuclear unit in Brazil
Brazil’s Eletrobras says nuclear unit hit with cyberattack ,https://finance.yahoo.com/news/brazils-eletrobras-says-nuclear-unit-113223064., PAULO, Feb 4 (Reuters) – A nuclear power subsidiary of Brazil’s Eletrobras suffered a cyberattack but no operations were impacted, the state-controlled power holding company said in a filing late on Wednesday.
The network that was attacked by ransomware is not related to the operational systems of nuclear energy plants Angra 1 and Angra 2, said Centrais Eletricas Brasileiras, as Eletrobras is formally known.
Subsidiary Eletronuclear has suspended use of some of its administrative software to protect its data, the company said in the filing.
It said the incident is under investigation by government entities responsible for nuclear power security. (Reporting by Tatiana Bautzer; editing by Jason Neely)
1 This Month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (109)
- October 2026 (302)
- 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)
-
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
