nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

We’ll stop Nimbys from blocking nuclear power stations, say Tories.

The rule changes would see planning officers ignore all environmental
considerations when building a new nuclear site,

Party wants to make it impossible to challenge plans using environmental impact assessments or habitat regulations

 Nimbys will be stopped from blocking nuclear power stations in their area
under Tory plans. The party wants to end the “absurd” blocking of new
nuclear sites through environmental impact assessments or regulations on
habitats, and would make it impossible to challenge a new power station in
court.

The Tories have submitted amendments to the Government’s Planning
and Infrastructure Bill that would exempt nuclear power stations from being
blocked or delayed on environmental grounds, to speed up energy production
in the UK. They accused Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, of presiding
over “the highest prices for offshore wind in a decade” and called for
more nuclear power to meet the UK’s growing demand for electricity.

The rule changes would see planning officers ignore all environmental
considerations when building a new nuclear site, which is likely to anger
locals and lead to public opposition. Writing for The Telegraph, Claire
Coutinho, the shadow energy secretary, said the new Hinkley Point C power
station in Somerset is set to be the most expensive in history because of
“bureaucracy and rampant lawfarism”. “[There is] Endless lawfare,
environmental paperwork, and legal challenges that do little to protect
nature but create plenty of expensive work for planning consultants and
pencil-pushing bureaucrats,” she said. “Every single delay and absurd
mitigation measure adds more cost.”

The amendments would only become law
with the support of Labour MPs, which is not expected to happen. Labour has
previously said it will reform the same rules raised by the Conservatives,
but will not exempt them from judicial review or all environmental
assessments.

Responding to the Conservative proposal, Sam Richards, chief
executive of pro-growth campaign group Britain Remade, said the UK had the
“worst of both worlds” with a planning system that does not protect
nature and slows down infrastructure projects. “These amendments are
radical, but the status quo where safe, clean nuclear power projects are
delayed and made more expensive due to repeated legal challenges and poorly
drafted environmental legislation is intolerable,” he said.

 Telegraph 18th July 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/18/tories-stop-nimbys-block-nuclear-power-hinkley-fish-disco/

July 20, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Ominous Plans: Making Concentration Camp Gaza

18 July 2025Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/ominous-plans-making-concentration-camp-gaza/

The odious idea of a camp within a camp. The Gaza Strip, with an even greater concentration of Palestinian civilian life within an ever-shrinking stretch of territory. These are the proposals ventured by the Israeli government even as the official Palestinian death toll marches upwards to 60,000. They envisage the placement of some 600,000 displaced and houseless beings currently living in tents in the area of al-Mawasi along Gaza’s southern coast in a creepily termed “humanitarian city”. This would be the prelude for an ultimate relocation of the strip’s entire population of over 2 million in an area that will become an even smaller prison than the Strip already is.

The preparation for such a forced removal – yet another among so many Israel has inflicted upon the Palestinians – is in full swing. The analysis of satellite imagery from the United Nations Satellite Centre (UNOSAT) by Al Jazeera’s Sanad investigations unit found that approximately 12,800 buildings were demolished in Rafah between early April and early July alone. In the Knesset on May 11 this year, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave words to those deeds: “We are demolishing more and more [of their] homes, they have nowhere to return to. The only obvious result will be the desire of the Gazans to emigrate outside the Strip.”

Camps of concentrated human life – concentration camps, in other words – are often given a different dressing to what they are meant to be. Authoritarian states enjoy using them to re-educate and reform the inmates even as they gradually kill them. Indeed, the proposals from the Israel’s Defense Department carry with them plans for a “Humanitarian Transit Area” where Gazans would “temporarily reside, deradicalize, re-integrate, and prepare to relocate if they wish to do so.”

The emetic candy floss of “humanitarian” in the context of a camp is a self-negating nonsense similar to other experiments in cruelty: the relocation of Boer civilians during the colonial wars waged by Britain to camps which saw dysentery and starvation; the movement of Vietnamese villagers into fortified hamlets to prevent their infiltration by the Vietcong in the 1960s; the creation of Pacific concentration camps to detain refugees seeking Australia by boat in what came to be called the “Pacific Solution.”

Those in the business of doing humanitarian deeds were understandably appalled by Israel’s latest plans. Philippe Lazzarini, head of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), stated that this would “de facto create massive concentration camps at the border with Egypt for the Palestinians, displaced over and over across generations.” It would certainly “deprive Palestinians of any prospects of a better future in their homeland.” Self-evidently and sadly, that would be one of the main aims.

A few of Israeli’s former Prime Ministers have ditched the coloured goggles in considering the plans for such a mislabelled city. Yair Lapid, who spent a mere six months in office in 2022, told Israeli Army Radio that it was “a bad idea from every possible perspective – security, political, economic, logistical.” While preferring not to use the term “concentration camp” with regards such a construction, incarcerating individuals by effectively preventing their exit would make such a term appropriate.  

Ehud Olmert’s words to The Guardian were even less inclined to varnish the matter. “If they [the Palestinians] will be deported into the new ‘humanitarian city’, then you can say that this is part of an ethnic cleansing.” To create a camp that would effectively “clean” more than half of Gaza of its population could hardly be understood as a plan to save Palestinians. “It is to deport them, to push and to throw them away. There is no other understanding that I have at least.”

Israeli political commentator Ori Goldberg was also full of candour in expressing the view that the plan was “for all facts and purposes a concentration camp” for Gaza’s Palestinians, “an overt crime against humanity under international humanitarian law”. This would also add the burgeoning grounds of illegality already being alleged in this month’s petition by three Israeli reserve soldiers of Israel’s Supreme Court questioning the legality of Operation Gideon’s Chariots. Instancing abundant examples of forced transfer and expulsions of the Palestinian population during its various phases, commentators such as former chief of staff of the IDF, Moshe “Bogy” Ya’alon, are unreserved about how such programs fare before international law. “Evacuating an entire population? Call it ethnic cleansing, call it transfer, call it deportation, it’s a war crime,” he told journalist Lucy Aharish. “Israel’s soldiers had been sent in “to commit war crimes.”

There is also some resistance from within the IDF, less on humanitarian grounds than practical ones. To even prepare such a plan in the midst of negotiations for a lasting ceasefire and finally resolving the hostage situation was the first telling problem. The other was how the IDF could feasibly undertake what would be a grand jailing experiment while preventing the infiltration of Hamas.  

This ghastly push by the Netanyahu government involves an enormous amount of wishful thinking. Ideally, the Palestinians will simply leave. If not, they will live in even more carceral conditions than they faced before October 2023. But to assume that this cartoon strip humanitarianism, papered over a ghoulish program of inflicted suffering, will add to the emptying well of Israeli security, is testament to how utterly desperate, and delusionary, the Israeli PM and his cabinet members have become.

July 19, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, Gaza, Israel | Leave a comment

New reports cast doubt on impact of US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites

Citing intelligence assessments, NBC News and Washington Post report that only Fordow site was destroyed in US attack.

US Secretary of Defense attacks media for questioning Iran strikes

By Al Jazeera Staff, 18 Jul 202518 Jul 2025, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/18/new-reports-cast-doubt-on-impact-of-us-strikes-on-irans-nuclear-sites

Washington, DC – New media reports in the United States, citing intelligence assessments, have cast doubt over President Donald Trump’s assertion that Washington’s military strikes last month “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme.

The Washington Post and NBC News reported that US officials were saying that only one of the three Iranian nuclear sites – the Fordow facility – targeted by the US has been destroyed.

The Post’s report, released on Friday, also raised questions on whether the centrifuges used to enrich uranium at the deepest level of Fordow were destroyed or moved before the attack.

“We definitely can’t say it was obliterated,” an unidentified official told the newspaper, referring to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Trump has insisted that the US strikes were a “spectacular” success, lashing out at any reports questioning the level of damage they inflicted on Iran’s nuclear programme.

An initial US intelligence assessment, leaked to several media outlets after the attack last month, said the strikes failed to destroy key components of Iran’s nuclear programme and only delayed its work by months.

But the Pentagon said earlier in July that the attacks degraded the Iranian programme by one to two years.

While the strikes on Fordow – initially thought to be the most guarded facility, buried inside a mountain – initially took centre stage, the NBC News and Washington Post reports suggested that the facilities in Natanz and Isfahan also had deep tunnels.

‘Impenetrable’

The US military did not use enormous bunker-busting bombs against the Isfahan site and targeted surface infrastructure instead.

A congressional aide familiar with intelligence briefings told the Post that the Pentagon had assessed that the underground facilities at Isfahan were “pretty much impenetrable”.

The Pentagon responded to both reports by reiterating that all three sites were “completely and totally obliterated”.

Israel, which started the war by attacking Iran without direct provocation last month, has backed the US administration’s assessment, while threatening further strikes against Tehran if it resumes its nuclear programme.

For its part, Tehran has not provided details about the state of its nuclear sites.

Some Iranian officials have said that the facilities sustained significant damage from US and Israeli attacks. But Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said after the war that Trump had “exaggerated” the impact of the strikes.

The location and state of Iran’s highly enriched uranium also remain unknown.

Iran’s nuclear agency and regulators in neighbouring states have said they did not detect a spike in radioactivity after the bombings, suggesting the strikes did not result in uranium contamination.

But Rafael Grossi, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, did not rule out that the uranium containers may have been damaged in the attacks.

“We don’t know where this material could be or if part of it could have been under the attack during those 12 days,” Grossi told CBS News last month.

According to Grossi, Iran could resume uranium enrichment in a “matter of months”.

