nuclear-news

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

How data centres will cut carbon emissions, not increase them

It should be noted that low carbon waste heat from electricity is increasingly renewable in source and this will substitute for natural gas consumption. As a result, carbon emmisions will be lowered.

Hence not only can data centres reduce energy consumption overall by the indirect effects described above, it can also reduce them directly by substituting the low carbon waste heat for natural gas consumption that is normally used for heating

David Toke, Oct 23, 2024
https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/how-data-centres-will-cut-carbon


Yes, you read that headline the right way. Despite the torrents of nonsense you will hear from lots of places (and a lot of energy nonsense these days seems to be concentrated in the Daily Telegraph) data centres and that fellow monster AI is unlikely to bust the electricity grid. Indeed, it is, on balance, more likely to reduce total energy demand.

Nevertheless, lurid tales of the data centre/AI monster devouring power have been spreading, and, they have even been linked to companies such as Meta, Amazon and Amazon issuing press releases about how they are going to source power from another monster, new nuclear power plants. However, as in horror stories in general, these monsters are, at least in almost all cases, entirely mythical.

As a point of fact, despite the seemingly rapidly rising number of data centres in the USA electricity demand in the first half of 2024 was the same as it was two years previously. The UK’s electricity demand has been on a downward path for some time. The International Energy Agency has recently published an analysis saying that data centres will be a small proportion of future growth energy demand (see HERE). Now, there is a very strong case for saying that electricity demand will increase to a greater or lesser extent. However, it rests on increased electrification of transport (starting with Electric Vehicles) and also heat pumps. But I don’t suppose many Daily Telegraph readers are very interested in that.


In the USA lots of data centres are being built in Texas. In the UK London is the biggest hub, housing over 40 per cent of the data centres sited in the UK. Not many people seem to realise that they will not consume gigantic amount of power. Even fewer people know that the alleged super-monstrous AI (which is said to ravenously consume this data centre energy) may, in fact, actually reduce energy demand in various indirect ways.


In fact AI and data centres that feed AI are likely to generate economic growth in service industries – business applications – that have a low energy intensity. GDP is likely therefore to become less energy intensive, replacing output that would otherwise be more energy intensive. Moreover the energy usage of these less energy- intensive applications will be itself reduced through better energy management organised through AI. Goldman-Sachs (see here) estimates that AI will see ‘the economy benefiting, from enhancing office productivity and sales efforts, to the design of buildings and manufactured parts, to improving patient diagnosis in healthcare settings,’ etc This means that as the efficient use of energy in the economy increases faster than the demand for energy services, then energy usage will decline, not increase. AI processing centres will themselves reduce the power they use as they take advantage of new tools that are becoming available to reduce power consumption. See HERE.

One way in which energy efficiency is going to be increased is directly as a result of the application of AI itself to improve the way that energy is managed, especially in buildings. Andrew Warren, the Chair of the British Energy Efficient Federation (BEEF), says in the October issue of the Energy In Buildings Newsletter ‘According to management consultants McKinsey, AI has the potential to deliver energy savings of up to 20% in buildings and 15% in transport systems. Additionally, AI-driven solutions can help businesses reduce CO₂ emissions by up to 10% and cut energy costs by 10-20% – particularly so in the field of industrial energy management.’

The overall effect of AI-driven increases in data centre consumption is visualised using the chart below. The demand for energy servicesA (green line) represents increasing energy demand under conditions of earlier industrial periods, whilst the demand for energy servicesB (orange line) represents the demand for energy services under a AI influenced services dominated economy. As can be seen also the green line represents the trend towards energy efficiency improvements that occurs as the economy refines its equipment, buildings, plant etc to use energy more efficiently. The orange line represents the increase for energy services in a AI influenced services economy. The key point is that it grows at a slower rate than overall energy efficiency improvements. This leads to a decline in energy consumption overall.

Of course this chart [on original] assumes that the energy economy is structured as before in its energy supply technologies. Of course energy will be increasingly supplied by electricity technologies. This chart ignores this effect, but is constructed so that we can focus on the effects of AI and data centre.

On top of all of this there are opportunities for data centres to sell otherwise waste heat to neighbouring businesses and housing estates in district heating systems. Indeed, it was reported last year that ‘The UK Government has awarded £36 million ($44.5m) to a district heating system in West London which will share data center waste heat with up to 10,000 new homes’. This development is taking place in Ealing.

We should make this the norm rather than the exception with data centres. We should take a leaf from German practice. Under the German Energy Efficiency Act (approved in 2023) data centres are required to re-use an increasing amount of waste heat – at least 20 per cent for those data centres which come into operation from 2028. It should be noted that low carbon waste heat from electricity is increasingly renewable in source and this will substitute for natural gas consumption. As a result, carbon emmisions will be lowered. Hence not only can data centres reduce energy consumption overall by the indirect effects described above, it can also reduce them directly by substituting the low carbon waste heat for natural gas consumption that is normally used for heating.

The reaction in some circles to the (it seems) mythical monster of the threatening data centres and AI becomes all the more stranger when it comes to nuclear power’s role in the story. Mythical nuclear power stations (that is ones that are unlikely to be built) are hypothesised as the answer to this (non-) problem. US companies such as Google, Amazon and Meta have been sounding their support for new nuclear power. In fact their support seems to consist of usually of vague announcements of future support. You would think of course, that if more electricity is needed, then we need to issue more contracts for renewable energy. This is especially as nuclear power plant seem very difficult to organise. However, such thoughts do not feature strongly in the minds of many Daily Telegraph readers.

The only definite support new nuclear power is actually getting in the wake of the imaginary AI monster seems to come from Amazon who has pledged $500 million towards a 300 MW small modular reactor (maybe the sort of offering that can please Trump supporters). Quite how a smaller type of nuclear reactor is going to deliver much of an increase in power supplies compared to the booming construction of wind and solar plant does not seem to compute with the Trumpists either. But it falls in with the ever-mythical notion that cheap nuclear power is (again) just around the corner story that we have heard for so many decades. What’s changed now? Really, not very much in fact – but the mixture of monster AI power demands and nuclear power coming to the rescue is really like something out of a 1950s science fiction story. And that’s all it is likely to remain.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

When The Holocaust Returned It Came Denouncing Anti-Semitism And Wearing A Star Of David


People assume what’s happening in Gaza can’t be an actual genocide, because the news media keep assuring everyone that’s not what we’re looking at, and so do the politicians in both parties. 

“This can’t possibly be what it looks like,” people say. “If it was, we would have heard about it in the news.”

Caitlin Johnstone, Oct 23, 2024

It was never going to look how we were expecting. It wasn’t going to show up in its old familiar costume with the bent cross and the tiny mustache, blaming all the problems on the Jews. 

It had to look different. If it didn’t look different, we never would have let it in the door.

And that’s still what’s throwing a lot of people off: it looks different. It doesn’t look like what all all the World War II movies and Holocaust novels conditioned us to watch out for. In fact, it looks so different that the victims in the last story have the same religion as the antagonists in the new one.

That old aphorism “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes” is true because people don’t tend to make the exact same mistake in the same way twice, but the conditioning which led them to make the first mistake will often lead them to make a second similar one.

We’ve all been made far too familiar with the Nazi extermination program to ever consent to Jews being rounded up and loaded onto trains again, but we also didn’t purge from our civilization all the murderousness, hatred and tyranny which made it possible. That’s why this new Holocaust has been allowed to happen.

We’ve all been conditioned to watch out for the next Hitler, but there’s never going to be another Hitler. We’ve been so focused on looking out for the Hitler who never comes that many of us missed when we started singing verses that rhyme with the ones we were hearing in Germany eight decades ago.

People assume what’s happening in Gaza can’t be an actual genocide, because the news media keep assuring everyone that’s not what we’re looking at, and so do the politicians in both parties. 

“This can’t possibly be what it looks like,” people say. “If it was, we would have heard about it in the news.”

The villains in this new story don’t look like the villains in the old story, and, if you are a properly indoctrinated westerner, they might not look like villains at all. They might just look like Jews defending themselves from terrorists and western governments rightly defending their dear ally — which is exactly what they should do if they want to prevent another Holocaust!

But it’s that very misperception which is making today’s Holocaust possible. This mass atrocity is being tolerated by huge parts of the population exactly because we see it as intolerable for large numbers of Jews to be killed by those who hate them, not understanding that the people who were killed on October 7 were killed not because of their religion, but because they were part of a settler-colonialist project which is premised on the perpetual abuse of a preexisting indigenous population.

People defend Israel’s actions on the grounds that Israel has reasons for doing things the way it’s doing them. They have to bomb Gaza — they suffered an unprovoked attack from a bunch of evil terrorists. They have to bomb all the hospitals and schools and mosques — that’s where Hamas are hiding. They have to bomb areas that are packed full of children — Hamas are using those children as human shields.

But those who commit mass atrocities always justify their actions. They always have reasons for doing them. They always frame it as a necessary act of self-preservation.

That was always what the next Holocaust was going to look like. It was never going to feature new bad guys who cackle and twist their mustaches saying “Haha, we are evil! Let’s kill a bunch of people because we are evil!” They were always going to frame themselves as the heroes and victims, and the other side as the villains and victimizers. They were always going to offer a bunch of reasons why what they’re doing is actually good and righteous, even though it looks evil on its face.

If we are to prevent genocidal atrocities, we need to be able to recognize what’s happening in real time, and we can’t do that if we’re expecting them to show up in familiar and instantly recognizable packaging. We need to be able to see through the manipulations and justifications in the here and now so we can stop it in its tracks instead of waiting for history to judge it in our rearview mirror after it’s already happened.

This is important to recognize when it comes to saving Gaza, and it’s important to recognize when it comes to preventing the Holocausts of the future as well. They will never look identical to the Holocausts of the past. Their form will be unprecedented, and they will have different justifications for their orchestration. But they will rhyme. And we need to be able to pick up on that as it happens.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Atrocities, Israel | Leave a comment

Nuclear lobby propagandises to kids AGAIN!

They did this in the past – with rather pathetic little comics and posters

Like this one, from Canadian uranium company Cameco

Department of Energy Goes Nuclear with New Comic Book – Office of Nuclear Energy, 23 Oct 24

What does dodgeball have to do with nuclear power?

You can find out in a new comic book released by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that’s geared toward young readers.

The Spark Squad Nuclear comic book follows middle schoolers Jasmine, Aria and Thomas on their quest to collect enough “joules” to qualify for the regional power fair.

The students quickly find out just how “energy dense” uranium fuel is after meeting Aria’s old friend Dakota at a nearby coal facility, which was recently converted to a nuclear power plant.

Dakota then asks for the Spark Squad’s help to initiate a chain reaction by getting enough uranium particles to play dodgeball with “neutron balls” to split apart other Uranium-235 atoms.

This epic game of dodgeball results in a sustained nuclear reaction AND more than enough joules for the students to qualify for regionals!………….

Spark-ing Interest in Nuclear Energy 

The Spark Squad comic book and video were created by DOE to make nuclear power more accessible to younger audiences.  

We developed a special activity called “Dodgeball Fission” and also worked with our national labs to create a STEM toolkit for the comic book to help engage learners of all ages. It can be used both in-school and out-of-school with standards-aligned, ready-to-use activities for educators.

Nuclear and STEM 

The United States operates the largest fleet of reactors in the world with 94 units located at 54 sites across the country. 

And, if you don’t live near one of these plants, then you might not know just how good of a neighbor nuclear can be. 

These plants support thousands of high-paying jobs with salaries that are typically 30 percent higher than the local average. 

Nuclear plants also contribute millions of dollars each year to their communities through federal and state taxes that are used to improve local infrastructure projects and schools.

DOE estimates our nuclear capacity could triple by 2050 to help meet our rising energy demand with clean power. 

That means hundreds of thousands of new jobs could be created in the sector as current nuclear plants work to extend their operations and new plants come online. 

To help cultivate this future workforce, it’s important to engage youth at an early age with activities like this comic book and the accompanying activities to spark their interest in future STEM careers. 

You can also check out earlier Spark Squad comic books as the team explores hydropower.

The Spark Squad comic books were produced through a collaborative effort between the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and Chromosphere Studio.  

 To explore more STEM activities related to nuclear power, check out our Navigating Nuclear Curriculum or visit our full suite of DOE STEM resources.  

 https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/department-energy-goes-nuclear-new-comic-book?fbclid=IwY2xjawGFBF9leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHdLM-idQxTS1kErOBso5ag3kYlNAjm1qHoCTt38mVxDrlqgf8IBwP-haUA_aem_Yd7COpwP3grZbyEr2-gLSg

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Education, USA | Leave a comment

President Biden’s depraved last 15 months enables Israel’s genocidal destruction of Gaza.

November 7th marks 52 years since Joe Biden was first elected to national office as Senator from Delaware. During that time as Senator, Vice President, President, he’s supported every US military intervention sowing havoc around the world from Vietnam thru Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq again, Yemen, Syria, Libya and Ukraine to name eight.

He’s also been a self-proclaimed Zionist. On October 21, 2023 he met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin in Israel and told him “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.” This was at the beginning of Netanyahu’s scorched earth policy of genocidal ethnic cleaning to remove all 2,300,000 Palestinians from Gaza.

Biden pledged America’s military treasure for Netanyahu to complete his decades’ long dream of expelling Palestinians from Gaza for Israeli settlement. Of course, Biden was careful to couch the so far $17.9 billion in US weaponry as purely defensive to complete the destruction of Hamas following their October 7, 2023 attack.

But in the ensuing year, Netanyahu has used our treasure to utterly destroy Gaza as a habitable land. He’s dropped Biden’s 2,000 lb. blockbuster bombs to obliterate most of Gaza’s infrastructure including schools, hospitals, water and sewage treatment facilities along with tens of thousands of Palestinians moms and kids. The death toll likely exceeds a hundred thousand with virtually every remaining Palestinian suffering starvation and illness from Netanyahu’s preventing most food, water and medicine from reaching Gaza.

All of this grotesque carnage is financed and enabled by President Joe Biden.

What Biden calls defense, the Israelis call Palestinian Removal. Was he even aware of this week’s Israeli conference on Israeli resettlement of Gaza titled ‘Preparing to Resettle Gaza’ organized by Netanyahu’s government and settler organization Nachala? The topic was not defense against Hamas. It was about removing the remaining 2,200,000 Palestinians trapped in the moonscape created by Biden’s bombs. Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir told attendees “We will encourage the voluntary transfer of all Gazan citizens. We will offer them the opportunity to move to other countries because that land belongs to us.” What Ben Gvir didn’t articulate was that those not leaving voluntarily will be killed.

Joe Biden has been a career long supporter of Israeli colonial Apartheid control of the Palestinian people. He’s never taken a significant action to advance Palestinian statehood much less recognize Palestinians’ humanity. But in his last 15 months as president, he’s gone over the abyss into depravity, enabling the most grotesque genocide in this century.

Alas, Joe Biden is not leaving the presidency on a high note.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Secrecy over radioactive pollution from nuclear bases

The Ferret, Rob Edwards, October 22, 2024

The Ministry of Defence has blocked the Scottish Government’s environmental watchdog from releasing information about radioactive pollution from the Clyde nuclear bomb bases for the last nine years.

Emails released under freedom of information (FoI) law reveal that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) asked the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) not to publish information about “environmental issues with radioactivity” at Faslane and Coulport near Helensburgh to protect “national security”.

In response to FoI requests from The Ferret, Sepa has refused to release more than 20 files about radioactive problems at the bases since 2016, and redacted others. We have appealed to the Scottish Information Commissioner, David Hamilton…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Sepa’s refusal to release the files is under investigation by the Scottish Information Commissioner, following two appeals by The Ferret in August and September 2024.

‘Difficult’ to withhold information about radioactive pollution

Now, in response to another FoI request, Sepa has released email correspondence with the MoD about The Ferret’s FoI requests on Faslane and Coulport. These show that the MoD asked Sepa not to publish certain files.

Sepa emailed the MoD in October and November 2023 with files it proposed to release asking whether they “should be disclosed”. The MoD replied on 27 November saying that “HQ colleagues” wanted information withheld, though exactly how much or what has been redacted……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Secrecy over radioactive pollution ‘unacceptable’

Professor Campbell Gemmell was Sepa’s chief executive between 2003 and 2012 when it released more than 400 pages about safety at Faslane and Coulport. The MoD were “very challenging to deal with”, he recalled.

He said: “The UK ministry applied pressure repeatedly on radioactive waste issues seeking to keep relevant environmental information out of the public domain. Putting similar effort into remedy would be better.”………………………….

The Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament pointed out that it was well known that the four nuclear-armed Vanguard-class submarines based on the Clyde were ageing and overstretched. They were more likely to leak, argued the group’s co-vice chair, David Kelly.

“This information is not a threat to national security. But it is a threat to the image of a responsible Ministry of Defence, that pollutes our environment with ever-increasing amounts of radioactive isotopes in the name of keeping us safe.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………
https://theferret.scot/radioactive-pollution-clyde-nuclear-bases/

October 24, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Cop29 host Azerbaijan set for major fossil gas expansion, report says

Exclusive: Those with ‘interest in keeping world hooked on fossil fuels’ should not oversee climate talks, say report authors

Guardian, Damian Carrington Environment editor, 23 Oct 24

Azerbaijan, the host of the Cop29 global climate summit, will see a large expansion of fossil gas production in the next decade, a new report has revealed. The authors said that the crucial negotiations should not be overseen by “those with a vested interest in keeping the world hooked on fossil fuels”.

Azerbaijan’s state-owned oil and gas company, Socar, and its partners are set to raise the country’s annual gas production from 37bn cubic metres (bcm) today to 49bcm by 2033. Socar also recently agreed to increase gas exports to the European Union by 17% by 2026.

The Cop29 summit, starting on 11 November, comes as scientists say that continued record carbon dioxide emissions means “the future of humanity hangs in the balance”. The International Energy Agency said in 2021 that no new fossil fuel exploitation should take place if CO2 emissions were to fall to zero by 2050.

But in 2023 Socar pushed 97% of its capital expenditure into oil and gas projects, the report found. The company launched a “green energy division” a few weeks after Azerbaijan was appointed as Cop29 host, promising investments in wind, solar and carbon capture technologies. But according to the report, Socar’s renewable operations remain insignificant.

Azerbaijan’s climate action plan was rated “critically insufficient” by Climate Action Tracker (CAT) in September. “Azerbaijan is among a tiny group of countries that has weakened its climate target [and] the country is doubling down on fossil fuel extraction,” said the CAT analysts.

Azerbaijan and Socar had also been accused of human rights violations, the report said. The authors said defeating the climate crisis required civil society to have freedom of speech and protected human rights.

“Given Socar’s pivotal role in Azerbaijan’s economy and its close ties to the country’s political elite, its influence will surely be felt throughout the climate negotiations in Baku,” said Regine Richter at the German NGO Urgewald, lead author of the report. “As we prepare for Cop29, we cannot but ask ourselves: did we put the fox in charge of the henhouse?”

Azerbaijan’s president, Ilham Aliyev, told a climate conference in April: “Having oil and gas deposits is not our fault. It’s a gift from God.” Aliyez appoints Socar’s management board and was vice-president of Socar until he succeeded his father as the country’s president in 2003. Azerbaijan’s ecology and natural resources minister, Mukhtar Babayev, will run Cop29. He previously worked for Socar for 26 years until 2018. Rovshan Najaf, the president of Socar, is part of the Cop29 organising committee.

………………………………………………………………………….. Socar works with some of the world’s biggest fossil fuel companies, including BP, TotalEnergies, the Russian oil giant Tatneft and the United Arab Emirates’ state oil company Adnoc. The CEO of Adnoc, Sultan Al Jaber, was president of Cop28 in Dubai, where nations failed to agree to “phase out” fossil fuels, as many wanted, instead choosing the weaker ambition of “transitioning away from fossil fuels”.

Socar also receives substantial financial backing from major international institutions, totalling $6.8bn in loans and underwriting between 2021 and 2023, according to research by the Banking on Climate Chaos coalition. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/23/cop29-host-azerbaijan-set-for-major-fossil-gas-expansion-report-says

October 24, 2024 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Three Mile Island nuclear plant gears up for Big Tech reboot

Reuters, By Laila Kearney, October 23, 2024

Summary

Companies

Activists say they will challenge licensing for the plant

Restart work is expected to begin in Q1 2025

Constellation has ordered major equipment

Microsoft would consider similar contracts to restart nuclear power plants

Work includes refurbishing cooling towers and millions of feet of scaffolding

THREE MILE ISLAND, Pennsylvania, Oct 22 (Reuters) – Giant cooling towers at Constellation Energy’s (CEG.O), opens new tab Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania have sat dormant for so long that grass has sprung up in the towers’ hollowed-out bases and wildlife roam inside.

Armed guard stations at an entrance to the shut concrete facility, surrounded by barbed wire, sit empty. The plant, which would run so loud when operating that workers were required to wear hearing protection, is nearly silent.

“It’s still eerie walking in here and it’s, just, quiet,” Constellation regulatory assurance manager Craig Smith said during a tour of the plant last week. Smith, who worked at Three Mile Island when Constellation shut the site’s remaining reactor in 2019, is now preparing for a restart.

Constellation announced last month that it would revive the half-century-old Three Mile Island with the purpose of fueling Microsoft’s (MSFT.O), opens new tab data centers. Microsoft is expected to pay at least $100 a megawatt-hour, nearly double the typical cost of renewable energy in the region, as part of the 20-year power contract.

The agreement shows the dramatic lengths Big Tech is willing to go to procure electricity for its artificial intelligence expansion and the undertaking by the U.S. power industry to meet that demand.

The effort to restore Unit 1 at Three Mile Island is expected to take four years, at least $1.6 billion, and thousands of workers to complete the unprecedented task of restarting a retired nuclear plant.

Constellation has already ordered costly equipment for the site and identified fuel for the unit’s reactor core, with work expected to start early next year, according to Reuters’ interviews with company executives, contractors and a tour of the site.

Successfully resurrecting Three Mile Island, which is widely known for a 1979 partial meltdown that cast a pall over the U.S. nuclear sector for decades, would put the plant at the front edge of an industry revival…………………………………………………..

A restart of the plant, however, is not certain. Three Mile Island, which will be renamed the Crane Clean Energy Complex, still requires licensing modifications and permitting. Local activists have also vowed to fight the project over safety and environmental concerns.

If the plan suffers the same lengthy delays and cost overruns that have plagued nearly every nuclear build in the country’s history, it could stymie other deals and set back Big Tech’s quest to rapidly expand, power experts say.

………………………………………………………………..The company has commissioned the fuel design for the reactor’s core, said Constellation Chief Generation Officer Bryan Hanson. The core holds the enriched uranium, the fuel source for the plant, stacked in pellets and sealed in tubes.

Constellation, which is the biggest U.S. operator of nuclear plants, will tap into fuel from its existing enriched uranium reserves as one of the final steps before starting up.

………………………………………………Not everyone is enthused about the prospect of a nuclear comeback. The power plants produce waste that can remain radioactive for thousands of years.

About a tennis court-size amount of spent nuclear fuel from Unit 1 is stored on Three Mile Island, which sits on a strip of land in the Susquehanna River. The decommissioning of Unit 2 is still underway about 45 years after the partial meltdown.

Local activist Eric Epstein, who remembers the March 1979 incident, said he will fight Constellation’s request to resume operating and water use licenses.

“It’s going to be a protracted battle,” Epstein said.

The first chance for the challenges comes on Oct. 25, when the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has scheduled its initial public hearing on Constellation’s plan to restart Unit 1.
Reporting by Laila Kearney Editing by Marguerita Choy
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/three-mile-island-nuclear-plant-gears-up-big-tech-reboot-2024-10-22/

October 24, 2024 Posted by | technology, USA | Leave a comment

Ontario town starts voting today on willingness to host ‘forever’ nuclear waste storage site

$418 million in subsidies from Canada’s nuclear industry

“When you look at the money, I don’t think it’s really significant when you look at the scope of this project,“

Teeswater, north of London, and northern Ontario site being considered for massive facility

Andrew Lupton · CBC News · Posted: Oct 21, 2024 

The small farming community of Teeswater, Ont., faces a massive decision. Starting today, its 6,000 residents will vote in a referendum on whether or not they’re willing to host Canada’s largest underground storage facility of spent nuclear fuel.

For Anja Vandervlies, who operates a 1,300-goat dairy farm nearby, it’s a monumental decision for her town in the municipality of South Bruce, and an easy choice for her. 

“If we vote yes, we’re stuck with this nuclear waste in the ground forever,” said Vandervlies, a member of the opposition group Protecting Our Waterways – No Nuclear Waste. “This is the only time that we, as residents, are going to get a say in this whole process.” 

A two-hour drive from London but less than 45 minutes from the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station on Lake Huron, Teeswater is one of two locations being considered to host Canada’s largest permanent underground storage facility for spent nuclear fuel. 

Also under consideration is Ignace, a community of about 1,200, located 245 kilometres northwest of Thunder Bay. Voters there have already said they’re willing hosts; now it’s Teeswater’s turn to have its say. 

Voting will be conducted online and by phone over seven days. To be binding, a yes vote of 50 per cent plus one is required. If Teeswater votes yes, the board of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) will make a final decision between Teeswater and Ignace, likely before the end of this year. 

Once the site is decided, the $26-billion storage facility would be built in stages, with plans to begin accepting waste in the 2040s and continue storing it away underground for the next 175 years. 

The process also requires consultation from First Nations groups in both communities. Neither has officially made a decision. The Wabigoon Lake Ojibway First Nation will vote in November. Opposition from Indigenous groups to the northern Ontario site is growing. 

Wherever it’s located, the facility, which the NWMO calls a “deep geological repository” that would be located 600 metres underground, will take spent nuclear fuel from Canadian Candu reactors located as far away as Winnipeg. 

Running counter to the safety concerns is the significant windfall awaiting whichever of the two communities winds up hosting the storage facility. 

The host town would not only benefit from high-paying jobs, but also $418 million in subsidies from Canada’s nuclear industry over the the course of the project. 

South Bruce Coun. Ron Schnurr didn’t want to say how he’s voting, opting instead to give the community its say this week.

However, he said the money would be a massive boost to a rural community with big infrastructure needs and a small tax base to pay for them. ……………………….

To Vandervlies and others in the group opposing the facility, the risk far outweighs the potential reward of hosting the site. 

“When you look at the money, I don’t think it’s really significant when you look at the scope of this project,” she said. 

The question

Voters will decide yes or no to the following question: 

  • Are you in favour of the Municipality of South Bruce declaring South Bruce to be a willing host for the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR)?

Information about how to vote, how to get on the voters list and where to find a voter assistance centre is posted here. Voting closes on Oct. 28 at 8 p.m. ET.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/teeswater-nuclear-waste-storage-site-vote-1.7356267

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

‘Millions of fish could die’ under current Hinkley Point C plan

Environmental advocates demand EDF takes action

By Lewis Clarke, Somerset Live , 22nd Oct 2024

A solutions-focussed, scientifically backed answer to the critical environmental situation at Hinkley Point C has been released by a coalition of scientists, engineers, and innovators, showing that the Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD) is both a necessary and feasible requirement for the builders of Hinkley Point C – EDF Energy – to apply.

An AFD Delivery Report, launched on October 16, gives evidence that the AFD can be installed safely and effectively in the Severn Estuary. It highlights the innovations in technical ability, technology, logistics, and science which will reduce maintenance times from 72 days per year down to just 19. The report debunks common misconceptions about noise levels, diving time, and more with scientifically backed evidence, and urges EDF to ensure the system is installed, tested, and operational before the station starts to abstract cooling water.

In light of the critical environmental situation at Hinkley Point C, a parliamentary debate led by Sir Ashley Fox MP was held last week on Wednesday 9th October 2024. During the debate, Sir Ashley Fox addressed that EDF Energy’s mosaic of mitigation measures, specifically the proposed saltmarsh plans, are a completely illogical choice.

The saltmarsh plans are a proposed alternative to the Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD), a system designed to protect aquatic life by deterring fish from entering the cooling systems of the power plant, and was included in the initial design plans of Hinkley Point C.

The AFD system remains mandated in the Development Consent Order (DCO). It is also considered best practice for screening estuarine intakes in the UK by the Environment Agency, and has been scrutinised by a Welsh Government Report (2021), a Public Inquiry (2022), and the ruling by Secretary of State Kwasi Kwarteng (2022) which all stated that the AFD must be installed. EDF Energy has been working to remove this vital environmental protection measure for nearly eight years, arguing on the grounds of health and safety concerns, noise pollution and effect on mammals, and further delay of the completion of Hinkley Point C.

The AFD Delivery Report provides a solution to the current impasse, but without the AFD, it has been warned by the Welsh Government Commission that approximately 182 million fish would be killed annually, including sensitive species like shad, sprat, Atlantic salmon, and herring.

In the AFD Delivery Report, Professor Mark Everard, University of West of England says “There can in my scientific view be no justification for removal of AFD. It makes absolutely no sense to permit very substantial damage to marine biodiversity and hope then that modest mitigation entailing a degree of recruitment only of species reliant on the saltmarsh can offset it.

