Researchers simulate damage from nuclear weapons use in Northeast Asia
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20230407_41/ A group of researchers from Japan and other countries have simulated direct casualties and delayed deaths that could be caused by the use of nuclear weapons in Northeast Asia.
Nagasaki University in western Japan and other bodies, including a US research institution, jointly conducted a simulation analysis taking into account nuclear strategies of countries concerned and situation in the region.
The joint research project is aimed at ensuring that nuclear weapons are never used again.
The researchers have looked at five possible cases of nuclear weapons use in Northeast Asia and ran a simulation of what could follow if nuclear weapons are used.
In one case, it is assumed that in the Korean Peninsula, three nuclear weapons are used by North Korea and the United States.
In another case involving two nuclear powers fighting over Taiwan, it models what might happen after a total of 24 nuclear weapons are used, including high-yield bombs.
The researchers have quantified the number of deaths based on an analysis of effects such as heat flow caused by a nuclear explosion and radioactive fallout.
Even if only one nuclear weapon is used, the simulation shows 220,000 people, or about 25 percent of the population of the targeted area, would die within several months.
The use of a large number of nuclear weapons, including high-yield ones, could result in deaths of 2.6 million people.
The researchers also simulated effects of firestorms which are multiple fires caused by heat flow merging over a large area driven by powerful wind forces created by the thermal updraft. They found that firestorms could cause a large number of casualties over a wide area.
Radioactive fallout could reach an extensive area depending on weather conditions. Up to 920,000 people could die of cancer over the course of a few decades.
Professor Suzuki Tatsujiro at Nagasaki University’s Research Center for Nuclear Weapons Abolition warns that misunderstanding and a lack of communication between rival nations could lead to the use of nuclear weapons. He says that even if only one is used, it would inevitably cause devastating damage.
Suzuki urges leaders of nuclear powers to face the potential risks and review their defense strategies that rely on nuclear deterrence.
B1 US Navy sends nuclear-powered guided-missile submarine to Middle East
The US Navy has deployed a guided-missile submarine capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk missiles to the Middle East, a spokesman said Saturday.
The Navy rarely acknowledges the location or deployment of submarines. Cmdr. Timothy Hawkins, a spokesman for the 5th Fleet based in the Gulf nation of Bahrain, declined to comment on the submarine’s mission or what had prompted the deployment……………………………………… more https://english.alarabiya.net/News/gulf/2023/04/08/US-Navy-sends-nuclear-powered-guided-missile-submarine-to-Middle-East-Statement
India and Pakistan Must Negotiate Nuclear Responsibilities
South Asia Voices, by Ladhu R. Choudhary, April 7, 2023
In 2019, while addressing an election rally, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated a fiery public remark, “every other day they [Pakistan] used to say ‘we have nuclear button, we have nuclear button.’ What do we have then? Have we kept it for Diwali (a mega Indian festival celebrated with extensive use of firecrackers)?” His statement is just one example of India and Pakistan’s exaggerated rhetoric around their nuclear rivalry.
…………………………………………… responsible nuclear states should strategize to stigmatize the bomb. Most importantly, these statements undermine the essential ingredients of nuclear responsibilities.
Nuclear responsibilities are defined as a set of extraordinary obligations and reasoning of the nuclear weapon states to exercise restraint in nuclear posturing and proliferation activities to avoid nuclear crises and avert a nuclear arms race. A nuclear responsibilities framework demands that states prioritize behaviors that reinforce credible deterrence postures and doctrines, reduce nuclear risks, and create the conditions for disarmament. Given the catastrophic risks of escalation, the political leadership in both India and Pakistan should refrain from acts of nuclear irresponsibility and demonstrate their respect for nuclear safety and security norms.
………………………………………………. Existing South Asian Nuclear Culture Lacks Nuclear Responsibilities
When politicians in India and Pakistan remind one another of the nuclear button and equate nuclear weapons with Diwali firecrackers, they reinforce South Asian atomic culture. This atomic culture has facilitated the acquisition of nuclear technology with chauvinistic pride and a symbol of supreme power for political independence. It has limited space for negotiating potential threats of nuclear exchanges and shared responsibilities of hostile SNW. For instance, New Delhi and Islamabad have not been able to build robust institutional arrangements for Nuclear Confidence Building Measures (NCBMs).