The war

Israel launched a massive attack against Iran on June 13, killing several top military officials, as well as nuclear scientists.

The bombing campaign targeted military sites, civilian infrastructure and residential buildings across the country, killing hundreds of civilians.

Iran responded with barrages of missiles against Israel that left widespread destruction and claimed the lives of at least 29 people.

The US joined the Israeli campaign on June 22, striking the three nuclear sites. Iran retaliated with a missile attack against an air base housing US troops in Qatar.

Initially, Trump said the Iranian attack was thwarted, but after satellite images showed damage at the base, the Pentagon acknowledged that one of the missiles was not intercepted.

“One Iranian ballistic missile impacted Al Udeid Air Base June 23 while the remainder of the missiles were intercepted by US and Qatari air defence systems,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell told Al Jazeera in an email last week.

Advertisement

“The impact did minimal damage to equipment and structures on the base. There were no injuries.”

After a ceasefire was reached to end the 12-day war, both the US and Iran expressed willingness to engage in diplomacy to resolve the nuclear file. But talks have not materialised.

Iran and the US were periodically holding nuclear talks before Israel launched its war in June.

During his first term in 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The agreement saw Iran scale back its nuclear programme in exchange for lifting international sanctions against its economy.

In recent days, European officials have suggested that they could impose “snap-back” sanctions against Iran as part of the deal that has long been violated by the US.

Tehran, which started enriching uranium beyond the limits set by the JCPOA after the US withdrawal, insists that Washington was the party that nixed the agreement, stressing that the deal acknowledges Iran’s enrichment rights.

On Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said he held talks with the top diplomats of France, the United Kingdom and Germany – known as the E3 – as well as the European Union’s high representative.

Araghchi said Europeans should put aside “worn-out policies of threat and pressure”.

“It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal – coordinated by EU in 2015 – not Iran; and it was US that left the negotiation table in June this year and chose a military option instead, not Iran,” the Iranian foreign minister said in a social media post.

“Any new round of talks is only possible when the other side is ready for a fair, balanced, and mutually beneficial nuclear deal.”

Tehran denies seeking a nuclear bomb. Israel, meanwhile, is widely believed to have an undeclared nuclear arsenal.

July 19, 2025 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Miliband bets on nuclear fusion in bid to lead (?)clean power race.

Energy Secretary to make it easier for developers to build reactors with planning shake-up

 Ed Miliband has taken a bet on nuclear fusion one day powering Britain by
making it easier for developers to build new reactors with minimal planning
restrictions.

Fusion plants are to be included in the UK’s national
infrastructure planning system, meaning they can be built in any part of
Britain without needing consent from local authorities and with little
opportunity for local people to object. Mr Miliband said the aim was to
ensure fusion, if it ever works, could rapidly become part of the UK energy
system.

 Telegraph 18th July 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/07/18/miliband-bets-on-nuclear-fusion-by-making-it-easier-to-buil/

July 19, 2025 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Trump’s nuclear power push weakens regulator and poses safety risks, former officials warn

Spencer Kimball, Jul 17 2025

Key Points

Former NRC commissioners say the order threatens the regulator’s independence, raising safety concerns that could undermine public confidence.

President Donald Trump has ordered an overhaul of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, part of his push to quadruple nuclear power in the U.S. by 2050.

The order requires the NRC to make decisions on nuclear plants within 18 months, completely revise its regulations and reduce its staff.

Former NRC commissioners say the order threatens the
regulator’s independence, raising safety concerns that could undermine
public confidence. President Donald Trump’s push to approve nuclear
plants as quickly as possible threatens to weaken the independent regulator
tasked with protecting public health and safety, former federal officials
warn.

Trump issued four sweeping executive orders in May that aim to
quadruple nuclear power by 2050 in the U.S. The White House and the
technology industry view nuclear as powerful source of reliable electricity
that can help meet the growing energy needs of artificial intelligence.

The most consequential of Trump’s orders aims to slash regulations and speed
up power plant approvals through an overhaul of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. The NRC is an independent agency established by Congress in
1975 to make sure that nuclear reactors are deployed and operated safely.
Trump accuses the NRC of “risk aversion” in his order, blaming the
regulator for how few nuclear plants have been built in the U.S. over the
past three decades. The president says that the NRC is focused on
protecting the public from “the most remote risks,” arguing that such a
cautious approach to approving plants restricts access to reliable
electricity.

 CNBC 17th July 2025, https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/17/trumps-nuclear-power-push-weakens-regulator-and-poses-safety-risks-former-officials-warn.html

July 19, 2025 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Sizewell C | Investor withdraws from consortium set for 25% stake.

17 Jul, 2025 By Tom Pashby, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/sizewell-c-investor-withdraws-from-consortium-set-for-25-stake-17-07-2025/

One of the investors reported to be considering a stake in Sizewell C has decided to withdraw, while the government is no longer planning to classify nuclear energy as “sustainable”.