“Cost reduction is cited by EDF as one element of its plan to remove the mandated AFD and would appear to be its principal consideration, but one that obviously overlooks the vital purpose of deflecting fish from the intake. Ideally, saltmarsh restoration should be implemented ADDITIONALLY to the AFD to mitigate the still substantial likely entrainment of multiple life stages of fish and invertebrates, even with deflection from the intake.”

South Gloucestershire Council understands that EDF will make another application to the Secretary of State to remove the requirement for an AFD in the new year, and so has written to the Secretary of State for Energy, Security & Net Zero, the Rt Hon Ed Milliband, requesting that he upholds the existing requirement to install an AFD.

Councillors Maggie Tyrrell and Ian Boulton, said in their letter to the Secretary of State: “We are writing to express our gravest concern regarding the scale of impact on the migratory fish populations of the Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which will result from the massive water abstraction at Hinkley Point C of 120,000 litres of seawater a second for 60 years once the power station is operational.

“This impact would be made significantly worse by the proposed application for a change to the 2013 Development Consent Order to remove the required Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD).

“A Welsh Government report on the AFD cites evidence that removal of the AFD would capture at least 182 million fish per year, a significant proportion of which would be killed. Put simply, removing the AFD would cause critical levels of wildlife destruction.”

The council is also concerned that EDF are approaching local landowners about a plan to create new salt marshes, which they would propose as alternative compensation habitat for fish in place of the AFD. It is understood that local landowners are deeply concerned about the idea, which has been turned down in other areas when raised by EDF, and experts query EDFs claims that new saltmarshes would offer suitable habitat for fish killed by the water intake of the new power station.

The council’s letter also highlighted that even with the AFD, that compensation will still be needed as some fish will still be drawn into the intake and killed. Alongside the letter, the Secretary of State was also provided with information about priorities to deliver improvements for fish passage in the Bristol Avon river and Coastal Catchments……………………
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/millions-fish-could-die-under-9641529

October 24, 2024 Posted by | oceans, UK | Leave a comment

Navy ‘Innovation’ Center  for “warfighting capabilities” will harm the Monterey Peninsula and ocean

Nina Beety
California Carmel Pine Cone, Monterey 23 Oct 24

The planned Navy Innovation Center for “warfighting capabilities” will
cause irreparable harm to the Monterey Peninsula and ocean. The Navy’s
track record of environmental damage is well-known – wanton disregard
for life, health, and safety, including its own personnel, maiming and
killing whales and dolphins, poisoning ocean, land, and drinking water –
while refusing accountability and transparency.

In its scant environmental assessment for the center, the Navy refused
to evaluate coastal zone management, hazardous materials and waste,
public health and safety, or recreation impacts, or existing local
impacts – [Navy] groundwater contamination from the airport flowing into
Laguna Grande, radioactive contamination under NPS, killing historic
trees along Del Monte Avenue, sonar, new 5G on the beach, and violating
federal laser limits. Its microwave emissions harm surrounding
residential areas and forests, and those emissions will increase with
the new center. The Navy’s nuclear waste dumps near the Farallons and
Half Moon Bay impact the bay.

This center is incompatible with the viability and health of this
community and the Earth. Please oppose it.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | environment, USA | Leave a comment

Secrets and Lies: This is how the West doomed Ukraine

Glenn Diesen, By Glenn Diesen, professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway  Wed, 16 Oct 2024,  https://www.sott.net/article/495541-Secrets-and-Lies-This-is-how-the-West-doomed-Ukraine

The desire of the US and UK to conduct a proxy war destroyed the Istanbul+ process.

In February 2022, Russia started its military operation against Ukraine to impose a settlement after a group of NATO countries had undermined the Minsk II peace agreement for seven years. On the first day after the start of hostilities, Vladimir Zelenskyconfirmedthat Moscow had contacted him to discuss negotiations based on restoring Ukrainian neutrality.On the third day, Russia and Ukraineagreedto start peace negotiations based on a Russian military withdrawal in return for this. Zelensky responded favorably to this condition, and he even called for a “collective security agreement” to include Russia to mitigate the security competition that had sparked the war.

The talks that followed are referred to as the Istanbul negotiations, in which Russia and Ukraine were close to an agreement before the US and UK sabotaged it, according to numerous claims by people close to the process.

Washington rejects negotiations without preconditions

For Washington, there were great incentives to use the large proxy army it had built in Ukraine to weaken Russia as a strategic rival, rather than accepting a neutral Kiev. On the first day after the start of the military operation, when Zelensky responded favorably to starting negotiations without preconditions,US State Department spokesperson Ned Pricerejectedthis stance – saying Russia would first have to withdraw all its forces.

This was a demand for capitulation as the Russian military presence in Ukraine was Moscow’s bargaining chip to achieve the objective of restoring Kiev’s neutrality. Less than a month later, Price was asked if Washington would support peace talks, to which he replied negatively as the conflict was part of a larger struggle:

“This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine… The key point is that there are principles that are at stake here that have universal applicability everywhere, whether in Europe, whether in the Indo-Pacific, anywhere in between.”

The US and UK demand a long war: Fighting Russia with Ukrainians

In late March 2022, Zelensky revealed in an interview with The Economist:

“There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

Israeli and Turkish mediators have since confirmed that Ukraine and Russia were both eager to make a compromise to end the war before the US and UK intervened to prevent peace from breaking out.

Zelensky had contacted former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to help with the talks. Bennett noted that Putin was willing to make “huge concessions” if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansion. Zelensky accepted this condition and “both sides very much wanted a ceasefire.”

However, Bennett argued that the US and UK intervened and blocked the peace agreement as they favored a long war. With a powerful Ukrainian military at its disposal, the West rejected the Istanbul peace agreement and there was a “decision by the West to keep striking Putin” instead of pursuing peace.

The Turkish negotiators reached the same conclusion: Russia and Ukraine agreed to resolve the conflict by restoring Ukraine’s neutrality, but NATO decided to fight Russia with Ukrainians as a proxy. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusogluarguedthat some NATO states wanted to extend the war to bleed Russia:

“After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long… But following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, I had the impression that there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue – let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine.”

Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s political party, confirmed that Zelensky was ready to sign the peace agreement before the US intervened:

“This war is not between Russia and Ukraine, it is a war between Russia and the West. By supporting Ukraine, the United States and some countries in Europe are beginning a process of prolonging this war. What we want is an end to this war. Someone is trying not to end the war. The US sees the prolongation of the war as its interest.”

Ukrainian Ambassador Aleksandr Chalyi, who participated in peace talks with Russia, confirms that Putin “tried everything” to reach a peace agreement and they were able “to find a very real compromise”. David Arakhamia, a Ukrainian parliamentary representative and head of Zelensky’s political party, said Russia’s key demand was Ukrainian neutrality.

“They were ready to end the war if we, like Finland once did, would accept neutrality and pledge not to join NATO. In fact, that was the main point. All the rest are cosmetic and political ‘additions.'”

Aleksey Arestovich, the former adviser of Zelensky, also confirmed that Russia was mainly preoccupied with restoring Ukraine’s neutrality.

The main obstacle to peace was thus overcome as Zelenskyofferedneutrality in the negotiations. The tentative peace agreement was confirmed by Fiona Hill, a former official at the US National Security Council, and Angela Stent, a former National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia. Hill and Stent penned an article inForeign Affairsin which theyoutlinedthe main terms of the agreement:

“Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement: Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.”

Boris Johnson goes to Kiev

What happened to the Istanbul peace agreement? On April 9, 2022, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson went to Kiev in a rush to sabotage the agreement and cited the killings in Bucha as the excuse. Ukrainian media reported that Johnson went to Kiev with two messages:

“The first is that Putin is a war criminal, he should be pressured, not negotiated with. And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they [the UK and US] are not.”

In June 2022, Johnson told the G7 and NATO:

“The solution to the war was ‘strategic endurance’ and now is not the time to settle and encourage the Ukrainians to settle for a bad peace.”

Johnson also published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journalarguing against any negotiations:

“The war in Ukraine can end only with Vladimir Putin’s defeat.”

Before Johnson’s trip to Kiev, historian Niall Ferguson interviewed several American and British leaders who confirmed:

“A decision had been made for the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin,” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime.“

Retired German General Harald Kujat, the former head of the German Bundeswehr and former chairman of the NATO Military Committee, confirmed that Johnson had sabotaged the peace negotiations. Kujat said:

“Ukraine had pledged to renounce NATO membership and not to allow any foreign troops or military installations to be stationed,” while “Russia had apparently agreed to withdraw its forces to the level of February 23.” However, “Boris Johnson intervened in Kiev on the 9th of April and prevented a signing. His reasoning was that the West was not ready for an end to the war.”

According to Kujat, the West demanded a Russian capitulation. He explained that this position was due to the US war plans against Russia:

“Now the complete withdrawal is repeatedly demanded as a prerequisite for negotiations. Perhaps one day the question will be asked who did not want to prevent this war… Their declared goal is to weaken Russia politically, economically, and militarily to such a degree that they can then turn to their geopolitical rival, the only one capable of endangering their supremacy as a world power: China… No, this war is not about our freedom… Russia wants to prevent its geopolitical rival USA from gaining a strategic superiority that threatens Russia’s security.”

What was Ukraine told by the US and UK?Why did Zelensky make a deal given that he was aware some Western states wanted to use Ukraine to exhaust Russia in a long war – even if it would destroy Ukraine? Zelensky likely received an offer he could not refuse:

If Zelensky would pursue peace with Russia, then he would not receive any support from the West and he would predictably face an uprising by the far-right/fascist groups that the US had armed and trained. In contrast, if Zelensky would choose war, then NATO would send all the weapons needed to defeat Russia, NATO would impose crippling sanctions on Russia, and NATO would pressure the international community to isolate Russia.

Zelensky could thus achieve what both Napoleon and Hitler had failed to achieve – to defeat Russia.

Arestovich explained in 2019 that a major war with Russia was the price of joining NATO. He predicted that the threat of Ukraine’s accession to NATO would “provoke Russia to launch a large-scale military operation against Ukraine,” and Ukraine could join NATO after defeating Russia.

Victory over Russia was assumed to be a certainty as Ukraine would merely be the spearhead of a wider NATO proxy war.

“In this conflict, we will be very actively supported by the West – with weapons, equipment, assistance, new sanctions against Russia and the quite possible introduction of a NATO contingent, a no-fly zone etc. We won’t lose, and that’s good.”

NATO turned on the propaganda machine to convince the public that a war against Russia was the only path to peace.

The Russian ‘invasion’ was “unprovoked”; Moscow’s objective was to conquer all of Ukraine to restore the Soviet Union; Russia’s withdrawal from Kiev was not a sign of good will to be reciprocated but a sign of weakness; it was impossible to negotiate with Putin; and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg subsequently asserted that “weapons are the way to peace.”

The Western public, indoctrinated with anti-Russian propaganda over decades, believed that NATO was merely a passive third party seeking to protect Ukraine from the most recent reincarnation of Hitler. Zelensky was assigned the role as new Churchill – bravely fighting to the last Ukrainian rather than accepting a bad peace.

The inevitable Istanbul+ agreement to end the war

The war did not go as expected. Russia built a powerful army and defeated the NATO-built Ukrainian army. Sanctions were overcome by reorienting the economy to the East, and instead of being isolated, Russia took a leading role in constructing a multipolar world order.

How can the war be brought to an end? The suggestions of a land-for-NATO membership agreement ignores that Russia’s leading objective is not territory but ending NATO expansion, as it is deemed to be an existential threat. NATO expansion is the source of the conflict and territorial dispute is the consequence, thus Ukrainian territorial concessions in return for NATO membership is a non-starter.

The foundation for any peace agreement must be the Istanbul+ formula. An agreement to restore Ukraine’s neutrality, plus territorial concessions as a consequence of almost three years of war. Threatening to expand NATO after the end of the war will merely incentivize Russia to capture strategic territory from Kharkov to Odessa, and to ensure that only a dysfunctional Ukrainian rump state will remain that is not capable of being used against Russia.

This is a cruel fate for the Ukrainian nation and the millions of Ukrainians who have suffered so greatly. It was also a predictable outcome, as Zelensky cautioned in March 2022.

“There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

October 23, 2024 Posted by | Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Iran complains to UN nuclear watchdog about Israeli threats against its nuclear sites

 https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2024/10/21/iran-says-it-warned-un-nuclear-watchdog-about-israeli-threats-against-its-nuclear-sites

Iran has written to the UN nuclear watchdog to complain about Israel’s threats against its nuclear sites, foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday at a weekly news conference.

Israel has vowed to attack Iran in retaliation for a volley of Iranian missiles launched on Oct. 1, leading to widespread speculation that Iran’s nuclear sites could be among Israel’s targets.

“Threats to attack nuclear sites are against UN resolutions…. and are condemned… we have sent a letter about it to… the UN nuclear watchdog,” Baghaei said in the televised news conference.

Separately, Baghaei said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi would travel to Bahrain and Kuwait on Monday as part of Iran’s efforts to curb regional tensions.

Iran launched its Oct. 1 missile attack to retaliate against Israeli strikes targeting its allies Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. It was the second Iranian attack on Israel this year; Israel responded to the first missile volley in April with an air strike on an air defense site in central Iran.

October 23, 2024 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Path to peace in Ukraine is thru negotiated settlement, not escalatory war that could go nuclear.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 21 Oct 24

Ethan Finegold’s October 20 letter ‘The US has the power to end the war in Ukraine’ offers just one simplistic remedy to achieve a Ukrainian victory over Russia. Finegold argues the US must approve long range missile strikes by Ukraine with the missiles we’ve already provided but restrict their long range use.

There are 2 problems with this solution. First, long range missile strikes will have no effect on achieving a Ukrainian victory. This is not just the opinion of we in the community including esteemed University of Chicago political science expert John Mearsheimer. It’s the opinion of his polar opposite, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who argues such strikes will have no effect because Russia has already moved over 90% of its strategic targets beyond the range of these long range missiles.

The second reason is decidedly more ominous. Russia has made clear both publicly at the UN and privately in backchannel talks with the Biden administration, that such attacks using US/UK missiles, fired using US technology and logistics, will put Russia at war with NATO. These communications so unnerved Biden that he rebuffed UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky last month who both sought US approval for such strikes. Russia upped the ante against such strikes by publicly revising its nuclear strategy to allow for use of nuclear weapons if a non-nuclear state strikes deep into Russia supported by weaponry from a nuclear state. So far, President Biden has wisely gotten the message.  

Finegold is correct in stating “Every day that this war is allowed to continue is another day that risks Russia’s use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield.” That is precisely why the US must pivot from endless weaponizing this 32 month long unwinnable war to a sensible negotiated peace.

October 23, 2024 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Humanity is on the verge of ‘shattering Earth’s natural limits’, say experts in biodiversity warning

Humanity is “on the precipice” of shattering Earth’s limits, and will
suffer huge costs if we fail to act on biodiversity loss, experts warn.
This week, world leaders meet in Cali, Colombia, for the Cop16 UN
biodiversity conference to discuss action on the global crisis. As they
prepare for negotiations, scientists and experts around the world have
warned that the stakes are high, and there is “no time to waste”. “We
are already locked in for significant damage, and we’re heading in a
direction that will see more,” says Tom Oliver, professor of applied
ecology at the University of Reading. “I really worry that negative
changes could be very rapid.”

Guardian 21st Oct 2024 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/21/humanity-earth-natural-limits-biodiversity-warning-cop16-conference-scientists-academics

October 23, 2024 Posted by | environment | Leave a comment

‘Nuclear waste would be disaster for our seaside’

BBC News, Paul Murphy, Environment Correspondent, 21 Oct 24

Campaigners opposed to plans for a nuclear waste disposal site on the Lincolnshire coast say it could be “disastrous” for the seaside economy.

The former Theddlethorpe gas terminal on the Lincolnshire coast is one of three sites being considered for an underground facility.

Guardians of the East Coast (GOTEC) said a survey of more than 1,000 visitors to the resorts of Mablethorpe and Skegness found the “great majority” would be put off coming to the area.

GOTEC said it had carried out “extensive research” into the potential impact of the facility.

The group has produced a 60-page booklet called The Nuclear Option.

According to chairman Mike Crookes, the facility would “blight this area” and the economic impact on tourism could be “profound” and “catastrophic”.

“The tourism industry in this area brings £600m of economic benefit and 8,000 jobs,” he said. “We need to protect this at all costs.”

A survey of 1,100 people along the coastline from Mablethorpe to Skegness, carried out by GOTEC, found “83% of them would not visit this area if that facility was built”, Mr Crookes added.

NWS is considering the site for what is known in the waste industry as a geological disposal facility (GDF).

Other possible sites have been mooted in Hartlepool and Cumbria………………………………………………………………………..

Most of the radioactive waste generated by the UK’s nuclear power stations is being temporarily stored at Sellafield in Cumbria, but longer term storage is needed for substances that remain hazardous for many thousands of years.

The idea of a nuclear waste site, or GDF, was first proposed for Theddlethorpe more than three years ago.

Local councillors have called for a referendum on the development.

According to the Theddlethorpe GDF Community Partnership, a facility would only be built in an area where the community “demonstrates if it is willing to host one”, following a “test of public support“, such as a referendum or consultation.

…………………………………… “The government has committed to providing multi-million-pound investment to the community that hosts a GDF. This investment could support better transport links which could help to enhance tourism in a local area.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4d3y33y3go

October 23, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »