nuclear-news

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

Macron and Zelensky sign military deal

18 Feb 2024 ,  https://www.sott.net/article/489024-Sell-out-Macron-and-Zelensky-sign-military-deal

The ten-year pact mirrors defense agreements Kiev recently signed with Berlin and London

France and Ukraine signed a bilateral security pact on Friday during President Vladimir Zelensky’s visit to Paris. While President Emmanuel Macron did not offer Kiev any ironclad military commitments, he promised another €3 billion in aid over the rest of 2024, as well as “cooperation” in the area of artillery.

The agreement states that France views the prospect of Ukraine’s accession to NATO positively, as “a useful contribution to peace and stability in Europe.” The largely symbolic deal is designed to help “pave the way towards Ukraine’s future integration into the EU and NATO,” French media noted, citing officials.

The pact follows a similar agreement struck with Germany earlier in the day, and another signed with the UK last month. All three are set to last ten years.

Last month, Macron announced that France would supply Kiev with 40 more SCALP-EG long-range cruise missiles and “hundreds of bombs,” promising to finalize the bilateral security agreement on an upcoming trip to Kiev. The trip, which was to run from February 13-14, was called off by the French side due to security concerns, according to French media.

Zelensky is set to ask Western sponsors for more financing at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, while the situation on the front lines of the Ukraine-Russia conflict is escalating, with Kiev facing severe personnel and ammo shortages.

Moscow has condemned Western deliveries of long-range weaponry such as French SCALP-EG cruise missiles, which Kiev has used to strike Russian infrastructure in Donbass, causing numerous civilian deaths. Russia maintains that further military aid to Kiev will only delay the end of the conflict without changing the final outcome, and lead to unnecessary deaths.

Comment: The ‘leaders’ of Europe are selling out Europe and the welfare of their countries while submitting to a globalist anti-human agenda.

See also:

February 20, 2024 Posted by | France, politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Ukraine can’t join NATO while in conflict – Netherlands 

16 Feb 24,  https://www.rt.com/news/592609-ukraine-cant-join-nato-netherlands/

Accession to the US-led bloc is a “sensitive process” that may require intermediate steps, Dutch caretaker PM Mark Rutte has said 

The Netherlands’ caretaker prime minister, Mark Rutte, has refused to say whether he would support Ukraine’s membership of NATO at an upcoming bloc leaders’ meeting, insisting that admitting Ukraine to NATO is not feasible while the conflict with Russia is ongoing. Rutte has been described in the media as a frontrunner to become the next secretary-general of the US-led bloc.  

The politician made the comments at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday in response to a question about whether EU prime ministers would “personally support” Ukraine’s membership bid at the next NATO summit in Washington in July.   

The bad news is – as long as the war is raging, Ukraine cannot become a member of NATO,” Rutte has said. “The good news is that we can learn from the European Union,” he added referring to the EU approach of implementing “intermediate steps” that countries take on “the way to accession” as opposed to NATO’s process that goes “from nothing to full membership.”  

Rutte admitted that the last time the question of Ukraine’s membership arose, Kiev was left “dissatisfied.” As a result, there is a need to “work carefully” to see “what next step is possible” so as not to “overpromise.”  

Ukraine applied to integrate with the NATO Membership Action Plan in 2008 and a decade later enshrined in its constitution membership in the US-led bloc as a strategic foreign policy goal.    

At last year’s NATO summit in Vilnius, the bloc’s leaders said that Ukraine’s “rightful place is in NATO,” but failed to provide clear commitments or describe a timeline.  

While the question of Ukraine’s membership is likely to be discussed at the next NATO summit in July, some Western politicians have warned against expecting a “big leap forward on that.”  

Russia views NATO expansion towards its border as a major security threat. President Vladimir Putin has argued that Western powers have used Ukraine to antagonize Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Putin called the West’s approach to Ukraine a colossal political mistake, pointing to NATO’s 2008 promise to accept the country into the bloc, as well as the Western-supported coup in Kiev in 2014.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Great British Nuclear seeks to buy EDF land for small modular reactor.

UK Government in talks to buy site in Heysham, Lancashire, as it rolls out the new
technology.

The government is holding talks with EDF to take control of
land at a site in Lancashire as part of plans to roll out mini-nuclear
power stations in Britain. Great British Nuclear is in early discussions
with the French state-owned energy group over buying land adjacent to its
existing nuclear plants at Heysham, with a view to potentially giving the
green light for a private developer to build a small modular reactor there.

The 255-acre site is one of eight in Britain approved for new nuclear
development and is the location of EDF’s Heysham 1 and Heysham 2 nuclear
power stations. Almost 109 acres has a nuclear site licence, while the rest
is being used for other purposes. Britain’s first small nuclear plants
are due to be awarded government contracts this summer after six designs,
including one from Rolls-Royce, were selected to compete for up to £20
billion in taxpayer funding.

The government does not expect to make a final
investment decision on the first small modular reactor until 2029. Great
British Nuclear is searching initially for two sites, each to house a
single mini-reactor, with a plan to build between four and six in total, as
part of the first phase of the rollout in Britain.

 Times 19th Feb 2024

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/great-british-nuclear-seeks-edf-land-for-small-modular-reactor-kmqd3hhz8

February 20, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

The San Onofre Briefing: The Latest on SoCal’s Shut Down Nuclear Power Plant

5 Feb 2024

What does it mean for a nuclear plant to be decommissioned? What’s the status of the nuclear waste currently stored on-site at San Onofre? What concerns does the public need to be aware of? Is San Onofre safe? As advocates for a safe and sustainable future for Southern California, SLF is thrilled to present the next edition of our First Fridays Series, “The San Onofre Briefing: The Latest on SoCal’s Shut Down Nuclear Power Plant.” This edition is a comprehensive exploration of the recent developments surrounding the decommissioning of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Our expert panel – including a retired Admiral of the US Navy and the Former Chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission – delves into the current status, environmental impact, and public health implications of the shut-down nuclear site.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | decommission reactor, USA | Leave a comment

Radiation Free Lakeland urges East Riding Councillors to Withdraw from GDF process

Radiation Free Lakeland. 16 Feb 24

Dear Councillor of East Riding,

At your full meeting on 21st February 2024 I believe a motion is being put forward for withdrawal from the expression of interest  by East Riding Council’s inward investment arm to start a “conversation” with residents about building a geological waste disposal facility for high level nuclear wastes.

RADIATION FREE LAKELAND

Radiation Free Lakeland are a voluntary group in Cumbria. Our Facebook group has almost 1000 members and a recent petition against investigations for GDF generated over 55,000 signatures.  We are running two campaigns currently: Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole and Lakes Against Nuclear Dump.

RFL have been pushing back against a GDF here since 2008  Many of our members were also active in the push back against NIREX (forerunner of NWS) in the 1ate 1990s. 

We fully support the motion for withdrawal and would urge East Riding Councillors to look at the experience in Cumbria. 

HISTORY OF GDF IN CUMBRIA 

In the 1990s the GDF plan was limited to low and intermediate level wastes for abandonment deep underground.  A public inquiry in Cumbria with many scientists and geologists arguing against the “Rock Characterisation Facility”  found that the low/intermediate level wastes would breach containment and percolate to the surface far sooner than NIREX had accounted for. The NIREX inspectors report can be seen here. https://www.davidsmythe.org/nuclear/inspector’s_report_complete.pdf

In breathtaking mission creep the UKs failed GDF plan now includes High Level Wastes which would be extremely hot at 100 degrees c or more.  The hot wastes are currently cooled by Britain’s Favorite View -Wastwater, along with water from the rivers Ehen, Calder and other water sources amounting to millions of gallons every day.  The reason the GDF would be so huge is to try and allow heat from widely spaced waste containers to dissipate into the surrounding rocks.   Despite optimistic assurances about safety, this has never been done anywhere in the world.  It is all a big experiment to dig a very big hole (or holes – new nuclear build/waste would require up to three GDFs),  bury the waste and forget about it into millennia.  

The former Leader of Cumbria County Council Eddie Martin, sadly no longer with us,  put it very well in his speech to Cumbria County Council’s Cabinet in January 2013 at which CCC decided to withdraw from the ‘Managing Radioactive Waste Safely’ process (now NWS) : ” Young children and radioactive materials need supervision. Like a child, like you and me, an energetic radioactive molecule will become less energetic as it ages but for some molecules it will take many, many ages…Like a two year old, radioactive waste can get into everything: water, soil, plants and animals.”  Eddie Martin’s full speech to Cabinet can be seen here https://www.lakesagainstnucleardump.com/post/heartfelt-thanks-to-courageous-leader-of-cumbria-county-council-eddie-martin

DEEP MINING FOR COAL AND NUCLEAR = DEEP POLLUTION 

East Riding’s point of contact with NWS “Head of Siting” is Steve Reece.  Mr Reece was formerly Operations Director for West Cumbria Mining.  On his watch many deep boreholes of over 500m were drilled through the geology in the Whitehaven area and flushed with water at 240 liters per second in an area riddled with old mines to ‘test the hydrology’ for the UKs first deep coal mine in 30 years.  Those 4000 metres of exploratory boreholes may have in part or in whole been responsible for the environmental catastrophe now unfolding in Whitehaven.  Polluted old mine water has been pouring into the harbour for over year now with no end in sight.  The fragile honeycomb of old mines dating back to medieval times has been breached and no one is taking responsibility with the Coal Authority even initially saying it was not minewater pouring into the harbour. Now no-one disputes the pollution is from old mine water but the authorities appear clueless about how to find the source of the problem and stop it.  The exact siting of Steve Reece’s coal mine “exploratory” boreholes are redacted from West Cumbria Mining’s pending licence applications to the Coal Authority…………………………………

GRASP THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY NO WITH BOTH HANDS

 Councillors and the public in East Riding are being given the chance to stop the GDF in its tracks in their area – a chance that was denied to the people of Cumbria who have already voted no to the plan many times over.  The rules have been changed to allow the GDF plan once more into West Cumbria. This area is seen as the most politically expedient choice for a GDF with the presence of Sellafield and a nuclear compliant workforce.  There are mumblings from other areas that ‘Sellafield has the waste already so a GDF should go there.’   However the presence of 150 tonnes of plutonium (not classified as waste, not earmarked for GDF)  is the very reason why earthquake inducing mining should not take place anywhere near the Sellafield site – either from Steve Reece’s coal mine (just five miles away) or from the far bigger void of a GDF..

COPELAND NWS “PARTNERSHIP” IS WITHOUT CONSENT BUT WITH CRONYISM.


There was no discussion or vote by the full Copeland Council in Cumbria in forming a “Partnership” with NWS in 2021.  The decision was taken quietly by just four people, including the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Copeland, on the executive. There is an ongoing police investigation into one of those for his failure to declare his interests of over £100,000 renumeration from the nuclear sector.  Both the (former) Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Copeland (now Cumberland) are also vehement advocates of the coal mine whose CEO is Mark Kirkbride.  Kirkbride is a key government advisor at the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management advising on investigation techniques, costings and construction on the GDF plans…………………….

West Cumbria is being treated as a nuclear fiefdom despite its beauty, its history, its wildlife, its ‘protected’ ocean and its tourism – all of genuine lasting value unlike the falsely puffed up ‘centre of excellence’ at Sellafield which threatens everything.  We urge councillors not to allow East Riding to become a nuclear fiefdom as is Cumbria.  We will continue to resist but it is difficult when this area is already viewed and treated by industry and government and by others as a nuclear fiefdom enslaved to the most toxic industry on the planet.  There is no “away” for the fiefdom’s wastes, they must be monitored and repackaged as and when necessary. The first step being to allow no further wastes to be railroaded to the Sellafield site.

We fully and vehemently support the motion to withdraw East Riding (and anywhere else) from GDF “conversations.”

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby

on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2024/02/16/radiation-free-lakeland-lettereast-riding-councillors-urged-to-withdraw-from-gdf-process/

February 20, 2024 Posted by | UK | Leave a comment

Chris Hedges: Julian Assange’s Final Appeal

Julian Assange will make his final appeal this week to the British courts to avoid extradition. If he is extradited it is the death of investigations into the inner workings of power by the press.

By Chris Hedges / ScheerPost, 18 Feb 24

LONDON — If Julian Assange is denied permission to appeal his extradition to the United States before a panel of two judges at the High Court in London this week, he will have no recourse left within the British legal system. His lawyers can ask the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) for a stay of execution under Rule 39, which is given in “exceptional circumstances” and “only where there is an imminent risk of irreparable harm.” But it is far from certain that the British court will agree. It may order Julian’s immediate extradition prior to a Rule 39 instruction or may decide to ignore a request from the ECtHR to allow Julian to have his case heard by the court.

The nearly 15-year-long persecution of Julian, which has taken a heavy toll on his physical and psychological health, is done in the name of extradition to the U.S. where he would stand trial for allegedly violating 17 counts of the 1917 Espionage Act, with a potential sentence of 170 years. 

Julian’s “crime” is that he published classified documents, internal messages, reports and videos from the U.S. government and U.S. military in 2010, which were provided by U.S. army whistleblower Chelsea Manning. This vast trove of material revealed massacres of civilians, torture, assassinations, the list of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay and the conditions they were subjected to, as well as the Rules of Engagement in Iraq. Those who perpetrated these crimes — including the U.S. helicopter pilots who gunned down two Reuters journalists and 10 other civilians and severely injured two children, all captured in the Collateral Murder video — have never been prosecuted.

Julian exposed what the U.S. empire seeks to airbrush out of history. 

Julian’s persecution is an ominous message to the rest of us. Defy the U.S. imperium, expose its crimes, and no matter who you are, no matter what country you come from, no matter where you live, you will be hunted down and brought to the U.S. to spend the rest of your life in one of the harshest prison systems on earth. If Julian is found guilty it will mean the death of investigative journalism into the inner workings of state power. To possess, much less publish, classified material — as I did when I was a reporter for The New York Times — will be criminalized. And that is the point, one understood by The New York Times, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, El País and The Guardian, who issued a joint letter calling on the U.S. to drop the charges against him.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and other federal lawmakers voted on Thursday for the United States and Britain to end Julian’s incarceration, noting that it stemmed from him “doing his job as a journalist” to reveal “evidence of misconduct by the U.S.”

The legal case against Julian, which I have covered from the beginning and will cover again in London this week, has a bizarre Alice-in-Wonderland quality, where judges and lawyers speak in solemn tones about law and justice while making a mockery of the most basic tenants of civil liberties and jurisprudence.

How can hearings go forward when the Spanish security firm at the Ecuadorian Embassy, UC Global, where Julian sought refuge for seven years, provided videotaped surveillance of meetings between Julian and his lawyers to the CIA, eviscerating attorney-client privilege? This alone should have seen the case thrown out of court. 

How can the Ecuadorian government led by Lenin Moreno violate international law by rescinding Julian’s asylum status and permit London Metropolitan Police into the Ecuadorian Embassy — sovereign territory of Ecuador — to carry Julian to a waiting police van? 

Why did the courts accept the prosecution’s charge that Julian is not a legitimate journalist? 

Why did the United States and Britain ignore Article 4 of their Extradition Treaty that prohibits extradition for political offenses? 

How is the case against Julian allowed to go ahead after the key witness for the United States, Sigurdur Thordarson – a convicted fraudster and pedophile – admitted to fabricating the accusations he made against Julian? 

How can Julian, an Australian citizen, be charged under the U.S. Espionage Act when he did not engage in espionage and wasn’t based in the U.S when he received the leaked documents? 

Why are the British courts permitting Julian to be extradited to the U.S. when the CIA — in addition to putting Julian under 24-hour video and digital surveillance while in the Ecuadorian Embassy — considered kidnapping and assassinating him, plans that included a potential shoot-out on the streets of London with involvement by the Metropolitan Police? 

How can Julian be condemned as a publisher when he did not, as Daniel Ellsberg did, obtain and leak the classified documents he published? 

Why is the U.S. government not charging the publisher of The New York Times or The Guardian with espionage for publishing the same leaked material in partnership with WikiLeaks? 

Why is Julian being held in isolation in a high-security prison without trial for nearly five years when his only technical violation of the law is breaching bail conditions when he sought asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy?  Normally this would entail a fine. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Julian’s lawyers will attempt to convince two High Court judges to grant him permission to appeal a number of the arguments against extradition which Judge Baraitser dismissed in January 2021. His lawyers, if the appeal is granted, will argue that prosecuting Julian for his journalistic activity represents a “grave violation” of his right to free speech; that Julian is being prosecuted for his political opinions, something which the U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty does not allow; that Julian is charged with “pure political offenses” and the U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty prohibits extradition under such circumstances; that Julian should not be extradited to face prosecution where the Espionage Act “is being extended in an unprecedented and unforeseeable way”; that the charges could be amended resulting in Julian facing the death penalty; and that Julian will not receive a fair trial in the U.S. They are also asking for the right to introduce new evidence about CIA plans to kidnap and assassinate Julian.

If the High Court grants Julian permission to appeal, a further hearing will be scheduled during which time he will argue his appeal grounds. If the High Court refuses to grant Julian permission to appeal, the only option left is to appeal to the ECtHR. If he is unable to take his case to the ECtHR he will be extradiated to the U.S.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. No other contemporary journalist has come close to matching his revelations.

Julian is the first. We are next.  https://scheerpost.com/2024/02/18/chris-hedges-julian-assanges-final-appealchris-hedges/—

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Biden & Blinken – Rule of Illegal Power Over Rule of Law

By Ralph Nader, February 16, 2024,
more https://nader.org/2024/02/16/biden-blinken-rule-of-illegal-power-over-rule-of-law/

Among the puzzling questions that the media chooses to ignore is asking high government officials why they are exercising the illegal use of power that violates the rule of law which they are required to obey.

This week, the Veterans for Peace (VFP) made it very easy for reporters to pose questions by sending an open letter (See veteransforpeace.org) to the Inspector General of the U.S. State Department and Antony Blinken, Secretary of State, invoking several U.S. statutes that require the “termination of provision of military weapons and munitions to Israel.”

Josh Paul, a former senior official in the State Department’s office charged with reviewing weapon transfers to foreign countries, said: “The Secretary and all relevant officials under his purview should take this letter from Veterans for Peace with the utmost seriousness. It is a stark reminder of the importance of abiding by the laws and policies that relate to arms transfers.”

What laws are being violated by the State Department daily as it approves ships and cargo planes full of weapons of mass destruction to be used in Israel’s war crimes and genocide against hundreds of thousands of Gaza’s civilians, mostly children and women?

These are the laws highlighted in the VFP letter:

  • The Foreign Assistance Act, which forbids the provision of assistance to a government which “engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”
  • Arms Export Control Act, which says countries that receive US military aid can only use weapons for legitimate self-defense and internal security. Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza goes way beyond self-defense and internal security.
  • The U.S. War Crimes Act, which forbids grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, including wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and unlawful deportation or transfer, perpetrated by the Israeli Occupying Forces.
  • The Leahy Law, which prohibits the U.S. Government from using funds for assistance to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights.
  • The Genocide Convention Implementation Act, which was enacted to implement U.S. obligations under the Genocide Convention, provides for criminal penalties for individuals who commit or incite others to commit genocide

Under these laws, the State Department has a “Conventional Arms Transfer Policy” which, the letter notes, “prohibit [U.S. weapons transfers when it’s likely they] will be used by Israel to commit … genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, [including attacks intentionally directed against civilian objects or civilians protected] or other serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights laws.”

The VFP letter continues, “Dozens of authoritative complaints and referrals made by hospital administrators in Gaza, as well as by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Palestine Authority, South Africa, Turkey, Medicins san Frontieres, UNRWA, UNICEF, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Norwegian Refugee Council and the World Food Programme have confirmed that there is an ongoing human rights and humanitarian disaster due to Israel’s cutoff of water and electricity, deliberate destruction of sewage infrastructure and delaying of aid shipments by Israeli forces.”

If you are wondering why these laws are not being enforced – the answer is that individual citizens or groups of citizens do not have any “legal standing” to sue Secretary Blinken, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. Only a Committee of Congress, backed by a Senate or House Resolution, can take the State Department to federal court. That action to enforce Congressionally passed and enacted laws is not likely to happen in this lawless, Israeli government-indentured Congress which refuses even to demand a ceasefire.

Mike Ferner, VFP National Director, observed “Just as any good soldiers can recognize when they are given an unlawful order, we believe some State Department staff are horrified at the orders they’re given and will decide to uphold the law, find the courage to speak out and demand an end to the carnage.”

There is a related serious matter, pointed out by international law practitioner, Bruce Fein who said “The United States has clearly become a co-belligerent with Israel in its war against Hamas-Gaza Palestinians by systematically supplying the IDF with weapons and intelligence without conditions. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, nationals of a co-belligerent state are not regarded as protected persons if their state has customary diplomatic relations with an allied nation [in this case, Israel].”

For decades, the State Department has had an independent Office of the Legal Adviser. The present occupant of that post, acting legal adviser Richard C. Visek has been publicly silent. I am sending the Veterans for Peace letter to him and asking him to respond to this letter and to the American people who pay his salary.

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Israel, Legal, USA | Leave a comment

Exploding Alberta’s Myths about Small Nuclear Reactors

Small nuclear reactors are unproven and years away from being in use. But the Alberta government is presenting them as a way to keep fossil fuels flowing. 

The untested technology is more about greenwashing than about cutting emissions.

Tim Rauf 15 Feb 2024, The Tyee

Alberta’s government is really excited about nuclear power.

More specifically, about novel and unproven small modular nuclear reactors. It hopes to use these to help lower the province’s carbon emissions while letting the energy industry continue operating as usual — an enticing prospect to the government given its intention to increase oil and gas production, while still having the energy sector get to net zero by 2050.

Small modular nuclear reactors produce less than one-third of the electricity of a traditional reactor.

The premise is that small reactors are easier to place and build, and cheaper.

Alberta hitched its horse to this wagon with Ontario, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan in 2022, taking part in a strategic plan for small modular reactor development and deployment. Alberta Innovates, the province’s research body, had a feasibility study conducted for it by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The study focused on using the reactors for greenhouse-gas-free steam emissions for oilsands projects, electricity generation in our deregulated market and providing an alternative to diesel when supplying power to remote communities.

More recently, Ontario Power Generation and Capital Power out of Edmonton entered into an agreement to assess SMRs for providing nuclear energy to Alberta’s grid. Nathan Neudorf, Alberta’s minister of affordability and utilities, was gleeful. “This partnership represents an exciting and important step forward in our efforts to decarbonize the grid while maintaining on-demand baseload power,” he said of the announcement.

All of this buzz makes it seem like SMRs are just over the horizon, an inevitability that will allow the province to evolve to have a cleaner, modern energy landscape.

But small modular reactors are nowhere near ready for deployment, and won’t be in Alberta for about a decade. That means for 10 years, they’ll provide no GHG-free steam to mitigate emissions.

“It’s still in the design phase,” Kennedy Halvorson said, speaking about the reactors. Halvorson is a conservation specialist with the Alberta Wilderness Association. The reactors are “so far off from being able to be used for us,” Halvorson added. “The earliest projections would be 2030. And we need to be reducing our emissions before 2030. So, we need to have solutions now, basically.”

With SMRs unable to stem the emissions tide for years, it’s confusing as to how they could make enough of a difference to get Alberta to net zero by 2050 (in line with United Nations emissions reduction targets to keep global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees).

Capital Power made similar projections………………………………………………………………………..

Construction itself is only one piece. Adding to that is the need to build a regulatory framework, which Alberta doesn’t have for nuclear…………………………………………………….

Ontario’s nuclear troubles

Listening to these public voices is prudent. We can look east to see what happens when the government and power utilities sidestep the process of getting explicit consent from communities that stand to be affected.

With its status as the nuclear activity hub in Canada, we can use Ontario as a litmus test of sorts and gauge Canada’s track record of care with nuclear. The report card isn’t great. There have been multiple cases of improper consultation with Indigenous Peoples on whose lands the waste, production or extraction sites are placed………………………………………………………………………..

Small reactors face a critical economic challenge

Adding to the timeline troubles are questions as to whether small reactors truly offer that much of an economic advantage, if any, compared with their larger counterparts.

In a previous article Ramana wrote, he pointed to the first reactors as an indication of the answer.

The first reactors started off small. Their size, though, coupled with the exorbitant price tag of nuclear development, meant they couldn’t compete with fossil fuels.

The only thing they could do to reduce the disadvantage was to build larger and larger reactors, Ramana said.

A large reactor that could produce five times as much electricity didn’t cost five times as much to build, he said, improving the return from the investment.

Economically the SMR can’t seem to compete with its larger sibling. Adding this to the delays abundant with nuclear, controversies around construction and communities, and the misalignment of timelines for meeting climate commitments, we need to ask why we’re seeing such a fervent enthusiasm for small modular reactors.

Greenwashing by any other name

The answer is likely a simple one: The Alberta government wants to keep the taps on. Their friends in the energy industry do too. Like carbon capture and sequestration before it, SMRs are the next way to stave off pesky talk of divestment and transition…………………………………………………………….

Deflecting and delaying isn’t the only greenwashing happening either, Halvorson argued. She noted there’s a special kind of tactic that comes with nuclear and other “clean” technology, where only carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas offsets are counted.

“When we reduce it all to just how much CO2 something emits, we’re not getting the full picture of environmental impacts,” Halvorson said. She pointed to water use in nuclear as an example.

“Most nuclear technologies require a massive input of water to work. And as we know, right now we’re in a drought in Alberta. Our water resources are so precious. We already have industries that are using way too much water as is, in a way that’s not allowing our environments and ecosystems to replenish their reserves, like their water resources,” she said.

Despite the cheerleading for nuclear Alberta, where small nuclear reactors will let us enjoy the fruits of fossil fuels (and even produce more) in a cleaner way, the bones don’t read that way. The argument that we can keep on drilling so long as we have that newest silver bullet hasn’t stood up to scrutiny before, and it doesn’t now.  https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2024/02/15/Exploding-Alberta-Myths-Small-Nuclear-Reactors/

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Egypt Building Walled Camp in Sinai Desert to Absorb Palestinian Refugees from Gaza

Israel will likely try to push Palestinians from Rafah into the camp

by Dave DeCamp February 15, 2024 https://news.antiwar.com/2024/02/15/egypt-building-walled-camp-in-sinai-desert-to-take-palestinian-refugees-from-gaza/
Egypt is building an 8-square-mile walled enclosure in the Sinai Desert near Gaza to prepare for an influx of Palestinian refugees as Israel is vowing to launch an assault on Rafah, which borders Egypt and is packed with about 1.5 million Palestinians.

The revelation of Egypt’s construction, which was reported by The Wall Street Journal and an Egyptian rights group, signals Cairo is caving to Israeli pressure to allow Palestinians to enter its territory.

Egyptian officials told the Journal that more than 100,000 people would be able to fit into the camps they are constructing. If a mass exodus of Palestinians from Gaza does happen, the Egyptian officials said they want to limit the number of refugees they allow in to between 50,000 and 60,000.

The Sinai Foundation for Human Rights first reported on the construction on Wednesday and said the project is expected to be completed within 10 days. Egyptian officials told the Journal they expect a broad Israeli offensive on Rafah could start “within weeks.” Israel must be aware of the construction and will likely try to push as many Palestinians into the camp as it can.

Israeli government officials have not been shy about their desire to cleanse the Gaza Strip of its Palestinian population and re-establish Jewish settlements. A document prepared by Israel’s Intelligence Ministry that was leaked back in October said the best-case scenario for Israel would be to send all 2.3 million Palestinians living in Gaza into Egypt.

But Cairo’s opposition to the plan caused Israeli officials to look elsewhere and suggest Western countries take in Palestinian refugees. According to Israeli media, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu previously said he was looking for countries to “absorb” Palestinians, but he’s cooled the rhetoric since the Biden administration criticized other Israeli ministers for making similar comments.

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Egypt, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Germany and Ukraine sign ‘long term’ security deal

Zelensky said that the details of the agreement “are very specific and involve long-term support,” and that the pact proves that one day “Ukraine will be in NATO.”

 https://www.rt.com/news/592570-germany-ukraine-security-deal/ 17 Feb 24

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has said the agreement proves his country will join NATO

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky have signed a security pact under which Berlin will supply Kiev with military and economic aid for another ten years.

Inked on Friday, the agreement commits Germany to providing “unwavering support for Ukraine for as long as it takes in order to help Ukraine defend itself” and restore its 1991 borders. In addition to retaking the regions of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, this feat would also involve the seizure of Crimea from Russia, which some American officials and Kiev’s former military chief view as next to impossible.

On top of military aid, the plan binds Germany to training Ukrainian police officers, transferring weapons manufacturing technology, paying for green energy projects, and a range of other efforts to help the Ukrainian government “continue providing services to its people”

Speaking at a ceremony in Berlin, Zelensky said that the details of the agreement “are very specific and involve long-term support,” and that the pact proves that one day “Ukraine will be in NATO.”

Germany is Ukraine’s second-largest Western backer, behind only the US. To date, Berlin has given Kiev €22 billion ($23.7 billion) in assistance, including €17.7 billion in military aid, according to figures compiled by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. When aid transferred via the EU is included, Germany has handed over a total of €28 billion to Ukraine, Scholz said on Friday.

In addition to signing the decade-long pledge to Ukraine, Scholz announced a new package of military aid worth €1.1 billion. It will include 36 self-propelled howitzers, 120,000 artillery shells, and additional ammunition for Ukraine’s German-provided Iris-T air defense systems.

Germany’s outlay has hurt its own military readiness, with the New York Times reporting in November that training exercises are routinely canceled due to ammunition shortages, while German soldiers have yet to fire their latest howitzers, all of which have been sent to Ukraine.

Scholz’s decision to sanction Russian energy imports has also hammered the German economy, with industrial output falling by 2% last year, while the entire economy shrank by 0.3% in the same time period, according to the country’s Federal Statistical Office. One in three German manufacturers is currently considering moving abroad, Federation of German Industries (BDI) chief Siegfried Russwurm told Bild on Saturday, citing persistent inflation and high energy costs. 

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Germany, politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

South Korea’s nuclear mafia

Japan’s corrupt ‘nuclear village’ gave us the Fukushima disaster and there’s every reason to be concerned about South Korea’s corrupt ‘nuclear mafia’.

JIM GREEN, FEB 18, 2024, Substack,

Zion Lights’ latest substack post is a vacuous puff-piece about South Korea’s nuclear power industry. Therefore I’ve copied below a few articles I wrote for Nuclear Monitor about South Korea’s corrupt and dangerous nuclear industry.

Literally everything in Lights’ post could have been lifted from a nuclear industry promotional piece. Just one thing caught my eye: the three countries with the best record for building reactors relatively quickly are Japan, South Korea and China according to a table included in Lights’ post. Those three countries all have seriously corrupt nuclear industries. Correlation, causation, coincidence?

Lights is a British nuclear power advocate who previously worked for self-confessed liar, climate denier and MAGA lunatic Michael Shellenberger. You can read more about Lights here, Shellenberger here, and you can read Extinction Rebellion’s important statement about both of them here.

This is an excerpt from a 2017 Nuclear Monitor article, with some light editing to update the content.

In 2009, a KEPCO-led consortium won the contract to build four power reactors in the United Arab Emirates. In 2010, boosted by the UAE contract, South Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy set a target of winning contracts to build 80 power reactors overseas by 2030, and in 2015 KEPCO had a target of winning overseas contracts for six reactors by 2020.6 But all those targets have come to absolutely nothing ‒ KEPCO and KHNP haven’t won any reactor construction contracts since the 2009 UAE contract.

South Korea has signed nuclear cooperation agreements with at least 27 countries8 but those agreements aren’t leading to reactor contracts……………………………………………………………………

Nuclear corruption and the partial reform of South Korea’s nuclear mafia

The corrupt behavior of Japan’s ‘nuclear village’ ‒ and the very existence of the nuclear village ‒ were root causes of the March 2011 Fukushima disaster and a string of earlier accidents.1 In the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster, academic Richard Tanter identified a worldwide pattern of nuclear corruption:2

“During the eighteen months from the beginning of 2012 to mid- 2013, major corruption incidents occurred in the nuclear power industry in every country currently seeking to export nuclear reactors: the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Russia, France, and China. A number of other countries that operate or plan to have nuclear power plants also had major corruption cases, including Lithuania, Bulgaria, and Pakistan; moreover, serious allegations of corruption were raised in Egypt, India, Jordan, Nigeria, Slovakia, South Africa, and Taiwan.

“In the Korean case, systemic nuclear industry corruption was found; in Canada, deep corporate corruption within the largest nuclear engineering corporation was one matter, and bribery of nuclear technology consuming countries’ senior ministers was another. In Russia, the issue was persistent, deep seated, and widespread corruption in state-owned and private nuclear industry companies, with profound implications for the safety of Russian nuclear industry exports.

…………………………………………………………………………………………….. Corruption scandals are partly responsible for the massive downgrading of South Korea’s nuclear power ambitions.21 A detailed article on the scandals by Philip Andrews-Speed from the National University of Singapore has recently been published in the Journal of World Energy Law & Business.22 Importantly, Andrews-Speed notes that the problems only partially been resolved.

……………………………………………………………

, a much broader pattern of corruption began to come to light:

“Investigations of 101 companies revealed a wide range of illegal activities including bribery, overpaying, preferential treatment and favouritism, limiting competition in bidding, accepting parts with fraudulent or even no certificate, and collusion by parties in the falsification of testing reports.”

An investigation by the Korea Institute for Nuclear Safety showed that 2,114 test reports had been falsified by material suppliers and equipment manufacturers; that a further 62 equipment qualification documents (environmental and seismic qualification) were falsified between 1996 and 2012; and that a further 3,408 test reports and 53 qualification reports could not be verified or were unclear.22,23 Over 7,000 reactor parts were replaced in the aftermath of the scandal.23

Andrews-Speed details the corruption that probably had the greatest consequences for reactor safety:22…………………  https://jimkgreen1.substack.com/p/south-koreas-nuclear-mafia

February 19, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, South Korea | Leave a comment

Julian Assange’s Final Appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice 20-21 Feb. What to Expect.

Day X is here! Julian Assange’s Final Appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice.

STELLA ASSANGE, FEB 19, 2024, Stella Assange – The Fight to Save my Husband

The new public hearing dates are upon us. We will be gathering outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Tuesday and Wednesday, 20-21 February. It may be the final chance for the UK to stop Julian’s extradition.

Date: 20-21 February 2024
Location: Royal Courts of Justice
Time: 8:30 am GMT
On Wed 21 Feb, there will be a march to Downing St after the hearing.

Here’s what to expect on the two days.

Meet our presenters that will be live outside the Royal Courts of Justice…………………….

JADC (The Committee to Defend Julian Assange), one of the oldest grassroots groups here in the UK will be helping us to sell T-shirts, bags, badges and our new hoodies. So, make sure to come by and say hi to Emmy and Jeannie who will be manning our table.

There will be speakers throughout the two days! Including:

Apsana Begum
Tim Dawson
John Hendy
Richard Burgon
Peter Oborne
Jeremy Corbyn
John McDonnell
Zarah Sultana
Chris Hedges
Andrew Feinstein
Andrew Wilkie
Tariq Ali
Rebecca Vincent
Ben Westwood
PEN International
Clare Daley
Mick Wallace
Chip Gibbons

Here’s how you can help………………………………………..

more https://stellaassangeofficial.substack.com/p/20-21-feb-what-to-expect?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=800783&post_id=141788957&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&utm_medium=email—

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Legal, UK | , , , , | 2 Comments

Nuclear Delays, Cost Overruns Imperil UK’s Net-Zero Goals

For the first time, the department’s nuclear road map was honest about why Britain and France are still so keen on nuclear, as opposed to much cheaper renewables. The roadmap mentions 14 times the link between civil and military nuclear power and the need to strengthen ties between the two to reduce costs. This military link was consistently denied in the 1990s, and in the earlier years of this century.

February 12, 2024, Paul Brown,  https://www.theenergymix.com/nuclear-delays-cost-overruns-imperil-uks-net-zero-goals/

Électricité de France (EDF), the owner of the biggest construction project in the world—the giant nuclear power plant under construction at Hinkley Point in the southwest of Britain—recently announced further cost increases and delays to its completion, adding to doubts that the United Kingdom can fulfill its legal pledges to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

The French government, which owns EDF, wants the UK to chip in billions of pounds to help bail the project out, but London says it has no obligation to do so. This is leading to tensions between the two governments, with French taxpayers objecting to paying for British nuclear power stations when their own nuclear industry is struggling with under-investment and a massive debt burden. It leads to doubts that a second power station of the same size, this time on the Suffolk coast in the east of England, will ever be built.

The overoptimistic miscalculations made by EDF mean the cost estimates for the Hinkley Point project have now doubled from the 2015 estimate of £18 billion (US$22.8 billion) to between £31 and £34 billion. But that makes the problem sound better than it is: the figures are calculated in 2015 prices, and the true cost with inflation is now said to be £46 billion (US$58 billion) and still rising.

EDF is faced with making up this funding gap when it is already deep in debt and needs vast capital reserves to modernize its own fleet of more than 50 reactors and start a promised new build program. Just before the French government re-nationalized the company last year, its debts were already a staggering €54.5 billion (US$59 billion)/

When the Hinkley Point power station was first planned, the company famously predicted that UK consumers would be cooking their Christmas turkeys on power from the station by 2017. That date has been revised several times, and stood at 2027 until the third week in January. Now it has slipped back in the best case to 2029, but more likely to 2031. As one commentator put it: “The turkeys would have died of natural causes by then.”

The problem is that both governments are relying on their nuclear industries for a large part of their emission reductions. Both have to reach net-zero targets by 2050. Hinkley Point would in theory be producing 7% of British electricity by 2030 as an interim target date, displacing existing gas stations. But Hinkley Point was only part of the net-zero plan—EDF is in partnership with the British government to build a second  identical power plant at Sizewell, on the Suffolk coast.

Both Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C are twin European Pressurised Reactors (EPRs), designed by EDF. Each station is supposed to produce enough power to supply six million British homes. But it is a design that has proved difficult to construct. EDF started one in Flamanville in Normandy in 2009 which was expected to be running in 2013, but is still not complete. Yet the UK is intent on continuing to allow EDF to build four reactors of the same design in Britain.

The British government has so far sunk £2.5 billion into the Sizewell C project but is not making a final investment decision while it looks for private investors. Up to now, it has found no takers.

So while the future of this power station remains in doubt, the timetables are slipping badly, and even if it does go ahead not many would bet on it producing power before 2050.

One of the odd aspects of this situation is that, in an election year in Britain, there is no political debate about what looks like a serious crisis for the nuclear industry and the UK’s climate targets. The Labour party supports the building of nuclear power stations, too, and will not be drawn into debate for fear of antagonizing the trade unions in the sector that are strongly in favour of giant power stations.

Suffolk campaigners, however, are not so reticent. “Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C epitomise the definition of insanity—doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result,” said Alison Downes of Stop Sizewell C. “EDF and its EPR reactors are an unmitigated disaster, and it stretches credulity that Sizewell C is affordable. Indeed the government seems too embarrassed to publish the cost of Sizewell C. It should cancel the project immediately instead of handing over scarce billions that could be used instead for renewables, energy efficiency, or—in this election year—schools and hospitals.”

Stop Sizewell C and a number of other groups are challenging the Conservative government in the courts over its failure to fulfill its legal obligations under its own law that bound the UK to reach net-zero by 2050. Further delays to the nuclear power station construction program may add to the campaigner’s case.

Last month, the UK government produced a new nuclear roadmap projecting a massive new build program to bolster the industry, both for these large reactors and dozens of small modular reactors. The Department for Energy Security & Net Zero (DESNZ) remains optimistic about the nuclear industry despite the delays, but said it would not be bailing out EDF.

Hinkley Point C “is not a government project,” the department said in a statement, so “any additional costs or schedule overruns are the responsibility of EDF and its partners and will in no way fall on (UK) taxpayers”.

For the first time, the department’s nuclear road map was honest about why Britain and France are still so keen on nuclear, as opposed to much cheaper renewables. The roadmap mentions 14 times the link between civil and military nuclear power and the need to strengthen ties between the two to reduce costs. This military link was consistently denied in the 1990s, and in the earlier years of this century.

While Labour, which has a massive lead in the opinion polls going into election year, refuses to engage in a nuclear debate, it does differ from the Conservatives on the role of renewables. The current government encourages offshore wind and some solar power but has effectively blocked onshore wind farms for nearly a decade. Since this is the cheapest form of electricity production in these windy islands, and the public overwhelmingly support onshore turbines, Labour says it will at least overturn this blocking policy.

February 18, 2024 Posted by | climate change, politics, UK | Leave a comment

The UK’s biggest nuclear waste dump faces an inquiry by the National Audit Office (NAO) over its soaring costs and safety record.

The public spending watchdog has said it wants to examine whether Sellafield in
Cumbria is “managing and prioritising the risks and hazards of the site
effectively in the short and long term”.

It follows growing concern over
the costs of managing the site’s nuclear legacy. An NAO statement said:
“Cleaning up the site is a long-term endeavour, likely to last well into
the next century. It is expected to cost £84bn (in discounted prices),
though this cost estimate is highly uncertain.”

Sellafield stores and
treats nuclear waste from weapons programmes and power generation. The site
comprises more than 1,000 buildings and has about 81,000 tonnes of
radioactive waste in storage. This is expected to rise to 3.3m tonnes over
the coming years.

About 2,000 tonnes comprise high level waste – the most
toxic – including around 140 tonnes of plutonium in what is the world’s
largest stockpile. The site employs about 11,000 people and cost the
taxpayer around £2.5bn last year. Scrutiny of its budget and safety record
come after a series of critical reports in the Guardian, with allegations
ranging from lax cyber security to a poor work culture. The Government,
which ultimately controls Sellafield, has defended the site’s operations,
insisting there is “no elevated risk to public safety as result of the
issues reported”.

 Telegraph 15th Feb 2024

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/15/nuclear-site-sellafield-under-investigation-spending-nao

February 18, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s Nuclear Strategy Faces Criticism: Uncertainty Looms for Small Modular Reactors

The UK’s nuclear strategy faces increasing criticism from MPs due to lack of clarity on small modular reactors (SMRs). Concerns about timelines, waste management, and costs cast doubt on their role in the future energy mix.

Rafia Tasleem, 14 Feb 2024,  https://bnnbreaking.com/politics/uks-nuclear-strategy-faces-criticism-uncertainty-looms-for-small-modular-reactors

The UK government’s nuclear strategy, specifically its approach to small modular reactors (SMRs), faces mounting criticism from Members of Parliament (MPs) for its lack of clarity and the ensuing uncertainty in the nuclear sector.

A Murky Vision for Nuclear Power

MPs have expressed serious concerns about the timeline for SMR projects, potential waste management issues, and the overall vision for the sector. Despite promises of support and investment, the government’s plans for SMRs remain obscure, casting doubts on their role in the future energy mix.

The Environmental Audit Committee has voiced strong criticisms, citing the unclear strategy as a significant obstacle for the nuclear industry. This ambiguity not only undermines industry confidence but also raises questions about potential cost implications for taxpayers.

Hinkley Point C: A Cautionary Tale

The ongoing saga of Hinkley Point C serves as a stark reminder of the challenges and uncertainties surrounding UK energy policy and developments, especially in the face of the climate crisis.

Initially greenlit in June 2016, the project’s funding was divided between the government, EDF, and China General Nuclear (CGN). However, in a surprising turn of events, CGN withdrew its funding in December 2022, leaving the government to shoulder the shortfall in investment.

Furthermore, the opening of Hinkley Point C has been delayed until at least 2029, with the projected cost ballooning from £25 billion to at least £35 billion—a staggering increase that has raised eyebrows and ignited debates on the feasibility of nuclear power as a sustainable and cost-effective solution.

The Future of UK Nuclear Power

With the UK government aiming to have 24 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050, the choice lies between additional large-scale reactors like Hinkley Point C or a combination of large and SMRs. However, the escalating costs and delays associated with Hinkley Point C have cast a long shadow over the nuclear sector.

The current state of affairs raises pressing questions about the future of nuclear power in the UK, especially in light of the climate crisis and the need for sustainable and reliable energy sources. As MPs and industry experts grapple with these concerns, the search for clarity and a coherent strategy becomes ever more urgent.

As of February 15, 2024, the UK government faces a critical juncture: to address the concerns surrounding its nuclear strategy and provide a clear path forward, or risk further uncertainty and potential setbacks in the nation’s quest for a sustainable energy future.

February 18, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »