This week in nuclear news
A vertical garden at Medellin’s City Hall.
Ralph Nader: Stop the Worsening Undercount of Palestinian Casualties in Gaza.
The horrors of nuclear weapons testing.
March 11 – reflecting on Fukushima.
********************************************
Climate. Climate change is warping the seasons. The world is not moving fast enough on climate change — social sciences can help explain why.Europe unprepared for rapidly growing climate risks, report finds.
Noel’s notes. The need for clear thinking on the Holocaust in Gaza. Oh for a bit of sanity and genuine leadership! Normalising the unthinkable – the 16th Annual Nuclear (so-called) Deterrence Summit.
AUSTRALIA.
- The Campaign to Free Assange: Reflections on ‘Night Falls’.
- Prime Minister of Australia, and Henchmen, Referred to International Criminal Court for Support of Gaza Genocide. Shock as Australian Prime Minister learns that he is not above international law.
- AUKUS: Are nuclear-powered submarines a good idea for Australia?
- Australia has had many significant inquiries into nuclear power, over the past 60 years.
- The Coalition wants nuclear power. Could it work – or would it be an economic and logistical disaster? Peter Dutton’s climate denial is morphing into a madcap nuclear fantasy. The ban should stay. Nuclear power: Peter Dutton changes gear in favour of big reactors not small modular ones. Peter Dutton’s nuclear implosion after Dunkley byelection loss. Tell him he’s dreaming’: Bowen rubbishes Coalition claim Australia could have nuclear power in a decade. Peter Dutton won’t back down on the Coalition’s desire to take its nuclear energy policy to the next election. Nuclear slow and expensive, renewables fast and cheap: Bowen slaps down Coalition “fantasy”. Dutton’s nuclear option would condemn us to pricey power and blackouts. Market has ‘made its decision’ about nuclear energy being too expensive. Coalition must come clean on how its nuclear vision would work.
- Coalition’s plan to go nuclear puts five regions on the table as favoured locations for nuclear reactors. MP says coalition ‘must’ explain plan for nuclear power near Anglesea on the Victorian Surf Coast. Top scientist explains nuclear process and risks: Sunshine Coast previously considered for facility. Talk of nuclear power plant sites ‘conjecture’, says Liberal MP amid internal division on Dutton’s policy. Western Australia’s Premier Cook goes nuclear on Dutton’s ‘simplistic, ridiculous’ power plan.
- Senior Western Australia Liberal calls for Australia to become nuclear weapons power.
- Australia nuclear facility installs massive rooftop solar system to save $2 million.
- Events. Peace! – No AUKUS, No War! Australia wide events and protest actions for Peace, end AUKUS, cancel nuclear submarines and mobilise against war 14 – 24 March
NUCLEAR ISSUES
| EMPLOYMENT. Fukushima fishers strive to recover catches amid water concerns. | ENVIRONMENT. Hinkley Point Responds to Environmental Concerns Over Bristol Channel Eel Populations. | ETHICS and RELIGION. Aiding Those We Kill: US Humanitarianism in Gaza. The West has set itself on a path of collective suicide — both moral and economic’ Oceans. Could Fukushima’s radioactive water pose lasting threat to humans and the environment? |
| HISTORY. The lesson from the criminal H Bomb Bravo “test”– Hibakusha remind us. Oppenheimer feared nuclear annihilation – and only a chance pause by a Soviet submariner kept it from happening in 1962 | MEDIA. New York Times: Nuclear Risks Have Not Gone Away.US Media and Factcheckers Fail to Note Israel’s Refutation of ‘Beheaded Babies’ Stories. ‘Mr Dutton is right’: Murdoch’s News Corp papers grant nuclear power glowing coverage. NewsGuard AI Censorship Targets People Who Read Primary Sources To Fact-Check The News. – (a pro-Trumpist article?- but probably true) | OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . ‘It’ll be a shortlist of one!’ Villagers in England fear nuclear dump proposal. An Open Letter from Hollywood On Oppenheimer and Nuclear Weapons. Kenya. Senator Omtatah to take the Uyombo nuclear power plant war international. |
| POLITICS Australia’s Opposition party’s nuclear red herring is a betrayal of the Australian people . – also at https://antinuclear.net/2024/03/11/1-a-coalitions-nuclear-red-herring-is-a-betrayal-of-the-australian-people/ . Scottish National Party ministers to set out plans for removing nuclear weapons after independence. UK Labour versus Green. UK Budget: Government confirms £160m deal to acquire Hitachi nuclear sites. U.S. Congress about to fund revival of nuclear waste recycling to be led by private start-ups. | SAFETY. Greenpeace warns on danger of restarting Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant . Improvement notice served over storage of hazardous materials at Dounreay. ‘Sometimes I can’t sleep at night’: Adi Roche warns of nuclear risks of Ukraine conflict as she picks up peace award. Aberdeen shipping logistics company warned over nuclear transport safety failings.. | SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. China outlines position on use of space resources. Russia says it is considering putting a nuclear power plant on the moon with China. Russia and China announce plan to build shared nuclear reactor on the moon by 2035, ‘without humans’. |
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES.
