No end to the gloom in USA’s nuclear industry
Nuclear power: Can its winter of discontent ever end?, CNBC14 Nov 2015, Under different circumstances, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s recent decision to grant its first license to a nuclear power plant in nearly two decades would be interpreted as a boon for the atomic energy industry.
These, however, are hardly normal times for the nuclear sector, which many observers acknowledge is hamstrung by relentless domestic opposition — even as dozens of new atomic power reactors are being constructed worldwide. Despite nominal backing from the federal government, and an accelerating push to promote carbon free energy sources, the Tennessee Valley Authority’s $4.5 billion Watts Bar plant isn’t being interpreted as a fresh start for a beleaguered sector.
“We haven’t done anything in 20 years … now we’re off to the races? Not at all,” said Vincent DeVito, a partner at Bowditch & Dewey, LLP, and a former Department of Energy policymaker….
Entergy WILL shut down FitzPatrick nuclear plant
on November 10, 2015 SCRIBA, N.Y. – At a meeting with Wall Street analysts today, the owners of FitzPatrick nuclear plant reiterated their plan to shut down the power plant by early 2017 and made no mention of any potential to reverse the decision.
Entergy Corp. CEO Leo Denault gave projections of future company earnings that included expectations that FitzPatrick will close in about a year. He made no mention of any talks with New York state to keep the plant open………http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2015/11/entergy_affirms_plan_to_shut_fitzpatrick_nuclear_plant_no_mention_of_talks.html
UK’s Trident nuclear “deterrent” – militarily useless
Corbyn stance on scrapping nuclear missiles makes sense, Irish Times, Eamonn McCann, 12 Nov 13 Military’s default ‘deterrence’ position on nukes more to do with prestige than defence “……… Britain’s nuclear weapons and the Trident delivery-system are both hugely expensive and utterly useless.
We have the word of David Cameron that, “overwhelmingly”, the most dangerous threat to Britain today arises from the blow-back savagery of Islamic State. But neither IS nor any other discernible threat can possibly be deterred by nuclear submarines prowling the ocean waiting for word from Whitehall to tap in the co-ordinates of whatever city or facility has been selected for vaporisation.
In his memoir, A Journey, Tony Blair conceded that Trident’s value was “non-existent in terms of military use” – before adding that cancelling the system would represent an intolerable “downgrading” of Britain’s place in the world.
Renewing Trident
Last week, Conservative chairman of the Commons foreign affairs select committeeCrispin Blunt estimated the cost of renewing Trident at £167 billion. Money is so tight people with disabilities have to take a hit. But it is money no object when it comes to nuclear bombs which nobody can explain the need for. It is about keeping up appearances, about strutting your stuff and swanking around the world. It is about acting big when you’re feeling small.
Corbyn has caused consternation among British conservatives and almost all of the mainstream media not because his ideas are odd-ball or extreme but because upon examination, many make plain sense. It is for this reason that many in positions of privilege in Britain are determined to subject him to raillery and skit rather than subject his politics to serious scrutiny.
You can learn all you need to know about British politics these days from the fact that only the mavericks now make sense. http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/corbyn-stance-on-scrapping-nuclear-missiles-makes-sense-1.2426050
Nuclear lobby’s case about climate change becomes ever weaker, as grids adapt to renewables
Case for nuclear wanes as grids adapt to renewable energy , https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/8287-Case-for-nuclear-wanes-as-grids-adapt-to-renewable-energy China Dialogue . Paul Dorfman , 6 Nov 15 The UK is wasting a huge sum on nuclear energy at a time when low-carbon sources can provide a growing share of the world’s electricity supply, writes Paul Dorfmann It was widely reported last month that Chinese President Xi Jinping and UK Prime Minister David Cameron had struck a deal to try to reinvigorate UK’s stalling nuclear ambitions, but the reality is nothing has been signed yet, despite the huge financial incentives being offered by the Treasury to French and Chinese nuclear corporations.Nuclear lobby hoping to be part of Paris Climate Talks
Morning Energy, Politico, 7 Nov 15 “……..LOOKING FOR LOVE IN ALL THE RAD PLACES: The White House is putting on a summit this afternoon designed to promote the Obama administration’s “commitment to nuclear energy as a clean energy and climate mitigation solution.” Translation: This is another line in the preamble to the Paris climate talks to show that every tool in the proverbial toolbox will get whipped out. The nuclear crowd is certainly excited for the attention and the summit will also let them feel like part of Team Climate, given the industry’s sense of being the unloved stepchild of the whole enterprise. Nuclear wonks shed tears when Congress nixed cap-and-trade in the president’s first term and the EPA’s Clean Power Plan feels a bit too little too late while reactors permanently unplug from the grid.
