Hurricane Ida threatens 2 nuclear power stations in Louisiana
Two Nuclear Plants In Ida’s Path As Storm Expected At Cat 4, Simply Info, [excellent pictures and maps]
Hurricane Ida is expected to hit the US as a category 4 storm. The Weather Channel projects Sunday night landfall and a direct hit on Louisiana. Storm surges in the area range from the Texas border to Mobile Alabama.
Two nuclear power plants are in the direct storm path. River Bend and Waterford. Waterford sits near the mouth of the Mississippi and in the zone of the highest expected storm surge. Current estimates have a 10-15 foot surge expected for that area. This could be potentially more severe as the storm pushes water up the Mississippi River. Waterford sits about 24 miles from the mouth of the river and is next to Lake Pontchartrain……………..more http://www.simplyinfo.org/?p=19660
Reaffirm commitment to ban nuclear tests, UN chief says in message for International Day,
Reaffirm commitment to ban nuclear tests, UN chief says in message for International Day, UN News 29 Aug 21 Countries which have not yet ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) are urged by UN Secretary-General António Guterres to do so without delay.
The UN chief made the appeal in his message for the International Day Against Nuclear Tests, observed on Sunday, 29 AugustThe UN chief made the appeal in his message for the International Day Against Nuclear Tests, observed on Sunday, 29 August
The date marks the 30th anniversary of the closure of the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site in Kazakhstan, the largest of its kind in the former Soviet Union, where more than 450 nuclear devices were exploded over four decades.
Terrible consequences
Mr. Guterres said nuclear tests caused enormous human suffering and environmental damage.
They had terrible consequences on the health of people living in affected areas. Many were relocated from their ancestral lands, disrupting their lives and livelihoods. Pristine environments and ecosystems were destroyed, which will take decades, if not centuries, to heal.”
The closure of the Semipalatinsk test site signaled the end of the era of unrestrained nuclear testing, said Mr. Guterres. Soon afterwards, countries began negotiating the CTBT.
The treaty bans all explosive nuclear weapons tests anywhere, by any country, he added, effectively “putting a brake on the nuclear arms race and providing a powerful barrier to the development of new nuclear weapons.”
No excuse
The CTBT was adopted in 1996 and has been signed by 185 countries, and ratified by 170, including three nuclear weapon States. However, it must be signed and ratified by 44 specific nuclear technology holder countries before it can enter into force……………….
Threat still real: Kazakhstan Ambassador
The threat that nuclear weapons pose to the world remains “as realistic as ever”, said Kazakhstan’s Ambassador to the UN, Magzhan Ilyassov, speaking to UN News ahead of the International Day (interview here and at right).
“For us, the 29th of August is not a day in the calendar. It is a reminder about how traumatic nuclear tests can be for humankind because in Kazakhstan alone, 1.5 million people still suffer, and will unfortunately suffer for future generations, from genetic diseases, cancer, leukaemia, which were caused by exposure to nuclear tests.”
Mr. Ilyassov said the total impact of the nuclear explosions carried out at the Semipalatinsk site was “1,200 times more” than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, during the Second World War.
“The test site itself is of the size of Israel, so it’s a big chunk of the territory of Kazakhstan and that cannot be used for any other purpose like agriculture for many, many decades now,” he said, adding “so with that, we can also project what was the damage caused by other nuclear test sites around the world which were eventually closed.” https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/08/1098682
Regional voters reject gas led recovery, support investment in renewables — RenewEconomy
New survey confirms that some of the Morrison government’s most ardent supporters of coal and gas are largely out of step with the views of their own electorates. The post Regional voters reject gas led recovery, support investment in renewables appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Regional voters reject gas led recovery, support investment in renewables — RenewEconomy
”Every euro invested in nuclear power makes the climate crisis worse’
Every euro invested in nuclear power makes the climate crisis worse’ https://www.dw.com/en/nuclear-climate-mycle-schneider-renewables-fukushima/a-56712368 29 Aug 21
Can nuclear energy help us meet climate goals? The editor of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, Mycle Schneider, says no. He explains his stance to DW.
And if we’re talking about the construction of new power plants, then nuclear power is simply excluded. Not just because it is the most expensive form of electricity generation today, but, above all, because it takes a long time to build reactors. In other words, every euro invested in new nuclear power plants makes the climate crisis worse because now this money cannot be used to invest in efficient climate protection options.
