nuclear-news

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

Secrecy ramping up as problems mount in the UK nuclear programme

 David Cullen NIS 12th Nov 2024

The UK’s nuclear weapons programme is at a critical stage with mounting problems, and secrecy is being increased when transparency and accountability are more vital than ever. Routine public disclosures of information are now months overdue, nearly a year in one case. At the same time, the increasingly draconian approach to secrecy from the Ministry of Defence (MOD) is limiting the information that they will disclose through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, or in response to Parliamentary Questions.

The current level of public disclosure about the programme is lower than any time since at least the early 1990s. Without proper scrutiny there is no meaningful way for the public to understand what is happening, or for elected representatives to challenge it, and the likely result will be greater mismanagement, increased safety risks and a waste of huge sums of public funds.

At Nuclear Information Service (NIS) we prefer to focus on the content of our work, rather than drawing attention to ourselves and what we do, but these levels of secrecy are unprecedented during the 24 years we have been operating and we have decided to speak out. Whatever your position on nuclear weapons, the current information black hole is antithetical to good governance, and fundamentally unacceptable in a democracy.

Missing updates to Parliament

From 2011 to 2023, the MOD published an annual update to Parliament on the progress of its nuclear weapon upgrade programmes. The first of these was the ‘Initial Gate’ report on what is now known as the Dreadnought Programme, summarising the first few years of scoping work undertaken by the MOD and the plans for the new submarine class. From 2012 to 2021 these were routinely published shortly before Christmas (with the exception of 2015, when the Strategic Security and Defence Review published that November was deemed to have included enough information that there was no separate update).

The 2022 update was not published that year. NIS submitted an FOI request in January 2023 asking for a publication date and we were told in early February the update was “expected to be released in the coming weeks”. In response to a Parliamentary Question in late February from John Healy, who has since become Minister for Defence, the MOD said the update was “undergoing final clearance procedures”. No reason was given for the delay, despite this being explicitly asked by Healy and in a subsequent question submitted by Baroness Blower. The update was finally published on 8th March. The end of the update stated that the MOD planned “to next report progress to Parliament in late 2023”.

The 2023 update has not been published at all. NIS contacted the MOD in early December 2023 to ask what the planned publication date was and were told the annual update was “an enduring commitment by the MOD to Parliament…[but] there is no prescribed timeframe for its release” and the MOD was “unable to provide a date for its publication”. It is now early November 2024, nearly two years after the time period covered by the last update. In what sense can the MOD credibly describe these updates as annual?

Major Projects data not yet released

The other annual release of information about the progress of the MOD’s nuclear upgrades is the government’s Major Projects Data releases. These are coordinated by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA), a quasi-independent branch of government which sits under the Cabinet Office and is supposed to help ensure the government’s large projects are well managed and provide value for money. Projects are given a traffic-light colour rating, with many of the projects relating to the nuclear weapons programme being given ‘Amber’ or ‘Red’ rating, indicating respectively that they face serious problems, or appear unachievable.

Alongside the report published by the IPA which summarises the ratings for each programme and makes some general observations about programme management, data is published by each government department on their respective programmes. This includes predicted end dates, costs and a brief explanation of progress and/or problems. Since 2016 these have been published each July. Although the election this year may have interfered with the publication timetable, the data is typically assembled in March of each year, two months before the election was called. As it is now four months since the election, it is difficult to understand why the data has not been published.

Resistance to information disclosure

These missing information releases come at a time when the MOD is significantly more resistant to disclosing information to the public and parliamentarians than it has been in the past. In recent years key pieces of information have even been withheld in the MOD Major Projects releases. The 2022 release had redactions relating to the Astute, Dreadnought, Core Production Capability, Mensa, Pegasus and Teutates projects.

When NIS challenged these redactions we were told that that some were the consequence of an “anomaly” which caused them to be “withheld erroneously”. However, the planned end dates for the Astute and Dreadnought programmes were still withheld, as was the MOD narrative on the timetable for those two projects. The MOD took eight months to complete an internal review of this decision, instead of the maximum expected time of forty working days, and upheld the decision.

The FOI requests we submitted for our recent briefing on the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement were treated similarly, although the delays were shorter. No information has been disclosed to us on the transfer of nuclear materials under the MDA between 2014 and 2024, and only three years of data on the transfer of non-nuclear components of nuclear weapons has been released, with the excuse that extracting the information would take too much time……………………………………………………………………………………….

This antipathy to disclosure is reflected in the recent changes to the government’s stance on official figures relating to its nuclear stockpile. These came in the 2021 Integrated Review, alongside the announcement of an increase to the UK’s warhead stockpile cap, breaking with a decades-long trend of reductions. Figures for the numbers of operational warheads that the UK owns, for deployed warheads, or deployed missiles are no longer published. These changes are a breach of commitments made by the UK and other nuclear-weapon states at the 2000 and 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conferences to increased transparency about their capabilities.

Foreclosed FOI avenues

The questionable role of the ICO, which is responsible for regulating FOI matters in the UK, is sadly not limited to the dubious interpretation of the rule on ‘similar’ requests. Our appeals to the ICO over the missing data from the 2022 Major Projects release and on the transfer of nuclear material under the MDA have both been recently rejected………………………………..

Under the FOI Act, we technically have the right to appeal to the Information Tribunal, but in this case there is no prospect of us being meaningfully able to exercise that right. In previous Information Tribunal cases, such the 2019 case over the government’s withholding of reports from its internal nuclear safety regulator, the MOD can refrain from making its key arguments in open court, and will instead make them in a closed session which we would not be able to attend.

If we wished to make a meaningful case at tribunal with any realistic hope of success, we would face the kafkaesque prospect of needing to employ a barrister who we could not even properly instruct, as we do not know what arguments are being made by the MOD. The position of the ICO suggests that most of the case would be heard in closed session and we would have little chance of winning. As rulings of the tribunal create FOI case law, it would actually be irresponsible for us to bring a case under these circumstances.

State of the programme

It is not hard to think of reasons why the MOD wishes to minimise information in the public domain about the weapons programme, considering what we do know about the state of the programme and its upgrade projects. The reliability issues in the Vanguard fleet, and extended patrols they have caused, are the most visible issues, but there are many more.

HMS Vanguard has rejoined the fleet after its extended seven year deep maintenance and refuelling, but appears not to have been sent out on patrol for many months after rejoining the fleet. We saw a failed missile test-firing earlier this year and the fire on HMS Victorious in 2022. The entire Astute-class fleet was unable to put to to sea for five months this year, and it’s possible that the problems that caused this may surface in the incoming Dreadnought fleet. It seems likely that US submarines had to help during the recent change in Vanguard patrols. There may be additional delays to the Dreadnought programme, particularly after the recent fire at Barrow, which would put additional strain on the Vanguard fleet.