Schroders Greencoat, which describes itself as “a specialist renewables infrastructure investor”, was previously reported to be one of the companies considering an ownership stake in Sizewell C.

It was widely reported that Schroders Greencoat was one of the companies in the consortium led by Brookfield Asset Management, which was in total considering a 25% stake in the nuclear power plant.

In an email dated 16 July seen by NCE, the investor said it no longer wishes to invest in the project on the Suffolk coast.

Wait for final investment decision continues

Sizewell C must achieve its final investment decision (FID) before main construction can start.

Despite the delay, Sizewell C has committed over £2.5bn on contracts.

The scale of the works are now visible to the public via aerial images taken in April 2025 published on Google Earth and Maps.

It is now expected that the final investment decision will be taken this summer.

Nuclear dropped from sustainable finance classification plans

The UK Government recently decided to not go ahead with plans to create a UK Green Taxonomy for financial investments, meaning that it won’t have a specific classification of certain areas of activity, like nuclear power, as “sustainable”.

This had been a plan hatched by former chancellor Jeremy Hunt in the 2023 Spring Budget, but NCE found that no work had gone towards this 16 months later.

HM Treasury economic secretary to the treasury and city minister Emma Reynolds announced the decision in the UK Green Taxonomy Consultation Response.

“To make sure the UK is well-positioned to capture [growth in the green economy], the government is delivering a world-leading sustainable finance framework,” Reynolds said.

“This includes ensuring that we have the right tools in place and the proportionate regulation that is needed to support the transition, strengthening the UK’s position as the sustainable finance capital of the world so that the UK can lead the clean energy transition at home and abroad.

“That is why, after careful consideration, the government has concluded that a UK Taxonomy would not be the most effective tool to deliver the green transition and should not be part of our sustainable finance framework.

“Whilst our ambitions to continue as a global leader remain unchanged, the consultation responses showed that other policies were of higher priority to accelerate investment into the transition to net zero and limit greenwashing.”

It is understood that the decision to drop plans for the taxonomy may have contributed to Schroders Greencoat’s withdrawal from investing in Sizewell C.

Anti-Sizewell C campaign attributes withdrawal to taxonomy decision

Stop Sizewell C executive director Alison Downes said: “It’s welcome news that Schroders Greencoat won’t be investing in Sizewell C.

Based on our dialogue with Schroders, we attribute this to the government deciding not to adopt a green taxonomy, which thankfully has the outcome that nuclear energy cannot be erroneously labelled ‘green’.

“We wish that other investors would take the same view and exit Sizewell C forthwith.”

No comment from parties to negotiations

The negotiations around the final investment decision are often described as commercially sensitive, and as such the government doesn’t tend to comment.

This hasn’t stopped sources informing the media about certain parts of the negotiations, like the report in the FT that the government is now taking a minority ownership stake.

The Department for Net Zero and Energy Security, Sizewell C and Schroders Greencoat did not supply a comment.

July 19, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

THE END FOR ZELENSKY?

Washington wants the Ukrainian president to leave office—will it happen?

Seymour Hersh, Jul 19, 2025

In fall of 2023, Ukrainian General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the commander in chief of the country’s armed forces, gave an interview to the Economist and declared the war with Russia had become a “stalemate.” It took three months for President Volodymyr Zelensky to fire him. The general, who is the most popular public figure in Ukraine, was named ambassador to London a month later and has served there with distinction, if quietly.

Zaluzhnyi is now seen as the most credible successor to Zelensky. I have been told by knowledgeable officials in Washington that that job could be his within a few months. Zelensky is on a short list for exile, if President Donald Trump decides to make the call. If Zelensky refuses to leave his office, as is most likely, an involved US official told me: “He’s going to go by force. The ball is in his court.” There are many in Washington and in Ukraine who believe that the escalating air war with Russia must end soon, while there’s still a chance to make a settlement with its president, Vladimir Putin………………………………………………………… (Subscribers only) https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/the-end-for-zelensky?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1377040&post_id=168643905&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

July 19, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Trump Asked Zelensky If He Could Strike Moscow If the US Provided Longer-Range Weapons.

Trump later denied that he was considering sending long-range weapons to Ukraine and said that Ukraine shouldn’t target Moscow

by Dave DeCamp | Jul 15, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/07/15/trump-asked-zelensky-if-he-could-strike-moscow-if-the-us-provided-longer-range-weapons/

President Trump has encouraged Ukraine to step up strikes deep inside Russia and even asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky if his forces were capable of striking Moscow if the US provided longer-range weapons, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.

Sources told the FT that the conversation occurred during a July 4 phone call. “Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow? . . . Can you hit St Petersburg too?” Trump asked. Zelensky replied that his forces could “absolutely” strike the Russian cities if the US provided the necessary weapons.

