nuclear costs « nuclear-news

Nuclear weapons in Europe – hindering global security?

Europe’s Nuclear Deterrent Debated Voice of America 8 Feb 2010 Jennifer Glasse | London Germany’s new coalition government is calling for U.S. nuclear missiles to be removed from Europe. A London research organization says Germany’s announcement has reopened the global debate about whether nuclear weapons help or hinder global security……

The U.S. administration will make its nuclear policy clear with a paper known as the Nuclear Posture Review expected to be reported to the U.S. Congress this month. In the meantime, the German government has called for the removal of U.S. tactical weapons on its soil and from Europe altogether.

Europe’s Nuclear Deterrent Debated | Europe | English

February 9, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Germany, weapons and war | antinuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

AREVA’s nuclear reactor safety features now too costly to compete with Korea’s nukes

It was speculated that those expensive features may have cost the company the UAE contract, and Areva has considered scaling back some of those additions for future designs.

Where Is Nuclear Power Really Heading?A Look at Obama’s Call for New Nuclear and the Reactors that Might Be Built by solveclimate Dave Levitan – Feb 5th, 2010

“…….The cost issues surrounding safety have already come up internationally. The United Arab Emirates awarded a high-profile contract for a new plant to a South Korean company late in 2009, after the French company Areva had been positioned as the front-runner.

The Areva EPR reactor has some advanced safety features including a “core catcher” room that could help prevent compromised nuclear fuel from escaping the reactor, as well as an enforced shell that could theoretically withstand an airplane impact. Continue reading →

February 6, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, France | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, reactor, reactors | Leave a comment

Medical Use of Ionizing Radiation Needs Better Regulation

Medical Group Urges New Rules on Radiation

The New York Times By WALT BOGDANICH

February 4, 2010

The leading professional organization dedicated to radiation oncology has called for enhanced safety measures in administering medical radiation, Continue reading →

February 6, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | health, USA | antinuclear, cancer, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive | Leave a comment

U.S. Energy Department carefully helping private uranium producers

the additional government supplies in the market could have depressed prices, making it difficult for producers to expand operations……….

Energy Dept cancels surplus uranium transfers

By Tom Doggett

WASHINGTON, Feb 4 (Reuters) – The U.S. Energy Department has canceled plans to put into the market during 2011 extra government-owned surplus uranium supplies, Energy Secretary Steven Chu told Congress on Thursday, Continue reading →

February 6, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear wastes, uranium | Leave a comment

Future for U.S. Nuclear power industry really is doubtful

Problematically, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has a policy that does not require newer designs to be substantially safer than old designs,

Where Is Nuclear Power Really Heading?A Look at Obama’s Call for New Nuclear and the Reactors that Might Be Built by solveclimate Dave Levitan – Feb 5th, 2010 “…..Energy Secretary Steven Chu and the president are making it clear that they intend to move forward. Thus, the question arises: After more than a decade without any new nuclear plants being built in the U.S., what exactly would new nuclear power look like?

Slowed Momentum, Escalating Costs…. Continue reading →

February 6, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, reactor, reactors | Leave a comment

Cameco, Exelon, USEC, – Nuclear and Uranium Stocks are Losers

Top Nuclear Stocks Losers (NYSE: CCJ,EXC,USU) Trak In, Business and Finance News by EIN, 2010/02/05 Dallas, Tx – Cameco Corporation (USA) (NYSE:CCJ) went down 2.94% to $27.37 on 2.29 million shares. The stock hit an intraday high and an intraday low of $28.30 and $27.34 respectively. In the last six months the stock went down over 6%. Cameco Corporation is a Canada-based company. The Company, along with its subsidiaries, is engaged in the exploration, development, mining, refining, conversion and fabrication of uranium for sale as fuel for generating electricity in nuclear power reactors in Canada and other countries. Continue reading →

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, reactor, reactors, uranium | Leave a comment

Stephen Chu’s religious faith that a nuclear waste solution will be found

(Despite 60 years of fruitless search ) “Chu, testifying to the panel members on the budget proposal, maintained that “we’re going to have a solution to nuclear, the backend fuel issue…”

GOP: Chu Sending Mixed Signals on NuclearEnergy and Environment National Journal Amy Harder
February 4, 2010

Republican senators today accused Energy Secretary Steven Chu of sending mixed signals to the nuclear industry. Continue reading →

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive | Leave a comment

Activists get deep inside U.S. Nuclear Weapons Site in Europe

U.S. Nuclear Weapons Site in Europe Breached By Hans M. Kristensen FAS Stategic Security 4 Feb 2010

A group of people last week managed to penetrate deep onto Kleine Brogel Air Base in Belgium where the U.S. Air Force currently deploys 10-20 nuclear bombs. Continue reading →

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | EUROPE, safety | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | 1 Comment

Tax-payers giving a blank check to the U.S. nuclear industry?

“With hundreds of billions in bailouts already on the shoulders of US taxpayers, the country cannot afford to move forward with a program that could easily become the black hole for hundreds of billions more,” …The Senate energy bill approved by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee last June would create a Clean Energy Deployment Administration (CEDA) within the DOE that could distribute a virtually unlimited number of loan guarantees without any congressional oversight.

Obama’s Nuclear Giveaway, Buried in the budget is a plan to underwrite the nuclear industry’s revival.

Mother Jones 4 Feb 2010 By Kate Sheppard

“… the Obama administration’s 2011 budget proposes tripling the loan guarantee program—from the $18.5 billion that Congress has already approved to $54.5 billion. The program’s expansion is just one of several signs that the Obama administration is throwing its muscle behind the nuclear industry’s push for a massive expansion. Continue reading →

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin | Leave a comment

$Billions for Nuclear Power Sneaked into the U.S Climate Bill

Nuclear’s Slice of the Climate Pie— Mother Jones, Feb. 3, 2010 By Kate Sheppard

Senators hoping to pass a climate and energy bill this year have listed increased support for nuclear power as one of the major enticements for Republicans and apprehensive Democrats to back the legislation. Continue reading →

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, USA | antinuclear, climate change, energy efficiency, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin | Leave a comment

Unnecessary nuclear and uranium projects get $billions in U.S. budget

POGO is Shocked by Wasteful Spending in DOE Budget

Project on Government Oversight, Ingrid Drake, 4 Feb 2010 In the midst of initiating a federal spending freeze, it is shocking that President Obama’s FY 2011 Budget Request released this week pours billions of dollars into two unnecessary nuclear weapons construction projects. There is no demonstrated requirement for either the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) at the Y-12 National Security Complex nor the Chemical and Metallurgical Research Replacement Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).

“Contrary to the spin, neither of these facilities are needed to ensure the safety, security and effectiveness of our weapons,” says Peter Stockton, POGO Senior Investigator.

In addition, DOE does not even have an estimated cost for completing the projects, as the budget describes their total costs as “TBD.” “To Be a Disaster,” is what POGO fears that term means, based on DOE’s atrocious record of soaring construction costs and overruns. For example, the cost of the Highly Enriched Uranium Manufacturing Facility (HEUMF) at Y-12 ballooned from $97 million to $549 million. The National Ignition Facility (NIF) project also experienced dramatically increased costs and delayed completion dates. The Department of Energy sold the NIF to Congress in the early 1990s with a reported cost estimate of $700 million and an original completion date of 2002, yet its most recent cost estimate is $5-6 billion with a completion date of 2010 — more than 600 percent over budget and at least 8 years behind schedule.

Despite the 10 percent spending increase on the nation’s nuclear weapons budget, one of the only areas to see reduced growth is the budget for weapons dismantlement, which was sliced almost in half….http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2010/02/pogo-is-shocked-by-wasteful-spending-in-doe-budget.html

February 5, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear wastes, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment

Westinghouse nuclear plans delayed in Florida and in India

Westinghouse says Florida nuclear units to be delayed US nuclear regulator action delays Florida units By C.J. Kuncheria, NEW DELHI, Feb 3 (Reuters) – Nuclear energy firm Westinghouse Electric, owned by Japan’s Toshiba Corp (6502.T), said regulatory issues would delay the starting of two reactors it is building in Florida by 1-½ to 3 years. Continue reading →

February 4, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, reactor, reactors, reprocessing, Westinghouse | Leave a comment

Young Obama supporters tell Obama – Nuclear is Wrong Way

Dear Mr. President – Nuclear Power Will Set Back Race Against Global Warming « It’s Getting Hot In Here 2 Feb 2010 Dear President Obama,According to a report released by Environment America in November, the long process to build nuclear plants along with the carbon intensity of production will set us back in the fight against global warming. The next 5-10 years are CRITICAL for the future of my generation and the planet that your daughters will inherit. Continue reading →

February 3, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons, radioactive | Leave a comment

Nuclear renaissance not likely, despite Obama’s support

This unending stream of technical, financial and political downfalls could doom the “reactor renaissance” to history’s radioactive dump heap. “

Harvey Wasserman: Obama’s New Nuclear War THE HUFFINGTON POST 2 Feb 2010 Amidst utter chaos in the atomic reactor industry, Team Obama is poised to vastly expand a bitterly contested loan guarantee program that may cost far more than expected, both financially and politically.The long-stalled, much-hyped “Renaissance” in atomic power has failed to find private financing. New construction projects are opposed for financial reasons by fiscal conservatives such as the Heritage Foundation and National Taxpayers Union, and by a national grassroots safe energy campaign that has already beaten such loan guarantees three times. Continue reading →

February 3, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin | Leave a comment

An idealistic U.S. President Influenced by Nuclear Warriors

I must admit that I have been worried since he appointed Steven Chu from Los Alamos Labs as his Secretary of Energy and John Holdren as science advisor because they are both enthusiastic endorsers of nuclear power

Helen Caldicott: How Did an Idealistic President Become a Champion of Nuclear Power and By Default, Weapons Proliferation? THE HUFFINGTON POST 2 Feb 2010 In 1983, Barack Obama, a senior at Columbia University described his visions of a “nuclear free world” in an article titled “Breaking the War Mentality” in the university newsmagazine, Sundial. He described discussions of “first- versus second-strike capabilities” that “suit the military-industrial interests” with their “billion-dollar erector sets,” and called for the abolition of the global arsenals of tens of thousands of deadly warheads.As a candidate he acknowledged that he was worried for the safety of his children who lived in Illinois because it has the highest concentration of nuclear reactors in the US – and opposed further nuclear subsidies. “I am not a nuclear proponent,” he said. Continue reading →

February 3, 2010 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear secrecy, nuclear spin, nuclear weapons | Leave a comment