There may be additional details of, or implications from, any of these problems, or undisclosed connections between them, which could prove highly embarrassing to the MOD. There may also be additional issues beyond those we currently know about or suspect.

From the responses that we have had to our FOI requests, it seems the MOD’s argument in favour of its recourse to secrecy is fairly consistent in general terms. It claims that disclosing any information relating to the UK’s nuclear programme could allow ‘adversary’ states, particularly Russia, to draw conclusions about the capabilities and vulnerabilities of the programme. The so-called ‘mosaic effect’, where multiple pieces of individually inconsequential information can be drawn together to form a wider picture, is frequently invoked. These conclusions could then be leveraged by Russia or others to disrupt the weapons programme and degrade the UK’s ability to keep one nuclear-armed submarine at sea at all times.

It is not possible to know to what extent this hypothetical risk would remain credible when subjected to detailed critique and analysis. We only know that the MOD has been able to successfully convince the ICO and Information Tribunal of its veracity in closed forums with no external scrutiny. However, it stands to reason that this convoluted scenario would appear more credible if the UK is already struggling to maintain patrols. To what extent are the vulnerabilities the MOD cites to justify its secrecy a function of its own mismanagement? It is not possible to say, but a clear inference can be drawn from the conspicuous absence of the 2023 Update to Parliament: the MOD has chosen to say nothing rather than provide a basic overview of how its upgrade programmes are progressing.

Is the spectre of Russian interference being used as an excuse to hide MOD mismanagement and emerging problems in the programme from the public? How close is the programme to being unable to field its nuclear armed-submarines safely? What is the MOD trying to hide? The public deserve answers to these questions, and there is no reason that they cannot be given in a form that poses no risk to the security of the UK and its population. At NIS we will continue to seek what information we can to highlight these issues, but regular detailed parliamentary scrutiny is long overdue.

Members of the public have the right under the FOI Act to be provided with information on request, and ministers are expected to be candid and transparent towards Parliament under the ministerial code. When the approach of the government is to frustrate that right and avoid those obligations, and the ICO does not challenge them, this is a serious threat to democratic oversight and accountability. We welcome the recent calls from the House of Lords following the changes to the Mutual Defence Agreement, but as the Public Accounts Committee stated earlier in the year, there is also gap in the parliamentary scrutiny of government nuclear spending. We believe the gap is actually much wider, and it is time for regular and detailed scrutiny by Parliament of the whole UK nuclear weapons programme. https://www.nuclearinfo.org/comment/2024/11/secrecy-ramping-up-as-problems-mount-in-the-uk-nuclear-programme/

November 14, 2024 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

This year has been masterclass in human destruction, UN chief tells Cop29

This year has been “a masterclass in human destruction”, the UN
secretary general has said as he reflected on extreme weather and record
temperatures around the world fuelled by climate breakdown.

António Guterres painted a stark portrait of the consequences of climate breakdown
that had arisen in recent months. “Families running for their lives
before the next hurricane strikes; workers and pilgrims collapsing in
insufferable heat; floods tearing through communities and tearing down
infrastructure; children going to bed hungry as droughts ravage crops,”
he said.

“All these disasters, and more, are being supercharged by
human-made climate change.” Guterres was addressing scores of world
leaders and high-ranking government officials from nearly 200 countries
gathered in Azerbaijan for the Cop29 UN climate summit. Over a fortnight of
talks, nations will try to find ways to raise the vast sums of money needed
to tackle the climate crisis. Developing countries want guarantees of $1tn
a year in funds by 2035 to help them cut greenhouse gas emissions and adapt
to the impacts of extreme weather.

Guardian 12th Nov 2024

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/12/year-masterclass-in-human-destruction-un-chief-tells-cop29

November 14, 2024 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Ratepayers First: The Economic Case Against Nuclear’s Data Center Dreams

Now that data centers are growing and the climate crisis is accelerating, nuclear power is being positioned as a solution to both crises. Yet, this is deeply flawed.

Nov 6, 2024, Powermag 6th Nov 2024

As an energy professional in Georgia with a front row seat to the construction of Plant Vogtle, I found the October 23 Washington Post editorial endorsing nuclear energy as a tool for combating climate change astonishing. Georgia is the first state to build nuclear power in 30 years and the editorial board profoundly mischaracterized what happened here, and as with nearly all essays in support of nuclear, it never mentioned impacts to ratepayers, those of us who are actually paying for Plant Vogtle.by Patty Durand,

Perhaps the editors did not know that Georgia Power added $11.1 billion to its rate base, the assets on which it earns a profit, for its 45.7% share of the project. That amount of money for just 1,020 MW of generation is a horrible thing to do to ratepayers. Plant Vogtle cost eight to 10 times more than any other type of generation and resulted in a 25% rate increase, the largest in Georgia’s history. Yet, this achieved only a 7.5% expansion in Georgia Power’s capacity.

Glib claims that Vogtle was “FOAK” (first of a kind) and lessons learned will reduce future costs ignore the magnitude of the cost overruns and severity of the management failures. Real reasons for cost overruns include leaving expensive components in fields unprotected from weather and without a chain of custody resulting in a failure rate of 80%, and creating materially inaccurate project schedules for Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) filings to make it appear that construction milestones had been reached when they had not. These and other deceptive behaviors led to costly construction mistakes that are not related to FOAK.

Georgia Public Service Commissioner Tim Echols, a frequent contributor to POWER magazine, was public in his opinion that the commission should not review Vogtle’s construction costs for prudency and reasonableness throughout the 15-year timeline of the project, saying that would happen at the end. A settlement agreement on Vogtle reimbursements between PSC staff and Georgia Power was made two months before hearings were to begin, so the promised prudency hearings were never held. Thus, a shared understanding of Vogtle’s failures never took place, leaving room for nuclear supporters to make up reasons for Vogtle’s cost overruns that have no basis in fact.

Now that data centers are growing and the climate crisis is accelerating, nuclear power is being positioned as a solution to both crises. Yet, this is deeply flawed. The timeline for building nuclear is too slow, the costs are too high, and the corruption that follows nuclear power because of the big money involved is ignored. Using nuclear energy to address these crises means regulators won’t have to fix the perverse cost-plus business model that encourages utilities to slow walk or block the clean energy transition, and data centers can grow while keeping their climate emissions pledges intact.

This is very convenient for everyone but the ratepayer. Few people realize that most large industrial customers are on marginal rate tariffs, which are different than traditional base tariffs. Marginal tariffs do not include capital costs. Instead of paying $0.15–0.19 per kWh as most residential customers do, industrials like data centers pay only $0.05–0.06 per kWh .

The recent announcement that Microsoft would buy all the power from Constellation Energy’s recommissioning Three Mile Island carefully avoids mentioning who is paying the (unknown) billions of dollars in capital costs. And if Constellation Energy secures the $1.6 billion Department of Energy loan they seek, those repayment costs will flow to residential rates too, via the traditional base tariff.


Nuclear is a deeply flawed choice when climate change can be addressed affordably and rapidly with renewables and modern grid technologies, and numerous reports show a path toward meeting data center energy needs without nuclear………………………………………………………………..

Enormous predictions for data center growth projections made by utilities must be verified by independent third parties, and we already know double counting of data center load growth is happening. The continued use of trade secret protection rules by utilities refusing to disclose their prospective data center clients or allow verification of their enormous growth projections is not acceptable

……………………………………………………………… There are numerous voices calling for a measured response to data center load growth, among them AES President and CEO Andres Gluski, who said during an interview with CNBC that “euphoria” over nuclear energy as a power source for data centers is a “little overblown.” He noted that renewables are cheaper, easier to site, and “the future is going to be renewable energy.”

Ratepayers matter, and it’s time that everyone focuses on what’s best for them. And what’s best for them are affordable electricity bills and rapid decarbonization of the electric grid that does not include paying for expensive nuclear energy to serve data centers.

—Patty Durand is the founder and president of  Cool Planet Solutions.
https://www.powermag.com/blog/ratepayers-first-the-economic-case-against-nuclears-data-center-dreams/

November 14, 2024 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

To Be Pro-Israel Is To Be Pro-War

November 14, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Nuked: The Submarine Fiasco that Sank Australia’s Sovereignty, book by Murray Horton

Global Peace and Justice Aotearoa, 12 Nov 24, Reprinted from Covert Action Magazine

Andrew Fowler’s book Nuked: The Submarine Fiasco That Sank Australia’s Sovereignty (Melbourne University Press, 2024) was not written by a member of the peace movement. That is both a strength and a weakness. A strength, because Andrew Fowler is an award-winning investigative journalist, who has worked in mainstream Australian current affairs TV. So, it can’t be dismissed as “anti-American, anti-military” propaganda.

But it is a weakness because the author never questions the basic tenet of the book’s subject—why does Australia need any submarines at all, regardless of whether they are conventionally powered or nuclear powered. The book’s focus is a forensic analysis of who won the highly lucrative battle to supply Australia’s new subs—it was all set up to be France but then, after hidden, sub-surface maneuvering worthy of one of the book’s subjects, Australia and the U.S. torpedoed the French and did a deal among themselves.

This book is about AUKUS (Australia, UK, U.S.), the new kid on the “Indo-Pacific” block—although it should be pointed out that the UK is an awfully long way away from either the Indo or the Pacific. It is an attempt to build a new Western military alliance, initially between those three countries but with the prospect of other countries (including New Zealand) joining the ill-defined AUKUS Pillar Two at some unspecified time in the future. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. The book is about the birth of AUKUS, which is all about submarines.

AUKUS
I’ve written about AUKUS previously in Covert ActionMagazine, so I refer you to that for the back story. In 2016 Australia signed a $A50 billion contract for France to build it 12 state of the art conventionally powered submarines for the Australian Navy. It was the largest defence contact in the history of both France and Australia. The right-wing Liberal Party was in Government in Australia, headed by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The book names names—the man who fronted the deception and betrayal of France was Scott Morrison, who replaced Turnbull as the Liberal Prime Minister in 2018, in an internal Party coup (a common occurrence in Australian politics). Behind the scenes, the key man was Andrew Shearer, “a vehemently pro-American China hawk” who went on to become Director-General of National Intelligence. Right up until just before AUKUS was announced in 2021, Morrison’s government continued to assure France that it was proceeding with the contract to buy French submarines.

Dumping France For the U.S.

Instead of 12 diesel-powered French subs, Australia signed up to have the U.S. and UK build eight nuclear-powered (but not nuclear-armed) subs for its Navy. The cost is astronomical—up to $A368 billion by 2055. Yes, that’s right—those eight subs will not be ready for more than 30 years. The first of them is unlikely to be ready until the 2040s so, to fill that gap, Australia will buy three existing U.S. subs from the early 2030s, at a cost of up to $A58b, with an option to buy two more. This is a staggering amount to spend on one military project from a country with a population of just under 27 million people.

“(AUKUS) was a clear victory for Washington, which had been concerned for some time that France had a different view on how to deal with the rise of China… There was barely a murmur of opposition from the media. Morrison had pulled off a major achievement of what U.S. public intellectual Noam Chomsky describes as the political art of ‘manufacturing consent’…”.

“How did it happen that the bulk of analysis and criticism of the submarine deal came from two former Prime Ministers, Paul Keating (Labor) and Malcolm Turnbull (Liberal) who, though on opposing sides of politics, were united in warning that the submarine deal stripped away Australia’s sovereignty……………………………..

Australia Expected To Fight Alongside U.S. In War With China

There is only the feeblest pretense that these nuclear submarines (still decades away from reality) will be used to defend Australia. Their role will be to patrol close to the Chinese coast, to hem in the Chinese Navy and, in the event of war, to attack China with cruise missiles. That’s the theory, anyway. The advantage of their being nuclear-powered is that they don’t have to return to port to refuel. U.S. hawks expect Australia to fight on its side in any war with China over Taiwan………………………………………………………………………………………..

Integration With U.S. Military

There is a lot more to the U.S.-Australia military relationship than some exorbitantly expensive nuclear submarines that may or may not ever materialise. There is the top-secret Central Intelligence Agency/National Security Agency Pine Gap spy base near Alice Springs, in central Australia, which is crucial to the global warfighting abilities of the U.S.  There is the North West Cape facility on the westernmost point of mainland Australia, which the US Navy uses to communicate with its nuclear attack subs. There is Australia’s increasing involvement with the U.S. military and intelligence satellite programme, in preparation for war in space.

“Australia’s integration with the U.S. military was, of course, well underway before the AUKUS agreement. As already noted, Pine Gap and North West Cape are part of this. But there is also the basing of thousands of U.S. Marines in Darwin (northern coast), the stationing of nuclear-capable B-52s at Tindal (Australian Air Force base, northern Australia), and the stationing of U.S. military throughout the Australian Defence Force, including from the National Reconnaissance Office at the military headquarters in Canberra… Though Defence Minister Richard Marles has ruled out automatic support of the United States in any war over Taiwan, it is difficult to see how Australia won’t be involved. Pine Gap, Tindal, North West Cape and Perth (Western Australia’s biggest city) will all be integral to the battle.”

Change Of Government; No Change Of Foreign Policy

Scott Morrison’s Liberal government was voted out at the 2022 Australian election and was replaced by Anthony Albanese’s Labor Party. But Australia’s commitment to AUKUS remained unchanged………………………………………………………………………………

“Nuked” specifically attributes Labor’s fervent desire not to be seen as “anti-American” to the events of 1975, when the Central Intelligence Agency and its local collaborators, succeeded in getting Gough Whitlam’s Labor government overthrown in a bloodless coup. The U.S. covert state was particularly concerned about Whitlam’s revelations about its Pine Gap spy base and possible threats to close it. Jeremy Kuzmarov has recently written about this in CovertAction Magazine (15/11/23), so I refer you to that.

For half a century the Australian Labor Party has lived in fear of the same thing happening again, and has bent over backwards to prove its loyalty to the U.S.

………The consequences of the fear that drove the ALP leadership to embrace AUKUS with barely a second thought will haunt them for years to come. Just as Morrison was only too willing to trade Australian’s independence for the chance to win an election, so too was Labor. Now it is left to make work a deeply flawed scheme that, more than ever before, ties Australia’s future to whoever is in the White House.”

Jobs For The Boys
And what has happened to Scott Morrison, who retired from politics in 2024? “Along with Trump’s former CIA Director, Mike Pompeo, Morrison became a strategic adviser to U.S. asset management firm DYNE Maritime, which launched a $157 U.S. million fund to invest in technologies related to AUKUS. ………

“Morrison also became Vice-Chair of American Global Strategies (AGS), headed by former Trump National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien. AGS, stacked with former Pentagon, White House and State Department officials, boasts that it ‘assists clients as they navigate U.S. government processes,’ a useful addition to any company wanting to boost profits in the burgeoning area of military spending.”

New Zealand & AUKUS

…………………………………………………………………………… There are plenty of similarities between Australia and New Zealand but also significant differences. Whereas Australian governments of either party fall over themselves to loyally serve the U.S. empire, New Zealand has been nuclear free by law since the 1980s (and it was an Australian Labor government, on behalf of the U.S., which tried to pressure New Zealand to drop the policy. That pressure backfired).

……………………………………………………………….But there is a constant push to get New Zealand further entangled in the U.S. war machine, including Pillar Two of AUKUS (which has been, thus far, only identified as involving “advanced military technology”). New Zealand currently has a very pro-American Government, which is already a non-member “partner” of NATO and which is eager to serve the U.S……………………………………..

Not All New Zealand Politicians Lining Up To Grovel To Uncle Sam.

For a refreshing contrast, here’s an extract from a recent (2/10/24) press statement from Te Pāti Māori, the indigenous party, which has six Members of Parliament (out of 123). “Meanwhile the New Zealand Government is in talks with the United States about joining AUKUS to further support their war efforts. This represents the next phase of global colonisation, and it is being negotiated behind closed doors,” Co-Leader Rawiri Waititi said.

“The U.S. wants to use Aotearoa as a Pacific spy base. This could mean the end of our longstanding nuclear free policy to allow their war ships into our waters. AUKUS threatens our sovereignty as an independent nation, and the Mana Motuhake of every nation in the Pacific. It threatens to drag Aotearoa into World War 3,” said Waititi.

“The New Zealand government is putting everyone in Aotearoa at risk through their complicity. They must end all talks about joining AUKUS immediately. They must sanction Israel and cut ties with all countries who are committing and aiding war crimes,” said Co-Leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer………………………………. more https://gpja.org.nz/2024/11/12/nuked-the-submarine-fiasco-that-sank-australias-sovereignty-by-murray-horton/

November 14, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, media, resources - print | Leave a comment

Caitlin Johnstone: The Incoming Trump Administration Is Already Filling Up With War Sluts,

Caitlin Johnstone, Nov 12, 2024  https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-incoming-trump-administration?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=151534941&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Donald Trump has named Republican congressman Mike Waltz as his next national security advisor, a position that was held by ultrahawk John Bolton in the last Trump administration.

Like Bolton, Waltz is a warmongering freak. Journalist Michael Tracey has been filling up his Twitter page since the announcement with examples of Waltz’s insane hawkishness, including his support for letting Ukraine use US weapons to strike deep into Russian territory, criticizing Biden for not escalating aggressively enough in Ukraine, advocating bombing Iran, opposing the US military withdrawal from Afghanistan, and naming Iran, North Korea, China, Russia and Venezuela as “on the march” against the United States toward global conflict. The mainstream press are calling Waltz a “China hawk”, but from the look of things he’s a war-horny hawk toward all the official enemies of the United States. 

Trump has also confirmed that Republican congresswoman Elise Stefanik will be taking on the role of US ambassador to the UN, a role previously held by warmonger Nikki Haley in the last Trump administration. Again, there doesn’t seem to be much difference between the old hawk and the new one.

Stefanik is best known for her congressional efforts to stomp out free speech on college campuses, making a lie of Trump’s lip service to the importance of First Amendment rights. As explained by Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp, she’s a hawkish swamp monster whose political career was primed in some of the most odious neoconservative think tanks in Washington, and opposes placing any limits on US military support for Israel. Earlier this year Stefanik actually flew to Israel to give a speech before the Israeli Knesset vowing to help stop the “antisemitism” of protesters against Israel’s genocidal atrocities at American universities. 

And now we’re getting reports throughout the mass media that deranged war slut Marco Rubio has been tapped as Trump’s new secretary of state. It’s really hard to imagine anyone worse for the role of Washington’s top diplomat than a warmonger who has spent his entire political career pushing for more wars, sanctions and slaughter at every opportunity.

This should dash the hopes of Trump supporters everywhere that this time their guy really will end the wars and drain the swamp. Trump’s appointment of Iran hawk Brian Hook to help staff the State Department for the next administration and his rumored consideration of Mike Rogers for secretary of defense are likewise bad signs, as is Tucker Carlson’s claim that virulent China hawk Elbridge Colby is likely to play a role in the administration.

Trump’s anti-interventionist supporters loudly applauded the other day when he unexpectedly announced that Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley would not be playing a role in the next administration. In response to the announcement, libertarian comedian and podcaster Dave Smith said on Twitter that stopping Pompeo was not enough and that “we need maximum pressure to keep all neocons and war hawks out of the Trump administration.” In response to Smith’s post, Donald Trump Jr tweeted, “Agreed!!! I’m on it.”

When I saw this, I tweeted the following:

“Ignore their words and watch their actions. Been saying it for years, and I’m going to keep on saying it. Ignore their words, watch their actions. Talk, as they say, is cheap.”

Their actions are telling us a lot more than their words right now.

November 14, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear reactor in 2011 disaster-hit area restarted

13 Nov 24, https://japantoday.com/category/national/update1-japan-nuclear-reactor-in-2011-disaster-hit-area-restarted-after-halt

A nuclear reactor in northeastern Japan, hit by the devastating 2011 earthquake and tsunami, was restarted Wednesday after a temporary suspension due to an instrument problem, the plant operator said.

In late October, the Onagawa plant’s No. 2 unit became the first reactor to operate in eastern Japan since the natural disaster, but it was halted earlier this month after a checking device became stuck inside the containment vessel.

Tohoku Electric Power Co, the operator of the Onagawa nuclear plant in Miyagi Prefecture, said it detected that a nut on a joint of a guide tube — designed to send devices into the reactor — was not tightened adequately when it was replaced in May.

The operator said it plans to begin power generation possibly this week after the reactor reaches stable criticality and hopes to start commercial operations around December.

The Onagawa unit cleared safety screening in February 2020 under stricter safety standards set after the 2011 nuclear accident at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant. The reactor is the same type as those at the Fukushima plant.

November 14, 2024 Posted by | Japan, politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear site holds emergency exercise


BBC 12th Nov 2024

A safety exercise which simulates an emergency at a nuclear site is taking place.

People who live close to the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant in Cumbria may hear the site siren and receive text, email and telephone warnings if they have signed up for them.

If the siren sounds, the gates will be shut and the site placed into lockdown.

Full-scale safety tests have to take place at Sellafield at least once a year and are observed by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR).

This is a “daylight exercise”, but details of timings or the scenario are not revealed in advance.

A Sellafield spokesperson said everyone on site is expected to “respond appropriately and follow instructions”.

ONS inspectors will provide feedback and learning points following the exercise. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj7dezyed2o

November 14, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

TODAY. The International Atomic Energy Agency in full force with its lying propaganda, at COP 29, with at least 20 ‘Events”.

COP 29 will be a flop anyway – so I suppose that is some kind of twisted comfort – in that very few will trust the outcome of this hijacked UN Climate Summit

From IAEA website’s disgusting propaganda:

“ a rich programme of IAEA and partner events to showcase nuclear science and technology solutions for climate change “

“The IAEA is organizing a series of events on four thematic areas: energy, food, the ocean and water. “

“an informed debate on the tools and benefits offered by nuclear technology”

Hijacked by all the polluting industries, but the biggest liar of the lot is the IAEA – with their full knowledge that nuclear does nothing to fight climate change. And in fact – climate change effects will kill the nuclear industry,

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Christina's notes, climate change | Leave a comment

How a Secluded 1984 Conference Forged Israel’s Unprecedented Influence Over US Media

Buoyed by its success, the operation soon expanded to include school and university students worldwide, training them to act as vigorous advocates for Israel in classrooms and on campuses. Graduates of these Israeli-funded programs frequently enter influential fields, including journalism, where they continue to promote Hasbara narratives and defend Israel’s actions. The impact on Western media coverage of Palestine has been profound.

Mint Press News, November 11, 2024 

As Israel’s October 1 invasion of Lebanon unfolds, the media’s complicity in shaping public perception raises urgent questions, particularly when viewed through the lens of a controversial 1984 conference where influential advertising and media figures gathered to refine Israel’s narrative strategies. This conference laid the groundwork for a sophisticated propaganda campaign—Hasbara—that sought to sanitize Israel’s actions and cast its military operations in a favorable light. Today, as Western journalists whitewash, distort, and conceal Israel’s the realities of Israel’s deadly campaign of violence, the enduring legacy of this meeting becomes alarmingly clear, revealing how narratives crafted decades ago continue to shape the coverage of a conflict that claims countless lives.

…………………………………………………………………………… The mainstream media’s systematic use of distancing and evasive language, omission and other duplicitous chicanery to downplay or outright justify Israel’s murder of innocent civilians while simultaneously dehumanizing their victims and delegitimizing Palestinian resistance against brutal, illegal IDF occupation is as unconscionable as it is well-documented. Amazingly though, ‘twasn’t ever thus. Once upon a time, mainstream news networks exposed Israel’s war crimes without qualification, and anchors and pundits openly condemned these actions on live TV to audiences of millions.

The story of how Western media was transformed into Israel’s doting, servile propaganda appendage is not only a fascinating and sordid hidden chronicle. It is a deeply educational lesson in how imperial power can easily subordinate supposed arbiters of truth to its will. Comprehending how we got to this point equips us with the tools to assess, identify, and deconstruct lies large and small – and effectively challenge and counter not only Israel’s falsehoods but the entire settler colonial endeavor.

‘Neighborhood Bully’

On June 6, 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon. The effort was ostensibly intended to drive Palestinian Liberation Organization freedom fighters away from their positions on Israel’s northern border. But, as the IDF savagely pushed ever-deeper into the country, including Beirut, it became clear that ethnic cleansing, massacres, and land theft were – as in Palestine – the true goal. Throughout the Lebanese capital, news crews from major networks and reporters from the West’s biggest newspapers were waiting.

Israel’s rapacious bloodlust and casual contempt for Arab lives had hitherto been, by and large, successfully concealed from the outside world. Suddenly, though, scenes of deliberate IDF airstrikes on residential housing blocks, Tel Aviv’s trigger-happy soldiers running amok in Beirut’s streets, and hospitals overflowing with civilians suffering from grave injuries, including chemical burns due to Israel’s use of phosphorus shells, were broadcast the world over, to nigh-universal outcry. As veteran NBC news anchor John Chancellor contemporarily explained to Western viewers:

What in the world is going on? Israel’s security problem, on its border, is 50 miles to the south. What’s an Israeli army doing here in Beirut? The answer is we are now dealing with an imperial Israel, which is solving its problems in someone else’s country, world opinion be damned.”

Global shock and repulsion at Israel’s conduct would only ratchet during the IDF’s resultant illegal military occupation of swaths of Lebanon. …………………………………………………………..

To say the least, Israel had an international PR disaster of historic proportions on its blood-soaked hands…………………………………………………..

So it was that in the summer of 1984, the American Jewish Congress – a major Zionist lobby organization – convened a conference in Jerusalem, Israel’s Public Image: Problems and Remedies. It was chaired by U.S. advertising supremo Carl Spielgovel, who a decade earlier provided pro bono advice to the Israeli government on strategies for publicly communicating why Tel Aviv refused to adhere to the terms of the Henry Kissinger-brokered 1973 Sinai Accords. Spielgovel later recalled:

It occurred to me then that the Israelis were doing a good job at training their military people, and they were doing a relatively good job at training their diplomatic corps. But they weren’t spending any time training information officers, people who could present Israel’s case to embassies and TV anchormen around the world. Over the years, I made this a personal cause celebre.”

The 1984 Jerusalem conference offered Spielgovel and a welter of Western advertising and public relations executives, media specialists, editors, journalists, and leaders of major Zionist advocacy groups an opportunity to achieve that malign objective. Together, they hammered out a dedicated strategy for ensuring the “crisis” caused by news reporting on the invasion of Lebanon two years earlier would never be repeated. Their antidote? Ceaseless, methodical, and wide-ranging “Hasbara” – Hebrew for propaganda – for “changing people’s minds [and] making them think differently.”

‘Big Scoop’

The AJC subsequently published records of the conference. They offer extraordinarily candid insight into how multiple Hasbara strategies, which have been in perpetual operation ever since were birthed. …………………………………………………………

There was extensive discussion of how to present “unpalatable policies” to Western populations…….. ” The necessity of training the Jewish diaspora in countering criticism of Israel was considered paramount.

………………….. media framing on Israel’s actions needed to be determined in advance…………………

 It was also suggested that on an individual and organizational level, Zionist activists serve as a rapid reaction force, deluging news outlets with complaints en masse should their coverage of Israel be at all critical. One attendee boasted of their personal success in this regard:

“One day CBS News Radio reported that an American soldier had been hurt by stepping on an Israeli cluster bomb at the Beirut airport. I called CBS to point out that no one had established the bomb was an Israeli one. One hour later CBS reported that an American soldier had stepped on a bomb; this time the report omitted any reference to Israel.”

‘Frequent Violations’

Another significant recommendation came from Carl Spielgovel: creating a “training program” to bring carefully selected Israeli information specialists into U.S. advertising, PR agencies, and major news outlets. The initiative aimed to equip them with industry insights, ensure Hasbara efforts were maximized, and establish close relationships between Israeli officials and the organizations to which they were assigned.

These “specialists” would operate under the guidance of a U.S.-Israeli council described as “wise persons who can project different scenarios and how to cope with them” on complex issues like “annexation and Jerusalem.”

………………………………………………………………..  Since then, a dedicated Hasbara program aimed at cultivating skilled Zionist advocates in the U.S. has operated continuously.

Buoyed by its success, the operation soon expanded to include school and university students worldwide, training them to act as vigorous advocates for Israel in classrooms and on campuses. Graduates of these Israeli-funded programs frequently enter influential fields, including journalism, where they continue to promote Hasbara narratives and defend Israel’s actions. The impact on Western media coverage of Palestine has been profound.

The rapid reaction force proposed at the 1984 AJC conference remains highly active. An extensive network of Hasbara-trained individuals and Israel lobby organizations is always on standby, ready to pressure and intimidate news outlets if coverage diverges from favorable framing or casts Israel in a critical light. As a senior BBC producer once confided to veteran media critic Greg Philo:

“We wait in fear for the telephone call from the Israelis. The only issue we face then is how high up it’s come from them. Has it come from a monitoring group? Has it come from the Israeli embassy? And how high has it gone up our organization? Has it reached the editor or director general? I have had journalists on the phone to me before a major news report, asking which words can I use – ‘is it alright I say this’?”

An October exposé by Al Jazeera, citing testimony from BBC and CNN whistleblowers, detailed “pro-Israel bias in coverage, systematic double standards, and frequent violations of journalistic principles” at both networks. 

Were it not for the persistent investigations by outlets like MintPress News, The Grayzone, and Electronic Intifada, unfounded allegations promoted by Israel since the outset of the Gaza conflict—such as claims of Hamas committing mass rape or beheading infants—might never have been thoroughly debunked and might still shape the “context” for Israel’s actions against Palestinians. Meanwhile, countless concerned citizens have actively challenged Western narratives on the conflict in real-time across social media, a groundswell of critique that may be fueling pushback within some mainstream newsrooms. ……………………………………. https://www.mintpressnews.com/1984-hasbara-conference-israel-influence-us-media/288534/

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Israel, media | Leave a comment

Small Modular Reactors / Commercial Viability Needs To Be Improved, Says Swiss Thinktank – for a better “Nuclear Ecosystem”

Part three on catalysing investment calls for the creation of “innovative financing mechanisms”, the use of public-private partnerships and for the inclusion of nuclear in [?] clean investment taxonomies, such as environmental, social and governance classifications.

developed by “stakeholders from across the nuclear ecosystem”.

World Economic Forum says ‘innovative financing mechanisms’ needed for deployment

NucNet, By David Dalton, 11 November 2024

The commercial viability of small modular reactors (SMRs) needs to be improved with partnerships between the public and private sector needed to help move projects to deployment, according to a report from the World Economic Forum (WEF), in collaboration with nuclear industry experts.

The report, A Collaborative Framework for Accelerating Advanced Nuclear and Small Modular Reactor Deployment, was published by WEF, a Switzerland-based thinktank, with management consultancy Accenture.

WEF said the report provides a framework to support the deployment of SMRs and other types of advanced of nuclear reactor.

The framework, according to WEF, “is a tool that can align stakeholders on key actions and strategies within nine priority areas to accelerate deployment”, and was developed by “stakeholders from across the nuclear ecosystem”.

The report said small modular reactor and microreactor developers highlight their freedom to rely entirely on private capital, thereby shielding taxpayers from financial risk. But it warned: “Public-private partnerships are crucial for developing enabling policies, driving modernisation of regulations and building a supply chain to deliver advanced nuclear and SMRs at scale.”

WEF’s framework has a three-part process for accelerating the deployment of SMRs and advanced reactors.

Part one is the “emergence” of the advanced nuclear and SMR market, part two is the delivery of advanced reactors and SMRs at scale, and part three is the financing of the reactors.

Under part one, WEF called for the modernisation of regulation, the automation of regulatory processes and aligning of regulatory bodies.

Part two, covering the delivery of the reactors at scale, suggests actions including the repurposing of existing infrastructure, colocation of reactors with current energy systems, engagement with communities throughout projects, and the preparation of supply chains.

It also suggests identifying skills gaps and partnerships between industry and educational institutions.

Part three on catalysing investment calls for the creation of “innovative financing mechanisms”, the use of public-private partnerships and for the inclusion of nuclear in clean investment taxonomies, such as environmental, social and governance classifications………………..  https://www.nucnet.org/news/commercial-viability-needs-to-be-improved-says-swiss-thinktank-11-1-2024

November 13, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s election victory deals blow to US clean energy industry.

Developers of solar and battery recycling projects put plans on hold amid concern
about policy and federal funding support.

Donald Trump’s US election victory has dealt a blow to the renewable energy industry, prompting at least half a dozen developers to put projects on hold and investors to dump
shares.

Canadian solar manufacturer Heliene is pausing progress on its
$150mn plan to manufacture solar cells in the US until it gets more policy
clarity from the incoming Trump administration. Battery recycling start-up
Princeton NuEnergy is reconsidering its timeline to build a $300mn factory
in 2028, the companies told the Financial Times. Clean energy fears Trump’s
re-election spells doom for the industry.

The president-elect has vowed to
turbo-charge the country’s oil and gas production and do away with
President Joe Biden’s climate policies on the campaign trail, including
repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, the strongest action the US has
taken to boost renewable energy.

FT 11th Nov 2024 https://www.ft.com/content/8bcb24f3-4deb-4500-8880-cf46a4670463

November 13, 2024 Posted by | renewable | Leave a comment

A massacre within a massacre: How journalists reporting on Gaza deaths are being targeted

Over 160 media workers have been killed and 60 detained as the methodical destruction of the brutalized Strip continues.

Eva Bartlett, 9 Nov 24  https://www.rt.com/news/606860-journalists-killed-reporting-gaza/

In spite of experiencing two Israeli wars on Gaza, I never imagined the horrific scenes coming out of northern Gaza now: Israel is exterminating the population in broad daylight, broadcast for all the world to see.

And no one is doing a damn thing to stop it.

Israel has besieged northern Gaza for weeks, preventing most humanitarian aid from entering, putting the population of 400,000 already starving Palestinian civilians in the north at severe risk of full starvation. The Israeli parliament has voted to ban UNRWA, the United Nations agency for humanitarian aid, which has been the sole lifeline for many Palestinians. 

Israeli forces have also bombarded water stations and wells, as well as cutting off communications with the outside world, depriving people of access to water, and leaving them trapped and isolated.

According to Euro-Med Monitor, in the last two weeks, 500 Palestinians have been confirmed dead in northern Gaza, “and thousands more have sustained injuries. Many remain unaccounted for, either in the streets or buried under the debris.”

As they have done elsewhere throughout the Gaza Strip during more than one year of genocide, Israeli forces are targeting hospitals in Gaza’s north. Euro-Med reported that, “Israeli army forces surrounded the Indonesian Hospital in the northern Gaza Strip town of Beit Lahia. They fired two artillery shells at the hospital, cut off its electricity, and targeted anyone moving in the area.”

The army is firing on medics and other rescuers, as they’ve done throughout 2023-2024, and as they did in 2009, when medics I was with came under Israeli sniper fire, and another medic I knew was killed by a flechette (dart) bomb. By killing the rescuers and destroying the hospitals, Israel ensures maimed Palestinians will go without medical care and probably die.

This is, of course, illegal under international law. But as Israel’s genocidal actions have shown the world, the Israeli government, army and settlers believe laws don’t apply to them. Take the horrific video of an Israeli drone precision-targeting a Palestinian child, killing it, and then bombing the civilians who ran to try to rescue the child. Par for the course for the Israeli army. Were the perpetrator one of the United States’ enemies, there would be calls for no-fly zones, sanctions and corporate media howling 24/7

Not content to merely murder Palestinian civilians by bombing, sniping and starvation, the Israeli army has reportedly been deploying robots with explosives and leaving booby trapped barrels to remotely detonate.

The scenes which journalists have been able to publish are surreal, like science fiction, with quadcopters policing the streets. A week ago, a friend told me in a message that he had to choose between starving or risking being shot dead by Israel soldiers or quadcopters if he tried to get bread. 

Some days ago, he messaged me at 4 in the morning: Israeli tanks were outside his home, the audio he sent was terrifying. He chose to stay in his home rather than endure another Nakba.

I don’t know if he is alive now.

War on journalists

Earlier this month, Palestinian cameraman Fadi al-Wahidi was shot in the neck by an Israeli quadcopter, leaving him paralyzed. Aside from Al Jazeera, for which Fadi worked, most Western media and journalist projection organizations are unsurprisingly silent.

Reporters Without Borders, which I previously wrote about for its downplaying the number of Palestinian journalists killed by Israel, has no entry on Fadi. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CJP), at least, does. Its entry notes:

“Al Wahidi was critically injured in the neck by a bullet fired from an Israeli reconnaissance aircraft while Al Wahidi and correspondent Anas Al-Sharif were covering an Israeli siege on northern Gaza’s Jabalia refugee camp. Both men were wearing “Press” vests and clearly identifiable as journalists.”

Anas al-Sharif – who continues to courageously report from northern Gaza – told CJP they’d been in an area “completely far from the areas of operations of the Israeli occupation forces,” and full of residents when, “an Israeli reconnaissance drone fired at us. After the shooting, we tried to move to another safer place and hide from any danger, but a bullet from the plane hit our colleague Fadi Al-Wahidi in the neck, which led to his complete paralysis.”


Wahidi has since fallen into a coma. His colleagues and friends are pleading for some sort of international intervention to allow him to be taken abroad for medical care, to save his life. 

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported, citing the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS), that between 7 October 2023 and 10 October 2024 168 Palestinian journalists and media workers have been killed in the Gaza Strip, including 17 women, 360 were injured, and 60 were detained.

The extermination campaign continues

It’s absolutely devastating to watch every day pass with alarming new updates from or on northern Gaza. Like Anas al-Sharif, Palestinian journalist Hossam Shabat courageously reports apocalyptic scenes of Israeli bombarding in northern Gaza.

In a live update on X recently, he said: 

“We are witnessing genocide and ethnic cleansing in northern Gaza, specifically in Jabalia, which is under siege from all directions. Israeli occupation forces are bombing displaced civilians, detaining them, and attempting to ethnically cleanse them. They are targeting shelters for displaced civilians, and bodies are scattered everywhere in the north, along the roads. Thousands of civilians are being forcefully displaced (ethnically cleansed) from the north.”

Meanwhile, in a bout of meaningless theatrics, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin have “demanded Tel Aviv improves the humanitarian situation in Gaza within 30 days or risk losing US military aid and face possible legal action.”  