The report said that Trump signaled backing for the idea of providing long-range weapons in order to “make them [Russians] feel the pain” to pressure Moscow at the negotiating table. In comments to reporters, Trump later denied that he was considering providing Ukraine with long-range weapons and said that Zelensky “shouldn’t target Moscow.”

The White House confirmed that the conversation about striking Moscow took place, but insisted Trump wasn’t encouraging Ukrainian attacks inside Russia. A White House official told the BBC that Trump was “merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing. He’s working tirelessly to stop the killing and end this war.”

The FT report said that US officials have also provided Zelensky with a list of potential long-range weapons the US could supply. The Ukrainians have been asking for Tomahawk missiles, which have a range of over 1,000 miles, making them capable of hitting Moscow from Ukrainian territory.

Last year, the Biden administration gave Ukraine the green light to use ATACMS missiles in strikes on Russian territory. The ATACMS have a range of about 190 miles, which is not far enough to hit Moscow. Russia has made clear that attacks on its territory risk nuclear escalation since it lowered the threshold for its use of nuclear weapons in response to the US backing the ATACMS attacks.

The revelation about the Trump-Zelensky call came after the US president announced a new plan to provide Ukraine with “billions of dollars” worth of weapons by selling arms to NATO countries that will then transfer them to the war-torn nation. He also threatened major tariffs on Russia and its trading partners if a peace deal isn’t reached in 50 days, an ultimatum Moscow has rejected.

July 18, 2025 Posted by | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

U.S. Military Launches MASSIVE Drills to Prepare for WAR with China | KJ Noh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfHiRlHD3ZY

The U.S. launched massive military drills focused on war with China in the Pacific theater this week, involving 12,000 personnel from the Air Force and Space Force, and more than 350 aircraft, with the Secretary of the Air Force noting that this exercise is “the first of its kind since the Cold War.”

  • US conducts Department-level War drills not seen in a generation aimed at China
  • How Trump’s Tariff Tantrum and Rubio in ASEA are part of this escalation; Beijing’s countermove: ASEAN-China FTA
  • History: Tariffs as economic warfare & as continuation of the TPP: Hybrid warfare and continuity of war agenda
  • 4 phases of Taiwan’s history/4 phases of US-China relation: Taiwan’s proxy role
  • Weaponization and provocation: does China have to respond? 
  • Russia-China two-front-war accusations; strategic sequencing, division of labor, separation anxiety

“If we make no effort to change direction, we will end up where we are heading.”

         — Chinese Proverb

July 18, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hungary Refuses To Finance US Weapons for Ukraine

Donald Trump has shifted the financial burden of new US weapons to the EU, raising tensions among member states

News Desk, JUL 14, 2025, https://thecradle.co/articles/hungary-refuses-to-finance-us-weapons-for-ukraine

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said on 14 July that Hungary will not participate in financing US weapons for Ukraine, even if Washington formally proposes the initiative to the EU.

“I would like to emphasize that Hungarian money, Hungarian weapons, and Hungarian soldiers will not be sent to Ukraine. 

Nothing will be sent there,” Szijjártó stated during a press conference in Budapest following a meeting with Moroccan Minister of Industry and Trade Ryad Mezzour.

Despite this, he expressed support for US President Donald Trump’s so-called peace efforts, stating: “No one has done as much for peace in Ukraine as Trump.” 

He added that these efforts “could have been much more successful in recent months if they hadn’t been obstructed by European and Ukrainian leaders.”

Szijjártó’s remarks came shortly after Trump announced on 14 July that the US would deliver Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine, saying the EU would cover the full cost.

“We will send them Patriots, which they desperately need … The EU is going to pay us 100 percent for that, and that’s the way we want it,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews.

Trump framed the weapons transfer as part of a broader strategy to pressure Moscow into negotiations, but did not specify how many systems would be delivered. 

“Putin really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening. But there’s a little bit of a problem there. I don’t like it,” he said.

The announcement coincided with the arrival of Trump’s special envoy, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, in Kiev. Ukrainian officials confirmed that discussions would center on weapons, sanctions on Russia, and deepening ties with Washington.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky earlier confirmed Kiev’s readiness to purchase Patriot systems and long-range missiles from the US. 

A significant announcement on further arms support is expected from Trump later this week, according to Axios.

July 18, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Small Nuclear Reactor company’s focus turns to raising $500+ million.

COMMENT. The ask for $500-million has been out there for about two years. Deadbeats, all of them involved in this sorry excuse for a project. It’s pathetic.

It comes after review by Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that it hopes to parlay into newfound investment

Adam Huras, Jul 10, 2025,
https://tj.news/new-brunswick/smr-companys-focus-turns-to-raising-millions-to-finish-design-work

ARC Clean Technology says its focus is now raising what is likely still the hundreds of millions of dollars it needs to finish the design work of its small modular nuclear reactor.

It’s a figure that’s likely upwards of $500 million, according to two former ARC CEOs.

That’s with the aim to enable NB Power to submit a license to construct application hopefully by 2027, with a target commercial deployment at Point Lepreau in the early 2030s.

It comes after the completion of a review by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that it hopes to parlay into newfound private investment.

Earlier this week, the country’s safety commission said it identified “no fundamental barriers” to licensing the ARC’s proposed sodium-cooled fast neutron reactor, after completing a second design review that had stretched on for over three years.

It’s a result that ARC is calling a “pivotal step” toward commercial deployment.

That’s while adding it gives the company new “global credibility” in a race to market.

Its focus now is raising new money.

“Our current focus is on advancing strategic partnership and investment discussions to set the stage for the next phase of design work to support a license to construct application,” ARC Clean Technology spokesperson Sandra Donnelly told Brunswick News.

Asked specifically how much money is needed, Donnelly declined to say.

“We continue to evaluate the going forward cost estimate through current discussions with strategic partners,” she said.

“We are not sharing specific numbers.”

ARC’s former CEO Bill Labbe had previously said the ARC-100 would cost $500 million to develop and needed an additional $600 million more in power purchase agreements to move the project forward.

That was after the Higgs government gave $20 million to ARC, while the feds awarded the company another $7 million.

Ottawa also provided NB Power with $5 million to help it prepare for SMRs at Point Lepreau.

The Gallant Liberal government also first spent $10 million on ARC and Moltex, the province’s other company pursuing SMR technology, as they set up offices in Saint John now roughly eight years ago.

In an interview with Brunswick News on Thursday, another former ARC president and CEO, Norm Sawyer, who left the company in 2021 and is now a board member at the National Research Council Canada, pegged the figure needed to likely be between US$500 and $700 million.

“A preliminary design is almost essentially complete,” Sawyer said of the Phase 2 review. “Obviously, the next step needs money.

“They would also have to staff up.”

Sawyer said further design work could involve upwards of 100 employees with intensive final engineering to be completed.

That doesn’t include the construction of a facility at Lepreau, Sawyer said.

Brunswick News first reported last spring that ARC had handed out layoff notices to employees, while confirming that, in parallel, its president and CEO since 2021, Labbe, was leaving the company.

Asked if staffing levels will now change, Donnelly said that’s now “being reviewed as part of preparations for the next phase of design work.”

“It’s a positive step for them, it’s just can they leverage it now to get to the next step which is really investment,” Sawyer said. “I think there’s value there for investors.

“It’s also up to how much risk investors are willing to take. I think the investor would want a PPA (power purchase agreement) first.”

A power purchase agreement is a long-term contract where a nuclear power plant sells electricity to a buyer, often a utility, government, or large energy consumer.

NB Power CEO Lori Clark told a committee of MLAs at the provincial legislature earlier this year that ARC is “looking for investors now.”

Clark herself travelled to South Korea last December to promote ARC’s “commercialization possibilities,” in part to drum up new financial support.

A trilateral collaboration agreement was announced last year between South Korea’s utility, ARC, and NB Power with the goal of establishing “teaming agreements for global small modular reactor fleet deployment.”

ARC also said that it welcomed in February “multiple delegations” from South Korea’s utility.

No financial agreement has been revealed as of yet.

Finding the money necessary to finish design work is integral to building timelines.

“Our next objective is to complete the required design work by 2027 to enable NB Power to submit a license to construct application, with a target commercial deployment in early 2030s,” Donnelly said.

“Timelines will continue to be reviewed as design work and partnership discussions progress.”

The company still faces other challenges.

Brunswick News has also reported that ARC is still in search of a new enriched uranium supplier, after it originally planned to buy from Russia. It’s a problem Sawyer has suggested might result in a redesign of the company’s small modular nuclear reactor technology.

Asked if the concern over an enriched uranium source has been resolved, Donnelly said that “the availability of HALEU (high-assay low-enriched uranium) fuel remains an overall market issue.

“We are encouraged that the HALEU supply chain has advanced significantly over the past year with strong government support in multiple countries, and we continue to evaluate multiple options to secure a fuel supply for the first ARC unit,” she added.

The enriched uranium is an integral component of the company’s ARC-100 sodium-cooled fast reactor.

But it’s not as simple as finding that enriched uranium closer to home. While Canada mines uranium, and there are currently five uranium mines and mills operating in Canada, all located in northern Saskatchewan, it does not have uranium enrichment plants.

The U.S. opened its first and only enrichment plant, operated by Centrus Energy in Ohio, amid a federal push to find a solution to the Russia problem. It remains the only facility in the U.S. licensed to enrich uranium, and has a lineup for SMR firms seeking its fuel.

That said, there appeared to be a glimmer of hope on the uranium front late last year as the Trudeau federal government’s fall economic statement promised support to strengthen nuclear fuel supply chains.

“To support demand for allied enriched nuclear fuel and bolster supply chain resiliency, the 2024 fall economic statement announces the government’s intent to backstop up to $500 million in enriched nuclear fuel purchase contracts from the United States or other allied countries, including high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), subject to further consultations with industry stakeholders on program details, and provide $4 million over 10 years, starting in 2024-25, for Natural Resources Canada to administer the program,” reads the fall mini budget.

The current Carney government has yet to table a budget laying out whether that commitment will continue to go ahead.

July 18, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran could fuel a new wave of nuclear proliferation

 In the wake of recent strikes by Israel and the United States on Iranian
cities, military sites and nuclear facilities, a troubling paradox has
emerged: actions intended to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons
may actually be accelerating its pursuit of them and encouraging other
countries to follow suit.

 The Conversation 14th July 2025, https://theconversation.com/u-s-and-israeli-strikes-on-iran-could-fuel-a-new-wave-of-nuclear-proliferation-260897

July 18, 2025 Posted by | Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Workers at Hinkley Point C nuclear plant stage wildcat strike over alleged bullying

 Hundreds of mechanical engineers stopped work in protest over
‘management practices’ at construction site. A group of mechanical
engineers numbering in the low hundreds stopped work on Tuesday without the
backing of their trade unions amid deepening woes within the 26,000-strong
workforce over the conditions on the site.

It was the second unofficial
strike to take place in a week after a walkout last Wednesday in defiance
of union reps and the site developer, French utility company EDF, following
claims that senior managers on the Hinkley site have bullied engineering
staff. A contract worker on the project, which is running years late and
billions of pounds over budget, told the Guardian one of the incidents was
believed to have involved a senior manager bullying a young woman on the
team.

“They’ve had enough, and they’re out the gate,” he said.
Trade union Unite confirmed that a number of workers are taking part in a
protest over “management practices” which has resulted in the workers
being removed from the site. “Unite expects this matter to be resolved
soon,” a spokesperson said. The Guardian understands that EDF, which is
developing the first new nuclear reactor in a generation at Hinkley Point,
has begun an independent investigation into the alleged bullying on site.
The row has emerged days after the UK nuclear watchdog confirmed it would
prosecute EDF alongside the site’s main contractors Bouygues Travaux
Publics and Laing O’Rourke for health and safety offences over the death
of a site supervisor at the site after an accident in 2022.

 Guardian 15th July 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/15/workers-hinkley-point-c-nuclear-plant-stage-wildcat-strike-over-alleged-bullying

July 18, 2025 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

Improvements required at Sellafield after lead oxide release

 The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has served an improvement notice
on Sellafield Ltd following an incident at the Cumbria site. In April, an
unintentional release of lead oxide was detected at the First Generation
Magnox Storage Pond (FGMSP) facility when workers noticed the degraded
condition of some flexible lead shielding.

Lead shielding sheets are used
across the site to protect workers from potential exposure to radiation.
The coating on the sheets used on the FGMSP skip handling machine had
degraded over time, resulting in lead oxide being released which posed a
potential risk to workers. Further enquiries have identified a number of
other locations across the Sellafield site where degraded flexible lead
shielding sheets caused a risk of lead exposure. Lead oxide is not a
radioactive substance, but can be harmful if ingested, inhaled or absorbed.

 ONR 9th July 2025, https://www.onr.org.uk/news/all-news/2025/07/improvements-required-at-sellafield-after-lead-oxide-release/

July 18, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Trump’s Weapons Magic Show is Smoke & Mirrors Masterclass

Simplicius, Jul 15, 2025

Trump finally ‘wowed’ the world today with his grand announcement on punitive measures against Russia.

As usual, the announcement struck a dull and lackluster chord for most, with Russian markets jubilantly jumping by nearly 3% in response. But let’s dig in to see whether there is actually more meat on the bone of Trump’s scary threats than people give credit for.

Firstly, the timing: Axios now reports that Putin allegedly told Trump he plans to ‘intensify’ the Russian summer offensive in the next 60 days, with the goal—according to some sources—purportedly being to capture the remainder of nominal Russian territory, i.e. Donetsk, Lugansk, and Zaporozhye oblasts

Axios: According to Trump, Putin allegedly told him about plans to intensify the offensive in Ukraine in the next 60 days.

Trump shared details of the conversation with the Russian leader with his French counterpart Macron, adding: “He wants to take everything.”

It was after this conversation, according to the publication, that Trump criticized Putin and promised to increase arms supplies to Ukraine.

If there’s any hint of truth to such reports, then Trump’s “50-day notice” would seem to line up with Putin’s timeline, given that the conversation happened days ago, and thus Putin’s “60-day plan” would fall almost precisely on Trump’s deadline.

The basic interpretation of that could be that Trump is giving Russia two months to capture whatever territory it claims belongs to it, then “the hammer” will come down.

Now on the weapons side, as always, is where the biggest cloud of ambiguity lies. No one seems to know precisely what weapons and from what package will be sent, but according to CNN, it all sounds like more of the same, but just ‘repackaged’ with a new price tag.

Reports indicate the same air-to-air missiles, howitzer and GMLRS rounds will be sent as before, but simply that now NATO countries will foot the bill. Prior to that, under Biden’s PDA, the US was sending weapons directly to Ukraine from its own stockpiles, and then replenishing those stockpiles with new orders to the MIC, from taxpayer funds. Now, it will come from European taxpayer funds—a win for the US, we must admit.

But the biggest focal point were the Patriot ‘systems’. Again, the cloud of confusion—no one quite knows what the numbers represent: Patriot launchers, batteries, battalions, etc. Trump once mentioned the word ‘batteries’, but the numbers being discussed do not appear to realistically jibe. For instance, he mentioned sending “17” to Ukraine, but the US itself only has something like a total 50-70 active batteries, and obviously sending a third of its entire Patriot stock is unlikely.

When you really read between the lines, what Trump appeared to intimate was that the eventual goal is to scrounge up a larger amount of ‘systems’ for Ukraine, but “initially” only a tiny fraction will be sent. This is one of the few commenters who grasped the nuances of the mealy-mouthed ‘announcement’:

Recall that Rubio just recently implied the US has no more Patriots to give, a video I posted several updates ago. He called on Europe to give their Patriots instead, but quelle surprise, in a new FT article German Defense Minister Pistorius admitted that Germany will not be sending any Patriots nor Taurus missiles:

You can see in the above [on original], he goes on to say that Germany could purchase two systems from the US for Ukraine, instead. This is a kind of puerile shell game which is really meant to bolster the PR narrative that Ukraine is being ‘supported’ in order to keep hopes alive, so that the AFU doesn’t collapse from demoralization.

German Defense Minister Pistorius to Reuters:

Decision on two Patriots for Ukraine will be taken within days or weeks, but actual delivery of first system will take months.

In short: it’s a lot of hoopla to kick the can down the road again, repackaging the same policy with new fanfare.

The sanctions threat was likewise fraught with double-meaning. Trump called them ‘tariffs on Russia’, but in reality they are merely tariffs on US’ own allies:

Russia exports virtually nothing to the US which can be ‘tariffed’. The threat here is meaningless as these other heavyweights will not put up with Trump’s threat, forcing him to back away at the last moment as usual, then claiming “victory” after securing some other secondary fig leaf ‘deal’.

In conclusion: the entire charade appears to be a sneaky but brilliant act of jugglery by Trump, wherein he once again gives the appearance of major ‘action’ against Russia to silence critics and placate neocons, while in actuality doing little to further Ukraine’s war efforts, apart from plugging the previous status quo back onto life support. The act is meant to play both sides, relieving pressure on himself, while not overly risking his relationship with Putin in the hopes he can still clinch his big Nobel-earning armistice.

Notably, top-shelf items like JASSM missiles were all absent from the discussion, contrary to high-octane predictions from the peanut gallery the day before. Likewise, in the earlier-mentioned FT article, Pistorius once again categorically rejected—for the umpteenth time—the sending of Taurus missiles to Ukraine:

So, what are we left with? Essentially, the resumption of Biden’s PDA status quo with an ambiguous new promise of “a few” Patriot launchers, which is more a preliminary call to look for some potential stock among allies.

When asked what would happen after the 50 day mark if Putin refuses to back down, Trump told a reporter: “Don’t ask me that question.”

The bigger debate is whether Trump has now officially taken ownership of the war, despite his feeble attempts to impute his continued failings to Biden; many think so. But I still suspect Trump is trying his hardest to playact the stern and impatient taskmaster to signal ‘toughness’ against Putin for his deep state audience, all while actually trying to mitigate damage to US-Russian relations.

For instance, ‘senior officials’ told FT just two days ago that Trump still views Zelensky as the primary obstacle to peace:

That would likely make his ‘anger’ at Putin a put-on.

Intermezzo:

Ex-Russian prime minister Sergei Stepashin has a stark message for Germany, amidst all the militarization threats:

Moscow ‘knows location’ of German missile plants as Merz plans to hand Zelensky the bombs to hit ‘center of Russia’ — ex-PM Stepashin

Given that all the Trump-Ukraine weapons antics are merely an attempt to front-run and offlet some steam from the Russian summer offensives, let us now turn to frontline news:

Starting in western Zaporozhye Russian forces took over the remainder of Kamyanske:……………………………………………………………………………………….. https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/trumps-weapons-magic-show-is-smoke?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1351274&post_id=168312161&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=c9zhh&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

July 17, 2025 Posted by | spinbuster, USA | Leave a comment