nuclear-news

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

IDF Report Found Multiple Cases of Friendly Fire Deaths on Oct 7

The probe identified numerous examples of Israeli forces overreacting or failing to act during the Hamas assault

by Kyle Anzalone June 20, 2024 t https://news.antiwar.com/2024/06/20/idf-report-found-multiple-cases-of-friendly-fire-deaths-on-oct-7/

A review by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) set to be released this summer will conclude that Israeli soldiers killed many of their own people on October 7, Israeli media reported. The inquiry is expected to identify multiple failures of the IDF during the Hamas rampage in southern Israel.

According to Israel’s Channel 12 News, the IDF report due to be released in mid-July found “many casualties due to our forces firing on our forces.” Tel Aviv has been accused of ordering its soldiers to kill hostages rather than allow Hamas to use them in negotiations, a policy long known as the ‘Hannibal Directive.’

The IDF’s October 7 review appears to point to incompetence rather than the intentional killing of its own civilians. However, Israeli outlet Ynet’s investigation of the IDF’s conduct found Tel Aviv had ordered troops to follow the Hannibal policy.

Still, the conclusions from the forthcoming report will amount to an official admission that scores, if not more, of Israelis were killed by IDF soldiers, not Hamas.

On October 7, Hamas launched a large-scale assault on southern Israel that left hundreds of attackers, 767 Israeli civilians, and 376 members of the Israeli security forces dead. The Jerusalem Post recently reported that many of the Israeli deaths were caused by IDF overreaction or inaction.

“According to the report, the probe will find numerous cases of friendly fire errors leading to tragic deaths, groups of IDF soldiers who were too hesitant to confront Hamas invaders (as still others rushed to fight without being formally summoned),” the outlet noted, adding that “higher-up commanders ordering some groups of soldiers to remain in a reserve second-line capacity – when they should have headed into the front, and not knowing how to handle complex battlefield questions involving a hostage.”

While Tel Aviv has denied that the Hannibal Directive was put into effect and insists it is no longer used, evidence has emerged of Israeli forces firing on homes knowing civilians were inside. One incident in Kibbutz Be’eri left 12 Israeli civilians dead.

There are multiple probes investigating the IDF’s actions on October 7, though one Israeli government-led inquiry was shut down by the country’s top court this week amid objections from the IDF and a number of senior officials.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

June 25, 2024 Posted by | Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The US nuclear arms control community needs a strategic plan

in By Stewart Prager | June 24, 2024

It is a commonplace that the danger of nuclear weapons is becoming more severe year by year. This is reflected in the Bulletin’s Doomsday Clock, for which the time to midnight has declined steadily since 1996. At this trend, the international security situation will continue to grow even more perilous, despite the ongoing efforts of the US arms control community.

To avert such a tragic outcome and drastically slash nuclear risk, the arms control community needs a new approach. It is usual within the scientific community, when faced with a grand challenge, to erase the blackboard, think fresh, and develop a new vision and strategic plan—with great positive effect in many sub-fields. Yet, such brainstorming and planning is not underway in the field of US nuclear arms control.

The US nuclear arms control community has been extremely resourceful and effective, with many past successes despite its constrained resources. However, the current approach of the collection of arms control organizations—each with independent efforts and plans—is unlikely to map to a more secure future. It is now the time for members of this community to challenge themselves with a community-wide effort to develop a strategic plan commensurate with the challenge of reducing nuclear risk.

Losing the debate. Currently, the United States is increasing the capability of its nuclear weapons through its massive modernization program. With this escalating capability—and the growing political pressure for further expansion to respond to nuclear plans in China and Russia—in 10 years the prominence of nuclear weapons will likely be even greater than it is today.

Societal forces that argue for increased dominance of nuclear weapons as providers of security have far larger influence on US policy than arms control advocates—and are winning the debate.

Funding for the nuclear weapons complex in 2024 is approaching $70 billion. The annual congressional lobbying effort that spawns is funded at over $100 million. Lobbying for nuclear weapons exceeds by several-fold the entire budget for all activities within the arms control community, which includes research, education, information dissemination, policy analysis, and lobbying. The relative persuasive power of arms control advocates likely exceeds its relative funding; ideas are not measured by the dollar. But the current level of effort and the approach for nuclear threat reduction advocacy are sorely inadequate, despite the creative, savvy, and persistent work of this community.

The arms control community is sufficiently under-resourced that it is difficult to free up the energy and time for a process of strategic planning, given the challenges of preserving even the funding currently available. However, it is at such a time that strategic planning is most crucial and must be provided priority.

The need for a strategic plan. The US arms control and disarmament community is united in the overarching goal of reducing the salience of nuclear weapons in international relations. But the community lacks not only a plan on how to fulfill that goal, but even a common statement of its grand challenge. An example of such a statement is “to alter the US nuclear arsenal and posture to accomplish global arms reduction in 10 years and disarmament in 20 years.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://thebulletin.org/2024/06/the-us-nuclear-arms-control-community-needs-a-strategic-plan/?utm_source=Newsletter+&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=MondayNewsletter06242024&utm_content=NuclearRisk_USNuclearArmsControlPlan_06242024

June 25, 2024 Posted by | 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES, USA | Leave a comment

Why ‘no’ to NATO?

David Swanson,   beyondnuclearinternational

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty forbids transferring nuclear weapons to other nations. It contains no NATO exception. Yet NATO proliferates nuclear weapons

Five NATO members have U.S. nuclear weapons stored and controlled by the U.S. military within their borders: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey. 

The people of each of these countries routinely protest the presence of nuclear weapons and have never been asked to vote on the matter.

Alliance spreads nuclear weapons, nuclear energy and risk, writes David Swanson

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty declares that NATO members will assist another member if attacked by “taking action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force.” But the UN Charter does not say anywhere that warmaking is authorized for whoever jumps in on the appropriate side.

The North Atlantic Treaty’s authors may have been aware that they were on dubious legal ground because they went on twice to claim otherwise, first adding the words “Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.” But shouldn’t the United Nations be the one to decide when it has taken necessary measures and when it has not?

The North Atlantic Treaty adds a second bit of sham obsequiousness with the words “This Treaty does not affect, and shall not be interpreted as affecting in any way the rights and obligations under the Charter of the Parties which are members of the United Nations, or the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.” So the treaty that created NATO seeks to obscure the fact that it is, indeed, authorizing warmaking outside of the United Nations — as has now played out in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Libya.

While the UN Charter itself replaced the blanket ban on all warmaking that had existed in the Kellogg-Briand Pact with a porous ban plagued by loopholes imagined to apply far more than they actually do — in particular that of “defensive” war — it is NATO that creates, in violation of the UN Charter, the idea of numerous nations going to war together of their own initiative and by prior agreement to all join in any other member’s war. Because NATO has numerous members, as does also your typical street gang, there is a tendency to imagine NATO not as an illegal enterprise but rather as just the reverse, as a legitimizer and sanctioner of warmaking.

The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty forbids transferring nuclear weapons to other nations. It contains no NATO exception. Yet NATO proliferates nuclear weapons, and this is widely imagined as law enforcement or crime prevention. The prime minister of Sweden said in May that NATO ought to be able to put nuclear weapons in Sweden as long as somebody has determined it to be “war time.” The Nonproliferation Treaty says otherwise, and the people who plan the insanity of nuclear war say “What the heck for? We’ve got them on long-range missiles and stealth airplanes and submarines?”

The people of Sweden seem, at least in large part, to also want to say No Nukes — but when were people ever asked to play a role in “defending democracy”? The purpose of bringing nukes into Sweden, for those in the Swedish government who favor it, may in fact be purely a show of subservience to U.S. empire, driven by fear of its obliging partner in the arms race, the militarists in Russia.

Poland’s president says his country would be happy to have “NATO” nuclear weapons there, “war time” or not, and this proposal is reported in U.S. corporate media with no mention of any legal concerns and with the claim that it comes as a response to the Russian placement of nuclear weapons in Belarus. Last year I asked the Russian ambassador to the United States why putting nuclear weapons into Belarus wasn’t a blatant violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, and he said, oh no, it was perfectly fine, because the United States does it all the time.

In fact, NATO itself owns and controls no nuclear weapons. Three NATO members own and control nuclear weapons. We cannot be certain how many weapons they have, since nuclear weapons are both justified with the dubious alchemy of “deterrence” and, contradictorily, cloaked in secrecy. The United States has an estimated 5,344 nuclear weapons, France an estimated 290, and Great Britain an estimated 240.

NATO calls itself a “nuclear alliance” and maintains a “Nuclear Planning Group” for all of its members — those with and those without nuclear weapons — to discuss the launching of the sort of war that puts all life on Earth at risk, and to coordinate rehearsals or “war games” practicing for the use of nuclear weapons in Europe. NATO partners Israel and Pakistan are estimated to possess 170 nuclear weapons each.

Five NATO members have U.S. nuclear weapons stored and controlled by the U.S. military within their borders: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey.  These are estimated at 35 nuclear weapons at Aviano and Ghedi Air Bases in Italy, 20 at Incirlik in Turkey, and 15 each at Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands, and Büchel Air Base in Germany. The United States is reportedly also moving its own nuclear weapons into RAF Lakenheath in the UK, where it has stored them in the past.

The people of each of these countries routinely protest the presence of nuclear weapons and have never been asked to vote on the matter. The notion that the nuclear weapons in a European country are still U.S. nuclear weapons and thus haven’t been proliferated is an odd fit with the general understanding of international treaties, which are conceived and written as if there were no such thing as empire……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/06/23/why-no-to-nato/
David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is executive director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org.

June 24, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Senate Nuclear Fetishists Take Lid Off of Pandora’s Box

“It’s extremely disappointing that, without any meaningful debate, Congress is about to erase 50 years of independent nuclear safety oversight by changing the NRC’s mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors

19 June 2024, David Kraft, Director, NEIS

CHICAGO—In a lopsided 88-2 vote (with 10 not voting, including Sen. Richard Durbin), the Senate passed S.870 – the so-called ADVANCED Act, a bill which quite literally takes the lid off of the nuclear safety box, both domestically and internationally.

So proud and confident were the Senators in nuclear power’s promises, rather than being introduced as stand-alone legislation, the 93-page bill had to be snuck into the 3-page Fire Grants and Safety Act – a bill reasonably assured to pass at a time when huge parts of the nation are again in the process of burning to the ground.

Using the logic similar to that of an adolescent purchasing a first car (“If it’s red, fast, and a convertible – that’s it! What could go wrong?”), bill advocates trotted out the usual litany of at best contestable at worst discredited arguments for its passage:  nuclear is clean and green, is needed to fight the climate crisis, creates jobs, and is over-regulated.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), the bill’s lead sponsor, (quite erroneously) stated, “Today, nuclear power provides about 20% (18.2% in 2022; 18.6% in 2023) of our nation’s electricity. Importantly, it’s emissions-free electricity (allowed to release radionuclides into the air and water, below regulatory limits) that is 24/7, 365 days a year. (except for outages and maintenance)”

While critics of the legislation warned of significant weakening of regulatory oversight built into the bill, John Starkey, director of public policy at the pro-nuclear American Nuclear Society, stated the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), “is a 21st century regulator now.”

That statement alone should send shivers up the spine, since that list would include: the FAA allowing Boeing to self-regulate in designing the 737-MAX, resulting in two crashes and hundreds of deaths, and the revelation that sub-standard parts have been manufactured into new planes; Norfolk Southern preventing desperately needed rail safety measures from passing in Congress, resulting in the East Palestine train disaster; and the federal pipeline regulatory agency PIMSA being asleep at the wheel, resulting in the Sartortia, Mississippi CO2 pipeline explosion.

Residents of Illinois – the most nuclear state in the U.S., which recently repealed its nuclear construction moratorium, opening the door to new reactors – might begin to feel some elevated distress, but – relax.  There’s nothing you can do about it, since homeowners are unable to obtain private insurance coverage against nuclear disasters.

Nuclear safety expert Dr. Ed Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists had this to say about the ADVANCED Act:

“It’s extremely disappointing that, without any meaningful debate, Congress is about to erase 50 years of independent nuclear safety oversight by changing the NRC’s mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors.  Just as lax regulation by the FAA—an agency already burdened by conflicts of interests—can lead to a catastrophic failure of an aircraft, a compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a (many) generations.

“Make no mistake: This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a longstanding industry goal.  The change to the NRC’s mission effectively directs the agency to enforce only the bare minimum level of regulation at every facility it oversees across the United States.

“Passage of this legislation will only increase the danger to people already living downwind of nuclear facilities from a severe accident or terrorist attack, and it will make it even more difficult for communities to prevent risky, experimental reactors from being sited in their midst.”

The Biden Administration legislation of the past few years has lavished more than $7 billion on the development of experimental, still non-existent “small modular nuclear reactors” (SMNRs) as a way to fight climate change. Yet, only one design has passed NRC licensing muster to date, and these reactors will not be commercially available in sufficient numbers to have an appreciable effect on climate disruption until well into the 2030s – assuming the proposed designs actually work.

As alarming as the domestic implications of the ADVANCED Act are, the international implications can be devastating.  The Act fast-tracks the development of SMNRs, which nuclear industry companies intend to sell oversees.  Some of these reactor designs require fuel that is more highly “enriched” – just barely below weapons-grade concerns – than that used in contemporary reactors.  Currently, the only available source for this fuel – called “HALEU”, for “high assay low-enriched uranium” – is RUSSIA.  Another design, using a different fuel concept, requires specially refined carbon, the main source of which is CHINA.

It is not unreasonable to ask:  just where would SMNRs have been placed in, say – Mariupol, Ukraine?  Or in Gaza?  Or any of the other world hot spots?  Again, not an unreasonable line of questioning since a recent priority of the Biden Administration is to sell nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia – where apparently the sun no longer shines, and journalists are hacked to pieces for covering such controversial topics.

Viable alternatives to nuclear expansion do exist: renewable energy, energy efficiency, energy storage, and transmission improvements are ALL cheaper, quicker to implement, reduce carbon emissions, produce no radioactive wastes, create no nuclear proliferation issues, and, most importantly – ALREADY EXIST.  Nothing more needs to be invented; just implemented.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) stated in December, 2023 that roughly 2,600 giga-watts (GW) of electric power projects – over twice the entire electrical use of the US, and roughly 27 times the entire output of all current US reactors combined.  The large majority of this backlog are renewable energy projects awaiting connection access to the aging transmission grid.  New EXISTING transmission technologies like reconductoring could double the capacity of the grid, creating greater ease of access for renewables and storage.

To summarize, The ADVANCE ACT:

•           kick-starts more radioactive releases and exposures using tax dollars;

•           spreads contamination to more places in the US and abroad;

•           ignores the potential increased harm from nuclear reactors large and small;

•           creates more intensely radioactive fuel;

•           less regulatory oversight;

•           export to other countries, and

•           foreign control of nuclear sites within our homeland.

Yet, the nuclear zealots continue to pour tax dollars into the nuclear power black hole by means of the ADVANCED Act.  This legislation was indeed a Trojan Horse – filled with killer bees. And they don’t make honey.

Nuclear Energy Information Service (NEIS) was formed in 1981 to watchdog the nuclear power industry, and to promote a renewable, non-nuclear energy future.

June 24, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Can Israel defeat Hamas? Its own military doesn’t seem to think so, clashing with Netanyahu

The Israel Defense Forces’ top spokesman said “Hamas is an idea” that can’t be eliminated and that saying it could be was “throwing sand in the eye of the public.”

NBC News, June 20, 2024, By Chantal Da Silva

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may still be leading the country into its 258th day of war in Gaza, but on Thursday he stood increasingly alone — and at odds with his own military.

Long criticized at home as well as abroad, Netanyahu’s approach is now the subject of a deepening disagreement with his top brass, as well as his country’s top ally, the U.S.

Netanyahu dissolved his war Cabinet this week after former Defense Minister Benny Gantz, a political rival, stepped down, accusing Netanyahu of standing in the way of “real victory.”

Comment: Four politicians resigned recently, and, over recent months, various IDF officials have resigned.

And on Wednesday, the Israel Defense Forces’ top spokesman seemed to lay bare the rift at the top of the country’s leadership. The central stated goal of the war in Gaza — to destroy Hamas — was not possible, and to maintain it was meant “throwing sand in the eyes of the public,” Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said.

“Hamas is an idea. Anyone who thinks we can eliminate Hamas is wrong,” Hagari said in an interview with Israeli broadcaster Channel 13. “The political echelon needs to find an alternative — or it will remain,” he said, referring to Hamas.

Netanyahu’s office quickly rebuffed the comments, saying in a statement that “the political and security cabinet headed by Prime Minister Netanyahu defined as one of the goals of the war the destruction of Hamas’ military and governmental capabilities.”…………………………………………………………..

 Hagari’s comments reflected a growing push for Netanyahu to present an actionable plan for the day after the war in Gaza…………..

The absence of a postwar plan for Gaza was at the heart of Gantz’s reasoning for quitting Netanyahu’s war Cabinet, and it has also driven criticism from Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

Comment: This idea of a post-war plan seems to be operating on the premise that there will be any Palestinians left in Gaza, whereas various officials have been clear that they intend to genocide all Palestinians that dare to remain.

Israeli forces pushed deeper into the southern Gaza city of Rafah, continuing a monthslong assault that local officials say has killed more than 37,000 people.

Comment: That estimate was valid months ago and it hasn’t increased much since then, which has led various analysts to put the number of, mostly women and children, slaughtered by Israel, at over 100,000.

……………………………………………… The U.S. sent an envoy to the region in a bid to prevent all-out war in Lebanon, but Netanyahu also sparked dismay in Washington when he accused it of “withholding weapons and ammunition.”

Comment: It seems that Israel intends to escalate the fighting between Hezbollah because it considers that as one way to drag the US into the conflict, which might be why the US sent an envoy to try to deter them (for the time being, anyway).

……………………………………………….. more https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-military-spokesman-hamas-defeated-netanyahu-war-gaza-rcna157991

June 23, 2024 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France’s Orano loses operating licence at major uranium mine in Niger.

Niger has removed the mining permit of French nuclear fuel producer Orano
at one of the world’s biggest uranium mines, the company said Thursday,
highlighting tensions between France and the African country’s ruling
junta.

 RFI 21st June 2024

https://www.rfi.fr/en/africa/20240621-france-s-orano-loses-operating-licence-at-major-uranium-mine-in-niger

June 23, 2024 Posted by | France, Niger, politics international, Uranium | Leave a comment

U.S. and China hold first informal nuclear talks in five years

By Greg Torode, Gerry Doyle and Laurie Chen, June 22, 2024

HONG KONG, (Reuters) – The United States and China resumed semi-official nuclear arms talks in March for the first time in five years, with Beijing’s representatives telling U.S. counterparts that they would not resort to atomic threats over Taiwan, according to two American delegates who attended.

The Chinese representatives offered reassurances after their U.S. interlocutors raised concerns that China might use, or threaten to use, nuclear weapons if it faced defeat in a conflict over Taiwan. Beijing views the democratically governed island as its territory, a claim rejected by the government in Taipei.

“They told the U.S. side that they were absolutely convinced that they are able to prevail in a conventional fight over Taiwan without using nuclear weapons,” said scholar David Santoro, the U.S. organiser of the Track Two talks, the details of which are being reported by Reuters for the first time.

Participants in Track Two talks are generally former officials and academics who can speak with authority on their government’s position, even if they are not directly involved with setting it. Government-to-government negotiations are known as Track One.

Washington was represented by about half a dozen delegates, including former officials and scholars at the two-day discussions, which took place in a Shanghai hotel conference room.

Beijing sent a delegation of scholars and analysts, which included several former People’s Liberation Army officers.

A State Department spokesperson said in response to Reuters’ questions that Track Two talks could be “beneficial”. The department did not participate in the March meeting though it was aware of it, the spokesperson said.

Such discussions cannot replace formal negotiations “that require participants to speak authoritatively on issues that are often highly compartmentalized within (Chinese) government circles,” the spokesperson said.

Members of the Chinese delegation and Beijing’s defence ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

The informal discussions between the nuclear-armed powers took place with the U.S. and China at odds over major economic and geopolitical issues, with leaders in Washington and Beijing accusing each other of dealing in bad faith…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.reuters.com/world/us-china-hold-first-informal-nuclear-talks-5-years-eyeing-taiwan-2024-06-21/

June 23, 2024 Posted by | China, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Scotland’s First Minister Swinney hits back at ‘hopelessly ideological’ attack from nuclear industry

By Martin Williams, @Martin1Williams, Senior News Reporter, Herald 20th June 2024

The First Minister has rejected an attack from the nuclear industry that his ban on new power plants is “hopelessly ideological”.

John Swinney doubled down on his rejection of new nuclear after he was challenged in the Scottish Parliament over his stance after the nuclear industry criticisms, revealed in the Herald on Sunday targeted his view that he was “not a fan of the nuclear industry” and that he “never have and never will” support investments in new power plants.

He has been responding to calls to lift the ban on nuclear as fears grow over hundreds of jobs being lost and skilled workers leaving Scotland for overseas.

The nuclear industry attacked the First Minister for being “hopelessly ideological and anti-science” after he said he was “not a fan” of the business and that he “never have and never will” support investment in the power plants……………………

When asked for his response to the nuclear industry in the Scottish Parliament, Mr Swinney said: “The Scottish Government does not support the building of new nuclear power stations in Scotland. We have abundant natural resources and a highly skilled workforce to take advantage of the many renewable energy opportunities. Evidence shows that new nuclear is more expensive than renewable alternatives.

“Nuclear energy also creates radioactive waste, which must be safely managed over many decades to protect the environment, requiring complex and expensive handling. The Scottish government is supporting continued growth in renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture technologies to drive economic growth, support green jobs and provide secure, affordable and clean energy for Scotland.”

But in response, Scottish Conservative Central Scotland MSP Graham Simpson said: “So it is hopelessly ideological and anti science…………………..

The First Minister responded: “I gave a considered answer to Graham Simpson. I don’t think it could in any way be described as ideological, because I made the point that evidence shows that new nuclear is more expensive than renewable alternatives.

“We are facing a cost of living and public finance crisis, so any responsible First Minister will look to make sure that we make the most fiscally efficient approach to energy generation.

“This government, as a result of its clear policy leadership, has successfully decarbonised electricity generation within Scotland. We have developed renewable energy with policy certainty, and I want to give the same policy certainty to storage, to hydrogen to carbon capture technologies to drive economic growth and support green jobs……………………

And he added: “So I am afraid to say Graham Simpson has not got a leg to stand on this question. We have got a clear strategy on renewables. We will pursue that and will pursue it sustainably to deliver for the people of Scotland………………………..  https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/24400300.swinney-hits-back-hopelessly-ideological-attack-nuclear/

June 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Delusional Netanyahu joins delusional Zelensky in seeking total victory when none possible

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 21 June 24  https://heartlandprogressive.blogspot.com/

Last November, Ukraine President Zelensky fired Valery Zaluzhny, his top military commander. Zaluzhny made the mistake, after the much touted Ukraine counteroffensive against Russia flopped, of suggesting the war was a stalemate that could not be won. Zelensky fired Zaluzhny, reminding him that the Ukraine war narrative was complete victory. Ukraine would win back all lost territory including Donbas, receive war reparations from Russia, and get Russia president Putin prosecuted for war crimes. Zelensky remains in delusion of achieving those goals for the past 7 months.

Just this week Zelensky has been joined in war delusion by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In a stunning development, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has publicly announced, in direct contradiction of Prime Minister Netanyahu, that Israel cannot defeat Hamas in Gaza.

Reason? Hamas is an ideology, and no military, however strong, can defeat an ideology on the battlefield. Israeli IDF Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari could not have been more candid “This business of destroying Hamas, making Hamas disappear, it’s simply throwing sand in the eyes of the public. Hamas is an idea, Hamas is a party. It’s rooted in the hearts of the people – whoever thinks we can eliminate Hamas is wrong.”

Israel’s genocidal campaign upon the entire Palestinian population has backfired spectacularly, making Hamas stronger every day. Instead of destroying Hamas, Israel is self- destructing before our eyes. It has not only lost on the battlefield. It has lost support of the entire world outside the Biden administration in America. No matter how this ends, Israel will neither recover its moral standing in the world, nor claim Gaza for Greater Israel.

A sign of Israel’s disintegrating political position is Netanyahu’s dissolution of his war cabinet over the resignation of opposition leader Benny Gantz. Netanyahu is left surrounding himself with extreme right wing fanatics who either are as delusional as Netanyahu or are simply trapped into continuing their genocidal campaign as the only means of remaining in power.

Netanyahu and his fanatical war council are now threatening to pivot north to attack Hezbollah in Lebanon. Such a move could militarily devastate Israel, with no chance whatsoever of prevailing. Netanyahu’s war delusions appear to have no limits.

It doesn’t matter how many standing ovations Netanyahu receives when he addresses Congress July 24, that is, if he is still in power. It doesn’t matter how many tens of billions in weapons Biden gifts Netanyahu to obliterate tens of thousands more Palestinian
kids and moms in their futile quest for total victory. Nothing can save Israel from defeat Netanyahu so delusionally set in motion.

But possibly the most delusional of all is President Biden, lusting to fling another hundred billion of American treasure to maintain two lost wars in furtherance of his preposterous belief that America still rules the world.

June 22, 2024 Posted by | Israel, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Over budget and plagued with delays: UK nuclear lessons for Australia

The big challenges facing nuclear power in Britain, both for large reactors and SMRs, are not technological or economic, but largely administrative and logistical.

AFR, Hans van Leeuwen, Europe correspondent, Jun 21, 2024 –

Behind the shore of England’s south-western county of Somerset lie the Quantock Hills – as perfect a landscape of lush rolling pasture and rugged heathland, laced with woodland groves and nestled hedgerows, as you could possibly imagine. It’s also home, incongruously, to a very, very large crane.

Big Carl, as it is known, is, in fact, the world’s largest. It is six kilometres long, 250 metres high and has 96 wheels. It has spent the past few years at Hinkley Point, on the Bristol Channel. Big Carl hit a mini-climax of hydraulic achievement just before Christmas last year, as it hauled a 14-metre tall, 245-tonne steel dome onto the top of a 44-metre nuclear reactor.

Progress at last. The reactor’s name is Hinkley Point C – which sadly doesn’t quite have the same folksy ring as “Big Carl”. Fifteen years have elapsed since French giant EDF and its Chinese partner began trying to build it, and rouse Britain from decades of nuclear slumber.

Lining up the regulators and the finance took seven years. Construction is in its seventh year, and might be only just past the halfway mark. There are 10,000 workers and 3500 British companies involved in pulling this off, at a cost that may end up topping £46 billion ($88 billion) – almost thrice the original estimate of £16 billion.

This is the kind of monumental scale of project that Opposition Leader Peter Dutton wants to bring to Australia. Alongside it, he also envisages small modular reactors (SMRs): more petite, but equally dully monikered, nukes that are thrown together in a factory and then operate from what is really little more than an industrial shed.

Britain wants to build those too, and is in the last throes of a competition to put taxpayer money behind at least one contender. But even the most advanced would-be manufacturer, Rolls-Royce, doesn’t appear to expect an SMR to actually be up and running until the start of the 2030s………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Why so long, and so costly?

Greatrex offers a warning to Australia: the big challenge facing nuclear power in Britain, both for large reactors and SMRs, but most clearly in evidence at Hinkley Point C, is not technological or economic, but largely administrative and logistical.

“Issues around bottlenecks in the planning system, the time it takes for permitting on various things, the issues around access to grid and grid connections, they’re all real factors,” he says.

“There are a whole number of issues around planning and permitting that seem to be taking more time to deal with than the actual construction period.”

This has left Greatrex and his organisation fighting a rearguard action against public and media perceptions that the industry is foundering – particularly as the flagship Hinkley Point C reactor project suffers repeated cost and deadline blowouts.

Although the government has this year doubled down on building large reactors to keep nuclear’s share of British electricity generation at about 25 per cent, the negative stories keep coming……………………………………………………………………………

For 35 years after the plant starts operating, taxpayers will fill any gap between that price and the going market rate, likely resulting in a subsidy far higher than that for offshore wind or solar. The government is also guaranteeing the debt funding of almost half the capital costs of building it.

The original estimated cost of Hinkley Point C was £16 billion, and the anticipated date to get it open and running was 2023. Now, it’s £35 billion in today’s prices, which could be £46 billion by the time the work is completed between 2029 and 2031.

EDF this year took a €12.9 billion ($20.8 billion) impairment charge on the project. The Chinese partner, having been frozen out of future nuclear projects in Britain for geopolitical reasons, has reportedly been withholding its own contributions this year.

The company has blamed the blowout on design changes enforced by the regulator, along with labour shortages and supply chain issues.

Going first to restart the nuclear construction industry in Britain after a 20-year pause has been hard,” Hinkley Point C boss Stuart Crooks said in a letter to staff earlier this year.

But the British government is still pushing on with a second reactor, the 3.2-gigawatt Sizewell C on the country’s east coast, which EDF will also build. This has taxpayer backing of £2.5 billion, and the government is on the hunt for £20 billion of private capital, supposedly by the end of the year………………………………………………………………………………

Rolls-Royce rollout starts at home

But even if the Coalition has to look elsewhere than Britain and Europe for its mega-reactors, energy spokesman Ted O’Brien has explicitly name-checked Rolls-Royce as a potential partner on SMRs………………………………………..

At any rate, Rolls-Royce has to crack its home market first. The government will next month decide which of six horses to back with taxpayer largesse.  https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/over-budget-and-plagued-with-delays-uk-nuclear-lessons-for-australia-20240621-p5jnkq

June 22, 2024 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear plant will cost nearly three times what was estimated

Australian Financial Review Tom McIlroy, Political correspondent, Jun 20, 2024 

Recent overseas experience suggests an Australian nuclear energy program
would be vulnerable to delays and cost blowouts – the construction of
Britain’s latest plant is years behind schedule and modular technology is
still not commercially viable.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will not say
how much his plan to build seven nuclear power stations by 2050 will cost,
but promised on Thursday to release the numbers before the election.

Britain’s Hinkley C generator in Somerset is on track to cost about three
times its original budget. It was initially due to be operational in 2017
and to cost about $35 billion, but it is now not expected to open before
2031 and will cost about $90 billion. The blowout has been blamed on
inflation, the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. The first new reactors in
decades, built from scratch in the United States, also suffered lengthy
delays and budget upheavals.

Australian Financial Review 20th June 2024

  https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/uk-s-nuclear-plant-will-cost-nearly-three-times-what-was-estimated-20240620-p5jna1

June 22, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

US greenlights new arms sale to Taiwan 

RT News 20 June 24

The $360 million deal will provide Taipei with hundreds of armed drones and missiles, the State Department has said

The US State Department has approved a new weapons sale to Taiwan involving hundreds of armed drones and missiles worth $360 million, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) has said.

Under the deal that was concluded on Tuesday, Taiwan will receive Altius-600M systems, which are unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with warheads, and related equipment at an estimated cost of $300 million, the agency said.

The US will also provide 720 Switchblade kamikaze drones known as “extended-range loitering munitions” along with accompanying fire control systems worth $60.2 million, according to the DSCA. Loitering munitions are small guided missiles that can fly around a target area until they are directed to attack.

………………………US defense contractor AeroVironment, which has been supplying Ukraine with the Switchblade suicide drones, said in April that the company had been “gratified by overwhelming user feedback and demand for additional systems.”

The Altius-600M drone can accommodate “multiple seeker and warhead options,” and can be launched from ground, air or sea, according to its manufacturer, Anduril…………………………  https://www.rt.com/news/599548-us-approves-taiwan-arms-sale/—

June 22, 2024 Posted by | Taiwan, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Climate Emergency strikes Islam’s Holy Ritual, with nearly 600 dead of Heat stroke at 124.24° F. in Mecca

JUAN COLE, 06/19/2024Ann Arbor (Informed Comment)

– As the temperature in Mecca reached 125.24° F. (51.8° C.) on Tuesday, word leaked out that nearly 600 pilgrims had died of heat stroke and 2,000 have been hospitalized for treatment. A virtual clinic treated more thousands remotely. Some 324 of the dead were Egyptians,, while dozens were from Jordan. The season of the annual Hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca, the birthplace of Islam, just ended. Some 1.8 million pilgrims participated.

Eyewitnesses said that not all the dead were elderly, that young persons died, as well.

Pilgrims carry out a series of rituals during the pilgrimage, beginning with preparing themselves and establishing their pious intention. Many of the steps involve being outside and being active. They dress in white robes. They circumambulate the cube-shaped Kaaba shrine. They run between the nearby hillocks of Safa and Marwa seven times, in commemoration of the search of Abraham’s wife Hajar for water for her son with the patriarch, Ishmael. They walk or are taken in buses to Mina and spend some nights of the pilgrimage there. There, they throw stones at satan.

AFP explains that some pilgrims try to avoid paying the hefty visa fees by just showing up unregistered. They however, then lack access to air conditioned facilities and are at special risk of heat stroke.

The number of heat stroke deaths seems to have doubled since last year. Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s major oil producers, and burning petroleum to power vehicles puts the deadly heat-trapping gas, carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere, heating up the planet.

The G20 Climate Risk Atlas writes, “The science shows that Saudi Arabia will experience devastating climate impacts if it follows a high-emissions pathway. Without urgent action, Saudi Arabia will see an 88% increase in the frequency of agricultural drought by 2050. Heatwaves will last more than 4,242% longer and the combination of sea level rise, coastal erosion and fiercer weather will cause chaos for Saudi Arabia’s economy, which stands to lose around 12.2% of GDP by 2050.”……………………………………..more https://www.juancole.com/2024/06/climate-emergency-strikes.html

June 22, 2024 Posted by | climate change, Saudi Arabia | Leave a comment

  UK nuclear power plants rollout may be hit by planning hurdles

 Companies bidding for government contracts to build the UK’s first mini-reactors
may find there are factors beyond their control. Britain wants to revive
its nuclear industry. Both the Conservatives and Labour, jostling for
electoral success, see reactors as a way of decarbonising the energy
network, providing a reliable base alongside clean but intermittent wind
and solar power.

But there’s a problem. All but one of the country’s
existing nuclear power stations are set to be decommissioned by the end of
the decade and Hinkley Point C, the only new one being built, is suffering
from budget blowouts and delays. The solution, it seems, is not to think
big but to think conspicuously smaller.

Mini-plants are being touted as a
faster and cheaper way of boosting the country’s nuclear capacity. Six
companies are on a shortlist competing for £20 billion in government
funding to build the nation’s first small modular reactors and in the
next two weeks they will submit final bids. Two are expected to be selected
by the end of the year.

So far, so good, yet there are worries that the
first hurdle may be somewhat easier to clear than what follows. In recent
years planning has been the bane of construction companies of all stripes,
from housebuilders to infrastructure specialists, and there is talk that
the rollout of small modular reactors could be hampered by the same lengthy
regulatory and permission-seeking processes that have beset larger-scale
nuclear projects, in particular.

The first small modular reactor is not
expected to be up and running before 2035. “Planning is a major drain on
the time in the schedule,” said Alastair Evans, director of corporate and
government affairs at Rolls-Royce, the FTSE 100 engineering specialist that
has been promoting its water-cooled reactor for use in the UK for several
years. “There will be lessons that we can learn and the planning
inspectorate can learn from what they have just been through,” a
reference to the ten years taken for the Sizewell C development in Suffolk
to move from initial public consultation to gaining consent. Small modular
reactors can take up the space of one or two football pitches, have a
capacity of up to 500 megawatts and will employ between 1,000 and 2,000 on
site.

Yet it still takes an average of more than four years for so-called
national significant infrastructure projects, which include all power
stations over 50MW, to secure a development consent order, according to the
latest government estimates, an increase from about two and a half years in
2012. Research by Britain Remade, a pro-growth think tank, suggests that
the average construction cost for new nuclear infrastructure that has been
built in the UK since 2000 is £9.4 million per megawatt, adjusting for
inflation. That is more than four times the cost in South Korea, which has
adopted a fleet approach to expand its nuclear capacity. “A key problem
is, if you look at the planning system for nuclear power stations, it is
extremely bureaucratic, slow-moving and paperwork-intensive,” Sam
Dumitriu, head of policy at Britain Remade, said.

He cited the 44,000-page environmental impact assessment that Sizewell C produced as part of its planning application. …………………………….

 Times 21st June 2024

https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/uk-nuclear-power-plants-rollout-may-be-hit-by-planning-consent-f87z66bv3

June 22, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Gavin Newsom’s $12 Billion Radioactive Diablo Scam Could Soon Be Twisting In The Wind

-by Harvey Wasserman, 20 June 24,  https://www.downwithtyranny.com/post/gavin-newsom-s-12-billion-radioactive-diablo-scam-could-soon-be-twisting-in-the-wind

Diablo Canyon’s infamous $12 billion nuclear war is raging hot and heavy in Sacramento. Citizen action may soon decide the outcome.

In the midst of a massive budget crisis, Governor Gavin Newsom is slashing social programs left and right. But he still wants to subsidize PG&E’s two money-losing atomic reactors near San Luis Obispo. The cash he wants from the state comes as part of a $1.4 billion package he strong-armed through the legislature in 2022. Much of that is coming from the feds.

But now he wants $400 million from California taxpayers.

And the legislature— amidst a fierce public uproar— may be on the brink of a definitive “NO!” Safe energy groups like the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace are rallying public pressure to stop the bailout.    

The fight is doubly galling, because when he was Lieutenant-Governor, Newsom co-signed a 2017 landmark plan to phase out Diablo’s twin uninsured reactors. They have a long history of structural and legal problems. They are surrounded by at least a dozen significant seismic faults… and sit just 45 miles from the San Andreas.  

 

Now four decades of age, their innards are cracked, rotted and embrittled. They risk spewing apocalyptic clouds that could turn California into a radioactive wasteland. They regularly emit heat, chemical pollutants and radioactive carbon-14 into the eco-sphere. 

Rooftop solar, off-shore wind and advancing battery technologies have long since left Diablo in the dust on safety, price, reliability, efficiency and job creation. For at least several hours on most days now, the state gets more than 100% of its electricity from renewables.  

 

Photovoltaic panels in central California now regularly produce below-market electricity that is literally “too cheap to meter.” Without Diablo gumming up the grid, and with limits on how much locally-generated power can be sold out of state, rates would plummet with no serious threat of blackouts. 

Independent experts now calculate that it would cost California more than $12 billion in over-market pricing to run Diablo through 2030. The company itself concedes the cost would exceed $8 billion. PG&E has also petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to run Diablo through 2045, with potential excess costs gouging the public for tens of billions, accompanied by enormous job losses.  

Amidst a “Solartopian” tsunami of new renewables and storage batteries, Diablo expensively jams the grid and raises the risk of blackouts. It employs just 1500 workers, versus more than 70,000 in rooftop solar alone, not counting wind, efficiency and battery production. 

To better serve PG&E, Newsom’s personally appointed Public Utilities Commission has thrown the state’s rate structure into chaos, slashing at least 17,000 solar jobs while sticking California with the nation’s second-highest electric rates (behind Hawaii).

 

In 2022, Newsom trashed the nuclear phase-out he signed in 2017. With no public hearings and a strong-armed midnight vote, he demanded a $1.4 billion “forgivable loan” for PG&E, whose record profits went in part to the company’s CEO, who in 2022 was paid some $40 million.  

 Most Californians get zero power from Diablo. But Newsom wants to soak all taxpayers to cover the PG&E bailout and to foot the multi-billion dollar bills for its on-going over-market costs.

Fierce legislative resistance has put Diablo’s future in doubt.  Consumer and safe energy activists throughout the state are campaigning hard against the bailout. On June 15, the Legislature voted nearly unanimously to slash it by $400 million.  

 If the legislators and their green backers succeed, California’s transition to a non-radioactive carbon-free energy economy could create countless new jobs while saving the state billions… and ducking the next Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and/or Fukushima. 

With the world’s fifth-largest economy, California could join the world’s fourth-largest economy— Germany, which shut 19 reactors on the road to  converting to wind, solar and batteries— in a sustainable post-nuclear world.  

Harvey Wasserman co-hosts California Solartopia which airs most Wednesdays, 5-6 pm, at KPFK/Pacifica, 90.7fm-Los Angeles. He wrote Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth. He was arrested at Diablo Canyon in 1984.

 

June 22, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »