nuclear costs « nuclear-news

Nuclear foolishness: Bill Gates and his sci-fi reactors

these outlandish designs are extremely unlikely to be produced commercially and offer only another nuclear distraction from the far more urgent problem presented by climate change.

More sci-fi reactors Nuclear Reaction – 26 March 2010, It certainly seems a week for crazy nuclear inventions. Yesterday we had Bill Gates and his sci-fi reactor……The realities of the baseload myth and decentralized energy production seem to have finally occurred to nuclear boffins and they’re trying to catch up with the rest of us.

Unfortunately, just because you make a nuclear reactor smaller it doesn’t mean they don’t have the same problems as their larger cousins. Sometimes the problems are even worse. Continue reading →

March 26, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, nuclear technology, nuclear wastes, nuclear weapons, renewable energy | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear plants viable only with advance levy on customers

Budget 2010: Consumers face levy on energy bills to pay for nuclear plants The Guardian UK 25 March 2010 The government has officially confirmed plans for a new carbon levy on consumer bills which it hopes will make building new nuclear plants viable, as the Guardian revealed in October last year. Continue reading →

March 26, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, UK | antinuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, reactors | Leave a comment

Tons of nuclear waste – $billions of cost to taxpayers

Nuclear Waste Piles Up, and It’s Costing Taxpayers Billions, 24 March 2010by: Mark Clayton | The Christian Science Monitor The Bush administration agreed to store nuclear waste from 21 new reactors. But the federal government still can’t meet its commitment to find permanent storage. Continue reading →

March 26, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radiation, uranium | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear arsenal completely dependent on USA

War With The Ghosts Permaculture Research Institute of Australia, George Monbiot, 26 March 2010, What are our nuclear weapons for, and who controls them?, “…….. Sharing our [UK’s] nuclear deterrence with France is out of the question. Last week the government slapped down a French offer to reduce the costs of our submarine patrols, by taking turns to prowl the same seas rather than duplicating the effort and occasionally crashing into each other. Continue reading →

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, weapons and war | cancer, France, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

Now U.S. taxpayer funds not only nuclear loans, but even the loans application!

Energy Department investing $45M for technology for southern Ohio uranium enrichment project, The Washinton Examiner, Associated Press03/24/10 EDTPIKETON, OHIO — The Department of Energy will invest $45 million in ongoing development and demonstration of centrifuge technology for a uranium-enrichment plant in southern Ohio.The department said Tuesday that it will provide the funding by taking title to depleted uranium from USEC Inc. The Bethesda, Md.-based company can then use the $45 million it set aside for uranium disposal. USEC also will provide $45 million in matching funds.

USEC says the demonstration and development work is needed to show progress to gain a $2 billion federal loan guarantee. The company says the guarantee is crucial to obtaining private financing to complete its American Centrifuge project in Piketon.The Energy Department last year delayed its final review of USEC’s loan guarantee application.Piketon is about 65 miles south of Columbus.

Energy Department investing $45M for technology for southern Ohio uranium enrichment project | Washington Examiner

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, reactors, uranium | Leave a comment

U.S. taxpayer funding not only nuclear loans, but also uranium enrichment

U.S. funding new uranium enrichment effort BETHESDA, Md., March 24 (UPI) –– The U.S. Department of Energy reached a cost-sharing agreement with uranium giant USEC Inc. to fund the development of uranium enrichment technology. U.S. enrichment company and the Department of Energy agreed on a joint $90 million cost sharing agreement to fund advanced centrifuge research at USEC’s American Centrifuge enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio…..The Department of Energy under the agreement takes care of the disposal of depleted uranium.

U.S. funding new uranium enrichment effort – UPI.com

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | antinuclear, depleted, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear wastes, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

Who guards the nuclear weapons lab guardians?

…the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) analysis which concluded that DOE needs more independent federal oversight, not less.

Mar 24, 2010The Problem with Providing Nuclear Weapons Labs with Relief from Federal Oversight, The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) Blog, Peter Stockton and Ingrid Drake, 25 March 2010, George Lobsenz’s article in yesterday’s issue of The Energy Daily correctly pointed out that the Department of Energy’s decision to provide the contractors who run the nuclear weapons labs with major relief from federal oversight was done “Without any prior public review or comment.” Continue reading →

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | safety, USA | cancer, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

Danger in providing nuclear technology to Pakistan

One cannot hand over nuclear power to a country so unpredictable.

Why Pakistan should not get a nuclear deal : Livemint.com Pradip Kumar Saha , March 24, 2010 “….Reports say the two countries [USA and Pakistan] could discuss a civil nuclear deal—nuclear power could help ease Pakistan’s energy woes at least. This has got India worried.There are several reasons why there should be no nuclear deal with Pakistan. Continue reading →

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Pakistan, politics international | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

Uranium Waste Solutions share price plummets

First Uranium ops lose value miningmx, Dewald van Rensburg | Wed, 24 Mar 2010 “….. The value of First Uranium’s subsidiary, Mine Waste Solutions (MWS), which is intended to reclaim gold and uranium from 14 mine dumps, has halved since March 2008, to about $211m. The value of the second operating division, the Ezulwini mine, has also halved since January 2009, to $437m.

First Uranium ops lose value

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, business and costs | nuclear costs, uranium | Leave a comment

Some U.S. States with nuclear wastes want Yucca dump

House members: Block Energy Dept. from abandoning Yucca nuke waste plan, The Hill, By Ben Geman – 03/24/2010 A bipartisan group of House members whose states contain nuclear waste left over from Cold War weapons production hope to block the Energy Department from walking away from the proposed Yucca Mountain waste dump in Nevada. Continue reading →

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | USA, wastes | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, nuclear weapons, plutonium, radiation, radioactive | Leave a comment

Anti-radiation emergency exercises in Russia

Russia holds its first anti-radiation exercises Voice of Russia 24 March 2010,

Russia has launched its first radiation emergency exercises in the Far East. The two-day exercises will involve experts and rescue workers from the Emergency Situations Ministry, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Security Service and the Federal Migration Service of Russia. The aim of the exercises is to assess the country’s ability to protect its people in case of a radiation threat.

Russia holds its first anti-radiation exercises: Voice of Russia

March 25, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Russia, safety | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, radiation, radioactive | Leave a comment

Desperate efforts to resuscitate the nuclear industry: why should taxpayers pay for this?

taxpayers shouldn’t have to offer billions in guarantees!

Nuclear Corporate Welfare, John Stossel, 23 March 2010, Today Energy Secretary Steven Chu took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to sell his plans for more nuclear power:America is on the cusp of reviving its nuclear power industry.

Last month President Obama pledged more than $8 billion in conditional loan guarantees Continue reading →

March 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | general | antinuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, uranium | Leave a comment

Iraq’s babies pay the price of depleted uranium weapons

GENOCIDE BY DEPLETED URANIUM IN IRAQ Bruce Gagnon Monday, March 22, 2010 By Jalal Ghazi

Forget about oil, occupation, terrorism or even Al Qaeda. The real hazard for Iraqis these days is cancer. Cancer is spreading like wildfire in Iraq. Thousands of infants are being born with deformities. Doctors say they are struggling to cope with the rise of cancer and birth defects, especially in cities subjected to heavy American and British bombardment. Continue reading →

March 24, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | health, Iraq | antinuclear, cancer, depleted, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons, radiation, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

UK’s Conservative Party’s confused nuclear energy policy

Both Labour and the Tories claim that they will not provide any public subsidy, but both know that this cannot be true when the nuclear industry that has never been able to survive without it.

(UK) THE TORIES ARE FICKLE AND NUCLEAR IS TOO BIG TO FAIL SAYS SIMON HUGHES, Steve Beasant, Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Marsh Ward, 23 March 2010, Launching the Tories’ energy policy in July 2006, David Cameron, gave a convincing and well-reasoned argument explaining why nuclear power must be a “last resort”. Later that year he described Labour’s enthusiasm for nuclear power as “irresponsible”. As Cameron rightly pointed out: “The problems of nuclear waste haven’t been dealt with. They have got to be dealt with in order to make any new investment possible.” Four years on, we’re no closer to finding out how to deal with highly toxic nuclear waste and the Tory leader’s point stands as strong as ever. But unfortunately, the Tories no longer seem to care. Continue reading →

March 23, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

Nuclear energy unsafe for Asia: renewables are the way to go

Asia’s nuclear dilemma, Global Post, by Jonathon Adams, 21 March 2010 Nuclear not the answer: activists, “….Philip White, of the Tokyo-based Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, disputed those [nuclear power]figures. “Renewable energies like wind and solar are not too expensive,” wrote White in an email. “Wind is cheaper than nuclear now. Solar will soon be cheaper when economies of scale and the associated development advances get operating.” Continue reading →

March 22, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, safety | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive, wastes | Leave a comment