- The West’s over-involvement in Ukraine.
- F-35A aeroplanes officially certified to carry thermonuclear bomb. NATO bringing missiles closer to Russia – member state.
- Plutonium. Plutonium pit ‘panic’ threatens America’s nuclear ambitions. Does the US Need New Plutonium Pits?.
- Biden is building for Israel a super weapon to replace the Iron Dome.
- Coalition Kill Chain for the Pacific: Lessons from Ukraine. U.S. Sells ‘Link 16’ Battlefield Communications System to Taiwan – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfF4In5Q99Q
WOMEN. Our International Women’s Day Heroine: Rosalie Bertell.
Tell him he’s dreaming’: Bowen rubbishes Coalition claim Australia could have nuclear power in a decade
Energy minister says average build time for a nuclear plant in US is 19 years and giving up on renewables would be a ‘massive economic own goal’
Josh Butler, 10 Mar 24, Guardian
The federal energy minister, Chris Bowen, has dismissed Coalition MP Ted O’Brien’s claim that Australia could develop a nuclear power industry within a decade, stating: “Tell him he’s dreaming.”
The mocking comment on Sunday came as the government continued to pour scorn on the opposition’s speculative alternative plan to renewable energy. O’Brien said the Coalition was in the “advanced stages” of finalising its policy, which is not expected to be unveiled for several weeks.
Bowen also told ABC TV that the government was open to amending its fuel
The federal energy minister, Chris Bowen, has dismissed Coalition MP Ted O’Brien’s claim that Australia could develop a nuclear power industry within a decade, stating: “Tell him he’s dreaming.”
The mocking comment on Sunday came as the government continued to pour scorn on the opposition’s speculative alternative plan to renewable energy. O’Brien said the Coalition was in the “advanced stages” of finalising its policy, which is not expected to be unveiled for several weeks.
Bowen also told ABC TV that the government was open to amending its fuel efficiency standards for motor vehicles while again denying claims from the Coalition and some manufacturers that it would increase car prices.
The Coalition’s push for nuclear energy in Australia has been derided by the government and experts. The opposition leader, Peter Dutton, has not specified where the potential nuclear facilities would be located, nor how much they could contribute to the nation’s energy mix.
Sky News reported on Sunday that a 2020 paper from the NSW chief scientist found a nuclear power industry would require tens of thousands of trained staff and at least two decades to become operational.
Responding to the report, O’Brien – the opposition’s energy spokesman – claimed the Coalition had received different advice.
“The best experts around the world with whom we’ve been engaging are saying Australia could have nuclear up and running within a 10-year period,” O’Brien said.
O’Brien did not reveal which experts the Coalition had talked to. Guardian Australia asked his office for more information.
The shadow minister said nuclear could be part of a “balanced mix” of other power types and he criticised Labor for being “negative”.
Bowen was asked about O’Brien’s claim that nuclear could be developed in Australia within a decade.
“Tell him he’s dreaming,” Bowen said on the ABC’s Insiders program, referencing the Australian comedy movie The Castle. “I don’t know what experts he’s talking to.”
