nuclear-news

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

Nuclear power’s role in Japan is fading. The myths of reactor safety and energy needs can’t change that reality.

By Tadahiro Katsuta , Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 11th Dec 2025

On November 24, the Niigata Prefecture approved the partial restart of the seven-unit Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant—the world’s largest, with a 7,965-megawatt-electric capacity—the first time it would be operated since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi accident. The decision follows a series of efforts by the Japanese government to revive its nuclear industry since the Fukushima disaster led to the temporary shutdown of all its reactors.

In February, the Japanese government unveiled the country’s latest revised strategic energy plan with one significant shift: It no longer includes the commitment to “reduce dependence on nuclear power as much as possible.” Since the 2011 Fukushima accident, this objective has been reaffirmed in all three revisions preceding the 2022 plan. Its removal marks a clear departure from the government’s previously cautious stance on Japan’s nuclear policy.

Decommissioning work of the Fukushima Daiichi plant is still falling behind schedule, and there are no prospects for fully lifting the evacuation orders in the Fukushima Prefecture. This uncertainty surrounding post-accident Fukushima casts doubt on the government’s ability to manage another nuclear crisis. Meanwhile, the government’s plan actively promotes the “effective use” of plutonium through the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel and the “usefulness” of nuclear power as a decarbonized power source in its newest plan.

The Japanese government had consistently maintained a strong policy of promoting nuclear power since the initial planning stage in the 1950s until the Fukushima accident. Its current position, therefore, comes as little surprise. But in the nearly 15 years since the accident, Japan’s energy structure and society have changed—and all evidence shows that nuclear power cannot simply be switched on again, despite what the government claims.

Displaced by renewable energy. As a result of new safety regulations that the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) established in 2012, nuclear power plants with inadequate accident prevention measures are still unable to operate.

Japan used to operate 54 commercial nuclear power plants before the Fukushima accident, but so far only 14 have obtained operating permits and resumed operations. This translated into nuclear power’s share of electricity supply dropping to just over 5 percent from the 29 percent before the accident. The government is seeking a 20-percent share by fiscal 2040 but has not presented any specific measures to achieve this goal.

Meanwhile, renewable energy has increased rapidly since the Fukushima accident, partially filling the vacuum of the shutdown reactors. Renewable energy now supplies 226 terawatt-hours of electricity—more than twice the 84 terawatt-hours supplied by nuclear power. And renewables will continue to dominate the electricity market with a target share of 40 to 50 percent by 2040, also more than double that of nuclear power……………..

While nuclear power lacks competitiveness in the electricity market, Japan’s electricity demand has already plateaued. Demand has decreased by more than 10 percent since 2010,[2] according to the latest figures. The government insists that electricity consumption will increase sharply over the next 10 years due to the growing demand in data centers and semiconductor factories. However, even if this happens, it will still result in a lower electricity demand compared to 2010.

Unlike France, Japan does not allow output adjustments for nuclear power generation, and being an island nation, it cannot export electricity overseas. Moreover, with a slowing economy and a shrinking population, electricity demand has already peaked. In a market that seeks to maximize profits by anticipating short-term electricity demand and avoiding excess power generation, nuclear power is not an attractive option.

Does Japan need MOX fuel?

……………………………………………..Power companies and the government have not disclosed what the cost will be for Japan of manufacturing this MOX fuel abroad and then importing it. But trade statistics indicate that the MOX fuel commissioned at a French reprocessing plant cost approximately $11,000 per kilogram of heavy metal (primarily plutonium and uranium), while uranium fuel imported from the United States cost approximately $1,000 per kilogram of heavy metal. In other words, MOX fuel is more than 10 times as expensive as imported non-reprocessed reactor fuel.[3]………………….

Does nuclear power mean fewer CO2 emissions?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..As spent nuclear fuel continues to accumulate in Japan, the government claims that it can be reduced by reprocessing. If so, the reduction cost can be estimated as ¥488 million ($3.3 million) per ton.[5] That’s an emission reduction cost per ton 300,000 times higher than for other mitigation measures indicated by the IPCC. Moreover, spent nuclear fuel does not disappear through reprocessing. Even at the end of a closed fuel cycle, the reprocessed and recycled used fuel will require permanent geological disposal, which comes with its own set of challenges. That’s particularly the case with MOX fuel, which generates high decay heat associated with plutonium and accumulated minor actinides.

Advocates of nuclear power argue that combining fast reactors and transmutation technology after reprocessing can reduce the volume of high-level radioactive waste. But, beyond their many scientific and economic challenges, those measures will not be available in time to solve the climate change crisis, which requires immediate solutions. The only way to stop the generation of spent nuclear fuel is to stop operating nuclear reactors in the first place.

The myth of nuclear power disappears. The Fukushima accident demonstrated—once again—that the claimed inherent safety of nuclear power is a myth. Japan’s reduced reliance on nuclear power since the accident has now also debunked a second myth—that the Japanese society needs nuclear energy. The government’s reversal of its passive stance in favor of a proactive nuclear power policy goes against the current facts. It should revise its energy plan accordingly.

Unfortunately, the new Japanese cabinet formed this October, like its predecessors, is sidestepping the many current and future challenges of nuclear power………………………… As long as the government continues to avoid confronting the difficult reality of nuclear power in Japan, the myth will go on. Until it doesn’t.

Notes…………………….
https://thebulletin.org/2025/12/nuclear-powers-role-in-japan-is-fading-the-myths-of-reactor-safety-and-energy-needs-cant-change-that-reality/

December 22, 2025 Posted by | Japan, politics | Leave a comment

They are​ calling fast-track Ukraine EU bid ‘nonsense.’ So why dangle it?

It’s supposed to soften the blow for lost NATO membership. But Kyiv is hardly ready and not all members are enthusiastic.

Ian Proud, Responsible Statecraft, Dec 18, 2025

Trying to accelerate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union makes sense as part of the U.S.-sponsored efforts to end the war with Russia. But there are two big obstacles to this happening by 2027: Ukraine isn’t ready, and Europe can’t afford it.

As part of ongoing talks to end the war in Ukraine, the Trump administration had advanced the idea that Ukraine be admitted into the European Union by 2027. On the surface, this appears a practical compromise, given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s concession that Ukraine will drop its aspiration to join NATO.

However, the idea of accelerated entry for Ukraine has not been met with widespread enthusiasm in Europe itself. Diplomats in Brussels dismissed the notion as “nonsense: There needs to be an appetite for enlargement that isn’t there.”

There are two big problems with Ukraine’s rapid accession, the first being readiness and the second cost.

Firstly, Ukraine is nowhere near ready to meet the EU’s exacting requirements for membership. The process of joining the bloc is long and complex. At the start of November, in presenting its enlargement report, the EU said that it could admit new members as early as 2030, with Montenegro the most advanced in negotiations.

After it was formally granted candidate status in June 2022, Ukraine this year passed screening of its progress against the various chapters of the acquis (regulations) that it needs to pass before accession is granted. However, the EU enlargement report on Ukraine downgraded the country’s status from A+ to B, largely in light of the corruption scandal that first erupted in the summer and that rumbles on today.

The report indicated that Ukraine had made good progress on just 11 of the 33 chapters required for accession. It has made limited progress on 7 of the chapters, including on corruption, public procurement, company law and competition policy. It has yet to finalize negotiations on any of the chapters. And, of course, with war still raging, it is incredibly difficult to both agree and put in place the reforms needed to align itself with EU rules and standards. So, even if the war ended by Christmas, which despite the progress still appears optimistic, it would be unlikely to do all of the necessary work in the space of a year to be ready for accession.

The second, possibly more insurmountable challenge is cost.

In July, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz commented that Ukraine was unlikely to join before 2034. The EU has already formalized its next seven year budget through to that time, coming in at $2.35 trillion.

As I pointed out for Responsible Statecraft last year, Ukrainian membership of the EU would come with an enormous price tag……………………………………………. So the economic cost of delivering Ukrainian membership may not be politically viable any time soon, and certainly not before 2034, as the German premier has indicated.

……………………………………With practically all Russia-Ukraine economic ties severed over the past decade, Russian President Vladimir Putin has dropped his opposition to EU membership for Ukraine. An end to the war would allow Ukraine, finally, to start to reform and rebuild its bankrupt economy, and EU membership could accelerate that process.

That’s why Zelensky’s decision to drop the aspiration to NATO membership is such an important stepping stone. It has been abundantly clear since the start of the war that Russia’s NATO red line will never change. Russia has verbalized its opposition at least since Putin’s Munich Security Conference speech in 2007, when he said that NATO expansion “represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.” 

……………………………………..https://responsiblestatecraft.org/ukraine-european-union/

December 22, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

India’s Parliament approves bill to open civil nuclear power sector to private firms

DailyMail, By ASSOCIATED PRESS, 19 December 2025

NEW DELHI (AP) – India´s Parliament approved new legislation Thursday that enables opening the tightly controlled civil nuclear power sector to private companies.

The government termed it a major policy shift to speed up [?] clean energy expansion while the opposition political parties argued that it dilutes safety and liability safeguards.

The lower house of parliament passed the legislation Wednesday and the upper house on Thursday. It now needs the assent from the Indian president, which is a formality, to come into force.

………….. critics say it opens the door to risks, mainly health hazards, that could have long term consequences…………..

 some are skeptical about India´s ambitions as the country´s nuclear sector is still very small, and negative public perceptions about the industry remain.

Opposition parties flagged concerns related to several provisions of the bill and urged the government to refer it to a parliamentary panel for examination. The government didn´t adhere to the request.

“The bill doesn´t have sufficient safeguards when it comes to mitigating the bad health of those impacted by living in areas closer to nuclear plants,” Ashok Mittal, a lawmaker from the opposition Aam Admi Party, told The Associated Press.

G. Sundarrajan, an anti-nuclear energy activist, called the bill a “disastrous law,” saying it takes away essential safeguards that are needed to make sure companies invest in safety and reduce the chances of a major disaster that can impact millions from occurring.

“It also provides little recourse for any Indian citizen to claim damages from nuclear companies even if they are affected by radiation leaks or suffer from any other health impact as a result of a nuclear plant in their region,” he said. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-15396015/Indias-Parliament-approves-bill-open-civil-nuclear-power-sector-private-firms.html

December 22, 2025 Posted by | India, politics | Leave a comment

73 Organizations Send Joint Letter Calling on the Federal Government to Improve Nuclear Waste Oversight

https://wawa-news.com/index.php/2025/12/17/73-organizations-send-joint-letter-calling-on-the-federal-government-to-improve-nuclear-waste-oversight/

73 organizations representing a broad segment of Canadian society have sent a joint letter to the federal government urging more oversight of the nuclear industry and of nuclear waste projects.

In the letter, the groups urged the Prime Minister and the Ministers of Environment and Climate Change and of Energy and Natural Resources to exercise oversight of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s “Adaptive Phased Management Project” to transport, process, bury and eventually abandon all of Canada’s nuclear fuel waste at the NWMO’s selected site in the heart of Treaty 3 Territory in northwestern Ontario and its upcoming impact assessment process.

The groups expressed an overarching concern about the lack of federal oversight of this project since its inception in 2002.

More recently, the NWMO has made it known that they are seeking to have transportation of the radioactive wastes excluded from the project’s impact assessment process. But for 20 years the NWMO has been describing transportation as part of their project, and the Impact Assessment Act requires activities that are integral to – or, in the language of the Act “incidental” to – the project be included in the assessment.

The joint letter requests that the federal government provide immediate oversight and direction in four areas:

73 organizations representing a broad segment of Canadian society have sent a joint letter to the federal government urging more oversight of the nuclear industry and of nuclear waste projects.

In the letter, the groups urged the Prime Minister and the Ministers of Environment and Climate Change and of Energy and Natural Resources to exercise oversight of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s “Adaptive Phased Management Project” to transport, process, bury and eventually abandon all of Canada’s nuclear fuel waste at the NWMO’s selected site in the heart of Treaty 3 Territory in northwestern Ontario and its upcoming impact assessment process.

The groups expressed an overarching concern about the lack of federal oversight of this project since its inception in 2002.

More recently, the NWMO has made it known that they are seeking to have transportation of the radioactive wastes excluded from the project’s impact assessment process. But for 20 years the NWMO has been describing transportation as part of their project, and the Impact Assessment Act requires activities that are integral to – or, in the language of the Act “incidental” to – the project be included in the assessment.

The joint letter requests that the federal government provide immediate oversight and direction in four areas:

December 22, 2025 Posted by | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment

Trump’s rush to build nuclear reactors across the U.S. raises safety worries

NPR, December 17, 2025

In May, President Trump sat in the Oval Office flanked by executives from America’s nuclear power industry.

“It’s a hot industry. It’s a brilliant industry,” the president said from behind the Resolute desk.

It’s also an industry that’s having a moment. Billions of dollars in capital are currently flowing into dozens of companies chasing new kinds of nuclear technologies. These are small modular designs that can potentially be mass produced in the hundreds or even thousands. Their proponents say these advanced designs promise to deliver megawatts of power safely and cheaply.

But there’s a problem, Joseph Dominguez, the CEO of Constellation Energy, told the president.

New nuclear plants keep getting caught up in safety regulations.

“Mr. President, you know this because you’re the best at building things,” Dominguez, whose company runs about a quarter of America’s existing nuclear reactors, said. “Delay in regulations and permitting will absolutely kill you. Because if you can’t get the plant on, you can’t get the revenue.”

Now, a new Trump administration program is sidestepping the regulatory system that’s overseen the nuclear industry for half a century. The program will fast-track construction of new and untested reactor designs built by private firms, with an explicit goal of having at least three nuclear test reactors up and running by the United States’ 250th birthday, July 4, 2026.

If that goal is met, it will be without the direct oversight of America’s primary nuclear regulator. Since the 1970s, safety for commercial reactors has been the purview of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But the NRC is only consulting on the new Reactor Pilot Program, which is being run by the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy……………………………………………………………………………………………………

Sites across the country will host new reactor designs

The new pilot program may be an unproven regulatory path run by an agency with limited experience in the commercial sector, but supporters say it’s energizing an industry that’s been moribund for decades.

“This is exactly what we need to do,” said Isaiah Taylor, founder and CEO of Valar Atomics, a small nuclear startup headquartered in Hawthorne, Calif. “We need to make nuclear great again.”

Valar and other companies plan to build smaller reactors than those currently used in the nuclear industry, and that makes a Chernobyl or Fukushima-type accident impossible, noted Nick Touran, an independent nuclear consultant. “The overall worst-case scenario is definitely less when you’re a smaller reactor,” he said.

Critics, however, worry that the tight July 4 deadline, political pressure and a lack of transparency are all compromising safety. Even a “small” release of radioactive material could cause damage to people and the environment around the test sites.

“This is not normal, and this is not OK, and this is not going to lead to success,” warned Allison Macfarlane, a professor at the University of British Columbia who served as chairman of the NRC under President Barack Obama. “This is how to have an accident.”

AI’s need for speed

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Right from the start it was clear that, unlike the slow and deliberate safety culture that has dominated nuclear power for decades, this new program would be all about speed.

…………officials responsible for overseeing safety would do “whatever we need to ensure that the government is not stopping you from reaching [nuclear] criticality on or before July 4, 2026.”

A new regulator

Before the executive order, the Energy Department did not regulate the safety of commercial nuclear reactors. That job fell to another body: the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The commission was set up in 1975 by Congress as an independent safety watchdog, said Allison Macfarlane, the former NRC chair. Part of the reason the NRC was formed was because the predecessor to the DOE, known as the Atomic Energy Commission, oversaw both safety and promotion of nuclear power at the same time.

“This was a very strong conflict of interest,” Macfarlane said.

But in recent years, companies, particularly those trying to build new kinds of reactors, had become frustrated with the NRC, Macfarlane said. “The promoters of these small modular reactors were becoming very vociferous about the NRC being the problem,” she said.

In 2022, the NRC rejected a combined license application for Oklo, a new nuclear startup. Oklo had submitted an application to build and operate its small reactor, called the Aurora powerhouse. But the NRC denied the application because it contained “significant information gaps in its description of Aurora’s potential accidents as well as its classification of safety systems and components.”

Oklo was told it could resubmit its application to the NRC, but it never did.

Then at the May signing of the executive order, Oklo’s CEO Jacob DeWitte appeared behind President Trump applauding the new reactor program at DOE.

“Changing the permitting dynamics is going to help things move faster,” DeWitte said to the president. “It’s never been more exciting.”

Oklo had another connection to the Energy Department — the secretary of energy, Chris Wright, was a member of Oklo’s board of directors until he took the helm at the DOE. Wright stepped down following his confirmation in February.

In August, a little over a month after that initial meeting between industry executives and the DOE, the Office of Nuclear Energy announced the 11 advanced reactor projects had been selected for the Reactor Pilot Program. Three of Oklo’s reactors were part of the new pilot program, including a test version of the reactor design rejected by the NRC…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Valar’s design looks far different from the reactors that are running today. It will use a special type of fuel together with a high-temperature gas to generate heat and electricity. Taylor said gathering real data will speed development and increase safety over the long-term….

(Valar is also party to a lawsuit against the NRC arguing the commission does not have the authority to regulate small reactors. In his interview, Taylor told NPR the company intends to file for an NRC license “when we’re ready.”)

…………………………………………………..  critics question whether the pilot program will really produce safe nuclear reactors.

The July 4, 2026, deadline puts enormous pressure on the program, said Heidy Khlaaf, the chief AI scientist at the AI Now Institute, which recently published a report warning that AI development could undermine nuclear safety.

“I think these manufactured timelines are actually incredibly concerning,” Khlaaf said. “There’s no timeline for assessing a new design and making sure it’s safe, especially something we haven’t seen before.”

Then there’s the question of public transparency. The NRC makes many of the documents around its decisions available publicly. It also frequently allows the public to comment as well, added Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the nonprofit Union of Concerned Scientists. The new pilot program is far more opaque and “is really an attempt to subvert the laws and regulations that go around commercial nuclear power,” he said.

While many of the test reactors are small and tout themselves as inherently safer than existing nuclear power plants, they are still capable of leaking radiation in an accident, Lyman noted. “If they are located closer to populated areas, if there aren’t any provisions for offsite radiological emergency planning … then you are potentially putting the public at greater risk, even if the reactors are small,” he said.

Perhaps most worrying, said former NRC Chair Macfarlane, is how the DOE’s safety assessment might be used to build more small reactors across the country, once the pilot reactors are built.

………………………………………..Macfarlane is unconvinced. She said relying on the hasty DOE analysis for the construction of potentially dozens or even hundreds of small reactors around the U.S. is the real risk.

“They can look at what the DOE did, they can take it as a piece of input, but they have to do their own separate analysis,” she warned. “Otherwise, none of us are safe.” https://www.npr.org/2025/12/17/nx-s1-5608371/trump-executive-order-new-nuclear-reactors-safety-concerns

December 21, 2025 Posted by | safety, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Julian Assange: Sweden Broke Own Laws With Nobel Prize to Venezuela’s Machado

The same dynamic is at play in the Caribbean once again, according to Assange, as the Nobel Committee crowns a Venezuelan politician best known for her unhinged appeals for foreign military intervention and her dedication of her Nobel victory to US President Donald Trump.

Max Blumenthal and Wyatt Reed, The Grayzone, December 17, 2025

By awarding its peace prize to Trump’s favorite Venezuelan opposition figure, pro-war coup plotter Maria Corina Machado, the Nobel Committee contravened the principles enshrined in its founding documents, as well as Swedish law, Julian Assange alleged in an explosive brief reviewed by The Grayzone.

The Swedish government violated its own laws by awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition figure Maria Corina Machado, according to an explosive legal brief filed by Julian Assange, the Wikileaks co-founder and former political prisoner who was hounded across the globe, confined in harsh conditions, and subjected to physical and psychological torment over the course of a decade by the US and its allies.

The Nobel committee’s decision to award Machado the Peace Prize — and the 11 million Swedish Kroner ($1.18 million USD) reward which accompanies it — means that “there is a real risk that funds derived from Nobel’s endowment have been or will be… diverted from their charitable purpose to facilitate aggression, crimes against humanity, and war crimes,” Assange stated.

The Wikileaks founder pointed to the “ample public statements… showing that the U.S. government and María Corina Machado have exploited the authority of the prize to provide them with a casus moralis for war,” adding that the explicitly stated purpose of the war sought by Machado and her wealthy Latin American backers would be “installing her by force in order to plunder $1.7 trillion in Venezuelan oil and other resources.”

The Nobel Foundation stands accused of a number of violations of Swedish criminal law, including breach of trust, misappropriation and gross misappropriation, conspiracy, crimes against international law, as well as financing of aggression, facilitation of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and breaching Sweden’s stated obligations under the Rome Statute, to which Stockholm says it is “deeply committed.”

Under Swedish law, “Alfred Nobel’s endowment for peace cannot be spent on the promotion of war,” Assange noted. “Nor can it be used as a tool in foreign military intervention. Venezuela, whatever the status of its political system, is no exception.”

By granting Nobel funds to Machado, Assange argues that the Committee is effectively financing “a conspiracy to murder civilians, to violate national sovereignty using military force…” By refusing to end payments, “they flagrantly violate Nobel’s will and clearly cross the threshold into criminality,” he alleged. The Wikileaks co-founder seeks the “immediate freezing of all remaining funds and a full criminal investigation” into Committee members who awarded the prize.

The Nobel Prizes were established in 1901 according to Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel’s last will and testament, which was later incorporated into the Swedish and Norwegian legal systems. The Peace Prize, which is meant to be bestowed on the figure who has contributed most to “fraternity between nations,” the “abolition or reduction of standing armies,” and “the holding and promotion of peace congresses,” has served as a cornerstone of Scandinavian soft power ever since.

Since its inception, however, the prize was marred by controversy due to the violent legacy of its recipients, and the political ambitions of its Norwegian sponsors. In the case of one of the Prize’s first winners, US President Theodore Roosevelt, the Norwegian Nobel Committee was criticized at the time for overlooking the American statesman’s naked warmongering in Latin America in order to curry favor with the nascent US empire. The New York Times sardonically observed that “a broad smile illuminated the face of the globe when the prize was awarded … to the most warlike citizen of these United States.”

The same dynamic is at play in the Caribbean once again, according to Assange, as the Nobel Committee crowns a Venezuelan politician best known for her unhinged appeals for foreign military intervention and her dedication of her Nobel victory to US President Donald Trump.

As Assange explained, Trump’s massive buildup of US military forces off the coast of Venezuela “has already committed undeniable war crimes, including the lethal targeting of civilian boats and survivors at sea, which has killed at least 95 people.”

“The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights labeled these U.S. coastal strikes against civilian boats “extrajudicial executions,” the Wikileaks co-founder wrote. And the “principal architect of this aggression” was none other than Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who “nominated María Corina Machado for the peace prize.”

Norwegian Nobel judges tied to influential Venezuelan regime change lobbyist

The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to a figure as clearly unqualified as Machado – and in apparent violation of Swedish law – raised questions about whether the Committee had been influenced by powerful outside interests. Machado’s nomination for the prize by the US Secretary of State had an undeniable impact on the decision, as the Nobel ceremony serves as a central channel of Norwegian soft power. But inside Oslo, a political powerbroker determined to return to power in his family’s native Venezuela may have also played a role in swinging votes for Machado. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The odds of Machado winning surged from 3.75% to 72.8% just hours before the Nobel Committee officially informed Machado of her victory. One unusually prescient bettor won $65,000 gambling on the Venezuelan opposition figure. “It seems we have been prey to a criminal actor who wants to earn money on our information,” said Kristian Berg Harpviken, the head of the Nobel Institute.

Months later, The Nobel committee still has yet to conclude its investigation into the corruption scandal. As of publication, the committee did not respond to a request for comment by The Grayzone.

For what promotes itself as the world’s premiere peacemaking institution, it may be too late to undo the damage wrought by giving the Nobel Prize to an avowed champion of violent regime change.

“Using her elevated position as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Machado may well have” already “tipped the balance in favor of war,” Assange concluded. https://thegrayzone.com/2025/12/17/julian-assange-sweden-nobel-venezuelas-machado/

December 21, 2025 Posted by | Legal, Sweden | Leave a comment

Nuc­lear power plant is threat to our future.

Western Morning News, Jo Smol­don Bridg­wa­ter, Somer­set18 Dec 2025,
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/western-morning-news/20251218/281835765040539

YES, of course the Stop Hinkley event you pub­li­cised (Let­ters, Decem­ber 13) was Christ­mas humour, but it does con­cern us that sig­ni­fic­ant facts are being ignored about the out­dated Hinkley Point C new (old) nuc­lear power plant being built on our pre­cious Severn estu­ary when cli­mate change pre­dic­tions sug­gest that the Hinkley coast­line will be inund­ated and flood­ing will occur across Somer­set.

How will this be safe when HPC radio­act­ive waste will be too hot to move and will have to reside on the fra­gile coast­line for over 200 years?

It seems that there are not enough skilled work­ers to com­plete the HPC job which has had design prob­lems, des­pite sup­posedly learn­ing from the mis­takes at Olkiluoto, in Fin­land, Flam­man­ville, in France, and Taishan, in China.

The ori­ginal work­force of 8,000 has now had to increase to 15,000, and still the start-up date is up in the clouds. The costs have escal­ated from £18 bil­lion to cur­rent pre­dicted costs of £46 bil­lion and rising.

How is the coun­try going to pay for this and all the other pie in the sky so-called new nuc­lear builds that roll off the tongues of the fast turnover of politi­cians that have been involved?

So far it has taken 10 Prime Min­is­ters, start­ing with Thatcher, to par­tially build HPC. Their leg­acy is a big mis­take that nobody has the cour­age to say we shouldn’t have star­ted this, it’s a run­away train on which nobody has figured out how to apply the brakes.

HPC is fin­ished. HPC will never be needed, I believe, other than for a build­ing site train­ing pro­gramme.

Not one of those Prime Min­is­ters will be account­able for the toxic high level radio­act­ive waste that will be lurk­ing on the Severn estu­ary coast­line far into the future for our chil­dren’s chil­dren to pay for and deal with.

The level of radio­activ­ity of the waste will be in total around 80% of the radio­activ­ity level cur­rently of Sel­lafield. This fact alone will mean that Hinkley will be the Sel­lafield of the South.

Hinkley’s design is cur­rently in the news due to its inten­tion of des­troy­ing more of our pre­cious Severn estu­ary fish and mar­ine life in its massive cool­ing water intakes, which will suck in an Olympic-sized swim­ming pool of water every 20 seconds.

EDF is fal­ter­ing over its require­ment to pro­tect the fish with an acous­tic fish deterrent. Even so, this tech­no­logy may save some of the fish, but the eggs and fry will pass into the cool­ing sys­tem and be des­troyed by the heat and chem­ic­als, which will then be pumped back out into the estu­ary.

The tech­no­logy of nuc­lear power belongs to the last cen­tury and is waste­ful of energy. The steam pro­cess res­ults in two thirds of the heat energy being pumped out into the estu­ary warm­ing the sea.

Stop Hinkley con­tin­ues to hold EDF to account, and we will be watch­ing, and we will be back for the next pre­dicted fin­ish date of 2027 with our HPC Christ­mas tur­key to cook.

December 21, 2025 Posted by | climate change, UK | Leave a comment

Arctic endured year of record heat as climate scientists warn of ‘winter being redefined’

Oliver Milman, Guardian 16th Dec 2025

Region known as ‘world’s refrigerator’ is heating up as much as four times as quickly as global average, Noaa experts say

The Arctic endured a year of record heat and shrunken sea ice as the world’s northern latitudes continue a rapid shift to becoming rainier and less ice-bound due to the climate crisis, scientists have reported.

From October 2024 to September 2025, temperatures across the entire Arctic region were the hottest in 125 years of modern record keeping, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) said, with the last 10 years being the 10 warmest on record in the Arctic.

The Arctic is heating up as much as four times as quickly as the global average, due to the burning of fossil fuels, and this extra heat is warping the world’s refrigerator – a region that acts as a key climate regulator for the rest of the planet……………………………………………………………………….. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/16/artic-record-heat-shrunken-sea-ice-report

December 21, 2025 Posted by | ARCTIC, climate change | Leave a comment

Subject: Rushing to Deregulation – the report of the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce


 NFLA 18th Dec 2025

Introduction:
‘Nuclear plants should be built closer to urban areas and should be allowed to harm the local environment’ so concluded The Times, 24 November 2025 on reporting on the findings of the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce in its final report to the UK Government. This recommendation made to Ministers
flew in the face of accepted policy, the Semi-Urban Population Density Criteria. that building new nuclear plants near towns and cities should be banned because of the risk posed to large numbers of people in the event of an accident involving radioactive materials.


Many of the other 46 recommendations made by the NRTs were equally disquieting, representing a
manifesto of deregulation – a ‘radical reset’ – in the vain hope that this will spark a renaissance in the nuclear industry, with new nuclear plants thrown up more quickly and more cheaply.

The outcome of the inquiry was effectively predetermined in line with a press release from the Office of the Prime Minister issued 6 February 2025. This appeared to mirror the front pages of vituperative pro-nuclear newspapers, with Prime Minister Starmer speaking of his determination to ‘slash red tape to get Britain building [new nuclear power stations] – as part of his Plan for Change ‘with the government ‘ripping up archaic rules and saying no to the NIMBYS to prioritise growth’.

The press release announced that the Prime Minister was establishing a Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce charged
with making this vision a reality which will ‘report directly to the PM’.
i
Although supposedly independent, three of the five taskforce members had clear links to the nuclear industry (Andrew Sherry is former chief scientist at the National Nuclear Laboratory, Dame Sue Ion has held various posts in UK nuclear industry bodies, and Mark Bassett is a member of the InternationalNuclear Safety Advisory Group), handy for a body charged with identifying the means to sideline Britain’s ‘overly bureaucratic’ nuclear regulations.

Cynics – like this author – might postulate that the findings were largely pre-written at the outset and that the real purpose of the taskforce was to seek to justify them.

In working upon this justification, the taskforce, reinforced by intermittent but consistent statements from Government Ministers, nuclear trades unions, and industry lobbyists, has sought to trash regulators as overzealous, and their regulations as disproportionate, and campaigners and members of the public who oppose nuclear development as NIMBYS and BLOCKERS, with their recourse to legal remedies seen as irksome……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/A445-NB331-Rushing-to-Deregulation-Dec-2025.pdf

December 21, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Transition will halve our energy costs by 2050

NESO report says net zero will make energy cheaper within 25 years
 Energy Live News 11th Dec 2025

Britain could halve its energy spending by 2050 as decarbonisation cuts costs and shields the economy from fossil fuel shocks.

That is the headline finding from NESO’s new analysis of the Future Energy Scenarios 2025 which lays out three illustrative routes to net zero and the price tags attached.

NESO says energy-related costs fall in every pathway dropping from roughly 10% of GDP today to around 5-6% by mid-century even as demand rises due to population growth, economic expansion and power-hungry data centres.

The reason is simple. Spending shifts from imported fossil fuels to homegrown renewables, stronger networks and efficient electric heating which cut operating costs and create local jobs.

The report also shows just how much a net zero system protects the country………….. https://www.energylivenews.com/2025/12/11/transition-will-halve-our-energy-costs-by-2050/

December 21, 2025 Posted by | renewable, UK | Leave a comment

Panic as Chernobyl’s $2 billion protective shield cracks open sparking fears of a deadly radiation leak

Daily Mail, By STACY LIBERATORE, US SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY EDITOR, 18 December 2025 

The dome built over the remains of the Chernobyl disaster has been damaged, raising fears it may no longer be able to contain radioactive material.

Officially known as the New Safe Confinement (NSC), the at least $2 billion protective shield was constructed over Reactor 4, which caused the world’s worst nuclear disaster in 1986.

The United Nations‘ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a nuclear watchdog, revealed this month that the NSC was severely damaged in a Russian drone strike in February. 

The IAEA team conducted a safety assessment earlier this month, finding the dome had lost its primary safety functions, including confinement capability.

IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi said: ‘Limited temporary repairs have been carried out on the roof, but timely and comprehensive restoration remains essential to prevent further degradation and ensure long-term nuclear safety.’

The inspection brought some relief, confirming that the dome’s main structure and monitoring systems remain intact. 

But beneath the damaged shelter lies massive quantities of radioactive material from the 1986 disaster, making the site a ticking time bomb.

The IAEA has urged urgent repairs and upgrades to Chernobyl’s protective shelter, calling for better humidity control, advanced corrosion monitoring, and a high-tech automatic system to keep the radioactive reactor remains under control. 

The damaged dome is the latest of several such expert missions since September last year, when the substations became increasingly affected by the military conflict.

‘These substations are essential for nuclear safety and security. They are absolutely indispensable for providing the electricity all nuclear power plants need for reactor cooling and other safety systems,’ Grossi said

‘They are also needed to distribute the electricity that they produce to households and industry.’

In 2026, with support from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Chornobyl site will undertake additional temporary repairs to support the re-establishment of the NSC’s confinement function, paving the way for full restoration once the conflict ends.

‘The IAEA – which has a team permanently at the site – will continue to do everything it can to support efforts to fully restore nuclear safety and security at the Chornobyl site,’ Grossi said in a statement……………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15393121/Chernobyl-protective-shield-radiation-leak.html

December 21, 2025 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

New UK-France Nuclear Steering Group Meets to Advance Cooperation Under Northwood Declaration

Statement by the United Kingdom and the French Republic on Nuclear Policy and Cooperation.

From: Cabinet Office, 18 December 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-uk-france-nuclear-steering-group-meets-to-advance-cooperation-under-northwood-declaration

At the UK-France Summit in July 2025, Prime Minister Keir Starmer and President Emmanuel Macron affirmed their commitment to strengthening the UK-France nuclear relationship. They signed the Northwood Declaration, which established the UK-France Nuclear Steering Group in order to provide political direction and coordinate bilateral work across nuclear policy, capability and operations.

On 10 December, the Nuclear Steering Group met for the first time in Paris, jointly chaired by senior officials from the UK Cabinet Office and the Presidency of the French Republic.

They were accompanied by senior military personnel and officials from defence and foreign ministries to discuss Euro-Atlantic security issues and coordination of their respective independent deterrents. They discussed their approach to strengthening deterrence in Europe and confirmed their ambition for bilateral co-operation on nuclear deterrence.

They also observed Operation POKER which was the first time foreign officials were given access to this demonstration of France’s strategic nuclear airborne component.

December 21, 2025 Posted by | France, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

‘Unquestionably an Act of War’: Trump Declares Naval Blockade Against Venezuela

“This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it,” warned one Democratic senator

Jake Johnson, Common Dreams, Dec 17, 2025

US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on “all sanctioned oil tankers” approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what’s widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.

The “total and complete blockade,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US “all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.”

US President Donald Trump late Tuesday declared a blockade on “all sanctioned oil tankers” approaching and leaving Venezuela, a major escalation in what’s widely seen as an accelerating march to war with the South American country.

The “total and complete blockade,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, will only be lifted when Venezuela returns to the US “all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.”

“Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America,” Trump wrote, referring to the massive US military buildup in the Caribbean. “It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before.”

The government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, which has mobilized its military in response to the US president’s warmongering, denounced Trump’s comments as a “grotesque threat” aimed at “stealing the riches that belong to our homeland.”

The US-based anti-war group CodePink said in a statement that “Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must ‘return’ oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective” of his military campaign.

“Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as ‘theft’ is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy,” said CodePink. “A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat.”

The announced naval blockade—an act of aggression under international law—came a week after the Trump administration seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela and made clear that it intends to intercept more.

US Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), one of the leaders of a war powers resolution aimed at preventing the Trump administration from launching a war on Venezuela without congressional approval, said Tuesday that “a naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war.”

“A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want,” Castro added, noting that a vote on his resolution is set for Thursday. “Every member of the House of Representatives will have the opportunity to decide if they support sending Americans into yet another regime change war.”………………………………………….https://www.commondreams.org/news/unquestionably-an-act-of-war-trump-declares-naval-blockade-against-venezuela

December 20, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant running on single power line, Russia says.

By Reuters, December 17, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-running-single-power-line-russia-says-2025-12-16/

MOSCOW, Dec 16 (Reuters) – The Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine is currently receiving electricity through only one of two external power lines, its Russian management said on Tuesday.

The other line was disconnected due to military activity, the management said, adding that radiation levels remain normal. Repair work will begin as soon as possible.

The nuclear plant, Europe’s largest, has been under Russian control since March 2022, when Russian forces overran much of southeastern Ukraine. It is not currently producing electricity but relies on external power to keep the nuclear material cool and avoid a meltdown.

Each side has regularly accused the other of shelling the facility. It experienced a couple of complete power outages earlier this month but was subsequently reconnected.

In September and October the plant was without external power for 30 days, relying on backup diesel generators, until a damaged line was reconnected during a local ceasefire arranged with the help of the U.N. nuclear agency.

Reporting by Reuters Writing by Maxim Rodionov Editing by Mark Trevelyan

December 20, 2025 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Scottish National Party says UK nuclear deterrent is ‘America-first’.

By Tom Dunlop, UK Defence Journal, December 17, 2025 

A disagreement over defence innovation and reliance on US technology surfaced in the House of Commons during Defence questions.

SNP MP Dave Doogan argued that what he described as an “America-first posture” is harming UK defence innovation, particularly in relation to the nuclear deterrent. He said the system relies heavily on US technology, citing components including “fusing, firing, arming, neutron initiators, the gas transfer system and the Mark 4 aeroshell.” Doogan also criticised plans to buy additional F-35 aircraft for what he characterised as “US-manufactured gravity-delivered nuclear weapons.”

He questioned why the government appeared aligned with US priorities while, in his view, overlooking European initiatives. “President Trump will put America first, but it is difficult to understand why this Labour Government seem keen to do the same, while spurning the innovation opportunity of the £130 billion SAFE programme in the EU,” Doogan told the House……………https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/snp-says-uk-nuclear-deterrent-is-america-first/

 –

 

December 20, 2025 Posted by | politics international, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »