As presidential elections approach in France, only the far right and communists support nuclear power
Then 24 , 11 Feb 22,
Ecologist Yannick Jadot, who regularly affirms his ambition to develop wind power and other renewable energies in France, castigated the recent commitments made by Emmanuel Macron to develop the country’s nuclear fleet.
Ecologist Yannick Jadot, who regularly affirms his ambition to develop wind power and other renewable energies in France, castigated the recent commitments made by Emmanuel Macron to develop the country’s nuclear fleet.
During his appearance on February 11 on the air of BFMTV, the Greens presidential candidate, Yannick Jadot, stormed against Emmanuel Macron’s recent commitments in the nuclear field, in particular after his announcement of the commissioning, from 2035, six new “EPR 2” type nuclear reactors, to which is added the study for eight more for the end of the 2040s.
President Macron locks the French for a century in nuclear power
“It does nothing for the climate, it does nothing for the French […] for the years to come”, notably protested the environmentalist MEP before adding: “President Macron locks the French for a century in nuclear power.”
Yannick Jadot then praised the virtues of a German energy model (where the share of wind power in electricity production exceeded 20% in 2021), which he describes as particularly prolific in terms of employment to better castigate the decision of the Head of State by invoking “dictators” and “the far right”: “Big companies, like small and large democracies, are investing in renewable energies. Unfortunately, only dictators, and in France the extreme right, still support nuclear power.
After having advocated a reduction in the share of nuclear power in French electricity production from 75% to 50% by 2025 – a reduction in the context of which the closure of the Fessenheim power station (Haut-Rhin) took place –, Emmanuel Macron made a 180 degree turn on the subject in the second part of his mandate, now showing himself in favor of a revival of the national nuclear fleet.
Visiting Belfort on February 10, he thus expressed his desire to “extend” the life of “all the nuclear reactors that can be extended”. “If the first extensions beyond forty years have been successfully carried out since 2017, I ask EDF to study the conditions for extension beyond fifty years”, he said, among other things..
…………… With the approach of the presidential election, the nuclear sector is particularly acclaimed on the right of the French political spectrum. On the left, its future is mainly praised by the communist candidate Fabien Roussel while Jean-Luc Mélenchon undertakes to get the country out of this source of energy as quickly as possible. https://then24.com/2022/02/11/for-jadot-only-dictators-and-in-france-the-far-right-support-nuclear-power/
As China tackles plastic pollution at home, it feeds the scourge globally
As China tackles plastic pollution at home, it feeds the scourge globally
Plastic waste in China, Hong Kong and the world has jumped during the Covid-19 pandemic as takeaway food in plastic containers has become the mainstay of restaurants and the only choice for many citizens subject to lockdowns.
Zero Contaminated Water” and “Dismantling of Reactor Buildings” Missing from the Plan: The Final Form of Decommissioning the TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant — Fukushima 311 Watchdogs
Work to bring the accident under control continues at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Unit 1, with its upper steel frame exposed (top left), is lined up with Units 2, 3, and 4 on the right. February 11, 2022 On March 11, it will be 11 years since the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear […]
Zero Contaminated Water” and “Dismantling of Reactor Buildings” Missing from the Plan: The Final Form of Decommissioning the TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant — Fukushima 311 Watchdogs
Oceans are better at storing carbon than trees. In a warmer future, ocean carbon sinks could help stabilise our planet
Rupert Sutherland and Laia Alegret
We think of trees and soil as carbon sinks, but the world’s oceans hold far larger carbon stocks and are more effective at storing carbon permanently.
The Green Bucket List
Peter Dykstra
When you’re immersed in environmental science and environmental politics, it’s sometimes hard to step back and measure progress. Here are a few gains and victories to charge your batteries.
February 13 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Temporary spent nuclear fuel storage isn’t temporary” • The proposal to “store” spent nuclear fuel in New Mexico is a Trojan horse that will defeat the goal of geologically isolating this highly radioactive and chemically toxic material. The proposed interim storage facility is geologically unsuitable even for a period of decades. [Santa Fe […]
February 13 Energy News — geoharvey
Conflict resolution – the positive way out of the Ukraine crisis
According to Anatol Lieven, an academic and Ukraine specialist, this is “the most dangerous crisis in the world today; it is also in principle the most easily solved”. A solution exists, drawn up by France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine in 2015, which involves the implementation of the Minsk II agreement. This offers demilitarisation, a restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty including control of the border with Russia, and full autonomy for the Donbas region. The main objection for Kyiv is that autonomy for the Donbas would prevent Ukraine from joining Nato and the EU.
One way through this would be for Nato to declare Ukraine a neutral country and decree that it does not join Nato for at least a decade. In practice, Ukrainian membership of the EU is ruled out for at least a generation because of Ukraine’s corruption, political dysfunction and lack of economic progress.