India and Pakistan need a better cooperation record for joint nuclear doctrine formulations and identifying implementation procedures. Furthermore, their ambiguous doctrines, postures, and accidents may escalate nuclear instability. ……………………………… more https://southasianvoices.org/india-and-pakistan-must-negotiate-nuclear-responsibilities/
The British government doesn’t want to talk about its nuclear weapons. The British public does
Women are far less likely than men to support UK possession (28 percent of women, compared with 53 percent of men)
Bulletin, By Tim Street, Harry Spencer, Shane Ward | April 6, 2023
In January 2023 British Pugwash and the polling company Savanta conducted a survey of UK public opinion on nuclear weapons issues and potential support for policies that advance nuclear arms control, disarmament, and non-proliferation.
The poll involved 2,320 UK adults who were asked about the Russia-Ukraine war, the United Kingdom’s ongoing replacement of its nuclear weapon system, the possibility that US nuclear weapons will again be stationed in the United Kingdom, the significant increase to the UK’s nuclear warhead stockpile cap, and the entry into force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
Our polling results found some notable differences between the British public’s views and the policies of the UK government concerning nuclear weapons. While 40 percent of poll respondents support the United Kingdom possessing nuclear weapons, there is significant support for policies that would control, limit, or even eliminate the UK’s nuclear weapons—including among supporters of nuclear possession. For example, over a third of those who support the UK’s possession of nuclear weapons also support joining a multilateral disarmament treaty.
Despite the challenges involved, especially at a time of war in Europe, we at British Pugwash see an opportunity for UK political parties to adopt policies more supportive of nuclear arms control and disarmament. Our key findings revealed these differences between government policy and public opinion:
Use of nuclear weapons. The UK government’s policy is to consider using nuclear weapons “only in extreme circumstances of self-defence, including the defence of our NATO allies.” UK and NATO policy does not rule out the first use of nuclear weapons.
Our poll found that 48 percent of UK adults oppose the first use of nuclear weapons by the United Kingdom, and only 40 percent support first use. This finding builds on the results of the survey British Pugwash conducted in 2021, which found that two-thirds of the British public want NATO to renounce the first use of nuclear weapons.
Replacing nuclear weapons. The United Kingdom is replacing all four parts of its nuclear weapons system: submarines, missiles, warheads, and associated infrastructure. The estimated cost of the four new nuclear-armed submarines is £31 billion (about $38 billion), and the estimated total cost of replacing nuclear weapons between 2019 and 2070 is at least £172 billion ($212 billion).
Our poll found that 42 percent of UK adults think the estimated cost of replacing the UK’s nuclear weapons does not represent value for money.
Stationing US nuclear weapons in the United Kingdom. The UK government has previously allowed US nuclear weapons and nuclear-capable aircraft to be stored, maintained, and operated from UK military bases. Although the United Kingdom has not hosted US nuclear weapons since 2008, in April 2022 an analysis of US Defense Department documents reported that a facility at the Royal Air Force’s Lakenheath base in Suffolk—which is used by the US Air Force—was being upgraded, potentially allowing the United States to again deploy nuclear weapons there.
British public opinion is split over allowing the United States to deploy nuclear weapons on UK territory. Our poll found that 34 percent of UK adults oppose, and 32 percent support, stationing US nuclear weapons in the United Kingdom.
Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. In 2017, 122 states voted in support of the Treaty, which prohibits the development, testing, production, acquisition, possession, stockpiling, and use of nuclear weapons, as well as any threat to use them. The United Kingdom has not signed or ratified the treaty. To join the treaty, the country would have to dismantle its nuclear arsenal or present a legally binding plan to do so.
Our poll found that 39 percent of UK adults support joining the ban treaty. Among 18- to 34-year-olds, 48 percent support joining the treaty, and only 13 percent are opposed.
Nuclear weapons possession. The United Kingdom is one of only nine countries possessing nuclear weapons. Our poll found that 40 percent of UK adults are in favor of possession. Women are far less likely than men to support UK possession (28 percent of women, compared with 53 percent of men). Some 27 percent of UK adults oppose UK nuclear possession, 29 percent neither support nor oppose nuclear possession, and 5 percent said they “don’t know” in response to this question.
Our poll also found that a minority of UK adults (39 percent) fully support the government’s decision to increase the UK’s nuclear warhead stockpile cap.
Even among supporters of nuclear possession, we found significant concerns about the government’s approach to nuclear weapons. For example, 23 percent of those who support nuclear possession don’t think the estimated cost of replacing the UK’s nuclear weapons represents value for money.
Furthermore, 38 percent of those who support UK nuclear possession do not want the military to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict. Notably, 35 percent of those who currently support the possession of nuclear weapons also want the United Kingdom to join the international ban treaty that would eliminate the country’s nuclear arsenal.
War in Ukraine. Our data indicate that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has significantly strengthened support for UK possession of nuclear weapons among those who already favored possession. Two-thirds of those who support nuclear possession said the conflict strengthened their position on this issue.
We also saw increases in support for nuclear weapons possession among those who otherwise oppose nuclear possession. In our poll, 16 percent of those who oppose UK possession of nuclear weapons said the Ukraine conflict had increased their support for possession.
Responses to this particular question likely reflect wider public support for UK involvement in the Ukraine conflict and may thus be temporary. Moreover, 39 percent of UK adults said the Ukraine conflict had “made no difference” to their view on UK nuclear possession. Overall, our data suggest that a key impact of the Ukraine war has been to reinforce support for UK nuclear possession among UK adults who already held this view.
Uncertainty and ambivalence. Nearly a third of respondents gave an “on the fence” answer to several of the questions posed. For example, 29 percent said they did not support or oppose the UK’s possession of nuclear weapons; 30 percent said they neither support nor oppose the rise in the nuclear warhead stockpile cap; 28 percent said they neither support nor oppose US nuclear weapons again being stationed in the United Kingdom; and 29 percent said they “don’t know” or are “unsure” whether the estimated cost of the UK nuclear weapons replacement program represents value for money.
These findings indicate that there is significant uncertainty about, and ambivalence toward, nuclear weapons among UK adults.
Why our survey matters.………………………………………………………………………………..
Greater public and parliamentary participation in decision making would improve the quality and legitimacy of the United Kingdom’s international policy. Yet decisions on nuclear weapons (and national security more generally) are largely made behind closed doors. The lack of democracy, transparency, and accountability surrounding nuclear weapons has a clear impact on the British public’s interest in and understanding of the issues. The findings of our poll may partly be explained by the lack of awareness and the absence of public debate on nuclear matters in the United Kingdom. The large number of “don’t know” and “on the fence” responses indicates that many UK adults do not feel well enough informed to make a judgment on these issues.
…………………………………………………………….. Our polling data clearly show a sizable gap between public attitudes and the government’s nuclear weapons policy. With a UK general election likely to be held in 2024, British political parties should be developing policies that better represent public views on nuclear weapons issues—and increase democracy, transparency, and accountability in defense and foreign policy more generally. https://thebulletin.org/2023/04/the-british-government-doesnt-want-to-talk-about-its-nuclear-weapons-the-british-public-does/
—
The temperature of the world’s ocean surface has hit an all-time high.
The temperature of the world’s ocean surface has hit an all-time high
since satellite records began, leading to marine heatwaves around the
globe, according to US government data. Climate scientists said preliminary
data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) showed
the average temperature at the ocean’s surface has been at 21.1C since
the start of April – beating the previous high of 21C set in 2016.
Three years of La Niña conditions across the vast tropical Pacific have helped
suppress temperatures and dampened the effect of rising greenhouse gas
emissions. But scientists said heat was now rising to the ocean surface,
pointing to a potential El Niño pattern in the tropical Pacific later this
year that can increase the risk of extreme weather conditions and further
challenge global heat records.
Guardian 8th April 2023
Antarctica’s melting ice sheet could retreat much faster than previously thought
Antarctica’s melting ice sheet could retreat much faster than previously
thought, new research suggests. The evidence comes from markings on the
seafloor off Norway that record the pull-back of a melting European ice
sheet thousands of years ago.
Today, the fastest withdrawing glaciers in
Antarctica are seen to retreat by up to 30m a day. But if they sped up, the
extra melt water would have big implications for sea-level rises around the
globe. Ice losses from Antarctica caused by climate change have already
pushed up the surface of the world’s oceans by nearly 1cm since the 1990s.
The researchers found that with the Norwegian sheet, the maximum retreat
was more than 600m a day.
BBC 5th April 2023
Nuclear fusion is a never-ending dream
. “The development of the toroidal [magnetic confinement] nuclear fusion reactor is totally blocked by three challenges:
One, abysmally high cost (trillions of yen more in the future?) and a mind-boggling long time (more than 50 years); two, gigantic and complicated systems (a mega-sized system cannot be handled unless simple); and three, the heat-resistant material and radiation-proof material for the reactor walls are not available on earth.”
BY CITIZENS’ NUCLEAR INFORMATION CENTER · APRIL 5, 2023, By Nishio Baku (CNIC Co-Director)
Green Transformation (GX) Basic Policy proposed by the Japanese government mentions nuclear fusion as one of the next-generation innovative nuclear technologies in its reference information. I doubted my ears when I learned that the Nuclear Energy Subcommittee of the ministerial Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy, which drafted the policy, brought up nuclear fusion as one of the “innovative technologies” to be pursued.
It was a big surprise. That is the very nuclear fusion that, at the Second International Conference for the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy of September 1 through 13, 1958 in Geneva, Dr. H. J. Bhabha from India, who chaired the conference, flamboyantly predicted would take shape in 20 years. It has been 64 years since then. The government refers to this vintage technology as “innovative”.
During the decade of the 1980s, various Japanese universities received more budget than previously from the government for nuclear fusion research. The website of professor Takabe Hideaki, Institute of Laser Fusion, Osaka University, notes on September 10, 2014 that, during the days of the Second Oil Crisis, when Gekko XII [the experimental laser fusion apparatus at Osaka University] was completed, the government’s top-down initiative provided the university with a budget of 30 billion yen (in the value of the yen at the time), to build the laser system and a robust building for it.
I find this maybe a special case (another document I have with me says, of the fiscal 1984 national budget, 35 billion yen was given to the then Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation and a total of 7 billion yen to universities). Uramoto Joshin, a former associate professor at the National Institute for Fusion Science, wrote in his retirement memoir “My Final Words as a NIFS Staff” (NIFS News, May 1998), that he was in a festive mood around the time when he joined the former Plasma Research Institute of Nagoya University, which was one of the founding bodies of the NIFS.
The boom faded, and in 1989, the Plasma Research Institute was reorganized as the National Institute for Fusion Science, an inter-university research institute, into which a part of the Heliotron Plasma Physics Laboratory at Kyoto University and a part of the Institute for Fusion Theory at Hiroshima University were incorporated. The technology that the government refers to is the same nuclear fusion.
In what respect can the nuclear fusion reactor be a “next-generation innovative reactor”? While there is no full-size nuclear fusion reactor, what would a “compact nuclear fusion reactor” look like?
Today, “private-sector nuclear fusion” by venture companies seems to be enjoying a global boom………………………………………………. the project did not seem very practical.
……………………………………………………………. Whatever the case, the ignition lasts only one instant.
How far will the muddy road continue?
This nuclear fusion was mentioned by Prime Minister Kishida in his administrative policy speech on January 17, 2022 with the cryptic reasoning that it would help achieve the 2050 goal of carbon neutrality. Using this as the basis, the government set up the Nuclear Fusion Strategy Expert Panel under the Integrated Innovation Strategy Promotion Council of the Cabinet Office.
The panel had its first meeting on September 30, where Takaichi Sanae, Minister of State for Science and Technology Policy, said: “I have a strong will to accelerate the efforts to commercialize nuclear fusion technology as far as possible.” However, the Innovative Reactor Working Group placed under the Nuclear Energy Subcommittee, states in its “Roadmap for Introduction” (August 9, 2022) that whether the construction of a prototype nuclear fusion reactor should start or not will be determined in the mid-2030s. What would “commercializing nuclear fusion” mean at this point?
I wonder how much longer this fusion boom will continue. “As I am leaving this institute, I breathe a sigh,” Associate Professor Uramoto said in his NIFS retirement memoir. “The development of the toroidal [magnetic confinement] nuclear fusion reactor is totally blocked by three challenges: One, abysmally high cost (trillions of yen more in the future?) and a mind-boggling long time (more than 50 years); two, gigantic and complicated systems (a mega-sized system cannot be handled unless simple); and three, the heat-resistant material and radiation-proof material for the reactor walls are not available on earth.”
For the cost, the Special Committee on the ITER Project of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission bragged about ITER in its report, “International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Project Forecast” (May 18, 2001): “It is difficult to correctly estimate the cost required to realize a nuclear fusion reactor, …………………………………………………
Of the challenges Uramoto pointed out, the second one, “gigantic and complicated systems (a mega-sized system cannot be handled unless simple)” and the third one, “the heat-resistant material and radiation-proof material for the reactor walls are not available on earth” remain unsolved, despite the passage of so many years.
The pot is calling the kettle black
It is meaningless to compare nuclear fusion with nuclear power generation, but some say: “Nuclear fusion is clean.” In terms of the radioactivity released when a large accident occurs, nuclear fusion technology would emit less radioactivity than a conventional nuclear plant.
However, the daily releases of radioactive materials from nuclear fusion would be greater than those from a conventional nuclear power plant. Nuclear fusion is also more likely to leak tritium and radioactive gas. It will produce four times as much energy as nuclear fission while producing seven times as many neutrons. Workers in the fusion plant would be exposed to radiation, and people in the neighborhood would also be exposed due to sky shine. Plant equipment would be strongly radiated and easily embrittled, requiring frequent replacement, producing a huge amount of highly contaminated wastes……………………………………………. more https://cnic.jp/english/?p=6549
Foundation in Fukushima nuclear plant reactor likely badly damaged
The internal wall of a cylindrical foundation supporting the reactor
pressure vessel of the No. 1 unit of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
power plant may be badly damaged across its entire circumference, its
operator said Tuesday. Some of the damage was revealed in videos taken
during a survey of the No. 1 unit’s containment vessel by operator Tokyo
Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., which said it would further analyze
the footage and assess the seismic resistance of the pedestal. The survey,
conducted from March 28 through March 31 using an underwater robot, found
the concrete wall missing in over half of the pedestal measuring 5 meters
in internal diameter, leaving the reinforcing bar exposed.
Mainichi 4th April 2023
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20230404/p2g/00m/0bu/040000c
Americans now fear cyberattack more than nuclear attack
The Hill, BY DANIEL DE VISÉ – 04/07/23
Americans now see cyberattack as the greatest threat facing the country, two recent polls show, suggesting that cyber fears have outflanked concern over climate change, immigration, terrorism or nuclear weapons.
The national obsession with computer-on-computer attack, documented in a 2023 Gallup poll and a 2022 Pew Research survey, comes at a time when cyberattack seems to be everywhere and nowhere.
………………………………………………. In the Gallup poll, published last month, 84 percent of respondents rated cyberterrorism as a critical threat, ranking it above 10 other fears, including international terrorism, global warming, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and Iran’s nuclear program. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
And, of course, the world faces many perils beyond cyberattack. One is nuclear war. Nuclear fears surged in the weeks after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
More than a year later, the nuclear threat seems greater than ever. The Doomsday Clock, a symbol of humanity’s proximity to extinction, stands at 90 seconds to midnight, signifying a moment of unprecedented danger.
Peter Kuznick, a history professor and director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, believes “the danger of nuclear war is probably greater” now than at the invasion’s start.
But the nuclear threat, Kuznick said, is “something that people don’t want to think about.”
US Department of Energy is once again promoting large nuclear reactors, despite lack of supply chain and absurdly unaffordable costs
The US Department of Energy (DOE) is once again promoting large-scale
reactors after spending a decade advancing smaller models. It boldly
declares in a report last month that the domestic nuclear industry has the
potential to “scale from ~100 GW in 2023 to ~300 GW by 2050 — driven by
deployment of advanced nuclear technologies.”
This is beyond absurd — it’s irresponsible.
It’s absurd because the US no longer has the supply
chain needed for large-scale nuclear projects — it can’t even forge a
pressure vessel; it’s irresponsible because the cost of building 200-300
new reactors would be more than $3 trillion.
Resources devoted to rescuing
a dying industry are resources that wouldn’t be available for viable,
less-costly strategies to achieve net-zero emissions in the power sector.
More than that, the report reflects an energy agency still dominated by a
nuclear-centric culture, and badly out of step with the times.
Energy Intelligence 3rd April 2023
https://www.energyintel.com/00000187-2f8a-db48-adf7-ef9af9880000
Campaigners continue to take a stand against the plan for new nuclear power at Bradwell
CAMPAIGNERS have promised to continue to protect the people and
environment until a village site is ruled out for use as a nuclear power
site. The Government has said it is “committed to a programme of new
nuclear projects beyond Sizewell C”.
The current government nuclear
policy statement identifies Bradwell as a site for nuclear energy until the
end of 2025. Despite the stop to the plans for a Chinese-led nuclear power
station in Bradwell, campaigners are continuing to take a stand against the
site being considered for nuclear use.
Maldon Standard 6th April 2023
Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center news roundup April/May 2023
Nuke Info Tokyo April/May Newsletter includes: Fukushima Now – Part 1:
Railroading the Contaminated Water Release is Unacceptable! by Ban
Hideyuki; Fukushima Now – Part 2: Current State of Post-Accident
Operations at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Jun. to Dec. 2022)
By Matsukubo Hajime; Childhood thyroid cancer cases confirmed in the
Fukushima Health Management Survey and others; Nuclear fusion is a
never-ending dream By Nishio Baku; News Watch Revisions to Basic Policy on
High-level Radioactive Waste Disposal / Surveillance Camera Monitoring
Interrupted at Rokkasho Recycling Plant / Takahama Unit 4 Automatically
Shut Down / Unjust Verdict in Lawsuit for National Compensation for
Second-Generation Hibakusha.
CNIC 5th April 2023
Japan’s nuclear regulators find errors in Japan Atomic Power’s safety documents for the Tsuruga plant.
Nuclear regulators said Wednesday they will again halt a safety assessment
of an offline central Japan reactor after its operator repeatedly submitted
documents containing errors, further prolonging a process toward resumption
that has already taken years. Japan Atomic Power has been seeking approval
to reboot the No. 2 unit at the Tsuruga plant in Fukui Prefecture under
stricter regulations imposed following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear power
plant disaster, but its application has been fraught with mistakes and data
tampering.
Japan Times 5th April 2023
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/04/05/national/tsuruga-reactor-safety-assessment-halt/
Mainichi 5th April 2023
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20230405/p2g/00m/0na/027000c
Worst-kept secret? In tweet, ex-PM Barak seems to confirm Israel has nuclear weapons
Says Western officials fear judicial overhaul will turn country into ‘messianic dictatorship that possesses nuclear weapons,’ thirsting for confrontation with Islam at Temple Mount.
By TOI STAFF4 April 2023 https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-tweet-ex-pm-barak-seems-to-confirm-israel-has-nuclear-weapons/
—
Former prime minister Ehud Barak appeared to confirm on Twitter Tuesday that Israel has nuclear weapons — something Israeli officials have heavily implied but avoid publicly confirming as a matter of policy.
“In conversations between Israelis and Western diplomatic officials, there are deep concerns raised of the possibility that if the coup in Israel succeeds, a messianic dictatorship — that possesses nuclear weapons and fanatically wishes for a confrontation with Islam centered on the Temple Mount — will be established in the heart of the Middle East,” tweeted Barak in his latest criticism of the government’s judicial overhaul effort.
One of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s aides tweeted last week that the overhaul “will eventually lead to a freedom-protecting and God-fearing DAVIDIC MONARCHY [akin to the] UAE,”
Since the government’s unveiling of its plan to radically curb the High Court of Justice’s power three months ago, Barak has become a leading voice in the protests against the plan.
He has warned that Israel risks devolving into a dictatorship, adding that people are duty-bound to refuse orders by “an illegitimate regime.”
In February, Barak likened President Isaac Herzog’s proposal to the government for compromise on the judicial plan to former British premier Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement efforts vis-à-vis Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, in a post to social media he later deleted.
He accused the Netanyahu government of pursuing a “coup d’état” and said the overhaul plan was an “attack on the Declaration of Independence” and did not serve the interests of the public or the country.
Navy’s nuclear-powered super submarine ‘Trident’ fixed with super glue
The damage was done at HMNB Devonport in Plymouth during a dry dock renovation and refuel. This work, reportedly started in 2015 and is four year behind the schedule and approximately £300 million over budget
Abhishek Awasthi January 31, 2023 https://www.firstpost.com/world/uks-own-chernobyl-averted-navys-nuclear-powered-super-submarine-trident-fixed-with-super-glue-12075672.html?fbclid=IwAR0u3HB9pkg4GbjW37GnF6XxNoRo97No0AskR6qi5bPaS0umNQ7852Hpre8
London: In a bizarre incident, employees aboard the UK’s most advanced frontline submarine Trident risked the lives of millions of people by allegedly using superglue to fix broken bolts of a nuclear reactor chamber prompting navy chiefs to order an investigation.
The crucial cooling pipes’ shoddy repairs were revealed after one of the bolt fell off during a routine check of the 16,000-ton HMS Vanguard.
Reports reveal that the bolts had broken due to careless overtightening, but civilian staff of the defence contractor Babcock glued the heads back on rather than alerting the damage to the authorities so that the fractured shafts could be repaired correctly.
The staff reportedly informed authorities about a process of work difficulty, or procedural fault, but avoided talking about the bolts and glue.
The staff reportedly informed authorities about a process of work difficulty, or procedural fault, but avoided talking about the bolts and glue.
The incident came to light after a UK newspaper publisged a detailed report on the grave blunder prompting Defence
Secretary Ben Wallace to call for a meeting and set accountability of the officials once and for all.
According to a Navy source, he was enraged that Babcock, one of the largest defence contractors in the UK, kept the Navy in the dark.
It’s a disgrace, they remarked. Nuclear technology forbids cutting corners. “The rules are the rules. Standards in the nuclear industry are never waived,” he said.
The damage was done at HMNB Devonport in Plymouth during a dry dock renovation and refuel. This work, reportedly started in 2015 and is four year behind the schedule and approximately £300 million over budget.
The sailors of the three remaining Trident 2 nuclear missile subs, HMS Vengeance, HMS Victorious, and HMS Vigilance, have had to endure protracted patrols due to persistent delays.
From 2028, the Dreadnought class will take their place and carry the UK’s nuclear deterrent.
The experts said that the seven bolts that were fixed using Superglue were reportedly preventing a Chernobyl type meltdown by holding the insulated coolant pipes.
They were discovered this month, ahead of the engineers’ scheduled first firing of the reactor at maximum power.
Investigators are still combing through data to determine when it occurred and who was to blame. As part of nuclear safety protocols, employees usually work in pairs.
After the incident, the Ministry of Defence in the UK issued a statement saying: “A fault from work done when HMS Vanguard was in dry dock was detected as part of a planned examination.”
It was reported and rectified right away, ministry said while adding that the Secretary of State also engaged with Babcock’s CEO in order to secure reassurance for future works.
Navy sources however claimed there were “no nuclear safety issues and that the reactor would not have exploded if the damage hadn’t been discovered.
“This is a big trust issue for Babcock and the Royal Navy to tackle,” former sub skipper Cdr. Ryan Ramsay stated, adding that It makes one wonder what else has been done poorly.
“The time strain imposed by falling considerably behind schedule may have induced this behaviour,” he said.
Babcock has multi-billion dollar contracts to overhaul at Devonport and maintain the Astute and Vanguard sub fleets
for the Royal Navy at HMNB Clyde in Scotland.
Any quality-related issue is extremely disappointing, however our own thorough inspection procedures found the problem, said Ramsay, adding that There was no safety or operational impact from the work.
Meanwhile, Rolls Royce which manufactures and maintains the reactors asserted that it was indeed a dereliction of duty on Babcock’s part.
1 This Month
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 (268)
- 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