As Japan marks the 10th anniversary of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the global conversation around the merits of using nuclear power to tackle the climate crisis remains hot. Many environmentalists are opposed, pointing to the risk of nuclear meltdowns and the difficulty of properly disposing of nuclear waste.
However, it has been championed by others for its ability to produce huge amounts of carbon-free energy. DW spoke to Mycle Schneider, editor of the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR), which assesses the status and trends of the global nuclear power industry.
DW: The goal is to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). What role can nuclear power play?
Mycle Schneider: Today we need to put the question of urgency first. It’s about how much we can reduce greenhouse gases and how quickly for every euro ($1.21) spent. So, it’s a combination between cost and feasibility, while doing it in the fastest possible way.
And if we’re talking about the construction of new power plants, then nuclear power is simply excluded. Not just because it is the most expensive form of electricity generation today, but, above all, because it takes a long time to build reactors. In other words, every euro invested in new nuclear power plants makes the climate crisis worse because now this money cannot be used to invest in efficient climate protection options.
What about existing nuclear power plants?
The power plants exist, they provide electricity. However, many of the measures needed for energy efficiency are now cheaper than the basic operating costs of nuclear power plants. That is the first point, and unfortunately it is always forgotten.
The second point is that renewables today have become so cheap that in many cases they are below the basic operating costs of nuclear power plants.
Let me give you two examples: The world’s lowest price for solar power in currently in Portugal, at 1.1 cents per kilowatt hour. And we now have the first results from Spain with costs for wind and solar power at around 2.5 cents per kilowatt hour. These are below the basic operating costs of the vast majority of nuclear power plants around the world.
It would often even be affordordable to pay 1 – 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity storage in addition to the generation costs for wind and solar power and still be below the operating costs of nuclear power plants. And here we have to ask the same question: How many emissions can I avoid with one euro, one dollar or one yuan?
So why are construction projects being announced now?
n the case of nuclear power, I often have the feeling that Trumpism prevails. Facts no longer matter. There is talk of plans and projects all over the place, but in reality, little or nothing actually happens. We document this in detail every year in the more than 300 pages of our World Nuclear Industry Status Report.
What sort of interests are behind this?
These are very clear self-interests. If the industry doesn’t launch phantom projects, then it will die even faster.
Why do politicians go along with it?
There are different interests here. During a visit to the Le Creusot forge in December 2020, for example, French President [Emmanuel] Macron made it clear that there are also military strategic interests in maintaining the nuclear industry. And France has never made a secret of the links between military and civil interests when it comes to nuclear.
In other countries like China there are different interests. China is funding infrastructure in a large number of countries through its Belt and Road Initiative, also known as the New Silk Road. This is geopolitics on a grand scale.
The co-financing of the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Great Britain, for example, puts this into context. In this case, the fact that it is an inefficient project is irrelevant. The scale of Chinese infrastructure investments is huge. There’s talk of $1,000 billion (€821 billion). That means: You have to look at each country, because each country has their own self-interests.
What other interests do energy companies have in continuing to operate unprofitable reactors?
The main reason is that an operating nuclear power plant generates income. As soon as a nuclear power plant is decommissioned, liabilities appear in the balance sheet and additional expenses appear.
You can see an example of this in Japan. If often took years to officially close nuclear power plants because companies could not afford to remove these plants from their assets. Some of these operators would have gone bankrupt overnight.
There’s no doubt that energy companies like EDF in France face a serious financial crisis. The question is, how will they survive this? Certainly not without the help of massive state subsidies in the long term. But as long as they can keep earning money, even if it’s no longer profitable, investing in demolition and waste management isn’t a consideration.
How much does demolition cost?
In the order of €1 billion per reactor. In France, only a third of [the required funds] have been put aside. This means the problem starts once the reactors go offline.
What about the costs of the storage of high-level radioactive waste?
No one knows how much this really costs, because there is no functioning permanent storage facility.
Is there any chance of a permanent storage facility being operational in the future?
There is currently no operational permanent storage facility. The most advanced projects are in Finland and Sweden. However, the concept there is based on a design from the early 1980s, with storage in copper containers. However, recent research has shown that the copper containers are significantly more susceptible to corrosion than first thought. That means the viability of commissioning one of these facilities in Sweden or Finland is still totally unclear. It’s the same situation for other countries. They are even further behind on development or they don’t even have storage models, let alone locations.
How far along in this process are countries in Asia?
In Japan there is still no storage location or model. The same goes for Korea. In China they’re discussing whether or not nuclear waste should be reprocessed. That’s even further away.
Basically, these countries behave just like countries in the West where the nuclear power plants were built two or three decades ago. That means there is no advanced planning in place and no coherent concept as to how their highly radioactive nuclear waste should be stored for eternity.
Mycle Schneider is the initiator and lead author of the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report, an independent reference report on the development of the global nuclear power industry. Schneider is an independent consultant to governments and international organizations around the world. In 1997 he was awarded the Alternative Nobel Prize (Right Livelihood Award).
This interview was conducted by Gero Rueter and adapted into English by Ineke Mules.
Australia’s biggest climate poll shows support for action in every seat
Australia’s biggest climate poll shows support for action in every seat
The survey of 15,000 Australians found 67pc believe the government should do more to tackle climate change, including a majority in all 151 national seats.
August 29 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Louisiana Hasn’t Yet Recovered From Two Major Hurricanes In 2020. Now Another Is Taking Aim” • Five named storms struck Louisiana in 2020. Two of them were major hurricanes, doing a total of $18.75 billion in damages. As the state still reels from the destruction, another major hurricane is now barreling toward the […]
August 29 Energy News — geoharvey
August 28 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “A Carbon Tax That Sends Americans Checks Could Pass This Fall: Interview” • The Senate will be voting on a reconciliation package soon. One of the things in that package is a proposed carbon tax that would actually use the funds from the carbon tax to create jobs, grow the economy, and even […]
August 28 Energy News — geoharvey
Why the nuclear lobby spruiks about climate change (when they really couldn’t care less) – theme for August 2021
It’s a breathtaking hypocrisy, in this month when we remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki – but the real purpose for new ”advanced”nuclear technology is simply support for nuclear weapons. ”Small nuclear reactors” have no hope of affecting global heating – quite the reverse – as they take funding and human energy away from genuine solutions.
Why does the nuclear lobby bang on about climate change?
Simply in order to get tax breaks and other financial incentives that go with being accepted as ”green” and ”sustainable”
This is why the nuclear industry, IAEA, and all the associated bodies and governments are bent on convincing everybody that the goal of nuclear power is to fight climate change.
The journalists buy their arguments, because those arguments are cleverly dressed up in technicaljargon – avoiding discussion of matters that journalists might understand better, (such as the costs, waste disposal problems, environmental and health impacts)
The essential connection with nuclear weapons is obscured, making everybody involved feel better.
Need to investigate ANSTO’s tax-payer funded, loss-making, unnecessary nuclear medicine production
Australian government watcher, 28 Aug 21, The production of isotopes for medical purposes by nuclear reactors is a declining industry due to its inherently dangerous and risky nature and its extremely high manufacturing costs
These isotopes are being replaced by cyclotron produced isotopes which are practically and completely free of any risk to the patients and can be produced by relatively easier and safer means at a greatly reduced costs
The only reason that isotopes produced by nuclear reactors are used for medical purposes is that their manufacture is highly and unrealistically subsidised by government grants as is the case with ANSTO in Australia
The rapid growth in the international use of cyclotron isotopes for medical therapies is making the production of isotopes by nuclear reactors obsolete
As a result the continued production of isotopes for medical purposes by ANSTO at Lucas Heights could be stopped
immediately with huge savings in government expenditure and no effect on the provision of medical therapies
There were also arguments within ANSTO against the proposed corporatising of the medical isotopes production since this would expose all of its problems including its obsolete and outdated status and the extremely high production costs
In addition there are concerns both externally and within ANSTO internally about the cost and marketing difficulties with the Synroc technology which is far from the initially promoted commercial success and has been overtaken in many countries by their own developed alternatives to reduce the volume of nuclear waste and treat it to make it suitable for long-term storage and eventual disposal
In view of this it is essential for a full and proper independent inquiry and investigation into ANSTO to determine the true situation and make practical and hopefully cost saving recommendations as to its future operations
Australian Labor Party backs bills to de-register most political parties
Australian Labor Party backs bills to de-register most political parties, WSWS, Mike Head, 25 August 2021 In a nakedly anti-democratic and self-serving move, the Labor Party’s parliamentary caucus this week agreed to assist the Liberal-National Coalition government push four far-reaching electoral bills through parliament with breakneck speed.
As a result of Labor’s complicity, the bills could be rammed through both houses of parliament and become law within days. In fact, the three main bills were rushed through the House of Representatives yesterday.There has been virtually no public discussion or media coverage on this historic attack, unveiled suddenly last week on the eve of the next federal election, which is due by May next year.
The bills contain a host of measures to suppress alternative political parties and the basic rights of voters. Neither the Morrison government nor Labor has offered any explanation as to why these bills have been brought forward now, seemingly out of the blue……..
The most sweeping provision in the bills seeks to strip party registration from every party not currently represented in parliament. It would compel parties to provide lists and details of 1,500 members—triple the existing requirement—within three months of the laws passing, all in the middle of widespread lockdowns.
Without party registration, federal election candidates for the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) and 35 other currently registered parties would be prevented from having their names and thus identifying their political affiliations on ballot papers. Their candidates would have to stand without any party name, or as undifferentiated and unexplained “independents.”
…….. Predictably, the existing parliamentary parties would continue to be exempt from any membership requirement whatsoever. They could well have difficulty nominating 1,500 members, unless they could count MPs, staffers, trade union officials and other office holders.
……… The only provision that Labor will not support is the lowering of “political campaigner” financial disclosure obligations for advocacy, welfare, environmental and other groups that participate in election campaigns.
…………. The same bipartisan front has been formed on every attack on fundamental democratic rights over the past two decades. This includes the repeated tightening of police-state “terrorism” laws, the “foreign interference” legislation to potentially outlaw links to international or overseas parties, and the 2017–2018 expulsion of members of parliament who were possibly entitled to dual citizenship, effectively disqualifying millions of people with immigrant backgrounds from even nominating for election.https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/08/26/elea-a26.html
International Atomic Energy Agency doubts the ability of Japan to clean up Fukushima nuclear wreck by intended date 2051
UN team: Unclear if Fukushima cleanup can finish by 2051, MARI YAMAGUCHI, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT, ASSOCIATED PRESS, August 27, 2021,
TOKYO — Too little is known about melted fuel inside damaged reactors at the wrecked Fukushima nuclear power plant, even a decade after the disaster, to be able to tell if its decommissioning can be finished by 2051 as planned, a U.N. nuclear agency official said Friday.
“Honestly speaking, I don’t know, and I don’t know if anybody knows,” said Christophe Xerri, head of an International Atomic Energy Agency team reviewing progress in the plant’s cleanup.
“We need to gather more information on the fuel debris and more experience on the retrieval of the fuel debris to know if the plan can be completed as expected in the next 30 years,” he told reporters.
The cleanup plan depends on how the melted fuel needs to be handled for long-term storage and management, he said.
The IAEA team’s review, the fifth since the disaster, was mostly conducted online due to the coronavirus pandemic. Only Xerri and another team member visited the plant this week before compiling and submitting a report to Japan’s government on Friday.
In the report, the team noted progress in a number of areas since its last review in 2018, including the removal of spent fuel from a storage pool at one of the damaged reactors, as well as a decision to start discharging massive amounts of treated but still radioactive water stored at the plant into the ocean in 2023………. https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/news/un-team-unclear-if-fukushima-cleanup-can-finish-by-2051/?ref=recent
We’re Number One in Weapons Sales, by Polly Mann — Rise Up Times
The main recipient region in 2016–20 was Asia and Oceania (accounting for 42 percent of global arms imports), followed by the Middle East (33 percent), Europe (12 percent), Africa (7.3 percent), and the Americas (5.4 percent).
We’re Number One in Weapons Sales, by Polly Mann — Rise Up Times
NSW stuns with 34GW of wind, solar proposals for New England renewable zone — RenewEconomy
NSW gets 34GW of project proposals for its New England renewable energy zone, one of five designed to build the capacity to replace coal. The post NSW stuns with 34GW of wind, solar proposals for New England renewable zone appeared first on RenewEconomy.
NSW stuns with 34GW of wind, solar proposals for New England renewable zone — RenewEconomy
1 This month
17 October, Free Public Talk on Nuclear Issues in South Australia
David Noonan will speak on public interest concerns over the new Roxby Downs Indenture Act 2026 on BHP copper-uranium mining and ore processing in SA, and on how AUKUS may face SA with a High-Level nuclear waste agenda.
Dr Jim Green will discuss international developments in the field of nuclear power including ‘small modular reactors’ and Generation 4 ‘advanced’ nuclear reactor concepts.
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