Bowen said the average build time for a nuclear plant in the US – a country he called “the nuclear leader of the world” – was 19 years.
“Ted O’Brien thinks he can do it in Australia in 10 with a standing start, no regulations, banned not only nationally but in the three most populous states,” Bowen said.
The minister rubbished arguments that Australia should scrap its ban on nuclear energy to allow private industry to investigate options, claiming that establishing a nuclear industry would require “eye-watering amounts of government taxpayer subsid[ies].”
“I’ve had no one knock on my door to say ‘I want to build a nuclear power plant in Australia’ but I had plenty of the world’s biggest renewables companies through my door,” Bowen said on Sunday.
“There’s a myth this is happening elsewhere in the world. It’s not. Australia has the best renewable resources in the world. It would be a massive economic own goal to give up utilising those resources and go down this nuclear fantasy.”
Beyond suggesting nuclear plants be built at former coal-powered facilities, the Coalition has not confirmed details of their policy – including costs, timeframes, how local opposition would be overcome and the amount of power to be generated.
Dutton could fill in some of the blanks in his budget reply speech in May. He is under pressure to announce details.
Coalition MPs have been agitating for the opposition leader to outline new policies they can spruik ahead of the federal election, which could be held this year…………. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/10/tell-him-hes-dreaming-bowen-rubbishes-coalition-claim-australia-could-have-nuclear-power-in-a-decade
Coalition’s nuclear red herring is a betrayal of the Australian people.
Coalition’s nuclear red herring is a betrayal of the Australian people
March 9, 2024 | Canberra Times
Tim Buckley, Annemarie Jonson
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8547521/peter-duttons-nuclear-red-herring-is-a-coalition-betrayal-of-australians/
The sudden enthusiasm of the LNP for nuclear energy is another divisive, cynical and damaging ploy to ignite Climate Wars 2.0 and disrupt and delay Australia’s accelerating renewables transition on behalf of the fossil fuel cartel. The LNP’s climate and energy luddites burned a decade when they were in office. We can’t afford more of the same policy lunacy.
Policy confusion, disinformation and chaos around the nuclear furphy is exactly the solution if you are looking to destroy renewable energy investor confidence, deter investment, and set back our accelerating pathway to decarbonisation – the bedrock of our nation’s economic future. Investors need credible and stable policy and regulation.
The Coalition’s nuclear red herring, and its related threat to pull strategic public capital investment from utility-scale renewables, increases sovereign risk, and is a betrayal of the Australian people.
Nothing about nuclear power makes sense in Australia.
As former Chief Scientist Dr Alan Finkel has said, it would be 20 years or more before the first operation of small modular reactor (SMR) technology in Australia. We need to decarbonise our energy system and economy this critical decade to address the concurrent climate, energy and cost-of-living crises.
SMR technology is not commercial. There are no SMRs in operation outside of Russia and China. In November, the only SMR development in the US was terminated.
There are no private companies worldwide who can build and operate nuclear power plants without massive government underwriting, because they can’t get insurance.
Tokyo Electric Power Company went bankrupt overnight due to its Fukushima nuclear disaster, requiring a US$200 billion taxpayer bailout of the cleanup costs, which will still be being funded beyond 2050.
In promoting nuclear, the LNP is essentially calling for a massive multi-decade subsidy fest that would make the LNP’s Snowy 2.0 and NBN white elephants look like value for money by comparison. Where has the LNP’s staunch preference for free markets gone?
The LNP nuclear shills say they will soon announce sites for reactors. It is not clear in what universe they think they can secure social licence from impacted communities. Legal challenges and civic protest are inevitable.
How they propose to manage the financial cost of multi-centuries of waste storage and rehabilitation to mitigate risk remains a mystery. It is worth noting the unfunded £260 billion liability this decade UK taxpayers face for decommissioning its nuclear waste. Does the LNP suggest leaving this massive cost to future generations?
The economics simply don’t stack up. Firmed renewables are the cheapest form of energy. The cost of nuclear power generation is much higher than its low-cost clean energy alternatives.
But don’t take our word for it. The CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator said in May 2023 that nuclear is “not an economically competitive solution in Australia”, and that we lack the “frameworks for its consideration and operation within the timeframe required.”
The 2022 World Nuclear Industry Status Report said that between 2009 and 2021, costs for solar declined from US$359 to US$36 per megawatt hour (MWh), a fall of 90 per cent, and for wind from US$135 to US$38 per MWh, a 72 per cent fall, while nuclear power costs rose from US$123 to US$167 per MWh, up 36 per cent in the same period.
Battery storage costs are falling double digits each year, and Goldman Sachs just forecast another 40 per cent decline by 2025. Massive ongoing deflation is a feature of renewables, nuclear is the opposite; massive ongoing inflation of costs, externalised onto the public (as highlighted by the World Nuclear News).
The Investor Group on Climate Change, representing investors with $30 trillion in assets, said there is no interest among investors in nuclear.
The IGCC notes nuclear has “project time blowouts of anything from seven to 15+ years and cost blowouts in the tens of billions, and lowest-cost technologies, renewables, batteries and so on, are available to deploy now”.
At last, we are seeing a huge influx of capital into Australia’s renewables transition, triggered by the enabling policy architecture of the Albanese federal government such as Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s federal Capacity Investment Scheme announced in late 2023. Our $3.6 trillion super industry has flagged this policy framework as key to crowding in private capital into renewables infrastructure.
Just last month Rio Tinto inked landmark world-scale 25-year power purchasing agreements worth billions that will underwrite the nation’s biggest yet wind and solar developments, powering the processing of its alumina and aluminium in central QLD with green energy.
The Investor Group on Climate Change, representing investors with $30 trillion in assets, said there is no interest among investors in nuclear.
The IGCC notes nuclear has “project time blowouts of anything from seven to 15+ years and cost blowouts in the tens of billions, and lowest-cost technologies, renewables, batteries and so on, are available to deploy now”.
At last, we are seeing a huge influx of capital into Australia’s renewables transition, triggered by the enabling policy architecture of the Albanese federal government such as Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s federal Capacity Investment Scheme announced in late 2023. Our $3.6 trillion super industry has flagged this policy framework as key to crowding in private capital into renewables infrastructure.
Just last month Rio Tinto inked landmark world-scale 25-year power purchasing agreements worth billions that will underwrite the nation’s biggest yet wind and solar developments, powering the processing of its alumina and aluminium in central QLD with green energy.
March 11 – reflecting on Fukushima
by Linda Pentz Gunter https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/03/10/reflecting-on-fukushima/
The lesson learned should be an end to nuclear power. Japan is going in the opposite direction
On March 11 this year, and every year since 2011, we reflect on what happened on that day at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan — and the impacts that continue. The never-ending tragedy.
The news cycle was 24/7 on the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011. Gradually, the media lost interest. Fresh catastrophes — also human-caused — came to dominate the headlines.
The stories of ongoing harm, of physical and psychic pain, disease and death, displacement, family separation, and lawsuits dismissed or lost, are often told through the megaphones of desperate Japanese mothers, determined not to let such a fate befall another generation. They are the new Hibakusha, the Cassandras of Japan, sounding the warning but doomed to be disbelieved or ignored.
Because there will be another major nuclear disaster. And Japan, shockingly, is lining itself up to be a strong candidate. A country that has now experienced the second worst nuclear disaster of all time, and is heavily seismically active, is seeking not only to reopen its old reactors but to explore building new ones, including small modular reactors.
The only lesson from the Fukushima nuclear disaster that successive Japanese governments seem to have learned is how to minimize, cover-up and even dismiss and deny its devastating environmental and health effects.
It has done this by consistently whitewashing the Fukushima aftermath — holding the Summer Olympics (delayed a year only due to covid, not the unacceptable radiation levels); moving people back into still contaminated areas; ascribing the high thyroid cancer rates to increased testing; forbidding schools to teach children about the harms of radiation; and, of course, pouring radioactive water from the site into the Pacific Ocean so the unsightly waste water storage casks — a perpetual reminder of the continued build-up of radioactive water at the site — will vanish from view along with the bad PR.
Japan got another reminder of just what kind of gamble it is taking when a 7.6 magnitude earthquake struck the Noto Peninsula on January 1st of this year, not far from the Shika nuclear power plant. Buildings fell, 100,000 people were evacuated and tsunami warnings were posted. Conflicting stories emerged as to whether the Shika reactors, mercifully shut down at the time, had suffered lasting damage or whether there were radioactive spills. Area residents have demanded an investigation.
Catastrophe was averted because luck prevailed. Next time, it might not.
All of this should serve as a warning and not only to Japan of course. It doesn’t take an earthquake or a tsunami— or even a war as we are seeing in Ukraine whose reactors remain at perpetual risk —to cause a nuclear disaster. The safety margins are so fragile at nuclear power plants, that even something as minor as a falling tree limb could set an accident in motion if both offsite and then onsite power is lost to the reactors.
There was no war or earthquake or tsunami in Ukraine in 1986 when Chernobyl Unit 4 exploded. Nor in Pennsylvania in 1979 when the Three Mile Island Unit 2 reactor melted down. Nor in New Mexico later in 1979 when 90 million gallons of radioactive liquid and eleven hundred tons of solid mill waste burst from the Church Rock uranium mill tailings pond, permanently contaminating the Puerto River.
What was there, on each occasion, were human beings who made catastrophic mistakes with a highly dangerous, obsolete technology that even on a good day, causes harm to human health and on a bad one can leave a deadly, longlasting legacy as we have seen in Fukushima.
All of those human errors were preventable. And they still are — provided we remove the object of fallible human responsibility: inherently dangerous nuclear power plants.
The only worthy legacy of the Fukushima disaster, now 13 years on and still going, is to abandon the use of nuclear technology permanently.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International. All opinions are her own.
Saying “Hamas Just Needs To Surrender” Is Saying “We’ll Kill Kids Until We Get What We Want”
“It’s heartbreaking,” added Biden, referring to the genocide that he himself is actively backing and could choose to end at any time.
CAITLIN JOHNSTONE, MAR 9, 2024
Of the many awful warmonger comments President Biden made in his State of the Union address Thursday night, arguably the worst was when he reiterated the US empire’s position that it is fine and good for the IDF to keep murdering Gazan civilians until Hamas bows to all of Israel’s demands.
Biden did this by lamenting the “heartbreaking” death and starvation of civilians in Gaza while in the same breath stating that Hamas could end all of this violence by laying down arms and surrendering those responsible for the October 7 attack.
“Israel has a right to go after Hamas,” Biden said. “Hamas ended this conflict by releasing the hostages, laying down arms — could end it by — by releasing the hostages, laying down arms, and surrendering those responsible for October 7th.”
“This war has taken a greater toll on innocent civilians than all previous wars in Gaza combined,” Biden went on to say. “More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed, most of whom are not Hamas. Thousands and thousands of innocents — women and children. Girls and boys also orphaned. Nearly 2 million more Palestinians under bombardment or displacement. Homes destroyed, neighborhoods in rubble, cities in ruin. Families without food, water, medicine.”
“It’s heartbreaking,” added Biden, referring to the genocide that he himself is actively backing and could choose to end at any time.
(Democrats love babbling about how “heartbreaking” Gaza is. It’s their favorite thing to do. They love nothing more than to weep publicly over the death and starvation and unfathomable human suffering they themselves are directly responsible for, as though it’s some kind of natural disaster and not a US-backed genocide that is only happening because this Democrat-run administration actively facilitates it.)
We don’t talk enough about how horrifyingly evil it is that the actual, stated position of Israel and its immensely powerful allies is that all of the killing and starvation of Palestinian civilians in Gaza is entirely the fault of Hamas, because Hamas has not acquiesced to the military demands made by Israel. In effect, it is saying “We will kill thousands and thousands of children until you give us everything we want.”
I mean, imagine if Russia did that. Imagine if Putin started raining military explosives on parts of Ukraine known to be densely packed with children, and then saying the mass-scale child-killing will continue until Ukraine surrenders and that all of the child deaths are actually the fault of the Ukrainians because they still haven’t given Putin everything he wants.
I think we all know that if such a thing were to happen it would be the subject of worldwide condemnation, and justifiably so. Such a tactic is not meaningfully different from lining up children on their knees on the battlefield and shooting them one by one in the back of the head until the enemy unconditionally surrenders.
They’re not just doing this with airstrikes and bullets — they’re doing it with food as well. Aaron Maté has a new article out titled “The Biden doctrine in Gaza: bomb, starve, deceive” which picks apart statements from White House officials about the temporary pier this administration is planning to build on Gaza’s coast over the next several weeks, ostensibly to allow for the arrival of more aid into the enclave………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Maté explains that Vice President Kamala Harris recently gave a speech in which she said Hamas needs to agree to a hostage deal in order to “get a significant amount of aid in,” which is the same as saying Israel and its allies will help starve Gazan civilians until Hamas capitulates to their demands.
“The very fact that the delivery of ‘a significant amount’ of aid is conditional on Hamas accepting Israeli demands underscores that Israel, with US backing, is using that aid as a tool of coercion,” Maté writes, noting that this directly contradicts Biden’s admonishment to Israeli leaders in his State of the Union address that “Humanitarian assistance cannot be a secondary consideration or a bargaining chip.”
Washington’s role in the mass murder of Palestinians in Gaza makes a lot more sense when you stop looking at it as a reluctant passive witness to Israel’s crimes and begin viewing it as an active participant. US officials will occasionally wag their fingers at the Netanyahu government and act like Israel’s worst atrocities are being carried out against the beneficent humanitarian wishes of the United States, but if you mentally mute all the narrative spin that’s being placed on this thing you just see a giant concentration camp packed full of children being murdered at mass scale by the most powerful empire that has ever existed. https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/saying-hamas-just-needs-to-surrender
Our International Women’s Day Heroine: Rosalie Bertell
ON BY MARIANNEWILDART, https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2024/03/08/our-international-womens-day-heroine-rosalie-bertell/
Rosalie Bertell, PhD (1929-2012), was a biometrist – a mathematician who analyzed risks to health from radiation and pollution. In this interview she mainly tells about her research on radiation and cancer, which led to restricting X-rays to diagnostic uses, revealed how above-ground nuclear testing had led to elevated breast cancer cohorts, and helped prevent the establishment of nuclear power plants in several communities.
http://www.radio4all.net/files/wingsradionews@gmail.com/WINGS-33-23CancerMath-28_58-128kbps.mp3
Rosalie Bertell was one of the first to raise concerns about military geoengineering and her book “Planet Earth – Latest Weapon of War” was re-published in 2020 as an updated version thanks to another heroine Dr. Claudia von Werlhof. The book’s first appearance in 2000 did not reach the international reader, because the publisher, The Women´s Press, London, went bankrupt and the book was available only in Canada (Black Rose 2001).
Dr Werlhof said “Rosalie and I, we met only once, in Bonn, Germany, in 2010 at the 30th Anniversary of the Right Livelihood Award, where she proposed to sign the following petition:
“It is morally reprehensible and an offense against humanity and the Earth to interfere with the normal function of the planetary system – to cause or enhance storms, hurricanes, tsunamis, monsoons, mud slides, draught, flooding, earth quakes or volcano eruptions”.
The 22 laureates present from different parts of the world, all of them signed it.
Meeting Rosalie Bertell in person was for me like meeting a very old friend. It is because I share with her the same motivation, feeling and thinking about our Mother Earth: the indignation and pain about her ongoing destruction, the immense love for her, and the necessity of a general planetary upheaval in support of Mother Earth. For this we need exactly what Rosalie Bertell embodied: a burning heart, a very clear mind and a ”planetary consciousness“ that knows about the Planet, our Mother Earth, as a huge living being, the ways she is endangered today, and the firm decision to fight for her life. What else? Mother Earth or Death!
This is what the reader of ”Planet Earth” should learn from its author. We need a world in which it is not necessary to write books like ”Planet Earth”, anymore!”
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 