nuclear-news

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

The extraordinary financial costs of ‘small’ nuclear power stations

By Alan Finkel, Cosmos, 21 Mar 24

Partial extract from an article to be posted in 360info.org

They’re being touted as the solution to kickstarting a nuclear power industry in Australia.

According to the Opposition’s Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Ted O’Brien, small modular reactors (SMR) could be built within ten-year period if it wins the next election. 

However, it would likely take 20 years to commence commercial operation of any nuclear reactors in Australia from the time in-principle approval was reached.  To reach that starting point and enable detailed consideration of the challenges and costs of nuclear power, the existing legislative ban on nuclear power in Australia will need to be removed.

There are other obstacles.

While there’s plenty of excitement about SMRs, the problem is there just isn’t enough data about them, mainly because there are none operating in any OECD country.

And it’s unknown when any might be. As Allison Macfarlane, former chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory commission, argues in her article,The end of Oppenheimer’s energy dream, the proposal for small modular reactors to help us in the clean energy transition is fanciful. 

The SMR furthest along the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval process, from the US company NuScale, cancelled its first planned installation in Utah last November when the initial cost blew out to USD$9 billion, corresponding to USD$20 billion per GW.

The only countries with working SMRs are China and Russia.

Micro and large reactors

Micro reactors are intended to generate electrical power up to 10 MW per unit.  Although companies such as Rolls Royce are developing these, there do not appear to be any commercial micro modular reactors that have completed their design.

That leaves full-scale reactors, which have also been mentioned as part of a possible Australian nuclear power play.

Korean company KEPCO builds most of the nuclear reactors in Korea and has now built one at Barakah in the United Arab Emirates. This 5.6 GW plant, scheduled to open this year, has taken 16 years to complete and cost  USD$24 billion (AUD$36 billion).  At 5.6 GW, that is AUD$6.4 billion per GW.  Given salaries and skills shortages in Australia, inflation, interest rates and our regulatory requirements, it would cost more and take longer in Australia.

The Hinkley C plant in the UK was supposed to be finished in 2017 but has been delayed again until 2031 – 23 years after approval.  The estimated construction cost ballooned to AUD$89 billion.  At 3.2 GW electrical power, that is AUD$28 billion per GW.


In the US, the most recent nuclear reactors to be built are the Vogtle 3 and 4built at the existing facility that is home to the Vogtle 1 and 2 reactors.  Both were  anticipated to be in service in 2016.  Vogtle 3 began commercial operation in July 2023.  Vogtle 4 is projected to commence operation in the second quarter of 2024 – 15 years after the construction contract was awarded.

Construction  cost USD$34 billion (AUD$52 billion) for the combined 2.2 GW output of the two reactors, or AUD$24 billion per GW.

Construction of nuclear plants in the United States has declined dramatically over the years.  Approximately 130 were built from the mid 1950s to the mid 1990s.  Only four commenced operation in the 30 years from the mid 1990s to now, and at the time of writing there are no nuclear reactors under construction in the United States. 

In France, only one nuclear power plant is under construction.  The 1.65 GW Flamanville EPR reactor is hoped to be completed and begin to supply electricity later this year, 17 years after construction began.  The most recent cost estimate was AUD$22 billion or AUD$13 billion per GW.  No other nuclear power plants are planned in France.

These high costs and long delivery durations for full-scale reactors are the reasons SMRs are proposed as a way forward in Australia.  However, SMRs are a new technology.  There are none in operation or construction in any OECD countries, thus it is not possible to estimate the costs or delivery schedules.  NuScale’s investment to date suggests that the capital cost for the first units to be delivered will be very high. ………… https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/energy/the-extraordinary-financial-costs-of-nuclear-power/

March 24, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, business and costs, China, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | 1 Comment

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Opened 25 Years Ago; It Was Supposed to Close Next Week

https://nuclearactive.org/ March 21st, 2024 

Did you know that on Friday, March 26, 1999, the first shipment of plutonium-contaminated nuclear weapons waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) reached the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)?

Earlier that week, on Monday, March 22, 1999, Federal Judge John Garrett Penn lifted a seven-year injunction allowing the shipment of purely radioactive waste to WIPP.  The shipment did not contain any hazardous waste.  In fact it wasn’t even Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons waste.  It was NASA waste from the production of the plutonium batteries for the Cassini space vehicle.

On Tuesday, March 23rd, LANL loaded waste drums into the three TRUPACT shipping containers.

On Wednesday, March 24th, final testing was done and the truck and trailer with three TRUPACTS was ready.

Peaceful protesters with signs had gathered at the intersection of Airport Road and 599 on the south side of Santa Fe.  National Guard, police and other security personnel dressed in combat gear lined the intersection for about a block in each direction.  Black Hawk helicopters flew over the area.  A little snow fell.  Nevertheless, tensions were high.

LANL checked the weather conditions and it was determined that the shipment could not leave LANL.  To ship, a five-hour clear weather window was required.  A dense fog had developed around Santa Rosa, New Mexico and the shipment did not depart from LANL.

LANL tried again, successfully, on Thursday, March 25th.  Again peaceful protesters and security personnel were at the intersection.

Early on the morning of Friday, March 26th, the shipment arrived at WIPP to cheers from those waiting to see the truck and trailer.  https://www.energy.gov/em/articles/fight-wipp-history-nations-deep-geologic-nuclear-waste-repository

Prior to the arrival of the first shipment at WIPP, DOE had promised the People of New Mexico that it would clean up all the transuranic, or plutonium-contaminated, waste across the nuclear weapons complex,

including LANL, and dispose of it in the underground salt bed at WIPP in 25 years and begin a 10-year closure of the facility.   For example:  http://nuclearactive.org/elected-officials-question-doe-plans-to-keep-wipp-operating-forever/ (Aug. 11, 2022); http://nuclearactive.org/doe-breaks-its-promises-to-new-mexico-part-i/ (Jan. 12, 2021); and http://nuclearactive.org/doe-breaks-its-promises-to-new-mexico-part-2/ (Jan. 19, 2021).

Next Tuesday, March 26, 2024, is the 25-year deadline.  But DOE and WIPP will not make its deadline.  In fact, DOE plans to keep WIPP open until 2083, basically forever, for LANL waste from fabricating new and provocative nuclear weapons. …………………………………………………more https://nuclearactive.org/

March 24, 2024 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

World Water Day Prompts Submission to Parliamentary Committee on Risks of NWMO’s Nuclear Waste Project to Water

Thunder Bay – A Northern Ontario alliance concerned about a risky project to transport and bury nuclear fuel waste has chosen World Water Day to submit their brief to a parliamentary committee studying freshwater.

We the Nuclear Free North submitted the ten-page brief to the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development today, outlining the set of risks the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) project poses to the lakes, rivers and groundwater of Northern Ontario. The Committee is carrying out a comprehensive study of the role of the federal government in protecting and managing Canada’s freshwater resources in Canada.

The opposition group points to the risks during transportation, processing and burial of the highly radioactive nuclear fuel waste, including from operations at the site of the proposed deep geological repository.

“The NWMO plan is still largely theoretical, but according to their own limited descriptions of the operating period, it is evident that freshwater in the area of the site will be impacted”, explained Wendy O’Connor, one of the report authors.


“Water used for washing down the nuclear waste transportation packages will become contaminated with radionuclides. According to the NWMO’s published details, that water will be sent to a settling pond and then released to natural water bodies in the vicinity of the site, as will the contaminated water that will be pumped from the underground repository”, said O’Connor.

“Despite assurances from the nuclear industry, it remains entirely possible that the nuclear waste itself, deposited underground, will contaminate the deep groundwater in the near or long term – contamination that will eventually reach surface water in the vast watershed”.

The NWMO’s candidate site in Northwestern Ontario is located half-way between Ignace and Dryden. Because it is at the height of land for the Wabigoon and the Turtle River systems, there are concerns about releases to the downstream communities, including Rainy River and Lake of the Woods. The group notes that if and when the radioactive releases occur from the deep geological repository there will be no means to reverse the impacts.


World Water Day, held on 22 March every year since 1993, is an annual United Nations Observance focusing on the importance of freshwater.

“It’s ironic that the UN theme for World Water Day in 2024 is “Water for Peace”, given the level of division and conflict that the NWMO’s proposal has brought to our region”, commented Kathleen Skead, a member of Anishinaabe of Wauzhushk Onigum Nation, one of several downstream Treaty 3 communities.

“Hopefully people will pause today and recognize that water is life and the NWMO’s promise of money is not worth the risk. Water is vital for all forms of life.”

The brief is posted HERE.

We the Nuclear Free North is an alliance of people and groups opposing a Deep Geological Repository for nuclear waste in Northern Ontario. We oppose the transport, burial and abandonment of this radioactive waste in our northern watersheds.

Our alliance is honoured to have received the name Tataganobinlooking far ahead into the futureLearn more about who we are, and the origin and meaning of this name.

March 24, 2024 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear, wastes | Leave a comment

Groups demand broader consent for nuclear waste storage

A petition demands that Ottawa require the Nuclear Waste Management Organization to get consent from other communities, including those along the transportation route.


Gary Rinne, 22 Mar 24
 https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/groups-demand-broader-consent-for-nuclear-waste-storage-8471189.

THUNDER BAY — An alliance of Northern Ontario citizen groups wants the federal government to ensure an underground storage site for used nuclear fuel isn’t built without the consent of all impacted communities.

We The Nuclear Free North has launched an online petition asking Ottawa to require the Nuclear Waste Management Organization to demonstrate it has the permission not just of its designated “host community” but also of residents and communities in the region, along the transportation route, and downstream of the proposed repository.

NWMO has narrowed its search to the Ignace area in Northwestern Ontario and South Bruce in Southwestern Ontario, and plans to announce its preferred site before the end of this year.

In a news release Wednesday, North Bay-based Northwatch spokesperson Brennain Lloyd said NWMO has repeatedly stated it will only proceed with “an informed and willing host,” and argued that “the communities along the transportation route are ‘hosts’ to the same risks as Ignace,” but are shut out of the selection process.

“Residents living closer to the site and downstream live with the short-term and long-term risks of nuclear contamination but are not being asked if they are willing,” he added.

The alliance is also wary about five members of Ignace council having the ultimate power to decide if NWMO can label the community as an agreeable host.

“Now is the time for all of us to speak up,” said Dodie LeGassick, nuclear lead for Thunder Bay-based Environment North. “The federal government must intervene to bring some fairness and facts into the siting process. That’s what this petition is all about.”

The petition will be open to all residents of Canada until May 3.

Among other things, it notes that the federal government has affirmed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which requires that no hazardous materials shall be stored on the territories of Indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.

March 24, 2024 Posted by | Canada, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

U.S. Troops Are One Mile From The Chinese Border

the most important news, March 21, 2024 [ The original has several substantial quotations from news media]

The U.S. cannot afford a war with China.  The size of our military has been shrinking, and our resources are stretched way too thin.  Today, the U.S. has military bases in 80 different countries, and we have troops stationed in 178 different countries.  That is insane.  No empire in the entire history of humanity has had forces spread all over the planet like this.  Our ammunition levels are extremely low due to major conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, and every war game that our leaders have conducted has shown us losing a war to protect Taiwan.  So we should be trying to avoid sparking a war with China, because we are holding a losing hand.

But our politicians seem determined to provoke one anyway.  It is being reported that officials in Taiwan have confirmed that U.S. forces are now permanently stationed “on its islands in the Taiwan Strait”

Taiwan’s main island is approximately 100 miles from China, but in some places the Kinmen islands and China are “barely more than a mile apart”

What are our leaders thinking?

This doesn’t make war less likely.

It makes war more likely.

On Wednesday, China sent 32 warplanes toward Taiwan in a 24 hour period…

The Chinese do this sort of thing when they are upset.

And right now they are very, very upset.

And China has been feverishly preparing for the coming war…

When war with China finally erupts, will we be able to handle it?

Of course not.

Our forces are scattered all over the planet, and so many of our resources have already been poured into the war in Ukraine.

Even though there have been efforts to ramp up ammunition production in the U.S., it is being reported that “Russia is producing nearly three times as many artillery munitions as the United States and Europe combined”…

No matter how you feel about the war, that is just embarrassing.

One of the reasons why we won World War II was because the U.S. could simply outproduce everyone else by a wide margin.

But now we just look pathetic.

French President Emmanuel Macron and other western leaders have suggested that NATO troops should be sent into Ukraine if that is what is necessary to keep the Russians from winning.

If that actually happens, U.S. boys and girls will inevitably be sent to die in the trenches of eastern Ukraine too.

In anticipation of a wider war, the Russians are conducting another round of mobilization.

In fact, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has just announced “the creation of 2 new ground armies, with 16 new brigades & 14 new divisions”.