I’m a conflict mediator. This is a way out of the Ukraine crisis https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/09/conflict-mediator-ukraine-vladimir-putinGabrielle Rifkind
Instead of ramping up the threats, western nations should be offering Vladimir Putin a ladder to climb down, The current western narrative on the Ukraine crisis is that Russia is a machiavellian power with an expansionist agenda. That view is shaping our response: we are matching Vladimir Putin’s aggression, meeting strength with strength and threats with threats. But what if we tried to get inside the mind of the enemy, and ask what was motivating the aggression? By doing so, could we break this cycle – and offer Putin a way out, too?
When the USSR deployed ballistic missiles to Cuba in the 1960s, their proximity to the US nearly unleashed a third world war. Sitting in Moscow today, does Putin see being encircled by Nato as an equivalent threat? After all, one of his core demands is that Nato curbs its expansion close to the Russian border, and that Ukraine must not join. Russia claims that the US repeatedly told Soviet leaders it would incorporate Russia into a cooperative European security framework. In practice, Nato emerged as a US-dominated security frame with about 75,000 US troops still on European soil. Great powers always treat with suspicion and hostility the presence of rival great powers on their borders.
Putin was always bitter about the collapse of the Soviet Union. He bided his time, and in 2014 Russia seized Crimea and sent troops into Ukraine’s mostly Russian-speaking Donbas region to support the separatist movement.
Russia today is no benign liberal democracy and President Putin has an intelligence mindset, playing poker, not chess. He is prepared to threaten war, create chaos and spread misinformation to push back Nato from Russia’s borders. Using coercive diplomacy, he has amassed more than 130,000 troops on the eastern border of Ukraine, a continued threat to its sovereignty.
Yet however provocative Russia’s behaviour, western governments have a responsibility not to escalate the threat of war. The consequences of a direct US-Russian confrontation in Ukraine would be catastrophic on all sides. A full-scale conventional war could escalate into nuclear war. Even a limited war would create a ruinous global economic crisis that could destroy for the foreseeable future any chance of serious action against climate change.
I have worked in conflict resolution for the past 20 years and seen the dangers of stumbling into wars, unable to stop or turn back. Selling weapons to a country may look like a principled act in support of an ally but it usually takes them deeper and deeper into the quagmire of conflict. The US and the UK have instigated and been involved in four failed wars this century, but we seem to have failed to have learned the lessons.
There are those who argue that sending military support to Ukraine strengthens Nato’s hand at the negotiating table. Yet there are inherent dangers in this approach – the use of deterrence could be the very thing that escalates the situation.
Washington and London have pledged to increase offensive military aid to Ukraine and have announced arms deliveries, ammunition and anti-tank weapons. The UK is seeking to put itself at the forefront of western efforts to forestall what the prime minister, Boris Johnson, has called the risk of a “lightning war” in eastern Europe.
Germany has been much more sceptical, blocking the transfer of German-made weapons from Baltic states to Ukraine. It has long argued against sending weapons to active conflict zones. Germany has declared that it is prepared to have a serious dialogue with Russia to defuse the highly dangerous situation, arguing that diplomacy is the only viable way.
Whatever western governments feel about Moscow’s behaviour, de-escalating the conflict and giving Moscow a ladder to climb down is in everyone’s interest. We should not underestimate the link between humiliation and aggression. Putin is a very proud man, and smart politics by western governments should offer face-saving gestures if we are serious about avoiding war.
According to Anatol Lieven, an academic and Ukraine specialist, this is “the most dangerous crisis in the world today; it is also in principle the most easily solved”. A solution exists, drawn up by France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine in 2015, which involves the implementation of the Minsk II agreement. This offers demilitarisation, a restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty including control of the border with Russia, and full autonomy for the Donbas region. The main objection for Kyiv is that autonomy for the Donbas would prevent Ukraine from joining Nato and the EU.
One way through this would be for Nato to declare Ukraine a neutral country and decree that it does not join Nato for at least a decade. In practice, Ukrainian membership of the EU is ruled out for at least a generation because of Ukraine’s corruption, political dysfunction and lack of economic progress.
Talks between Putin and France’s President Macron this week were more conciliatory in tone. Macron said: “There is no security for Europeans if there is no security for Russia.” A permanent forum where Russia is welcome is needed to re-examine the post-cold war security system in Europe. This approach to issues such as missile deployments, arms control and transparency around military exercises could ease this conflict. Such a dialogue could create a climate of security cooperation with Russia.
- Gabrielle Rifkind is a specialist in conflict resolution and the director of Oxford Process
UK government has no idea on what do do with its plutonium trash
Seventy years after the United Kingdom first began extracting plutonium from spent uranium fuel to make nuclear weapons, the industry is finally calling a halt to reprocessing, leaving the country with 120 tons of themetal, the biggest stockpile in the world. However, the government has no idea what to do with it.
Having spent hundreds of billions of pounds producing plutonium in a series of plants at Sellafield in the LakenDistrict, the UK policy is to store it indefinitely—or until it can come up with a better idea. There is also 90,000 tons of less dangerous depleteduranium in warehouses in the UK, also without an end use.
Counterpunch 10th Feb 2022 https://www.counterpunch.org/2022/02/10/the-legacy-of-britains-dirty-decades-of-nuclear-reprocessing-120-tonnes-of-plutonium/
Practical considerations may hamper Australia’s path to nuclear submarines
Practical Considerations
Notwithstanding the sweeping nature of the AUKUS Partnership and the scope of the Security Agreement itself, a number of practical hurdles remain, including but not limited to the following:
- It is unclear how and when the parties will decide whether Australian submarines will incorporate either US or UK nuclear propulsion plants.
- The reactors in both US and UK submarines rely on fuel containing high enriched uranium (HEU); it is unclear how Australia will acquire the HEU necessary to power its fleet.
- Due to the volume of ongoing, contracted-for work, neither US nor UK shipyards are in a position to easily accommodate the construction of additional submarines in the near term.
- Balancing export requirements under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the nuclear regulations, determining how and when to license under the ITAR as opposed to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, National Nuclear Security Administration, or other regulations is going to be a challenge.
- It would not be unusual for the nuclear submarine program to involve some form of offsets which would provide Australian industry an opportunity to contract or subcontract for the provision of various items for the submarines.
- Financing for the technology transfers and ultimate construction of the nuclear submarines remains an open question. Whether the United States will provide Foreign Military Sales (FMS) or Foreign Military Financing (FMF) may also be discussed.
- Australian shipbuilders presently have no experience constructing nuclear submarines. Therefore, it is likely that in the event the governments decide to construct Australia’s submarines in Adelaide, such construction would depend on the availability of skilled labor and necessary equipment, presumably sourced from either or both the United States or the United Kingdom. This could raise a number of immigration-related questions for the Australian government.
- No training pipeline presently exists in Australia to produce nuclear-trained submariners. Australian applicants to the submarine program may need to attend university in the United States or United Kingdom and enroll in those navies’ nuclear power training pipelines. To the extent that it is plant-specific, such training could not begin until it is determined whether the new Australian nuclear-powered submarines will incorporate either US or UK nuclear propulsion plants.
Conclusion
As a result of the AUKUS Partnership, Australia will become the seventh nation to operate nuclear-powered submarines. ………….. However, success will depend on the extent to which the three governments can and choose to identify and resolve practical considerations over several decades to establish a pathway to an Australian nuclear submarine and technology integration.
AUKUS Alliance: US and UK to Help Australia Acquire Nuclear-Powered Submarines
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 11 Feb 22,
Continue readingFormer UK prime minister urges Australia to lift its game on climate change
Former UK prime minister urges Australia to lift its game on climate changeTheresa May has declared Australia should pick up its climate change agenda “rather more proactively” during the former British prime minister’s first visit.
Climate projections paint a grim future for WA if emissions not cut
Climate projections paint a grim future for WA if emissions not cutWA faces a grim future of more droughts and floods if climate change continues, but the state government is only beginning to plan to contribute towards global carbon emissions that could minimise the damage.
Australia’s biggest wind and battery project lands equity and turbine supply deals — RenewEconomy
Golden Plains wind farm, and a big battery, lands equity deal to finance the project, and a turbine supply and construction deal with Vestas. The post Australia’s biggest wind and battery project lands equity and turbine supply deals appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Australia’s biggest wind and battery project lands equity and turbine supply deals — RenewEconomy
Morrison boosts “Making Positive Energy” pre-election ad splurge to almost $31 million — RenewEconomy
Morrison government more than doubles its spending on pre-election advertising to convince voters it cares about the climate and clean energy. The post Morrison boosts “Making Positive Energy” pre-election ad splurge to almost $31 million appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Morrison boosts “Making Positive Energy” pre-election ad splurge to almost $31 million — RenewEconomy
“Stop pretending:” Governments urged to come clean on early coal closures — RenewEconomy
With more coal plants set to close early, the clean energy sector has called on governments to accept the reality of the end of coal. The post “Stop pretending:” Governments urged to come clean on early coal closures appeared first on RenewEconomy.
“Stop pretending:” Governments urged to come clean on early coal closures — RenewEconomy
Setting the record straight on carbon offsets — RenewEconomy
How can an organisation tell a good quality carbon offset from a bad one? When should offsetting be used? And what’s the best strategical approach? The post Setting the record straight on carbon offsets appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Setting the record straight on carbon offsets — RenewEconomy
1 This month.
20 September –National Day of Action in Melbourne on the International Day of Peace
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 