But clearly Israel’s biggest backer is spouting nonsense: there will be no cut to military aid, there will be no legal action, the US will never take a position to force Israel to cease the massacre in Gaza. In fact, giving Israel one month before any supposed repercussion is, in my opinion, giving Israel a green light to ethnically cleanse northern Gaza as quickly as possible.

Israel seems hell-bent on implementing former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s ‘Five Fingers’ project, which envisioned carving Gaza into segments, all under Israeli security control. If this is Israel’s intent, we will see the same bloody scenes from northern Gaza repeated block by block Israel all over the rest of the already brutalized Strip.

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Atrocities, media | Leave a comment

Witnesses describe alleged Ukrainian war crimes in Donbass city

 https://www.rt.com/russia/607474-ugledar-war-crimes-report/ 11 Nov 24

Ukrainian troops were given carte blanche to harass and commit crimes against the Russian-speaking population in the southern Donbass city of Ugledar, a Moscow-backed investigative mission has alleged.

Human rights defender Maksim Grigoriev, who chairs an international body investigating suspected crimes of the Ukrainian government, previewed on Monday a new report which focuses on the events in Ugledar. Russian troops liberated the town in early October, allowing civilian access to its remaining residents.

Witnesses said they had faced mistreatment since the armed coup in Kiev in 2014. One woman explained how she could not receive justice for her son, who was killed in a fight with a Ukrainian volunteer battalion member in 2016.

The woman said her son had been a large, strong man who had been stabbed to death after trying to defend local girls from a group of drunken troops from the Aidar unit. The criminal case was clear-cut and resulted in a conviction, but the sentence allowed the killer to be released on parole, Grigoriev said. The perpetrator reportedly did not see the inside of a prison cell.

The case exemplified the bias against the Russian-speaking population which was facilitated by the government in Kiev, the investigator said. It also helps explain the scale of criminality which Ugledar residents have endured in recent years amid open hostility between Russia and Ukraine, he added.

Among other things, the Ukrainian military had a strategy of forcing people out of the city by shelling it and claiming that the attacks were coming from the Russian side, Grigoriev said. Some residents said they personally saw such attacks.

“The [town’s] mayor reported in 2022 that there was nobody here, even though there were some 3,000 people left,” one witness said. “They [Ukrainian troops] were riding outside of Ugledar… and firing at it with mortars to incite panic and make people leave as fast as possible.”

Another man said he witnessed a foreign reporter on a guided tour. It came during a lull, so a Ukrainian soldier accompanying the woman gave an order on his radio: “It’s too quiet, make some noise.” Firing started immediately, scaring the journalist and causing her to run for her life, the man recalled.

Ugledar was subjected to “total looting” by the Ukrainians, Grigoriev claimed. Some homes were stripped down, with faucets, electric sockets and even wall tiling taken by marauders, according to witnesses.

Stolen goods were allegedly moved to other places and sold, sometimes marketed as “goods from Donbass” – a euphemism to designate their criminal origin.

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Cop29 could change the financial climate for the world’s wealthy polluters

Jillian Ambrose, Energy correspondent. Guardian 10th Nov 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/10/cop29-summit-financial-agenda-wealthy-polluters

This week’s summit will focus on paying for the costs of global heating – and much more money is needed.

About 50,000 government officials, policymakers, investors and campaigners will gather in Azerbaijan this week in the hope of answering a trillion-dollar question: how much money should go each year to helping developing countries cope with climate-related costs?

The aim of the UN’s Cop29 climate talks in Baku, which is being called the “climate finance Cop”, is to establish a new annual climate financing target to replace the current $100bn pledge, set in 2009, which expires at the end of this year. There is one clear consensus already: the existing climate finance available to developing countries is nowhere near enough to withstand worsening climate impacts. The ambition is too low, and in 15 years the annual target has been met in full only once, in 2022.

Campaigners have called for the governments of wealthier countries to contribute to a new collective quantified goal (NCQG) on climate finance. Forecasts of how much this will be vary but are typically $500bn to $1tn a year, or less than 1% of global GDP. Some estimates are as high as $5tn.

“Setting a more ambitious goal will be essential to helping vulnerable countries adopt clean energy and other low-carbon solutions and build resilience to worsening climate impacts,” said the World Resources Institute.

But who should pay? To date, the financial contributions that enable developing countries to pursue low-carbon growth and greater climate resilience have come from countries defined by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as “high income”. The list includes the UK, US, Japan and Germany. But in the 30 years since it was created, countries including China, India and South Korea have dramatically increased their economic might – and their carbon emissions.

It is likely that the talks will include calls to expand the list of countries contributing to climate financing. But even then the sums involved are too large for government spending ­budgets alone, according to delegates from many wealthy nations.

Instead, the talks aim to reform global climate lending to encourage more private capital to play a part. In an open letter last month, Stephanie Pfeifer, the head of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, said many global investors were beginning to explore ways to unlock and mobilise capital.

“An ambitious finance goal that includes private capital can encourage greater ambition in developing countries’ targets [for helping to limit global warming] by building confidence in accessible funding for both mitigation and adaptation, with the latter being historically underfunded,” she said.

This approach is not without its critics. Climate and humanitarian NGOs have warned that loans, even on favourable term, place the financial burden of the climate crisis on already indebted developing nations, which bear the lowest responsibility for the climate crisis but face the greatest risks. These groups have called for polluting companies to pay their fair share.

“Climate finance is not about charity or generosity but responsibility and justice,” according to Debbie Hillier, a policy lead at the humanitarian NGO Mercy Corps. “It is based firmly on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities – those who contributed most to the climate crisis must bear the brunt of the solution.”

To this end, a new Climate Finance Action Fund (CFAF) will be under consideration. It aims to draw on voluntary contributions from fossil-fuel-producing countries and companies to support developing nations’ climate projects.

For polluters who would rather not pay, campaigners are calling for climate taxes. Billionaires and fossil fuel giants are in the crosshairs of environmental NGO 350.org, which plans to hold them accountable for their outsize impact on the planet in a new campaign. The group argues that funds generated through taxing the ultra-rich could be used both for domestic policies and programmes to lower carbon emissions, and for international climate finance to ensure “those most responsible for the climate crisis contribute to its solution”.

This approach is likely to prove popular with the public. Oxfam is scheduled to publish a report suggesting that the majority of the British public support higher taxes on private jets and superyachts to help tackle the climate crisis.

The survey, by YouGov, is also expected to show strong public support for increasing taxes on the wealthiest UK individuals to fund action, and hiking taxes on businesses in sectors that produce the most emissions.

The key to whatever form climate finance takes will be accountability – a meaningful climate finance target will mean nothing if the annual goal is never reached.

November 13, 2024 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment