US navy accused of cover-up over radioactive shipyard waste
The US navy is covering up dangerous levels of radioactive waste on a
40-acre former shipyard parcel in San Francisco’s waterside Hunters Point
neighborhood, public health advocates charge.
The land is slated to be
turned over to the city as early as next year, and could be used for
residential redevelopment. The accusations stem from 2021 navy testing that
found 23 samples from the property showed high levels of strontium-90, a
radioactive isotope that replaces calcium in bones and causes cancer.
The Environmental Protection Agency raised alarm over the levels, but the navy
in 2022 said its testing was inaccurate and produced a new set of data that
showed levels of strontium-90 lower than zero, which was dismissed by
environmental health experts as impossible.
Guardian 25th June 2023
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/25/us-navy-accused-radiocative-shipyard-waste
What is the new ‘returning zone’ to be created in disaster-hit Fukushima?
June 24, 2023 (Mainichi Japan)
The Mainichi Shimbun answers some common questions readers may have about the new residence zones that will be created in parts of Fukushima Prefecture that have become uninhabitable as a result of the 2011 nuclear power plant accident.
Question: I heard that people who were unable to return to their hometowns due to the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster will be able to do so. Is it true?
Answer: Due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, parts of seven municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture have been designated as so-called “difficult-to-return zones” where residence is restricted due to high radiation levels. Within these zones, new “specified returning residence zones” will be established to allow those who wish to return to do so.
Q: How will this work?
A: This system is based on the revised Act on Special Measures for the Reconstruction and Revitalization of Fukushima enacted by the Diet on June 2. The new returning residence zones are set to includes homes, roads and meeting places deemed necessary for the daily lives of those who wish to return to the “difficult-to-return” zones. Decontamination will be carried out to reduce radiation levels in these areas, and then the evacuation order over the areas will be lifted………………………………………..
When the Great East Japan Earthquake hit, there were about 16,000 people living in the areas. However, only about 200 people reside there now — an apparent result of many past residents already having shifted their base of livelihood to other locations due to their prolonged displacement.
Q: How far will the scope of the new returning residence zones extend?
A: Reconstruction bases were set up in clusters of private homes and around train stations, but in the case of the new returning residence zones, the setting is likely to be limited to areas around the homes of those who wish to return. Since it remains difficult to live in an area when an evacuation order has only partially been lifted, there is strong demand for unconditional decontamination throughout the entire area.
(Japanese original by Shuji Ozaki, Minamisoma Local Bureau) https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20230623/p2a/00m/0op/028000c
Japan urged to face up to legitimate international concerns on dumping nuclear-contaminated water into ocean
By Global Times Jun 23, 2023
Japan was urged to face up to the legitimate concerns of the international community on dumping nuclear-contaminated water into ocean at the 53rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council on Thursday. Japan’s moves are passing on the risk of nuclear pollution to all mankind that are seriously endangering the right to health of people of all countries, the Chinese representative to the council said.
The Chinese representative said that Japan’s dumping of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea violated its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and Japan has so far failed to prove that the dumping of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is safe and sound. The data released by Japan itself also shows that nearly 70 percent of the treated nuclear-contaminated water still fail to meet the standards.
The dumping plan is not the only way to deal with the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water, nor is it the safest and most optimal means of disposal. However, the Japanese side chose to discharge the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean based on economic cost, and in doing so is passing on the risk of nuclear pollution to all mankind, and is seriously endangering the right to health of people of all countries.
The Chinese representative pointed out that Japan has not followed the principle of consultation on the dumping plan of nuclear-contaminated water, and has repeatedly tried to mislead the international community, trying to cover up the uncertain risks of nuclear-contaminated water dumped into the sea under the disguise of “treated water.”………………………………….
This is not a matter for Japan alone. The Japanese side must face up to the strong opposition voices at home and abroad and the reasonable concerns of the international community, honestly fulfill its international obligations, and dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in an open, transparent, and safest way, so as not to cause irreversible consequence, the representative noted. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202306/1293022.shtml
Nuclear Waste Transportation Draws Opposition in West
Concerns are growing in the west about nuclear waste transportation.
On Tuesday, the Snake River Alliance is holding a webinar on these concerns, heightened by the potential of a temporary waste facility opening in New Mexico.
Kevin Kamps is the radioactive waste specialist for Beyond Nuclear. He said these fears are combined with the recent train derailment of toxic waste in Ohio.
He said the federal government and nuclear power industry are rushing to create the New Mexico temporary waste facility.
“These dumps that are proposed are called consolidated interim storage facilities, which means it’s only temporary and the waste will have to move again,” said Kamps. “So it’s really wrongheaded. It’s going to automatically double transportation risks.”
In May, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a license for the temporary waste site in New Mexico.
The Biden administration says nuclear power is a key component for the country’s clean energy future. However, state officials in New Mexico have voiced their opposition to the facility.
Nuclear waste also is a concern in Idaho. Experiments are starting on new nuclear reactor designs such as small modular reactors at the Idaho National Laboratory.
However, Kamps pointed out that recent research found these SMRs generate two to 30 times the amount of radioactive waste as traditional nuclear reactors.
“So another downside of all this SMR talk,” said Kamps, “which unfortunately Idaho is on the cutting edge of.”
Kamps said he believes the country is living on borrowed time when it comes to the potential for disaster from nuclear power.
“We really should be transitioning into a renewable energy economy in this country,” said Kamps, “which is much safer, much more secure and actually much more cost effective than nuclear power.”
Suffolk campaigners vow to continue fighting Sizewell C
Campaigners have vowed to continue their fight against the “monstrous”
Sizewell C nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast despite losing a
legal challenge against the plans. The High Court announced on Thursday
that the judicial review brought by Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) had
been rejected as being ‘totally without merit’. TASC had launched the
review over the environmental impact of the project, particularly the
disposal of nuclear waste and the provision of a water supply to the
station.
East Anglian Daily Times 23rd June 2023
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/23608074.suffolk-campaigners-vow-continue-fighting-sizewell-c/
Chinese Boycott Over Fukushima Nuclear Plant Water Release Sinks Japanese Cosmetics
A consumer boycott in China over a planned release of water from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant is threatening to hurt Japanese cosmetics makers.
The viral campaign began earlier this month when largely unproven allegations that water discharges from the plant are hazardous to ……………………………..(subscribers only) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-23/china-boycott-over-fukushima-nuclear-plant-water-release-sinks-japan-cosmetics#xj4y7vzkg
Amid China Tensions, US Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier, USS Ronald Reagan, To Make A Rare Vietnam Port Call
By Ashish Dangwal. Eurasian Times, June 24, 2023
Amid heightened tensions with Beijing in the South China Sea, the US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan is scheduled to make a rare visit to Danang, the port city in Central Vietnam, on June 25.
This visit by the USS Ronald Reagan marks only the third time a US aircraft carrier has made such a stop since the end of the Vietnam War.
According to an announcement by Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry, the USS Ronald Reagan, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, was scheduled to reach Da Nang on June 25 and remain there until June 30………….
Additionally, Vietnam recently hosted Japan’s largest destroyer, the Izumo, after joint exercises with the USS Ronald Reagan and other American vessels in the South China Sea.
………. The United States aims to enhance its bilateral relationship with Vietnam, especially considering Hanoi’s ongoing disputes with Beijing over territorial boundaries in the South China Sea. …………………………………………….. more https://eurasiantimes.com/amid-china-tensions-us-nuclear-powered-aircraft-carrier-uss-ronald-reagan-to-make-a-rare-vietnam-port-call/
A $31 Billion Missile Program! US Looks To Reintroduce Nuclear Sea-Launched Cruise Missile Costing Equal To 10 Virginia-Class Subs
By Parth Satam, June 23, 2023, https://eurasiantimes.com/a-31-billion-missile-program-us-looks-to-reintroduce-nuclear-sea-launched-cruise-missile-costing-equal-to-10-virginia-class-subs/
A section of US Congressmen are voting for reintroducing a costly and redundant nuclear program. Republican lawmakers in the House are adopting a measure to institutionalize the Sea-Launched Cruise Missile-Nuclear (SLC)The SLCM was denied funding in last year’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget and concluded to have no battlefield use in the 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).
The Cold War-era concept envisages a cruise missile with a low-yield tactical nuclear warhead that can be fired from submarines, warships, or naval aircraft on a trajectory that makes it hard to track by radar.
According to a report in Defense News, the House Armed Services Committee “voted along party lines to amend the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with a provision that would create a program of record (PoR) for SLCM-N.”
A PoR is a listed ‘line item record’ in current and future defense acquisition plans that make them eligible for continued funding over the years.
Obscene Cost for a Useless Weapon
If the full HASC advances the Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) and passes the full floor vote in July, it would receive nearly $196 million as research and development funds.
However, political leaders and military experts advise against the astronomical costs and a futile capability, which they say can be invested elsewhere and be performed by other weapons systems.
Representative Courtney, a Democratic Congressman from Connecticut, who chairs the sea power subcommittee, cited May testimony from Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday stating that the warheads needed to make an SLCM-N program would cost at least $31 billion.
“The Navy can do a lot of other things with $31 billion. You can build 15 DDG destroyers with $31 billion, 10 Virginia-class submarines with $31 billion. You put nuclear warheads on these vessels, then you are changing the mission,” Courtney said.
Another Democratic Congressman, Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, argued that the US already has ballistic submarines in its fleet as well as lower-yield nuclear options from the air.
“It’s walking us down a path of spending enormous money on a capability that we don’t really need that will undermine our ability to build capabilities that we do (need) going forward,” said Smith.
Why Doesn’t the US Need the SLCM-N
Citing the need for flexibility and regional presence, the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) called for re-establishing a sea-launched cruise missile-nuclear capability.
President Biden’s FY 2022 budget continued funding SLCM-N, aiming to deploy it by the late 2020s. However, with the 2022 NPR identifying SLCM-N as “no longer necessary,” Biden’s 2023 budget request did not include SLCM-N funding.
The missile basically saddles important weapons platforms like submarines and warships with a mission set that can be undertaken by US Air Force (USAF) strategic bombers. It takes away the flexibility of employing diverse firepower options with a varied range of platforms.
“Should a geographic combatant commander intend to seek permission to use a nuclear weapon for tactical purposes, selecting bombers would offer more flexibility between mission sets and avoid committing to a weapons load-out decision as far in advance as would be necessary if SLCM-N were chosen” retired US Navy officer, Captain John Moulton writes in a paper.
In other words, an SLCM-N armed naval submarine or warship meets a very “narrow” mission set of destroying hardened enemy ground targets while sacrificing equally important tactical and strategic roles like hunting enemy submarines, destroying surface warships, mine laying or providing Intelligence-Surveillance-Reconnaissance (ISR).
Other currently nuclear weapons capable platforms like the B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress, B-1B Lancer, and the upcoming B-21 Raider envisaged for the same mission could also reach the warzone quickly.
The cost of revealing its position while firing an SLCM-N would also far outweigh the gains from hitting enemy ground targets with low-yield nuclear missiles, Moulton further explains. Moulton is a Senior Fellow at the Council on Strategic Risks’ Janne E. Nolan Center on Strategic Weapons.
The conditions that would justify using a tactical nuclear-tipped cruise missile would be very rare and would prevent a submarine or a naval vessel from performing optimally in a fluid battlefield situation.
In the Western Pacific, becoming part of a “joint force” in a mutually supporting pushback against a People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) fleet inside China’s dangerous Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2/AD) zone is a new evolving orientation guiding the US Navy’s submarine arm, explained in a previous EurAsian Times analysis.
Lastly, the risks of unintended nuclear escalation are exponentially higher when an SLCM-N is fired since the country sustaining the attack – China or North Korea – might legitimately retaliate with a nuclear strike, triggering a devastating atomic exchange.
Experts have long pointed out how such exchanges cannot be “controlled” given the tensions and the miscalculation involved.
A US asset firing an SLCM-N also counts as a nuclear first strike, which shifts the diplomatic narrative in the Russian, Chinese, or North Korean favor. None of these countries have ever indicated they plan to use nuclear weapons as a warfighting tool. While China has a clear No-First Use (NFU) policy, Moscow and Pyongyang have maintained they will use nukes only when the physical security of their country faces an existential threat. The author can be reached at satamp@gmail.com
Nuclear-based fantasies are holding back real climate action
SMR Education Task Force, June 22, 2023, https://crednb.ca/2023/06/22/nuclear-based-fantasies-are-holding-back-real-climate-action/—
Today a network of groups across Canada announces the launch of the SMR Education Task Force to share under-reported facts about small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) with members of Parliament and provincial legislatures.
We begin with the latest report from Canada Energy Regulator (CER). This federal document, called Canada’s Energy Future, projects that enough new nuclear reactors (SMRs) will be operational by 2050 to more than double Canada’s existing nuclear electricity generation.
Canada currently has 19 operating power reactors, built over 58 years. The new report claims that we will build more than 50 new reactors in much less time.
This fantasy has no basis in reality. It is inconsistent with independent analyses by energy researchers not tied to the nuclear industry. One such study in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists makes it clear that SMRs have at best a marginal role to play in a truly effective climate action plan. SMRs fail the tests of timeliness and affordability – they take too long and cost too much.
In addition to Ontario and Alberta, the CER report imagines deploying SMRs in Quebec and British Columbia. This is news to citizens in those provinces. BC ratepayers have rejected nuclear power in the past, and Quebec phased out of nuclear power in 2012. With every reactor comes long-lived radioactive waste — including the structure itself, which is a provincial responsibility to safeguard for thousands of years after shutdown.
Yesterday, the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick (CRED-NB) sent a letter to Canada’s Natural Resources Minister reminding him that more than 120 civil society, public interest, faith-based and Indigenous groups across Canada have signed a statement warning that SMRs are a dirty, dangerous distraction from urgent climate action.
These groups understand that responding to the climate emergency does not require gambling on untested nuclear reactors. They know that energy efficiency measures and renewable sources cost at least 3 to 7 times less than nuclear power per tonne of carbon emissions avoided.
The groups oppose using public funds earmarked for climate action to support the nuclear industry’s eager experimentation with novel reactor designs. We are challenging the government to release the research and data that support its nuclear-based strategy.
Nuclear promoters, with long-standing allies embedded in the federal and provincial governments, are making unsubstantiated promises about SMRs in an audacious attempt to grab as much public funding as possible to keep their dying industry alive.
Worldwide, nuclear’s share of global electricity has dropped over the last 25 years from 17% to less than 10%. The International Energy Agency forecasts that more than 90% of all new electricity installations worldwide over the next 5 years will be non-hydro renewables.
The industry’s money-grab will succeed only if our public representatives remain uninformed about the facts. That is why we are pleased to announce the SMR Education Task Force and look forward in the months ahead to share information about SMRs based on independent science and research.
IAEA Director General Grossi discusses nuclear safety with Russia’s Director of Rosatom, at Zaporizhzhia, in new consultations
MOSCOW, June 23 https://english.news.cn/20230624/19c5c0119ce24b04a7ab10e6a08f9a0b/c.html — General Director of Russia’s Rosatom State Corporation Alexey Likhachev discussed the current nuclear safety situation around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant (ZNPP) with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Rafael Grossi in Russia’s Kaliningrad on Friday.
During the discussion, both delegations addressed issues raised by Grossi at the UN Security Council briefing on May 30, in which the official discussed the security situation at the nuclear facility, Rosatom said in a statement.
Likhachev emphasized that the Russian side “expects the IAEA Secretariat to take specific steps to prevent strikes by the Ukrainian armed forces both on the ZNPP and on the adjacent territory,” it added.
He informed Grossi about the specific measures currently being taken by the Russian side to ensure the nuclear facility’s safe operation, particularly its water supply “after the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam was destroyed by the Ukrainian armed forces,” Rosatom said.
Both sides further discussed the outcomes of Grossi’s visit to the plant on June 15. During his visit, Grossi was able to personally verify whether the plant could continue operating safely, and confirm among other things that the water supply in the cooling pond was sufficient for the safe operation of the facility
Diversion from urgent climate action. How the European nuclear lobby undermines the EU’s energy future –
By Jan Haverkamp, https://eu.boell.org/en/nuclear-lobby, 22 June 23
In several countries in the EU, as well as in the Brussels corridors of the European Union institutions, a vehement debate is currently taking place regarding the demand for more nuclear power. Only five years ago, this attention hardly existed. This study looks at the sudden surge in attention for nuclear energy and tries to understand the role of different actors on the side of the nuclear lobby. It investigates the case of the Netherlands, which turned from a de facto nuclear phase-out country to one where expansion of nuclear energy is currently under preparation, as well as the European Union, where a large minority of Member States have brought nuclear back to the table in many climate-related legislative debates.
The current enormous political lobby for nuclear energy – at the party-political level in the Netherlands and by a substantial group of Member States in the EU – leads to a diversion of attention and capital from urgent and effective climate measures and threatens to delay urgent climate action.
This study provides ideas about how this lobby may be countered. The chances for that lie in the complexity of the issue and the realities on the ground that may force the executive – the government in the Netherlands and the European Commission in the EU – to prevent the nuclear debate diverting too much attention and capital from urgent and effective climate action, keeping in mind that nuclear power itself will deliver virtually nothing to the climate emergency’s resolution.
more https://eu.boell.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/nuclear_lobby_report_final.pdf
…… Executive summary
1. Introduction
2. Nuclear lobby in the Netherlands
3. Nuclear lobby in the EU
Who is who in the Brussels nuclear debate?
Who drives nuclear lobbying in the EU?
4. Final conclusions
References
A nuclear site is on tribes’ ancestral lands. Their voices are being left out on key cleanup talks
KNKX Public Radio | By The Associated Press, June 23, 2023
Three federally recognized tribes have devoted decades to restoring the condition of their ancestral lands in southeastern Washington state to what they were before those lands became the most radioactively contaminated site in the nation’s nuclear weapons complex, the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.
But the Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and Nez Perce Tribe have been left out of negotiations on a major decision affecting the future cleanup of millions of gallons of radioactive waste stored in underground tanks on the Hanford site near Richland.
In May, federal and state agencies reached an agreement that hasn’t been released publicly but will likely involve milestone and deadline changes in the cleanup, according to a spokesperson for the Washington State Department of Ecology, a regulator for the site. As they privately draft their proposed changes, the tribes are bracing for a decision that could threaten their fundamental vision for the site.
“As original stewards of that area, we’ve always been taught to leave it better than you found it,” said Laurene Contreras, program administrator for the Yakama Nation’s Environmental Restoration/Waste Management program, which is responsible for the tribe’s Hanford work. “And so that’s what we’re asking for.”
From World War II through the Cold War, Hanford produced more than two-thirds of the United States’ plutonium for nuclear weapons, including the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, in 1945. Production ceased in 1989, and the site’s mission shifted to cleaning up the chemical and radioactive waste left behind.
For these tribes, which have served as vital watchdogs in the cleanup process, the area’s history dates back long before Hanford, to pre-colonization. It was a place where some fished, hunted, gathered and lived. It’s home to culturally significant sites. And in 1855 treaties with the U.S. government in which the tribes ceded millions of acres of land, they were assured continued access.
The U.S. Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology have held confidential negotiations since 2020 on revising plans for the approximately 56 million gallons of radioactive waste stored in 177 underground tanks at Hanford. The discerning eyes of the tribal experts have been kept out, though EPA and Ecology have said there will eventually be opportunities for the tribes to meet with them about this.
The revisions are expected to affect an agreement among the three agencies that outlines the Hanford cleanup. Mason Murphy, program manager for the Confederated Tribes’ Energy and Environmental Sciences program, points out that the tribes also weren’t consulted in that original 1989 agreement.
“It’s an old scabbed-over wound,” Murphy said…………………………………………………….. https://www.knkx.org/government/2023-06-23/a-nuclear-site-is-on-tribes-ancestral-lands-their-voices-are-being-left-out-on-key-cleanup-talks
—
Is Fukushima wastewater release safe? What the science says
Radiation in the water will be diluted to almost-background levels, but some researchers are not sure this will be sufficient to mitigate the risks.
Bianca Nogrady Nature, 22 June 23
Despite concerns from several nations and international groups, Japan is pressing ahead with plans to release water contaminated by the 2011 meltdown of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean. Starting sometime this year and continuing for the next 30 years, Japan will slowly release treated water stored in tanks at the site into the ocean through a pipeline extending one kilometre from the coast. But just how safe is the water to the marine environment and humans across the Pacific region?
How is the water contaminated?
The power station exploded after a devastating earthquake and subsequent tsunami crippled the coastal plant, overheating the reactor cores. Since then, more than 1.3 million cubic metres of seawater have been sprayed onto the damaged cores to keep them from overheating, contaminating the water with 64 radioactive elements, known as radionuclides. Of greatest concern are those that could pose a threat to human health: carbon-14, iodine-131, caesium-137, strontium-90, cobalt-60 and hydrogen-3, also known as tritium.
Some of these radionuclides have a relatively short half-life and would already have decayed in the 12 years since the disaster. But others take longer to decay; carbon-14, for example, has a half-life of more than 5,000 years.
How are they treating the water?
The contaminated water has been collected, treated to reduce the radioactive content and stored in more than 1,000 stainless steel tanks at the site. …………………………
Will radioactivity concentrate in fish?
Nations such as South Korea have expressed concern that the treated water could have unexplored impacts on the ocean environment, and a delegation from the country visited the Fukushima site in May. Last year, the US National Association of Marine Laboratories in Herndon, Virginia, also voiced its opposition to the planned release, saying that there was “a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s assertion of safety”. The Philippine government has also called for Japan to reconsider releasing the water into the Pacific.
“Have the people promoting this going forward — ALPS treatment of the water and then release into the ocean — demonstrated to our satisfaction that it will be safe for ocean health and human health?” asks Robert Richmond, marine biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. “The answer is ‘no’.”
Richmond is one of five scientists on a panel advising the Pacific Islands Forum, an intergovernmental organization made up of 18 Pacific nations including Australia, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and French Polynesia. The panel was convened to advise on whether the release of the treated water from Fukushima was safe both for the ocean and for those who depend on it. Richmond says they have reviewed all the data provided by TEPCO and the Japanese government, and visited the Fukushima site, but there are still some unanswered questions about tritium and carbon-14………………………………….
TEPCO says fishing is not routinely conducted in an area within 3 kilometres of where the pipeline will discharge the water. But Richmond is concerned the tritium could concentrate in the food web as larger organisms eat smaller contaminated ones. “The concept of dilution as the solution to pollution has demonstrably been shown to be false,” Richmond says. “The very chemistry of dilution is undercut by the biology of the ocean.”
Shigeyoshi Otosaka, an oceanographer and marine chemist at the Atmospheric and Ocean Research Institute of the University of Tokyo says that the organically bound form of tritium could accumulate in fish and marine organisms. He says international research is investigating the potential for such bioaccumulation of the radionuclides in marine life, and what has already happened in the waters around Fukushima after the accidental release of contaminated water during the tsunami. “I think it is important to evaluate the long-term environmental impact of these radionuclides,” Otosaka says………………………………. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-
Ukraine Can Develop Nuclear Weapons ‘Within a Short Time’: Ex-Zelensky Aide
BY JON JACKSON ON 6/23/23
eksii Arestovych, a former adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, said during a Thursday interview that Ukraine has the ability to quickly produce its own nuclear weapons “within a short time.”
Arestovych, who also served as an officer in Ukraine’s military intelligence service, made the remarks while speaking with Russian activist Mark Feygin…………… Arestovych has also stated that Crimea would be a major target for Zelensky’s forces during the conflict. https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-can-develop-nuclear-weapons-within-short-time-ex-zelensky-aide-1808663
Community energy for the UK
At the close of Community Energy Fortnight (10-23 June), the Nuclear Free
Local Authorities have written to a minister asking the government to hold
onto parts of the Energy Bill that will be vital if the community energy
sector is to continue to grow.
In his letter to Nuclear and Networks
Minister Andrew Bowie, who is leading on the legislation for the
government, NFLA Steering Committee Councillor Lawrence O’Neill has asked
for Clauses 272 and 273 to be retained in the bill.
These clauses, backed by the campaign group Power for People, would allow small community owned projects generating renewable energy to supply electricity to the National
Grid or to the communities that they serve on a fairer basis, and they
would also guarantee these suppliers a set income. Disappointingly, the
government is believed to be looking at dropping these clauses from the
bill, without suggesting any alternate provision.
NFLA 23rd June 2023
1 This Month
23-25 October – on Zoom – World BEYOND War’s annual global conferenc
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (219)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