We’ve heard that Energy Department No. 2 Liz Sherwood-Randall will attend, as will former EPA chief and ex-White House climate czar Carol Browner, John Kotek, and DOE’s top acting nuclear energy official, and at least one national lab director is flying in for the occasion. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz was originally expected to appear but a conflict came up. Industry will also be well represented with Leslie Dewan, the CEO of nuclear it company TransAtomic, UPower founder Jacob DeWitte, and Bill Gates’ TerraPower along with the old guard like Westinghouse. Our understanding is that there will be two panel discussions, one on nuclear-fueled carbon reduction and one on innovative nuclear tech. One insider said the summit would be “all in all helpful bonding and messaging pre-COP………
Read more: http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-energy/2015/11/pro-morning-energy-wolff-211140#ixzz3qwGZvFwF
Jeremy Corbyn has got it right about Trident nuclear missiles
Corbyn is right about Trident – and his team should realise that, The Independent 9 Nov 15
- Sean O’Grady
- @_seanogrady “…………We talk as if we were still a world force, or had some right to be, and as if Trident will deliver us peace and power because our “enemies” will fear us all the more. Maybe it will, although there is scant evidence of it.
- The nation has just remembered and honoured those who fell in two world wars, but also in all those conflicts in the nuclear age – Northern Ireland, the Falklands, Sierra Leone, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. At no point were nuclear weapons of any use. Nor did they win the Cold War. It was the Americans who did that for us, just as they did for non-nuclear powers such as Germany or Italy. The Russians, despite Mikhail Gorbachev’s warm working relationship with Margaret Thatcher, regarded the British, like the French, as nuclear footnotes at best. Neither the Kremlin, the IRA, Saddam Hussein, nor the Taliban have been that bothered about Trident or those magnificent Vulcan bombers we see at air shows.
- Even if it were true that nuclear weapons could help to defend the realm – because the future is uncertain and new threats can always emerge – the truth we cannot face up to as a nation is that it is beyond our means. We will be paying some £100bn over 40 years for something that is really controlled by the United States. Mad…..http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/corbyn-is-right-about-trident-and-his-team-should-realise-that-a6726486.html
BHP another burst dam disaster – this time in Brazil
BHP disaster unfolds in Brazilian village 7 Nov 2015 The Weekend Australian Business MATT CHAMBERS
BHP Billiton was last night facing one of the worst disasters in its 130-year history after sludge from two burst mining dams at the Samarco iron ore joint venture in Brazil destroyed much of a nearby town, killing at least two people and leaving scores unaccounted for.
Brazilian newspapers reported local unions as saying there were 15 or 16 people killed and 45 missing after the tailings dam burst at BHP’s 50 per cent-owned Samarco operations in the state of Minas Gerais, burying houses and streets in the town of Bento Rodrigues in muddy waste.
Late last night officials were reportedly confirming two deaths but said the toll could mount.
Yesterday afternoon, BHP managing Andrew Mackenzie could not confirm how many people were killed or injured, or whether employees of Samarco, which BHP owns with Brazilian giant Vale, were missing after the disaster.
“There has been a tragic incident at the Samarco iron ore operation,” Mr Mackenzie said in a hastily arranged media conference in Melbourne………
Local reports said another dam, Santarem, which recently had its crest raised with a rubber structure to increase its capacity, had also burst, while Samarco said “dams” had been breached.
A local official said more than 50 were injured in the disaster and that the death toll could pass 40.
“That is not official,” said local fire chief Adao Severino Junior. “The situation is grim. It is dark. There is a lot of mud.”
He said rescue operations would continue through the night.
Television footage showed a torrent of industrial muck several hundred metres long that swamped houses and ripped off roofs in Minas Gerais, which is in the southeast of the country and host to a large mining industry.
BHP shares slid 58c, or 2.5 per cent, to $22.70 yesterday after news of the disaster, which Morgan Stanley estimated could result in a year of lost iron ore production……
Reuters reported last night that flooding from the mine had reached another village called Paracatu de Baixo and that villagers were being evacuated.
If the number of reported deaths from the disaster are correct, the tragedy will eclipse the Appin coalmine explosion in 1979 in the Illawarra region, in which 14 workers died.
Another great mining disaster in BHP’s history was also caused by a tailings dam failure, but not one that caused any immediate deaths.
At the OK Tedi copper mine in Papua New Guinea, a tailings dam collapse in 1984 started more than 20 years of government approved tailings discharge into local rivers, causing huge environmental damage.
Eskom says need for nuclear is ‘urgent’ – but could take decades to build!
“URGENT” NUCLEAR POWER? THIS IS HOW LONG IT TAKES TO BUILD A REACTOR CHARLIE FRIPP 05NOV 2015 Yesterday, Eskom CEO Brian Molefe said that South Africa needs to add nuclear power to its electricity generating capacity “urgently”, but the problem is that a nuclear plant isn’t something that came be planned, constructed and made operational in a short space of time.“We do not think that it is possible to continue with an energy mix that excludes nuclear. It is feasible to fund and operate further nuclear plants in South Africa and, in fact, it is urgent we do so,” Molefe told Parliament’s Public Enterprises Committee yesterday.
How long does it take to build a nuclear power plant, though?
Across the world, there are just over 438 nuclear reactors and around 149 nuclear power plants. Constructing these behemoths is no small feat, and we have crunched the numbers to determine the average time that it takes to construct a nuclear reactor. Not including the 99 stations in the US (because they report stats differently), this is where they’re located. [table and graph]
While various projects across the globe were a stop-start affair, the average time in construction for a nuclear reactor is 8.2 years. South Africa’s own Koeberg power station was close to pushing the ten-year mark for construction, as Unit 1 took 8.1 years to complete, and Unit 2 was just under nine-and-a-half years.
What’s interesting is that average build times are getting longer. In the last decade, for example, only China and South Korea have managed to build a nuclear power station in less than five years.
The other thing to note, of course, is that the while construction delays are almost inevitable for nuclear plants, cost overruns are the norm too (World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2015)………. http://www.htxt.co.za/2015/11/05/urgent-nuclear-power-this-is-how-long-it-takes-to-build-a-reactor/
USA Republicans would trust Ben Carson and Donald Trump with nuclear weapons!
Republican voters have lost their damned minds: They trust Ben Carson the most with nuclear weapons Regular Nazi analogies? Check. Appalling ignorance of global affairs? Check. Someone give this man nuclear weapons, Salon.com SOPHIA TESFAYE , 3 Nov 15 , Ben Carson is leading the entire Republican field according to a new national NBC/WSJ poll, but it’s the findings of another poll that demonstrate the depths of his support, with nearly 40 percent of Republican voters indicating that the retired neurosurgeon is best equipped to handle the nation’s nuclear arsenal.
In the aforementioned NBC/WSJ poll, Carson leads all Republican candidates with 29 percent support and comes second to Donald Trump in the Reuters poll, with 18 percent. In the NBC poll, Carson is the only Republican presidential candidate in the field to have 50 percent support among Republican voters when you combine their first and second choices……..http://www.salon.com/2015/11/03/republican_voters_have_lost_their_damned_minds_they_trust_ben_carson_the_most_with_nuclear_weapons/
Even were the claim true of its being “carbon free,” the future viability of nuclear power is questionable through the extreme-weather consequences of the very same development, climate change, which its boosters assert it would help solve. Severe wildfires or floods can destroy its vital safety systems.
The reactors’ voluminous cooling water demand can’t be met when heat waves and drought conditions reduce river flows and raise water temperature. Indeed, as David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer at UCS puts it, we must solve the climate problem first to continue nuclear-energy use, not the other way round.
Nuclear energy is not worth the risk http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Editorial/2015/11/01/Nuclear-energy-is-not-worth-the-risk.html?ci=stream&lp=7&p=1 BY FRANCES LAMBERTS Realistically, in response to the “Sound-off” question in the Press on Oct. 25, I suspect we will be living with nuclear power for a while. The U.S. Treasury spigot for building new plants having been re-opened under the previous administration and kept open under President Obama, we now have Watts Bar II coming online by the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Vogtle plant’s expansion in Georgia carried forward by the Southern Company.
Despite closure of a number of plants because nuclear power is now uncompetitive economically, the industry has been seeking and receiving license extensions for various old plants. Continue reading
Nagasaki hosts 61st international meeting of scientists for nuclear disarmament
Scientists meet in Nagasaki to seek abolition of nuclear weapons, Japan Today NATIONAL NOV. 01, 2015 – NAGASAKI — Scientists and nuclear experts from around the world gathered in southwestern Japan on Sunday to push for the abolition of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, with this year marking the 70th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Japanese cities.
Nagasaki, one of the two cities devastated by an atomic bomb at the end of World War II, is hosting for the first time the Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs, which originated from calls for such a meeting from eminent scientists such as Albert Einstein about 60 years ago.
With the momentum toward nuclear disarmament seen to have suffered a setback after a U.N. conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ended in failure in May, organizers hope once again to call attention to the inhumane nature of nuclear arms and encourage dialogue in a world plagued with conflicts.
The five-day international conference, which is the 61st of its kind, brings together nearly 200 participants from about 40 countries, including U.S. and Russian officials and the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Ali Akbar Salehi, according to the organizers.
On Sunday morning, participants met at the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum with Yoshiro Yamawaki, 81, an atomic bomb survivor, to hear firsthand about the horrors of nuclear weapons.
Topics to be discussed at the conference include the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, paths toward a world free of nuclear weapons and risks involved in the civilian use of nuclear energy in light of Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster triggered by a huge earthquake and tsunami in March 2011.
A declaration will be released on the final day of the event. Some sessions are open to the public, including a speech by Osamu Shimomura, who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2008. He was in a city adjacent to Nagasaki when the atomic bomb was dropped……http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/scientists-meet-in-nagasaki-to-seek-abolition-of-nuclear-weapons
South Africa’s nuclear trajectory unstoppable – path to “national suicide”
South Africa’s nuclear plans are “national suicide” http://mybroadband.co.za/news/energy/144377-south-africas-nuclear-plans-are-national-suicide.html The Sunday Times has reported that SA’s nuclear trajectory looks unstoppable, and that the cost is likely to be between R500 billion and R1 trillion. By Staff Writer – November 1, 2015 The Sunday Times has reported that South Africa’s nuclear trajectory looks unstoppable, and the cost for the nuclear project is likely to be between R500 billion and R1 trillion.
Apart from Russia’s state-owned Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation, there are four other companies which could run the project.
They are France’s Areva, Westinghouse Electric, China’s State Nuclear Power Technology Corporation, and South Korea’s Korea Electric Power Corporation.
In October, National Treasury allocated R200m to the Department of Energy for preparatory work to consider the costs, benefits, and risks of building four more nuclear power stations in South Africa.
Opposition to nuclear plans
Many people are opposed to South Africa’s nuclear plans, including the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM).
In 2014, NUM said it does not support “any temptations to employ nuclear energy as part of the solutions for sustainable energy”. “We, therefore, encourage government to take out nuclear as part of the energy mix. The risks and dangers of this element of energy far outweigh the benefits experienced by humankind.”
The union said the economy of South Africa cannot afford to build a R1-trillion nuclear plant.
The Sunday Times quoted NUM spokesperson Livhuwani Mammburu as saying that the country’s nuclear investment will be “national suicide”.
The Democratic Alliance said earlier this year that the government’s R1-trillion nuclear build plans are going to turn South Africa’s energy crisis into a jobs crisis.
DA leader Mmusi Maimane said the nuclear deal will drag the country’s economy back, and will cost thousands of South Africans their jobs.
“Whichever funding model is chosen, you can rest assured that it will be paid for by the South African taxpayer, and that we can expect substantial tariff increases over many years.”
South Africa – nuclear news items in brief
South Africa Nuclear build programme under fire October 27 2015. Johannesburg – Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson faces another round of tough questions in Parliament today on the nuclear build programme.
http://www.iol.co.za/business/news/nuclear-build-programme-under-fire-1.1936163#.VjSvPCt2N-J
Meeting on nuclear plant strident
26 October 2015. A sizeable crowd filled the Gansbaai Tourism Hall on Thursday evening 15 October to query, question and oppose a proposed nuclear power plant. …
Throughout the meeting, members of the public and several civil groups apposing nuclear development in South Africa, including Bantamsklip, Tesselaarsdal Action Group, Thyspunt Alliance and
Koeberg Alert Alliance, voiced their outrage and concern about the development of nuclear power plants in South Africa. Bantamsklip presented the consultants with several big folders containing a petition opposing the proposed Bantamsklip nuclear power plant with over 10 000 signatures. …
Treasury allots R200m to nuclear plan
22 October 2015. THE Treasury has allocated R200m to the Department of Energy to “support preparatory work” on the procurement of nuclear energy, it was announced in the medium-term budget policy statement on Wednesday. The allocation will be used to “consider the costs, benefits and risks of building additional nuclear power stations”.
The ANC, at its national general council this month, called on the government to make a thorough and transparent cost-benefit analysis of the procurement of nuclear energy.
While the Department of Energy has stated that nuclear procurement is imminent and ready to begin, this is the first time budget funds have been put towards the project.
However, compared with the likely scale of the project should it go ahead in its proposed form, the R200m allocation is extremely small.
http://www.bdlive.co.za/national/2015/10/22/treasury-allots-r200m-to-nuclear-plan
(See links to other recent items about South Africa’s controversial nuclear build programme here:http://www.necsa.co.za/About-US/Press-Room/Nuclear-Build-Programme)
The bizarre reactor that might save nuclear fusion
21 October 2015. If you’ve heard of fusion energy, you’ve probably heard of tokamaks. These doughnut-shaped devices are meant to cage ionized gases called plasmas in magnetic fields while heating them to the outlandish temperatures needed for hydrogen nuclei to fuse. Tokamaks are the workhorses of fusion—solid, symmetrical, and relatively straightforward to engineer—but progress with them has been plodding.
Now, tokamaks’ rebellious cousin is stepping out of the shadows. In a gleaming research lab in Germany’s northeastern corner, researchers are preparing to switch on a fusion device called a stellarator, the largest ever built. http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2015/10/feature-bizarre-reactor-might-save-nuclear-fusion
Australia boosting coal industry while it seeks to be co-chair of the Green Climate Fund
Australia bids to co-chair the Green Climate Fund criticised by Tony Abbott, Canberra Times, October 30, 2015 James Massola Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop has launched a bid for Australia to co-chair the Green Climate Fund that former prime minister Tony Abbott once criticised as “a Bob Brown bank on an international scale”.
A decision on who the next two co-chairs of the fund will be is expected to be made in Zambia late next week. The co-chair positions are typically held by one developing and one developed country for a period of one year. Fairfax Media has learnt that Ms Bishop first proposed Australia put its name forward to co-chair the fund when Mr Abbott was still prime minister.
Final approval for the bid was not, however, forthcoming until the Liberal Party switched to Malcolm Turnbull last month…….
Greens climate change spokeswoman Larissa Waters, however, said the decision to nominate for the co-chair position was hypocritical given that, in her view, Australia’s estimated fair share contribution should be $350 million annually.
“Australia has no credibility in overseeing the Green Climate Fund when this government is simultaneously trying to open the southern hemisphere’s largest coal mine in Queensland,” she said.
“We are the largest per capita emitter of carbon pollution of any developed country and the Turnbull government’s measly reduction targets will keep it that way.”
The bid comes ahead of a crucial climate conference that will be held in Paris at the end of this year, which Ms Bishop, Environment Minister Greg Hunt and possibly Mr Turnbull will attend. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-bids-to-cochair-the-green-climate-fund-criticised-by-tony-abbott-20151030-gkmvv6.html#ixzz3q5fTp7CX
1 This Month
29 Jan. Thursday 7-8 p.m. Webinar – World’s Largest Nuclear Station in Port Hope, ON?
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
31st January – Challenging the War Machine – a DECLASSIFIED UK SUMMIT
Website of the Week
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (283)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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
nuclear-news 