Meanwhile, Israeli officials continue to insist that a major ground operation will happen in Rafah no matter what the Biden administration thinks about such a move…

When the IDF goes into Rafah, that could cause the entire region to erupt.

And so U.S. forces may be called on to intervene in the Middle East as well.

Spreading your resources way too thin is a sure way to lose.

Unfortunately, our politicians don’t seem to understand this, and their very foolish decisions will soon lead to absolutely disastrous consequences.

Michael’s new book entitled “Chaos” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.  https://themostimportantnews.com/archives/u-s-troops-are-one-mile-from-the-chinese-border

March 24, 2024 Posted by | China, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Halting Biden’s Weapon Shipments to Israel

byEDITORMarch 22, 2024

The Chris Hedges Report with attorney Katherine Gallagher and Palestinian plaintiff Ayman Nijim on their lawsuit demanding the Biden administration halt weapons shipments to Israel.

By Chris Hedges / The Real News Network

The Center for Constitutional Rights has filed the lawsuit on behalf of the human rights organization, Defense for Children – Palestine; Al-Haq, a Palestinian human rights group based in the occupied West Bank; and eight Palestinians and US citizens with relatives in Gaza accusing President Joe Biden and other senior officials of being complicit in Israel’s “genocide” in Gaza. The case is being heard in a federal court in California.

Lawyers representing Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, have attended the proceedings along with the plaintiffs who accuse them of “failure to prevent and complicity in the Israeli government’s unfolding genocide.”

Since the October 7 incusrion by Hamas and other resistance groups, which left some 1,200 people dead, more than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, thousands are missing, some 60,000 have been injured and nearly all of the Gaza Strip’s 2.3 million people have been displaced. Israel’s blocage of humanitarian supplies and food have cause a widespread famine and many are dying of starvation and infectious diseases.

The CCR complaint was filed in November last year. It charges that Biden, Blinken and Austin “have not only been failing to uphold the country’s obligation to prevent a genocide but have enabled the conditions for its development by providing unconditional military and diplomatic support [to Israel].”The CCR is asking the court to “declare that defendants have violated their duty under customary international law, as part of federal common law, to take all measures within their power to prevent Israel from committing genocide against the Palestinian people of Gaza”. The group is also calling for the US to use its influence over Israel to end the hostilities against Palestinians in Gaza. Joining me to discuss the case is Katherine Gallagher, a Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, and plaintiff Ayman Nijim……………………………Transcript……………….  https://scheerpost.com/2024/03/22/the-chris-hedges-report-halting-bidens-weapon-shipments-to-israel/

March 24, 2024 Posted by | Israel, Legal, USA | Leave a comment

This is why Sizewell C construction poses ‘possible risk’ to new hospital build

 Potential obstacles facing construction of new West Suffolk Hospital in
Bury St Edmunds by 2030 include funding shortfall and development of
Sizewell C

 A shortfall in funding and a difficulty in finding a contractor
are among the potential obstacles facing plans to build a new hospital in
Bury St Edmunds by 2030. A report, published ahead of the West Suffolk NHS
Foundation Trust (WSFT) board meeting tomorrow, highlighted potential
issues with the Hardwick Manor project.

The building of a new nuclear power
plant, Sizewell C, on the Suffolk coast was mentioned as one of the reasons
finding a contractor could be challenging.

 Suffolk News 21st March 2024

https://www.suffolknews.co.uk/bury-st-edmunds/news/this-is-why-sizewell-c-construction-poses-possible-risk-to-9358253

March 24, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Julian Assange and the Plea Nibble

Barry Pollack, one of Assange’s legal representatives, has not been given any indication that the department would, as such, accept the deal, a point he reiterated to Consortium News: “[W]e have been given no indication that the Department of Justice intends to resolve the case.”

March 23, 2024 by: Dr Binoy Kampmark  https://theaimn.com/julian-assange-and-the-plea-nibble/

Be wary of what Washington offers in negotiations at the best of times. The empire gives and takes when it can; the hegemon proffers and in equal measure and withdraws offers it deems fit. This is all well known to the legal team of WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange, who, the Wall Street Journal “exclusively” reveals, is in ongoing negotiations with US Justice Department officials on a possible plea deal.

As things stand, the US Department of Justice is determined to get its mitts on Assange on the dubious strength of 18 charges, 17 confected from the brutal Espionage Act of 1917. Any conviction from these charges risks a 175-year jail term, effectively constituting a death sentence for the Australian publisher.

The war time statute, which was intended to curb free speech and muzzle the press for the duration of the First World War, was assailed by Wisconsin Republican Senator Robert La Follette as a rotten device that impaired “the right of the people to discuss the war in all its phases.” It was exactly in time of war that the citizen “be more alert to the preservation of his right to control his government. He must be most watchful of the encroachment of the military upon the civil power.” And that encroachment is all the more pressing, given the Act’s repurposing as a weapon against leakers and publishers of national security material. In its most obscene incarnation, it has become the US government’s political spear against a non-US national who published US classified documents outside the United States.


The plea deal idea is not new. In August last year, the Sydney Morning Herald pounced upon comments from US Ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy that a “resolution” to the Assange imbroglio might be on the table. “There is a way to resolve it,” the ambassador suggested at the time. Any such resolution could involve a reduction of any charges in favour of a guilty plea, subject to finalisation by the Department of Justice. Her remarks were heavily caveated: this was more a matter for the DOJ than the State Department or any other agency. “So it’s not really a diplomatic issue, but I think there absolutely could be a resolution.”

The WSJ now reports that officials from the DOJ and Assange’s legal team “have had preliminary discussions in recent months about what a plea deal could look like to end the lengthy legal drama.” These talks “remain in flux” and “could fizzle.” Redundantly, the Journal reports that any such agreement “would require approval at the highest levels of the Justice Department.”

Barry Pollack, one of Assange’s legal representatives, has not been given any indication that the department would, as such, accept the deal, a point he reiterated to Consortium News: “[W]e have been given no indication that the Department of Justice intends to resolve the case.”

One floated possibility would be a guilty plea on a charge of mishandling classified documents, which would be classed as a misdemeanour. Doing so would take some of the sting out of the indictment, which is currently thick with felonies and one conspiracy charge of computer intrusion. “Under the deal, Assange could potentially enter that plea remotely, without setting foot in the US.” Speculation from the paper follows. “The time he has spent behind bars in London would count toward any US sentence, and he would be likely to be free to leave prison shortly after any deal has concluded.”

With little basis for the claim, the report lightly declares that the failure of plea talks would not necessarily be a bad thing for Assange. He could still “be sent to the US for trial”, where “he may not stay for long, given the Australia pledge.” The pledge in question is part of a series of highly questionable assurances given to the UK government that Assange’s carceral conditions would not include detention in the supermax ADX Florence facility, the imposition of notorious Special Administrative Measures, and the provision of appropriate healthcare. Were he to receive a sentence, it would be open to him to apply and serve its balance in Australia. But all such undertakings have been given on condition that they can be broken, and transfer deals between the US and other countries have been plagued by delays, inconsistencies, and bad faith.

-ADVERTISEMENT-

The dangers and opportunities to Assange have been bundled together, a sniff of an idea rather than a formulation of a concrete deal. And deals can be broken. It is hard to imagine that Assange would not be expected to board a flight bound for the United States, even if he could make his plea remotely. Constitutional attorney Bruce Afran, in an interview with CN Live! last August, suggested that a plea, taken internationally, was “not barred by any laws. If all parties consent to it, then the court has jurisdiction.” Yes, but what then?

In any event, once on US soil, there is nothing stopping a grand volte face, that nasty legal practice of tagging on new charges that would carry even more onerous penalties. It should be never forgotten that Assange would be delivered up to a country whose authorities had contemplated, at points, abduction, illegal rendition, and assassination.

Either way, the current process is one of gradual judicial and penal assassination, conducted through prolonged proceedings that continue to assail the publisher’s health even as he stays confined to Belmarsh Prison. (Assange awaits the UK High Court’s decision on whether he will be granted leave to appeal the extradition order from the Home Office.) The concerns will be how to spare WikiLeaks founder further punishment while still forcing Washington to concede defeat in its quest to jail a publisher. That quest, unfortunately, remains an ongoing one.

March 23, 2024 Posted by | legal, USA | Leave a comment

Green Groups Protest ‘Nuclear Fairy Tale’ in Brussels

“All the evidence shows that nuclear power is too slow to build, too expensive, and it remains highly polluting and dangerous,” one activist said.

OLIVIA ROSANE, Mar 21, 2024,  https://www.commondreams.org/news/protest-nuclear-power

An international coalition of environmental groups dropped banners and blockaded roads to protest the International Nuclear Energy Summit in Brussels on Thursday.

While the summit, hosted by the Belgian government and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), pushes nuclear energy as a replacement for fossil fuels, more than 600 climate action groups launched a declaration calling nuclear power plants a “distraction which slows down the energy transition.”

“We are in a climate emergency, so time is precious, and the governments here today are wasting it with nuclear energy fairy tales,” Greenpeace E.U. senior campaigner Lorelei Limousin said in a statement. “All the evidence shows that nuclear power is too slow to build, too expensive, and it remains highly polluting and dangerous.”

“The nuclear lobby camouflages itself beneath a climate-friendly facade, hoping to divert massive sums of money away from real climate solutions, at the expense of people and the planet.”

At the United Nations COP28 climate conference in the United Arab Emirates last year, more than 20 countries pledged to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050. However, Greenpeace France calculated that achieving this would mean finishing 70 reactors each year between 2040 and 2050. This would be an unprecedented buildout in defiance of current trends: Between 2020 and 2023, 21 reactors were completed while 24 were shut down worldwide.

In the European Union specifically, many countries turned away from nuclear after 2011 in response to the Fukushima accident in Japan, according to Reuters. Germany shuttered its last three reactors for good in April 2023 following a successful anti-nuclear campaign there. In general, the nuclear share of the E.U. power mix dropped from 32.8% in 2000 to 22.8% in 2023, Greenpeace said.

Activists argue that nuclear still poses all the dangers the anti-nuclear movement has been warning about for decades and also cannot be ramped up quickly enough to prevent escalating climate extremes.

To reinforce this message, members of Greenpeace France blockaded the main roads to the Brussels summit using cars and bicycles. They also lit pink flares and threw pink powder as a motorcade of officials en route to the summit approached. The action succeeded in delaying the arrival of several delegations, Greenpeace E.U. said.

Other demonstrators dropped banners from the summit site at Brussels Expo reading, “Nuclear Fairy Tale,” while a group representing the 600 declaration signatories protested in front of an inflatable bouncy castle holding up a sign reading, “Nuclear fairy tales = climate crisis.”

The declaration was drafted by Climate Action Network Europe and signed by groups from at least 56 different countries and territories including Climate Action Network Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Sierra Club, Food and Water Watch, CodePink, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, and several 350.org, Fridays for Future, and Friends of the Earth affiliates.

“The nuclear lobby camouflages itself beneath a climate-friendly facade, hoping to divert massive sums of money away from real climate solutions, at the expense of people and the planet,” the declaration reads.

The signatories pointed out that, while the world must dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 in order to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, it would take longer than this for any new nuclear plant to come online.

At the same time, it costs significantly more money to increase nuclear capacity than renewable options like wind and solar, they stressed. A new reactor requires almost four times the funds of a new wind power installation.

“Governments need to invest in proven climate solutions, such as home insulation, public transport, and renewable energy, rather than expensive experiments, like small modular reactors, which have no guarantees of actually delivering,” the declaration says.

It also points to safety risks across the nuclear lifecycle, from uranium mining to waste storage. And it adds that those dangers would only increase as temperatures rise.

“The climate crisis also increases the risks involved in nuclear power, as increased heatwaves, droughts, storms, and flooding all pose significant threats to the plants themselves and to the systems that aim to prevent nuclear accidents,” the signatories argued.

Instead, the declaration proposes that governments focus on achieving 100% renewable energy while also improving efficiency.

“What we demand is a just transition toward a safe, renewable, and affordable energy system that secures jobs and protects life on our planet,” the declaration concludes.

March 23, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, opposition to nuclear | 1 Comment

Canadian officials found radiation levels in these northern Ontario homes ‘well above’ the safe limit. Their response: ‘¯\_(ツ)_/¯’ .

Many residents might not be aware they are living atop radioactive infill, which came from nearby, closed-down uranium mines that helped develop atomic bombs during the Cold War.Toronto Star

The number of homes in Elliot Lake affected by buried radioactive waste could top 100 — twice as many as previously thought. 

By Declan Keogh and Masih Khalatbari, Investigative Journalism Bureau, Thursday, March 21, 2024  https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/canadian-officials-found-radiation-levels-in-these-northern-ontario-homes-well-above-the-safe-limit/article_6b68ad20-e605-11ee-9a2a-f72182db65b6.html

In January 2021, a senior official with Canada’s nuclear regulator asked a colleague to do a rough, “back-of-the-envelope” calculation on the amount of potentially deadly radiation that residents in Elliot Lake were exposed to in their homes.

The government had just received a complaint that long-forgotten radioactive mine waste was buried underneath some homes in the northern Ontario city. Ron Stenson, senior project officer at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), wanted to “confirm our assumption that 468 Bq/m3 is not an urgent health concern.”

He did not get the answer he wanted. A senior official with the commission’s radiation protection division replied that those levels of radon are “well above” the public radiation dose limit set by federal authorities.

Stenson’s response came 90 minutes later: “¯\_(ツ)_/¯.”

For too long, shrugging is all the Canadian government has done, as far as local homeowner Lisa Speck is concerned.

The government official’s email is “a true visual representation of the response we’ve received to date,” she says. “It accurately summarizes the respect we’ve been shown.”

Documents show 100+ homes affected

Documents obtained by the Investigative Journalism Bureau show the number of homes affected by buried radioactive waste could top 100 — twice as many as previously thought. Many of the residents might not be aware they are living atop radioactive infill, which came from nearby, closed-down uranium mines that helped develop atomic bombs during the Cold War.

And when faced with calls for action, civil servants make jokes.

Speck, part of a group of Elliot Lake homeowners fighting to get the radioactive mining waste removed from their properties, called the email exchange “disgusting” and “dismissive.”

Despite having spent billions of dollars to clean up similar radioactive waste in Port Hope, federal regulators deny they have any obligation to do the same in Elliot Lake, saying the waste buried beneath the properties is the homeowners’ responsibility.

CNSC declined an interview request. In a statement, the agency said it could not answer detailed questions from the IJB because of ongoing litigation, adding that it’s “dedicated to upholding the highest standards of safety in our work.” Stenson did no respond to a request for comment.

Lawyers representing impacted Elliot Lake homeowners filed an application to Federal Court for a judicial review last July in the hopes of forcing the reversal of the federal government’s position.

The government filed their response in federal court on March 4, reiterating the waste is outside their jurisdiction and stating that the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which governs the CNSC, does not compel them to act upon demands from the homeowners.

It argues federal legislation does not give the public the right “to file complaints, request inspections, or demand orders be issued as against regulated entities.”

A screen grab from a January 2021 email sent by a senior project officer at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), after being told the levels of radon recorded at homes in Elliot Lake are “well above” the safe limits. Toronto Star illustration

Lawyers representing impacted Elliot Lake homeowners filed an application to Federal Court for a judicial review last July in the hopes of forcing the reversal of the federal government’s position.

The government filed their response in federal court on March 4, reiterating the waste is outside their jurisdiction and stating that the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which governs the CNSC, does not compel them to act upon demands from the homeowners.

It argues federal legislation does not give the public the right “to file complaints, request inspections, or demand orders be issued as against regulated entities.”

Lawyers representing impacted Elliot Lake homeowners filed an application to Federal Court for a judicial review last July in the hopes of forcing the reversal of the federal government’s position.

The government filed their response in federal court on March 4, reiterating the waste is outside their jurisdiction and stating that the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which governs the CNSC, does not compel them to act upon demands from the homeowners.

It argues federal legislation does not give the public the right “to file complaints, request inspections, or demand orders be issued as against regulated entities.”

At the crux of the federal government’s refusal to accept responsibility is a technicality: It says that it isn’t responsible for the regulation of naturally-occurring radioactive materials, only those that have been processed in some way. It says that the uranium rock dug up during mining “was never chemically processed” before being trucked to nearby Elliot Lake for use as backfill during the construction of homes. That, the government says, means it’s technically “not considered radioactive waste.”

‘Public perception of a coverup’

The government didn’t always view the radiation blight in Elliot Lake as someone else’s problem, internal documents suggest.

By the 1980s, the government had assumed some role alongside the mining companies that built most of the houses.

The Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) — the predecessor of the CNSC — took responsibility for “about 1,900 private properties and public areas,” according to a 1998 internal report summarizing the ongoing radiation problems in Elliot Lake.

Despite discovering “contaminated materials in structures” as well as “excessive gamma radiation due to the presence of mine waste on private properties,” there had been “minimal effort” to remove the waste, the summary report noted.

Fans and venting had been previously installed in homes to funnel the dangerous gas outside. However, it was likely these remediation efforts had failed, the report stated, possibly because residents didn’t know how to maintain the systems — or that they even existed.

“There is no evidence to suggest that owners were made aware of corrections made, or that they must assume responsibility for maintenance,” the report states.

All of this, the report concluded, created a “public perception of a coverup.”

“The only way to remove the mine waste issue from public perception is to remove the contamination.”

Supplied

As of 1998, it was estimated up to 120 properties were potentially affected by radioactive contamination and, as a result, “increased radiation exposure is likely as is renewed public concern.”

The report also called for a citywide effort to test properties, monitor and remediate excess levels of radiation and clean up the “man-introduced contamination” once and for all. It’s unclear whether those calls were heeded.

At the time, it was assumed that cleanup efforts would be shared between the federal government and the mining companies, with the companies offering financial assistance to remediate the properties they once owned.

Billions spent on remediation in other Ontario communities

In 2001, the federal government signed a deal with the municipalities of Port Hope and Clarington to collect, transport and permanently store as much as 2 million cubic metres of low-level radioactive waste that had been distributed by a government-owned radium and uranium refinery between the 1930s and the 1980s.

The $2.6 billion remediation project, which involves digging up and removing soil around affected houses, the construction of permanent storage facilities and monitoring of radiation levels, is slated to be completed by the end of this year.

Despite the parallels to Elliot Lake, the federal government has said it is not responsible for the cleanup in the northern community because the radioactive contamination came from a private company, not a crown corporation.

In June 2023, lawyers for the residents sent a host of politicians including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and executives of CNSC more than 3,000 pages of evidence and documentation. They called on the government and mining companies to remove the uranium waste in Elliot Lake.

Upon receiving the demands, Patrick Burton, director of CNSC’s uranium mines and mills division, asked two of his colleagues in radiation protection about the claims that residents were getting excess doses of radiation. He also told them to “buy a shovel and get a [travel authorization] for Elliot Lake,” adding a winking face emoji.

“Is that going to get a response?” replied one of his colleagues with a smiling face emoji.

When reached by the IJB, Burton directed questions about the email to CSNC. The agency did not offer further comment. When questioned by lawyers representing the Elliot Lake homeowners, Burton said it was supposed to be a joke among colleagues.

“The intention was never … for the homeowners to become aware of this exchange,” Burton said during his deposition.

Homeowner Speck says the joke was “rude” but says she would welcome the government’s shovels to clean up the uranium on her property.

“The statement sort of lends to the fact that he thinks it’s a small job. If it’s such a small job that he’s just going to go to buy a shovel and fix it … then just do that,” Speck says.

“Everyone in the community would expect better from a government official than to be joking about a matter that could potentially affect … or maybe has affected, a population of people.”

With files from the Toronto Star’s Marco Chown OvedThe Investigative Journalism Bureau is a non-profit newsroom based at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health.

March 23, 2024 Posted by | Canada, environment, Reference archives | 1 Comment

Disadvantaged Canadian towns look at the $billions promised by nuclear waste hosting

Offended tribal elders formed the Committee for Future Generations and initiated what they called the 7,000 Generations Walk Against Nuclear Waste, which saw participants trudge nearly 1,000 kilometres from Pinehouse to the legislature in Regina.

No local DGR debate has been harder fought than the 30-month marathon of psychological and ground warfare that unfolded in Saugeen Shores, one of several contestant municipalities in Bruce County, between 2011 and 2014.

Inside the race for Canada’s nuclear waste: 11 towns vie to host deep burial sitCanada’s nuclear waste will be deadly for 400,000 years. What town would like the honour of hosting it?CHARLES WILKINS TheGlobe and Mail Feb. 26 2015,

“……..There are 11 rural and wilderness municipalities vying for the DGR, survivors of an original roster of 22. The aspirants include veteran northern encampments such as Hornepayne, Ontario, where, as Brennain Lloyd of the environmental education group Northwatch describes it, there is “a really fierce desire” on the part of at least a few municipal administrators to “bring the nuke dump to town.”

And Schreiber, a struggling railway town on the north shore of Lake Superior. And Ignace, another struggler, in the boreal wilds to the west. And, to the east, Manitouwadge.

And Creighton, Saskatchewan, directly across the Manitoba border from Flin Flon (Creighton is a town described by a former resident as “having had its fiscal balls to the wall for half a century”).

And Blind River, Ontario, on the north shore of Lake Huron, where survival has for years depended on the uncertain flow of traffic along the Trans-Canada Highway.

And Elliot Lake, some 50 kilometres north of Lake Huron, where uranium mining was the sustaining industry during the 1950s and ’60s but which these days survives on the pensions of retirees who moved to the town to take advantage of discount housing left over from the boom years.

“What makes it all so attractive to competing municipalities is, of course, the money,” says Tony McQuail.

While billions of dollars will flow directly through the chosen town over a period of four or five decades, Lloyd suggests that most of the money is likely to end up in the pockets of big-city consultants and other outside beneficiaries.

Mainly, the price tag will buy decades’ worth of infrastructure and construction costs, as well as maintenance, monitoring and employment training. It will also pay for the transportation of the waste to the spanking new DGR, which will, by the time it opens, have been a reality for its “willing host” for a quarter of a century or more.

Finishing just the first phase of the preliminary assessment brings $400,000 of NWMO money to candidate towns, so they can “build sustainability and well-being.” It has been speculated that some towns had no intention of staying in the process beyond the early payout.

While some towns applied to participate of their own volition, others were, according to Lloyd of Northwatch, courted by the NWMO. “What bothers me most about the process,” says Lloyd, “is the ‘siloing’ that the NWMO practises on the municipal politicians they choose to target.

“They approach them not in the context of their communities, where the politicians are immediately answerable to their constituencies, but at municipal conferences and conventions where they’re away from home, isolated, perhaps a little unsure of themselves. They wine and dine them and soft-talk them about the unimaginable benefits that could accrue to their towns should they consider hosting the DGR.

“Then they fly them to Toronto and put them up in the best hotels and take them up to the Bruce Power site, or other nuclear generating stations, and show them what of course appears to be secure and flawless waste storage. The politicians are just snowed—they’re made to feel like important players. They take this dream of hope and prosperity and safe science back to their communities and in effect go to work for the NWMO.”

Other northern councils—at Ear Falls, at Nipigon, at Wawa—have been more divided over the DGR and so were eliminated early, or withdrew, from the process. Similarly, Brockton, near the site of Bruce Power, was cut late in 2014 after its residents elected a largely anti-DGR council. (The NWMO says Brockton’s assessment simply didn’t pan out.)

The aboriginal communities of Pinehouse and English River, Saskatchewan, were dropped from the process when community debate over land and water issues, as well as a growing distrust of the NWMO, became irresolvable.

While Pinehouse was still in the running, three community leaders, including a cousin of the mayor, received money from the NWMO. Offended tribal elders formed the Committee for Future Generations and initiated what they called the 7,000 Generations Walk Against Nuclear Waste, which saw participants trudge nearly 1,000 kilometres from Pinehouse to the legislature in Regina.

No local DGR debate has been harder fought than the 30-month marathon of psychological and ground warfare that unfolded in Saugeen Shores, one of several contestant municipalities in Bruce County, between 2011 and 2014………..http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/inside-the-race-for-canadas-nuclear-waste/article23178848/

March 23, 2024 Posted by | Canada, Reference archives, wastes | 3 Comments

‘We are the masters of the house’: Israeli channels air snuff videos featuring systematic torture of Palestinians

It’s hard to imagine the depths to which Israeli society has sunk. The official tells the Channel 13 reporter that “the feeling is one of pride.”

Israeli TV channels aired a number of reports showing the torture and humiliation of Palestinians in Israeli prisons. The videos are consumed by the Israeli public as entertainment, revealing the sadism of Israeli society.

BY JONATHAN OFIR   , https://mondoweiss.net/2024/03/we-are-the-masters-of-the-house-israeli-channels-air-snuff-videos-featuring-systematic-torture-of-palestinians/

Over the past month, mainstream Israeli television channels have aired what can only be described as snuff films. They depict the systematic torture of Palestinians from Gaza in Israeli jails. Such videos have aired on at least three occasions — twice on Channel 14, and once on the public broadcaster, Channel 13. While Channel 14 is considered right-wing, so is about two-thirds of the Israeli public, and the more “mainstream” Channel 13 has shown no qualms about airing similar footage. 

The broadcasts follow prison officials into detention centers to document the mistreatment of prisoners, which seems to be something that the officials — and apparently the viewers — find satisfying rather than revolting. The airing of these snuff films is a demonstration of societal sadism. 

As Yumna Patel has recently reported, several rights groups have sounded the alarm over the widespread and systemic abuse that Palestinian prisoners face at the hands of the Israeli authorities. These groups’ calls have been unintentionally buttressed by Israeli soldiers’ unapologetic videos of themselves torturing or demeaning Palestinian detainees, which they boastfully post on social media. Now, it seems that the phenomenon has expanded to mainstream Israeli television.   

The two aforementioned reports on Channel 14 (threads with subtitles can be found here and here) contained footage of actual interrogation sessions during which torture was used. The Channel 13 report did not, but it exposed some of the worst prison conditions to be broadcast to the public. These conditions include forcing prisoners to live in inhumane conditions and subjecting them to torture and harassment. Here’s the 11-minute video with translated subtitles.

‘The feeling is one of pride’

“Here, we see the cells in which the Nukhba terrorists are held,” the narrator says.

The “Nukhba” refers to elite Hamas-led fighters who carried out the October 7 attack. In the cell, viewers notice metal bunkbeds without mattresses, and instead of a toilet, there is just a hole in the floor. The room is almost completely dark throughout the day, and prisoners have their hands and legs chained together. 

We hear attack dogs barking constantly as prisoners are made to kneel while bound and blindfolded, their heads touching the floor. 

“This is how it should be,” a guard says. “This is how a Nukhba prisoner should be…what happened on October 7 will never return.” 

In another scene, a guard shouts at prisoners as dogs continue to bark incessantly. “Heads down! Heads on the floor!” he yells. 

“There are many prisoners here that I personally saw at the [October 7] events,” a prison official says, taking pride in humiliating them. “The difference is that this time, he is afraid, shaking, with his head on the floor…no Allahu Akbar, nothing. You won’t hear a squeak from him.”

“They have no mattresses,” says a warden shift commander. “They have nothing…we control them 100% — their food, their shackling, their sleep…[we] show them we are the masters of the house.” Even without knowing the background to that phrase, to hear him say it is chilling. 

“Masters of the house” was the election slogan of Itamar Ben-Gvir, the Jewish Power leader and current Minister of National Security. Ben-Gvir declared war on Palestinian prisoners long before October 7, and this has included shutting down bakeries that supply bread to prisoners — described by Ben-Gvir as an “indulgence” — and drastically limiting prisoners’ water use. So now it’s become much worse. 

While one is tempted to believe that all prisoners here are “Nukhba” members, it turns out that many of them aren’t even suspected of that. Rather, they were rounded up in Gaza after October 7, during mass arrests in which hundreds of Gazan men were stripped and paraded in a most sadistic demonstration of power. The mass arrests also included hundreds of women, including pregnant women detained with their babies. Israeli security officials told Haaretz that by their own estimate, “only 10 to 15 percent of the hundreds of the semi-naked and bound Gazan men arrested in the Strip during the recent days are Hamas members or those who identified with the organization.”

Back to the Channel 13 coverage, viewers can hear the nonstop blasting of the Zionist anthem, Am Israel Hai (“the people of Israel live”). 

“The prison authorities claim that it is meant to boost the morale of the staff,” the narrator declares. “But it is clear that this is another part of the psychological warfare against the prisoners.” 

Torture, in other words. 

It’s hard to imagine the depths to which Israeli society has sunk. The official tells the Channel 13 reporter that “the feeling is one of pride.”

 The reason such sadism has become formalized as a matter of policy is because this is what the Israeli public demands. The Israeli Democracy Institute released a survey last week showing that two-thirds of Jewish Israelis oppose “the transfer of humanitarian aid to Gaza residents at this time,” even if “via international bodies that are not linked to Hamas or to UNRWA.” For right-wing voters, the opposition to aid jumps from 68% to 80%. 

This is not Israel’s Abu Ghraib moment, because when Abu Ghraib was revealed, most Americans were revolted. Israeli society, on the other hand, is thirsting for genocide. No wonder they consume such videos as entertainment on mainstream TV.

Thanks to Tali Shapiro, B.M.@ireallyhatyou, Hilel Biton-Rosen, and Dave Reed.

March 23, 2024 Posted by | Atrocities, Israel, Reference | Leave a comment

To Mars and Back: Will NASA’s Ambitious Endeavor Be Worth It?

A mission to retrieve samples from the red planet is in the works. Some scientists wonder if it’s a wise investment.

UNDARK, BY SARAH SCOLES, 03.20.2024

……………. Mars Sample Return, or MSR, set to launch later this decade. MSR is an audacious plan to collect samples of material from the red planet and send them on a one-way trip to Earth.

……………………………..MSR is also hugely expensive, mired in revision and bureaucracy, and, in some experts’ opinions, lacking adequate scientific value. As the planned 2028 launch date approaches, those tensions are becoming more pressing. Budget uncertainties and possible cuts have put the project in limbo as politicians and scientists alike are questioning how MSR’s cost — currently estimated at $8 billion to $11 billion — and scientific benefit balance, and what it might mean for other NASA missions. “They’re competing for funding,” said Linda Billings, who has been a communication consultant for NASA’s Planetary Defense Coordination Office and its astrobiology program. “They’re competing for attention.”

MSR is attention-grabbing, impressive, and has already been appropriated about $1.7 billion for development. It’s also, if it succeeds, a political boon for NASA and the U.S. And so, the program, despite doubts and a current stall, continues, at least for the moment……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

LOFTY ambitions come at a steep price — and one that keeps mounting. In April 2023, NASA announced it was convening an independent review board in part to help wrangle MSR’s budget. And in September 2023, its board — which had 16 members, including Hamilton — issued its report.

The authors estimated that the mission may ultimately cost between $8 billion and $11 billion, a far cry from a 2020 independent review that estimated it closer to $4 billion.

new report from the Office of the Inspector General largely concurs with the independent review board’s findings, stating that NASA should have more realistic estimates for MSR’s cost and timeline, and that it should revisit the mission’s specifics. 

Given that inflation, the Senate last year proposed slashing the mission’s 2024 budget to $300 million, and possibly canceling it or cutting its scope. (The budget request was for $949 million, a figure the House approved.) The final budget, approved this month gives NASA the option to spend as little as the Senate-suggested $300 million and as much as $949 million on the mission. A report that accompanied the budget noted that NASA must submit its own report on the future of MSR to Congress, after its response to the independent review is complete.

At stake aren’t only taxpayer dollars, but also NASA’s other projects. ………………………..

 MSR has a “near zero probability” of launching in 2028 as intended. If the agency wants to launch by 2030, the next window, it can expect to spend more than $1 billion per year between 2025 and 2027……………


ONCERNS ABOUT 
MSR value, though, aren’t just about money. Some scientists — including a NASA-funded researcher who studies Mars — question the mission’s scientific value……………………

Billings, the NASA consultant, questions whether the mission will benefit members of the general public, who are footing the bill. “If you’re not a Mars scientist, who cares?” she said.

According to a 2023 Pew study, the public believes NASA’s top priorities should be monitoring asteroids and other objects that might hit Earth, and studying the climate — things that aid life on Earth. Several missions NASA is delaying in favor of MSR do, in fact, deal with such terrestrial concerns.

If Billings oversaw NASA’s budget, she said she would focus on science that’s important not just to scientists but to the broader world: “There should be tangible public benefit.”

………………………..Comparing MSR to Apollo is particularly potent at this moment. The dynamics are parallel: China is also planning a sample-return mission, called Tianwen-3. Such competition from an adversary was fuel for NASA during the Cold War, when the agency went up against the Soviets in space. “That was really the reason why we sent people to the Moon,” said Lee. “It wasn’t even about science at all.”

And while science will surely come out of MSR, this mission may owe its continued existence more to political power and international competition — things that tend to resonate with Congress. That is, after all, what appropriators are generally more concerned with, compared to the ages of alien rocks.

……………………..Today, while NASA retools the mission and fashions a response to the independent review, work on MSR has largely been paused….. https://undark.org/2024/03/20/nasa-mars-sample-return/?utm_source=Undark%3A+News+%26+Updates&utm_campaign=12776643e7-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5cee408d66-185e4e09de-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

March 23, 2024 Posted by | space travel, USA | 1 Comment

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s structural path: Let Ukrainians do all the dying in support of US proxy war against Russia

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 22 Mar 24

Early in the US proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, Senator Lindsey Graham gloried in America’s use of Ukrainian soldiers to do all the dying. “I like the structural path we’re on here. As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and the economic support, they will fight to the last person.” Anybody but US cannon fodder was just fine for the armchair warrior from South Carolina.

Two years later, with over 400,000 of those hapless Ukrainian soldiers dead from Sen. Graham’s exhortations to die for American exceptionalism, Graham remains unbowed.

During his recent visit to Kyiv, he demanded Ukraine pass a new mobilization law to draft younger cannon fodder to send into the chopper mill of a lost war. Graham is miffed Ukraine draft laws exempt men under 27. “I would hope that those eligible to serve in the Ukrainian military would join. I can’t believe it’s at 27. You’re in a fight for your life, so you should be serving — not at 25 or 27. We need more people in the line. No matter what we do, you should be fighting.”

Graham remains unconcerned he supported US provocations which led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He’s in denial of his acquiescence in the effort to prevent a negotiated settlement early on that would have preserved Ukraine territory. Now he’s telling Ukraine to send its young men to fill the ranks of the 400,000 dead Ukrainians he exalted to die for US exceptionalism.

It would take a psychiatrist, maybe a team of psychiatrists, to determine the pathology in in Graham’s psyche that leads him to promote mass slaughter of foreigners to prop up American’s collapsing control of European geopolitics. But good luck trying to get the Senior Senator from South Carolina to lie on the couch. His focus remains: ‘So many Ukrainians yet to die…so little time.”

March 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

Establishment Papers Fell Short in Coverage of Genocide Charges

the two most widely circulating newspapers in the US ………In the lead-up to the hearing (12/29/23–1/10/24), the New York Times only published three articles focused on the case (1/8/241/9/241/10/24), while another Times piece (1/10/24) included a brief mention of the genocide charges.

the two most widely circulating newspapers in the US cannot say the same. In the lead-up to the hearing (12/29/23–1/10/24), the New York Times only published three articles focused on the case (1/8/241/9/241/10/24), while another Times piece (1/10/24) included a brief mention of the genocide charges.

LARA-NOUR WALTON

South Africa on December 29 presented a historic case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—the highest court in the world. In an 84-page lawsuit, South Africa asserted that Israel’s deadly military campaign in Gaza—following the October 7 Hamas attacks, which killed 1,200 Israelis and foreigners—constitutes genocide. So far, more than 30,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been slaughtered, while over 71,000 have been injured in Israeli attacks.

Establishment media in the US were slow to cover South Africa’s “epochal intervention” in the ICJ—initially providing the public with thin to no reporting on the case. While the quantity of coverage did eventually increase, it skewed pro-Israel, even after the court in January found it “plausible” that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, and ordered Tel Aviv to comply with international law.

Thin early coverage

FAIR used the Nexis news database and WSJ.com to identify every article discussing the genocide case published in the print editions of the New York Times and Wall Street Journal for one month, from the announcement of the case on December 29 through January 28, two days after the ICJ’s preliminary ruling.

Under international law, genocide is one of the gravest charges that can be brought against a state. Since its 1948 ratification by the UN, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide has only been presented to the ICJ on a handful of occasions, and the historic nature of the complaint was not lost on its applicant: “South Africa is acutely aware of the particular weight of responsibility in initiating proceedings against Israel for violations of the Genocide Convention.”

Unfortunately, the two most widely circulating newspapers in the US cannot say the same. In the lead-up to the hearing (12/29/23–1/10/24), the New York Times only published three articles focused on the case (1/8/241/9/241/10/24), while another Times piece (1/10/24) included a brief mention of the genocide charges.

The Wall Street Journal ran no pieces focused on the charges prior to the hearing. The Journal‘s only mention of the genocide case in the pre-trial period came in a broader article about the war (12/29/23), which included six paragraphs about South Africa’s application. The paper did not reference the case again until the trial began.

‘Without any basis in fact’

During the two-day hearing, each paper ran two articles about it in their print editions. Each published an overview of the case (New York Times1/11/24Wall Street Journal1/11/24). For their second piece, the New York Times (1/11/24) looked at both Israeli and Palestinian reactions, while the Journal (1/12/24) focused only on Israeli reactions; the one Palestinian it quoted was identified as an Israeli citizen…………………………………………………………….

Uneven sourcing………………………………………………..

Unchallenged Israeli talking points………………………………………………….

Unscrutinized statements……………………………………………….

With no scrutiny of Israeli officials’ statements, US news becomes little more than a bullhorn for government propaganda.

March 23, 2024 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, media | Leave a comment