Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Staying in Gaza as an act of love: Stories from the Catholics who risk their lives to serve

“These are our people and we will not abandon them.” Selfless acts like these have earned the small Christian communities in Gaza the respect of all those living in Gaza.

Jeffery Abood December 15, 2023,  https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2023/12/15/gaza-israel-catholic-churches-246728?pnespid=t7VpGntebvMdwqbN9jG9FpKNvhOyTJJuMvXjkPUztB1mpgpXs8W0TdlrA_YDiged3nSYb4fJyw

Tens of thousands of Gazans are pressed against the border with Egypt at Rafah. Told that this was a safe place for them to flee, they are still under attack. Almost the entire population has been displaced by the fighting—1.9 million people, according to latest United Nations figures. Gazan health authorities say that more than 18,000 people have been killed since the fighting began; about 70 percent of the casualties are women and children. More than 49,000 people have been wounded.

How can we recover a sense of their individual sacredness that might lead to a stronger demand for an end to this violence and suffering? Perhaps if more people had the opportunity, as I have, to visit Gaza and meet with the Gazan people, they would have a different perspective about the violence raining down on the innocent people living in Gaza.

Media headlines often invoke only negative images whenever Gaza is mentioned. Yet just beneath these headlines, like a seed waiting to sprout, are inspiring examples of love and faith in humanity. It is vital we recognize and build on these, as love stands as the only force capable of ultimately ending the violence.

Gazans are incredibly warm and loving. My visits to Gaza reminded me of growing up in a Lebanese household and the warm hospitality for which Middle Easterners are famous. Family has always been at the center of their lives.

In fact, these robust and loving family connections are one of the main reasons Gazans have been able to endure 17 years of a brutal military blockade. Another reason is their deep faith. The sacred beliefs of both Muslims and Christians living together in Gaza provide a stable bedrock upon which they all depend.

Some recent instances of people embodying both this love and faith can be seen amid the ongoing bombing campaign in Gaza.

A common assumption is that people only remain in Gaza, and especially in the north, because they have no other choice. Yet, despite the very real dangers to themselves because they are remaining in an active war zone, some make the conscious decision to stay as an act of love.

Holy Family Parish in Gaza City is situated on a campus that houses the church, a school, three convents and a home for severely disabled children. Every few years, amid periodic bombing, the various religious orders living and working in Gaza receive evacuation orders.

Yet, despite many having the passports that would allow them to leave, the women religious in Gaza, many of whom come from abroad, choose not to. Instead, according to Father Mario Da Silva, a priest once assigned to the parish, they say, “These are our people and we will not abandon them.” Selfless acts like these have earned the small Christian communities in Gaza the respect of all those living in Gaza.

During the bombing in 2014, the Sisters at Holy Family faced a harrowing situation where they had to carry all the disabled children under their care (about 60) into the church’s courtyard. Their hope was that Israeli warplanes would notice them and refrain from dropping their bombs. The tactic proved successful then. However, a few weeks ago, the warplanes not only inflicted damage on Holy Family but also bombed nearby St. Porphyrius Church, killing or maiming nearly 100 people sheltering there.

In an interview with the Catholic news site Crux, Father Francis Xavier Rayappangari, commissary of the Holy Land in India, said he had recently spoken with the sisters at Holy Family.

“In the convent, there are three sisters and 60 residents, including handicapped and mentally challenged children and bedridden older people, who have no food, water, medicine, electricity or gas. Communication from outside is cut off, and the entire area is surrounded by the [Israeli] army.”

Regarding the current situation of the nuns, he further relayed, “Sometimes some generous and courageous people [in the neighborhood] bring something for them to eat. Whatever they receive from outside, the sisters first serve the residents. If there is anything left, they eat. Most of the time it is just one meal a day.… One day they had just one loaf of bread shared among the three…. The other day it was just an orange, and the three sisters shared it among them.”

In the Kuwaiti Hospital—similar to all Gaza hospitals, including Al-Ahli, the Anglican hospital—there were also Israeli military orders to evacuate. Many hospital directors, doctors and staff, most of whom are Muslim, have publicly stated that they refuse to abandon their patients, who due to their fragile medical status cannot be evacuated. They have chosen rather to put their own lives at a very real risk and stay.

In a separate interview, one doctor at the hospital stated, “Where should we evacuate these children? They are attached to ventilators. They are completely dependent on them and it is impossible to move them. If you want to kill us, kill us while we continue working here. We will not leave.”

The hospitals as well as the churches report receiving small amounts of aid from local residents, both Muslim and Christian, who contribute whatever food and basic supplies they can spare for patients or others seeking refuge. These acts are amazing examples of generosity from people who are in just as precarious a position. More than that, they are examples of bravery, as the simple act of crossing the street to deliver this aid can result, as it has with many others, in being killed by Israeli snipers.

In a recent email, a parishioner from Holy Family expressing his unshakable faith said, “I wish this would end very soon, because we are drained [from] seeing the suffering of all these innocent people, who are living with us in an open-air prison. We see cruel fire falling from the sky and can have no hope. We only know God will listen to all our prayers.”

Currently, the sisters of the various communities, as well as a priest from the Institute of the Incarnate Word, are caring for 700 displaced people, including 100 children and another 70 disabled children and adults with various neurologic and birth disorders at Holy Family.

Sister Nabila Saleh, the principal of the Rosary Sisters School in Gaza, told Aid to the Church in Need that it would be logistically impossible to move the elderly, children, sick and those with disabilities. She explained: “We will not go and leave our people. We are here to accompany them; we cannot possibly abandon them.”

So, despite the order for all civilians in Gaza City to evacuate to the south of the Strip, she stressed her decision to remain with the community in the parish “until the end,” knowing full well what that could mean.

In focusing only on the negative images depicted by the media about Gaza, we miss these beautiful and inspiring acts of love. We see people’s decisions to stay for others even when they are faced with their own likely deaths. This kind of dedication is only possible when the seeds of faith sprout out of a resilient love for both God and for others.

In failing to see that, we also fail to see the presence of the only force more powerful than any bomb, the only force that can and will ultimately win over hate and violence: love. In honor of that truly sacrificial love, it is crucial for us, as advocates of justice and peace, to actively pursue a genuine pro-life stance, and work for an immediate ceasefire before these beacons of faith, love and light are snuffed out.

Jeffery Abood is a member of the leadership council of Churches for Middle East Peace. He can be reached at jabood@att.net.

December 16, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Sad Clown with the Circus Closed Down*: Zelenskiy’s Demise

When it comes to love for the limelight and delusions of grandeur, Zelenskiy outstrips most politicians and not least of all Putin. Almost all politicians are egoistic, but Zelenskiy is narcissistic.

Zelenskiy’s inexperience and ego likely played pivotal roles in his disastrous decision-making.

Zelenskiy himself remained mired in personal corruption as the Pandora Papers demonstrated

Zelenskiy’s failures also have made him eminently expendable

by GORDONHAHN , December 11, 2023,  https://gordonhahn.com/2023/12/11/sad-clown-with-the-circus-closed-down-zelenskiys-demise/—

Introduction

         Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zeleneksiy appears to be at the end of the line politically and perhaps biologically. Portraying himself as a fighter for peace, anti-corruption, and full democratization when he ran for and won the presidency in 2019, he proceeded to lead the country into war, further corruption, and de-republicanization (authoritarianization).

On both a personal and global level this is high tragedy. A superb comedian and actor stars in a television fictional series as the president of Ukraine, rises in popularity, wins the country’s presidency on a peace platform, and leads the country into a catastrophic, easily avoidable war that threatens the survival of his country and himself.

The unreality of Ukraine refracts in our century of simulacra and disinformation through this icon moved from the television screen to real life politics, and the tragedy of it all is sold as a heroic triumph on the road to universal democracy, peace, and brotherhood.

In the real world, however, there is a rub. The country is historically divided along every conceivable line (ethnic, linguistic, cultural, political, ideological, economic, and social), an almost accidental state cobbled together by communists but claimed by hapless republicans and determined ultra-nationalists. Thus, Zelenskiy becomes president of a fundamentally divided country further riven by schism as a result of two ‘revolutions’ – really revolts – and a civil war compounded by foreign (Russian) intervention.

                  ****************************

Zelenskiy’s emergence and victory are as surreal as the Maidan regime of which he assumed leadership. 

Continue reading →

December 16, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear energy is not viable for Australia, for a number of reasons

By John Grimes, Saul Griffith, Tim Buckley, Blair Palese, Janaline Oh, John Hewson, Mara Bun, https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8456455/debating-viability-of-nuclear-power-in-australia/ December 13 2023

The prospect of nuclear power generation in Australia is now a live debate. There are a number of barriers that make nuclear unviable as a solution for Australia’s energy transition in a timeframe necessary to respond to the climate, energy and cost-of-living crisis. We outline these below.

We need energy, decarbonisation and cost of living solutions this decade. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommends a 50 per cent emissions reduction by 2030. As former Chief Scientist Dr Alan Finkel has noted, It is hard to imagine first operation of small modular reactor (SMR) technology before 2040.

SMR technology, advocated by proponents of nuclear energy in Australia, is not commercial. There are no SMRs in operation outside of Russia and China, and none under construction in Europe or North America, meaning there is no evidence of their safe and consistent operation, or viability. In November, the only SMR development in the US was terminated.

Nuclear power is prohibited in Australia under federal legislation, with similar legislation in the states and territories.

To overturn these bans and establish the new regulatory and compliance regime would take years and would only be the start of the process of developing a nuclear industry. Sites for reactors would need to be identified, and social licence secured. Rigorous approvals processes would need to run their course. A skilled specialist local workforce would need to be trained and deployed. Robust arrangements would need to be made to manage waste and to mitigate risk. Legal challenges and civic protest would arise.

All of the above means nuclear would not be ready to deploy in a climate-necessary timeframe in Australia.

Therefore, we must continue to deploy the commercially viable and proven zero-emissions technologies of firmed solar and wind power as rapidly as possible.

Further, the cost of nuclear power generation is much higher than its low-cost alternatives.

The 2022 World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) notes that between 2009 and 2021, unsubsidised costs for solar PV 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. This gap is widening.

The CSIRO/Australian Energy Market Operator May 2023 GenCost report found that: “A review of the available evidence makes it clear that nuclear power does not currently provide an economically competitive solution in Australia – or that we have the relevant frameworks in place for its consideration and operation within the timeframe required.”

The Investor Group on Climate Change, which represents investors with $30 trillion in assets under management, says there is no interest among investors in nuclear, when nuclear has “project time blowouts of anything from seven to 15-plus years and cost blowouts in the tens of billions, and lowest-cost technologies, renewables, batteries and so on, are available to deploy now”.

The 2023 WNISR notes that in 2022, “total investment in renewable electricity capacity reached a new record all-time high of US$495 billion (up 35 per cent), 14 times the reported global investment decisions for the construction of nuclear power plants”.

The climate and energy price crises require Australia to accelerate the decarbonisation of its electricity system and economy toward zero-emissions this decade.

Australia enjoys the global advantage of superabundant solar and wind resources.

Unlike some economies where nuclear energy is established, Australia also has available landmass for renewables infrastructure and the opportunity to share the benefits with communities.

We urge the federal government to maintain its policy and investment focus on the proven technology of low-cost, deflationary firmed renewables and “electrification of everything”, and to accelerate deployments, as it has done with its recent landmark boost to the Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS) bolstered by its pledge at COP28 to triple renewables by 2030.

When announced last year, the federal government said the first iteration of its CIS would drive around $10 billion of investment in clean dispatchable power.

Climate Energy Finance estimates the recently announced turbocharging of the CIS will see a four-fold lift in firmed clean energy investment across Australia.

The fastest-to-deploy and most popular renewable energy option for Australia is rooftop solar, the world’s cheapest energy source, because it eliminates transmission and distribution costs.

Mass solar electrification of households should be central to our clean energy transition plans.

Electrification of communities and commercial operations in Renewable Energy Zones will improve equity and build social licence for large-scale energy infrastructure, as it enables decarbonisation of industry.

These complementary actions will permanently reduce greenhouse emissions and energy prices, enable Australia to deliver on its climate commitments, and catalyse our generational opportunity to position Australia as a zero-emissions trade and investment leader.

Australia has no time to lose. The rise of renewables offers us a chance to reinvent Australia’s economy.

We can ill afford the opportunity cost of delay to our renewables transformation.

John Grimes is CEO of the Smart Energy Council. Dr Saul Griffith is co-founder and chief scientist of Rewiring Australia. Tim Buckley is a director of Climate Energy Finance. Blair Palese is founder of the Climate Capital Forum. Janaline Oh is executive director of Diplomats for Climate and a former senior diplomat. Dr John Hewson AM is a professor at the ANU Crawford School of Public Policy. Mara Bun is a company director and former president of the Australian Conservation Foundation.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Coalition delivers the same old tired nuclear talking points at COP28

With a heavy sigh, Crikey once again delves into the most pointless ritual in Australian public policy — the nuclear energy ‘debate’.

CHARLIE LEWIS, DEC 11, 2023,  https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/12/11/coalition-nuclear-energy-australia/

“Today I am happy to announce that a reelected Coalition government will, at its first COP after being returned to office, sign the nuclear pledge and return Australia to where it belongs, standing alongside its friends and allies,” opposition climate change and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien told world climate summit/increasingly dark joke at humanity’s expense COP28 on Saturday.

He pledged that a reelected Coalition government would triple nuclear energy output and overturn Australia’s nuclear energy moratorium, insisting “no nuclear, no net zero”.

And so, with a heavy sigh, Crikey once again delves into what our politics editor Bernard Keane has described as “the single most boring and ossified ritual in Australian public policy”.

A ‘sensible’ debate

It always starts with a demand for a “sensible” debate around the topic. Going back to John Howard’s years as prime minister (he called for this not once but twice) and to pick a handful of examples since: Then-foreign minister Julie Bishop in 2014, the then-assistant science minister Karen Andrews in 2015 and then-candidate Warren Mundine in 2019. Just last week, troublemaking former Labor minister Joel Fitzgibbon called on the Albanese government to end the ban on nuclear energy. This is not to mention a swathe of conservative media figures adding their voices to the choir over the years.

With dreary inevitability, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton reached for the old hymn book in his budget reply this year, arguing (all together now): “Any sensible government must consider small ­modular nuclear as part of the ­energy mix.”

Time is money and also money is money

As we’ve long reported — long, long reported — there are several barriers to nuclear power in Australia, primarily that the whole thing is incredibly expensive because Australia doesn’t have any nuclear infrastructure. As clean energy investor and man with a zeal for the teal Simon Holmes à Court, who was at O’Brien’s address, puts it, “it is a pretty easy pledge to sign because three times zero is zero”.

Nuclear power plants take a very long time to build — as Australia’s former chief scientist Alan Finkel told the Nine papers in August, it’s highly unlikely Australia could open a nuclear power plant before the early 2040s, a delay the country can ill afford if it is to dramatically reduce emissions as quickly as it needs to.

On top of this is the eye-watering price. According to research from the Department of Climate Change and Energy released in September this year, the cost of replacing coalmine sites with small nuclear reactors would be $387 billion.

Even former chair of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation Dr Ziggy Switkowski, who undertook a review on the viability of nuclear power for the Howard government in 2007 and is a very big fan of nuclear energy, conceded in 2018 “the window for gigawatt-scale nuclear has closed”:

With requirements for baseload capacity reducing, adding nuclear capacity one gigawatt at a time is hard to justify, especially as costs are now very high (in the range of $5 billion to $10 billion), development timelines are 15+ years, and solar with battery storage are winning the race.

The tax that is not to be named

There is and always has been only one way, in the eyes of Australia’s most credible nuclear spruikers, for nuclear energy to compete with existing energy sources: impose a carbon price.

Switkowski’s 2007 review probably didn’t greatly please Howard, given it found that nuclear became viable compared with coal and gas only if there was a carbon price. Economist and Crikey contributor John Quiggin has also previously argued in favour of nuclear energy in Australia only if it is backed by a carbon price.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | climate change - global warming, politics | Leave a comment

Oxfam welcomes Prime Minister Albanese’s call for a “sustainable ceasefire” and Australian vote for immediate ceasefire at UNGA

December 13, 2023,  The AIM Network  https://theaimn.com/oxfam-welcomes-prime-minister-albaneses-call-for-a-sustainable-ceasefire-and-australian-vote-for-immediate-ceasefire-at-unga/

Oxfam Australia has welcomed a joint statement signed by Prime Minister Albanese and the Prime Ministers of New Zealand and Canada calling for “urgent international efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire”, as well as Australia’s vote in support of an immediate ceasefire at the UN General Assembly.

The PMs’ statement calls for Israel to respect international law and describes Israeli settlements and settler violence in the West Bank as “serious obstacles to a negotiated two-state solution”.

Oxfam Australia Chief Executive Lyn Morgain said the statement and the successful vote were important steps.

“It is clear that this carnage has gone on for far too long and, as the statement says, 18,000 lives is far too high a price to pay. Civilians, including children, should never be punished for crimes committed by their leaders.

“For months now, Australians in their many thousands have been taking to the streets, signing petitions and actively campaigning for our leaders and government to do what it can to put an end to this senseless humanitarian catastrophe.

“The Prime Minister must continue to do all in his power to ensure this ceasefire happens, and that these issues aren’t forgotten once the fighting ends, so Palestinians have a real chance to live in a sustainable peace in their own state.”

December 14, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL | Leave a comment

The UN Nuclear Ban Treaty is Leading Resistance to Nuclear Autocracy.

Robert Rust, December 13, 2023 Union of Concerned Scientists

During the week of November 27th, under a cloud of international conflict and unease, delegates, politicians, activists and academics convened for the Second Meeting of States Parties (2MSP) to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) at the UN Headquarters in New York. Attendees came together to examine the global state of disarmament and harm-reduction work and call for more states to sign the nuclear ban treaty and join the stand against nuclear weapons. 

The TPNW is a broad coalition of nation states committed to building that framework through changing attitudes toward and the culture around nuclear weapons; currently, there are 93 signatories and 69 states parties. Unsurprisingly, none of the five nuclear-weapon states recognized by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, and France) have signed, and only seven of 38 OECD countries (Austria, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ireland, Mexico, and New Zealand) have signed or ratified. Clearly, this is a movement by those who have less to demand better behavior from those who have more. Nuclear weapons harm and threaten the many for the benefit of the few; the many are working to end that. 

Speaking at a session on the treaty’s obligations within victim assistance and remediation, Governor Hidehiko Yuzaki of Hiroshima made a key point about the way we think about security. Nuclear deterrence, he said, is an idea become dogma, not a hard truth; relying on it for security locks us into a system with inherent massive risks. We must stop thinking of security in these “narrow nationalistic frames”, and work to build a “collective, sustainable security framework.” 

Voices from the frontline 

The most important participants at the 2MSP were members of frontline communities directly impacted by mining, bombing, testing and storage across the world. The hibakusha, survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have experienced the horrors of nuclear weapons like no one else. The 2MSP heard how post-war US secrecy around the atomic bomb fostered significant discrimination towards hibakusha in Japan. Indeed, victim testimony at the museums dedicated to the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki describes how US scientists and military personnel arrived to test and observe the bomb’s impact on the local environment, including its inhabitants.

That dehumanization and disregard for human life was also central in nuclear testing across the world. Just as they are among the first and most seriously impacted by the effects of climate change, indigenous communities have historically been on the front lines of nuclear testing and uranium mining.

Speaking at the 2MSP, Karina Lester, who is from the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands (APY Lands) in the far Northwest of South Australia, spoke of her father and grandmother’s experiences of British nuclear testing in the area. She described how her father heard the ground shake and felt the “black smoke” move over their lands. The TPNW, she said, must continue to center the voices of those who have experienced the harm of nuclear weapons; the weapons must be made illegal, but governments must also work with those impacted to redress the harm caused. 

The TPNW should act as both a forum and a tool for those countries and communities who have been harmed. Powerful states have to respect the sovereignty of smaller states, honor their obligations through international treaties and respect the decisions of multilateral organizations. They have a history of failing to do so.

For example, discussing the work towards a nuclear-free Pacific, one speaker pointed out that after Christmas Island (Kiribas) was selected as a site for the United Kingdom’s nuclear testing, Samoa, which was a trust territory of New Zealand at the time, petitioned the UN Trusteeship Council to halt the 1957 test, but the United Kingdom did not listen. Indeed, examination of British military reports prior to the test show racist attitudes that were callously dismissive of harm to local “primitive” populations. The United Kingdom, United States and France saw the Pacific and Australia as “empty space”, erasing local populations entirely. ……………………………………………………………. more https://blog.ucsusa.org/robert-rust/the-un-nuclear-ban-treaty-is-leading-resistance-to-nuclear-autocracy/

December 14, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Gaza Is Deliberately Being Made Uninhabitable


CAITLIN JOHNSTONE, DEC 13, 2023  https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/gaza-is-deliberately-being-made-uninhabitable?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=139740561&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&utm_medium=email

Infectious diseases are tearing through Gaza, whose healthcare system has been rendered almost nonexistent, and people are beginning to starve in massive numbers. All of this is due to concrete policy decisions made by Israel in its horrific assault on the Gaza Strip.

In an article titled “Gaza’s health system is ‘on its knees’ as Israel pushes into Khan Younis,” The Washington Post reports that the mass displacement of nearly two million Palestinians in Gaza has led to overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions that are rapidly giving rise to disease.

“Meanwhile, the Gaza Health Ministry and other medical workers said they were recording new cases of acute hepatitis, scabies, measles and upper respiratory infections, mostly among children,” the Post reports. “Infectious diseases are spreading fast, said Imad al-Hams, a physician at the Kuwaiti Hospital in Rafah, as people crowd into tiny slivers of land to escape advancing Israeli forces.”

In a recent interview with CNN, Doctors Without Borders emergency coordinator Marie-Aure Perreaut described conditions in Gaza as “apocalyptic”, saying living conditions at the Al-Aqsa Hospital she’s working from “can barely be described as living conditions anymore.” 

“The healthcare system is completely collapsed at the moment,” Perreaut told Al Jazeera.

The UN World Food Programme reports that half of Gaza’s population is now starving due to Israeli siege warfare and the collapse of civilian infrastructure. In northern Gaza that figure goes up to nine in ten.

All of this aligns perfectly with Israeli policies of massive forced evacuations, attacking healthcare facilities, and laying complete siege to the Gaza Strip.

A doctor named Hafez Abukhoussa writes the following in a new article for Time titled “What I’ve Seen Treating Patients in Gaza’s Remaining Hospitals”:

Gaza’s health care system has almost completely collapsed as a result of Israel’s ongoing bombardment. Hospitals and ambulances have been repeatedly attacked. According to Gaza’s Ministry of Health, more than 250 medical workers have been killed so far, including two of my colleagues from Doctors Without Borders, who died while performing their duties in Al-Awda hospital in northern Gaza. Of Gaza’s 36 hospitals, only 11 are still functioning in any capacity, according to the World Health Organization. Hospitals in the north like Al-Shifa are barely functioning at all, as basic medicines and fuel have run out. My colleagues have been performing amputations by flashlight and without anesthesia. When Israeli soldiers raided Al-Shifa a few weeks ago — a move the head of the WHO called ‘totally unacceptable’ — doctors and staff were forced to abandon patients too sick or injured to evacuate. Some of those who refused to leave, including the hospital’s director, were arrested, alongside dozens of others. At Al-Nasr Children’s hospital, soldiers ordered staff to leave the patients, including four premature babies who required oxygen, who were later found dead.”

This all also aligns perfectly with the Netanyahu government’s reported agenda to “thin” the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip “to a minimum,” and with all the other calls for ethnic cleansing we keep seeing pushed by Israeli officials and thought leaders over and over again.

It also aligns perfectly with the suggestions made last month by an influential Israeli national security leader named Giora Eiland, a retired major general for the IDF.

“The international community warns us of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza and of severe epidemics,” Eiland wrote. “We must not shy away from this, as difficult as that may be. After all, severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer and reduce casualties among IDF soldiers.”

Eiland was completely dismissive of the idea that there are innocent people in Gaza, a sentiment we’re seeing pushed harder and harder as Israel draws nearer and nearer to a very, very dark chapter in the history of human civilization.

“They are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the ‘civilian’ officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population that enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th,” Eiland wrote, adding, “Who are the ‘poor’ women of Gaza? They are all the mothers, sisters or wives of Hamas murderers.”

“Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism,” Eiland adds. “Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”

When people talk about genocide in Gaza, they’re not just talking about the thousands of civilians who’ve been killed in Israeli airstrikes. The policies Israel has been deliberately putting in place have the potential to kill many, many more people than that in the coming months, and if Netanyahu and his goons get their way, that’s exactly what will happen.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wins, losses and participation trophies for US nuclear power in 2023

From the long-awaited commissioning of Vogtle 3 to the NuScale pilot’s collapse, here are the biggest wins and losses for nuclear from this year.

By Eric Wesoff, 12 December 2023,  https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/nuclear/wins-losses-and-participation-trophies-for-us-nuclear-power-in-2023

With this bumpy year for nuclear coming to a close and the world’s energy stakeholders having just gathered for the most nuclear-focused COP meeting ever, it’s a good time to assess the state of atomic power in the U.S.

Government pledges and consumer support for nuclear power in the U.S. have surged in recent years. Armed with this newfound policy support and financing, the relatively stagnant U.S. nuclear industry now has to start executing on its ambitious plans if the fuel is to play a meaningful role in decarbonizing the energy system.

So how did the U.S. nuclear sector fare in 2023? Here’s a list of its major wins and its losses.

A win on the world stage: Dubai hosts the first ​“nuclear COP”

More than 20 countries including the U.S., France, Japan and the U.K. pledged to triple global generation from nuclear energy by 2050 during this year’s COP28 global climate meeting in Dubai. Hitting that goal would require the world to install an average of 40 gigawatts of nuclear every year through 2050; presently, that annual installation figure is closer to 4 gigawatts.

Nuclear has received scant attention at previous COP meetings due to its financial challenges and the thorny issue of managing spent fuel, so the pledge is a marked departure from the policy status quo. All of this was enough to make this the year of the ​“nuclear COP.”

And although it’s a global pledge, President Biden’s climate envoy John Kerry helped spearhead the declaration, indicating the increasing embrace of nuclear power at the highest echelons of U.S. climate policy. Kerry said that the science has proven ​“you can’t get to net-zero 2050 without some nuclear.”

Participation trophy for Georgia Power: Vogtle 3 connects to the grid

It’s a bit of a stretch calling Vogtle 3’s long-awaited connection to the grid a ​“win” after a $16 billion cost overrun and a six-year overshoot of the target launch date, but the Department of Energy was looking forward to a new commercial reactor coming online this year, and the department ultimately did get its wish.

As of July 31, Georgia Power’s 1,100-megawatt Plant Vogtle Unit 3 nuclear reactor is supplying power to the grid — making it the first reactor to enter service since Tennessee’s Watts Bar Unit 2 began operating in 2016. Vogtle 4, a second 1,100-megawatt reactor, is nearing the finish line as well, with operations expected to start in early 2024, according to Georgia Power.

Thanks to then-Secretary Rick Perry, in 2019 the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office provided up to $12 billion in loan guarantees to help complete the Vogtle expansion amid a spate of spending freezes and lawsuits. The project generated more than 9,000 jobs during peak construction and will provide an additional 800 permanent jobs at the facility once fully operational.

Dan Yurman, publisher of Neutron Bytes, a blog on nuclear power, offered Canary Media this explanation for Vogtle’s major cost and schedule overruns: ​“The utility and the vendor kicked off a massive infrastructure project with major unaddressed risks in terms of supply chain, labor force skills, regulatory compliance and a 30-year gap in know-how to build large nuclear power plants. It is no surprise that the first-of-a-kind AP1000s came in at twice the cost and double the estimated time to complete them.”

The nuclear industry can call this a win — if it can learn from Vogtle and begin to remedy the missteps called out by Yurman.

A financial win: Nuclear funding and government support

The U.S. government is putting its money where its mouth is when it comes to supporting nuclear power: The (barely) Bipartisan Infrastructure Law added $3.2 billion for development of modular and advanced nuclear reactors, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office has devoted $11 billion in loan-making authority for advanced reactors and supply chains. What’s more, the epochal Inflation Reduction Act devotes $700 million to the HALEU Availability Program to support the development of a non-Russian supply of high-assay low-enriched uranium.

Additionally, the IRA offers a preposterously generous $15 per megawatt-hour production tax credit meant to keep today’s existing nuclear fleet competitive with gas and renewables, as well as a similarly generous investment tax credit to incentivize new plant construction.

Losing the global nuclear crown: China is sprinting ahead of the U.S. on nuclear 

America has the world’s biggest nuclear power fleet at 93 reactors, but it’s on its way to losing that distinction.

China has built 37 new reactors over the last decade for a total of 55, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. America has added a grand total of two reactors during that same period. China also aims to double its nuclear energy capacity by 2035, and it is well on its way; it has 22 nuclear plants currently under construction with more than 70 in the planning stages.

Outside of Vogtle 4, it’s unclear when — or if — another nuclear reactor will be connected to the U.S. grid.

And despite small modular reactors being held up as a cure-all to the U.S. nuclear industry’s significant challenges, the only country in the world that has actually built an SMR is China. It demonstrated a pair of smallish high-temperature, gas-cooled reactor units using a ​“pebble-bed” design and a more concentrated fuel format last year.

Notably, China is not a participant in the COP28 nuclear pledge — an ironic development as it’s the only country with any real chance of meeting the goal of tripling its capacity by 2050.

Huge win, disappointing loss for SMRs: NuScale’s ups and downs

The nuclear gods are fickle creatures. Small modular reactor pioneer NuScale Power made history in January 2023 when it scaled the highest regulatory peak in the U.S.: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission certified the design of its 50-megawatt module, the first small modular reactor and only the seventh reactor design ever approved for use in the U.S.

This was a long-fought victory for NuScale and advocates of SMRs: Utilities and developers can now reference NuScale’s SMR design when applying for a license to construct and operate a reactor. NuScale and the DOE spent more than 10 years and hundreds of millions of dollars to reach this regulatory milestone.

Armed with this historic design certification, NuScale landed a promising inaugural customer in the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems and began working on a deployment near the Department of Energy’s national laboratory in Idaho. Project plans had called for one 77-megawatt unit to begin operation in 2029.

The Idaho project was once widely predicted to be not only the first small module reactor completed in the U.S., but the next nuclear reactor to be built in the country, period. However, it was not to be so.

The project was ultimately scrapped in November because it couldn’t secure enough subscriptions from utilities in the Western U.S. to make the project work financially.

The innovative SMR aspirant still has a pipeline of tentative agreements to deploy reactors across North America, Europe and the Middle East.

Win for domestic HALEU fuel: Bringing uranium enrichment capabilities back to the U.S.

Call this one a win because, for the first time in 70 years, America is home to a U.S.-owned enrichment facility producing the concentrated fuel needed by the many advanced reactors now in development.

Centrus, a company with roots in the Manhattan Project, began demonstration-scale enrichment operations at its facility in Piketon, Ohio in October. It marks the potential rebirth of a once-strong American enrichment industry. America was once the only source of uranium enrichment outside of the Soviet bloc, but over the last 30 years, it has surrendered that role to Russia and other countries.

The HALEU produced in Centrus’ centrifuges will be used to test new fuels and reactor designs, as well as to fuel the cores of the two demonstration reactors funded through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and supported by DOE’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program.

The U.S. currently depends on Tenex, part of Russian state-owned nuclear supplier Rosatom, to supply the low-enriched uranium fuel that’s used in our civilian fleet. And Russia (which is not blockaded on nuclear fuel exports) supplies all of America’s high-assay low-enriched uranium, the more concentrated material required by the new generation of advanced reactors.

It is a precarious situation for U.S. national and energy security.

The DOE is looking to jump-start the domestic market by directing IRA funding toward enrichment and fuel-processing facilities like Centrus’ plant in Ohio, as well as by acting as the initial customer, creating an inventory and providing a reliable customer and price.

It’s a win for the U.S., but it comes after years of stepping on rakes.

A win for preserving the existing nuclear fleet: Diablo Canyon lives on

Pacific Gas & Electric, one of the three large investor-owned utilities in California, decided to decommission both of the reactors at California’s Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant in 2017.

But public outcry, political pressure and worries about grid failures seem to have helped get the plant’s operations extended an additional five years with the help of a state loan and up to $1.1 billion through the federal Civil Nuclear Credit Program designed to support economically ailing plants. It’s a win for California nuclear advocates and the emissions of the state’s grid.

PG&E has now filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a 20-year operating extension for the two 1,150-megawatt reactors at Diablo Canyon, which will trigger a review process expected to take a minimum of two years.

The U.S. nuclear fleet is the largest in the world, but it’s also one of the oldest: The average age of an American nuclear reactor is 42 years, compared to a world average of 31 years.

The majority of nuclear plant operators in the country have expressed interest in extending their operating licenses to allow operation up to 80 years, according to a poll of member utilities of Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade organization.

But even with such extensions, these older plants would all need to be replaced by around 2060, and nuclear power’s long lead times mean that decisions will have to be made about replacing their generation capacity in the late 2030s.

Neither a win nor a loss: Action in advanced reactors and microreactors 

Encouraged by government funding, shifting societal sentiment and a cornucopia of new reactor designs, 2023 witnessed a raft of startups and established vendors making deals in the U.S. and abroad to build next-generation nuclear reactors.

Microreactors like Oklo’s 15-megawatt fast breeder reactor, Aalo Atomics’ 20-megawatt thermal design based on the Marvel reactor at Idaho National Labs, and Westinghouse’s 5MWe eVinci design are intended to provide electrical power and heat in remote or behind-the-meter industrial applications. Ultra Safe Nuclear has plans to construct a microreactor facility in Gadsden, Alabama. The Department of Defense’s Strategic Capabilities Office’s Project Pele program is looking to build and demonstrate a 1–5 MWe mobile, high-temperature, gas-cooled microreactor capable of powering U.S. military bases.

But none of these designs are approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

For its part, the DOE is betting big on TerraPower and X-energy, with the agency’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program providing initial funding of $80 million to each, along with future cost-sharing funds. These two demonstration projects are poised to use HALEU from Centrus’ newly commissioned 16-centrifuge cascade.

TerraPower, founded by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, is developing a 345-megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor coupled with a molten salt energy storage system. The company has raised $750 million to build its operating demonstration reactor in Wyoming.

X-energy is developing its high-temperature gas-cooled advanced small modular reactor and plans the initial deployment at a Dow Chemical facility in Texas. 

These reactor designs also are not approved by the NRC.

Despite the proliferation of tentative agreements, memorandums of understanding and handshake deals, all of these planned reactors — with the possible exception of NuScale’s — fall into the famous ​“paper reactor” category — meaning they are simple, light, small, cheap and quick to build. Importantly, they are also never actually going to be built.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TODAY. The demise of Vladimir Zelensky – when will the USA throw him under a bus?

The augurs are not good for Ukraine’s President Zelensky . 

Menacing clouds gather: Zelensky in his latest trip to Washington failed to get more $billions from USA – the Ukraine counter-offensive against Russia has failed – European support for Ukraine is faltering- huge losses of soldiers and civilians – continuing corruption in Ukraine – shutting down of Orthodox churches in closed trials, alienation of all except fascist and nazi -connected political parties – unhappiness of oppressed Russian-speaking citizens.

With complete disregard for Ukraine’s history, – its experiences during World War 2, the Minsk agreement, the 8 years of war against the Donbass region, and then disregard of Zelensky’s promises pre-election, – USA and the West swallowed the whole magical myth of Zelensky as messiah for Ukraine, saving the world from the satanic Putin.

It might have been wise to consider just who is this person they are choosing to lead Ukraine, USA, NATO into this super-expensive murderous mess. The comedic background sounds like fun - the clown who once pretended to play the piano with his penis. But not only did Zelensky lack a background in politics: he was really out of his depth in the complicated and corrupt world of Ukraine’s business and political system

What Zelensky did have was an inflated ego, a narcissistic personality, and a superb ability to charm, con and persuade people. So he’s brave, energetic, etc. But it has been a disastrous two-way street - Zelensky conning the West and the West conning Zelensky. into Ukraine’s suicidal aim to humiliate Russia, re-acquire Crimea and the Donbass, and become a NATO bastion. 

In the meantime, the Ukrainian death toll mounts, and the USA weapons manufacturers profits mount.

But hey! – now we’ve got the Israel-Gaza crisis. That all needs USA weapons, too, to keep that massacre going. The spotlight is off Ukraine.

There must be many who resent Zelensky – to put it mildly. Perhaps there will be a negotiated way out of the Ukraine mess, and Zelensky might safely slide off to quiet retirement overseas.

Vladimir Zelensky has been very useful to the USA. But it’s time to discard him.

December 14, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Labor’s new AUKUS bill declares Osborne in SA, Stirling in WA as nuclear zones.

AUKUS’ claims of “nuclear stewardship” with US nuclear submarines and retaining the US origin high-level nuclear wastes are a farce.

The US has been unable to dispose of its own high-level wastes.

David Noonan, Kaurna Yerta/Adelaide, December 12, 2023, Issue 1396  https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/labors-new-aukus-bill-declares-osborne-sa-stirling-wa-nuclear-zones

Labor introduced a bill on November 16, which cites Osborne as the first designated zone for the AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines.

The Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023 allows for naval nuclear reactors at Port Adelaide under a new “Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulator”. That entity is to report directly to Minister for Defence Richard Marles.

Nuclear submarines have never used this port.

Alarmingly, Section 132 of the bill over-rides the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 and the military regulator is given powers over the civilian Nuclear Safety Agency ARPANSA.

The Medical Association for Prevention of War has sounded the alarm. “Naval nuclear reactors — like all nuclear reactors — pose potentially serious risks for people and the environment. But unlike other reactors, most information about naval reactors is kept classified, and it can be difficult to say how safe they are.

Marles told parliament he will hold the power to direct the military nuclear regulator during a “national security” emergency.

Stirling Naval Base, near Fremantle in Western Australia, is the second nuclear zone to be declared in this bill.

The South Australian and Port Adelaide communities have the right to have a say on nuclear safety and the risks in bringing naval nuclear reactors into the port. 

Key public interest questions are yet to be answered.

They include: Will communities be consulted on accident response plans? What is the existing radiation emergency capability in current and proposed nuclear sub port sites? Will local health and medical services be consulted? How will communities be properly informed about the risks of naval nuclear reactors? How will safety issues be monitored and communicated? How will the public interest in safety issues be protected? When will accident scenarios for nuclear subs at base be modelled and made public? How can the public verify the quality of emergency management plans and systems? How can authorities demonstrate their capacity to respond to radiation emergencies, and other accident scenarios?

The bill has now gone to a Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee inquiry, which is open for public submissions and is due to report next April.

The bill proposes to override state laws.
Section 135,  “Operation of State and Territory laws”, states: “If a law of a State or Territory, or one or more provisions of such a law, is prescribed by the regulations, that law or provision does not apply in relation to a regulated activity.”

The bill provides for regulated activities in “nuclear waste management, storage and disposal” at AUKUS facilities in future nuclear zones, to be authorised under Section 135.

According to media reports in August, the Woomera rocket range is understood to be the “favoured location” for the storage and disposal of submarine nuclear waste.

If the federal government wants to locate an AUKUS nuclear waste dump in South Australia, it will have to over-ride existing law to impose this. 

This AUKUS bill is a threat to the people of SA. AUKUS locks Australia into buying existing US military nuclear reactors in second-hand 10-12 year old submarines, loaded with intractable US-origin weapons grade high-level nuclear wastes. 

US Vice Admiral Bill Houston has said in-service Virginia class submarines would be sold in 2032 and 2035 and a newly-produced submarine in 2038.

AUKUS’ claims of “nuclear stewardship” with US nuclear submarines and retaining the US origin high-level nuclear wastes are a farce. The US has been unable to dispose of its own high-level wastes.

Marles said in March there would be an AUKUS announcement by early 2024 on a process to manage high-level nuclear waste and to site a waste disposal facility.

The storage and disposal of nuclear wastes compromises the safety and welfare of the people of SA. That is why it is prohibited by the state’s Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000.

This law covers public interest issues, including health, safety and welfare as well as “to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State”.

The import, transport, storage and disposal of high-level nuclear reactor waste is prohibited in SA.

This AUKUS bill must be challenged. The SA Premier is yet to say if he will support an Indigenous right to say “No” to an AUKUS dump. South Australians have a right to decide their own future and to say “No”.

[Dave Noonan is a long-term anti-nuclear campaigner. For more information see the Medical Association for Prevention of War’s Safety Brief. Contact the Committee Secretariat on 02 6277 3535 or email fadt.sen@aph.gov.au. Upload your submission here.]

December 12, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Liberal Coalition’s strategy – support fossil fuels by delaying renewables and pushing for nuclear energy

they’ve come up with the perfect strategy to ensure no climate action is taken – advocate the bypassing of renewables in favour of small nuclear modular reactors.

It’s the old strategy of “why put off until tomorrow what you can put off forever”?

Or, as Malcolm Turnbull put it at the COP28 meeting: “Nuclear’s only utility is as … a means of supporting fossil fuels by delaying and distracting the rollout of renewables”.

Energy transition needs gas not nuclear,  https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/energy-transition-needs-gas-not-nuclear-20231203-p5eola 11 Dec 23, Craig Emerson, Former Labor minister and economist

A rational decarbonising energy policy offers a middle path between the absolutists and the denialists.

A civilisation is in decline when logical thinking and evidence-based policy are angrily dismissed in favour of tribal dogma. Western civilisation is lurching in this dangerous direction. Bravery is needed from those who remain capable of rational thought.

A prime contemporary example is the energy transition. Arguing about the energy transition are the absolutists and the denialists.

The absolutists demand that Australia open no new coal mines or gas fields. They require the governments of poor countries to shut their coal-fired power stations forthwith, despite no affordable alternative source of electricity being available.

In these countries, solar and wind power can play a role in electricity generation, but not totally and immediately. Renewable generation requires firming capacity in the nights and evenings, which can be provided by gas generators.

In fact, gas peaking and standby can hasten the closure of coal-fired power stations, which is desirable for the planet. But the neocolonial absolutists demand gas be excluded from the energy mix in poor countries.

The absolutists also oppose carbon capture and storage as a matter of dogma. The same goes for carbon offsets, regardless of their integrity.

Gas is also used to produce synthetic fibres; the kind Absolutists like to wear in preference to thirsty cotton and the wool of methane-emitting sheep.

Coking coal is used to produce steel. Absolutists oppose new coking coal mines. People in poor countries are not to have access to steel products, the type that rich-country absolutists use every day.

Denialists, on the other hand, such as former prime minister Tony Abbott, speak of the global warming hoax and describe believers in climate change as members of a cult. Denialists believe that not just absolutists are involved in this conspiracy against the western way of life, but so too are the United Nations, the NASA space agency and the world’s bureaus of meteorology.

Denialists have learned not to speak so loudly of these alleged hoaxes, cults and conspiracies, operating on the assumption that most voters under the age of 40 have been brainwashed into believing climate change is real and will cast their votes accordingly.

To address this electoral quandary, they’ve come up with the perfect strategy to ensure no climate action is taken – advocate the bypassing of renewables in favour of small nuclear modular reactors.

With cost blowouts precipitating the recent collapse of a flagship US project working on a small modular reactor, the prospects of this technology supplying electricity at competitive prices are highly questionable.

In any event, former NSW treasurer Matt Kean, though favourably disposed to small nuclear modular reactors, has pointed out that none would be ready for commercial deployment before 2040.

By that time, Australia’s fleet of ageing coal-fired power stations will be clapped out.

The Peter Dutton-led opposition voted against the Albanese government’s safeguard mechanism, the latest attempt to put a price on carbon for major emitters, despite the Business Council of Australia calling it “a very good policy”.

In an effort to continue the debilitating climate wars that have been raging for more than a decade, Dutton labelled the safeguard mechanism a “carbon tax 2.0”.

With no emissions-reduction strategy, plenty of hostility towards renewables and a promise of small modular reactors from 2040 at the earliest, the denialists have only one remaining option – to use taxpayers’ money to fund the construction of new coal-fired power stations. The private sector certainly won’t risk it.

It’s the old strategy of “why put off until tomorrow what you can put off forever”?

Or, as Malcolm Turnbull put it at the COP28 meeting: “Nuclear’s only utility is as … a means of supporting fossil fuels by delaying and distracting the rollout of renewables”.

There is a middle path between the absolutists and the denialists.

A rational decarbonising energy policy would include the legislated safeguard mechanism, solar and wind energy, and – for firming capacity – the use of gas, big batteries and, where economically viable, pumped hydro.

Where gas producers can make carbon capture and storage feasible, they should be encouraged to do so. Trading in high-integrity carbon offsets should be part of the solution, especially for countries that lack viable renewable energy resources.

In various combinations, these features of a rational climate policy have been adopted by the Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull and Albanese governments. They were opposed by the Abbott government and, largely, by the Dutton-led Coalition.

Between them, absolutists and denialists would oppose most – if not all – of these sensible features.

Finding a demilitarised zone between these warring tribes is as elusive as it was when the Senate voted down a carbon price 14 years ago. Yet, it seems that most of the voting public feels the policy approach now being taken by federal and state governments lies along that narrow path.

The lesson from this story is to let warring tribes slug it out and get on with sound policy in the national interest.

December 12, 2023 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Going nuclear would be a costly mistake

Graeme Lechte, The Age, 12 Dec 23

The article ″⁣Coalition MP talks up triple nuclear option at climate summit″⁣ (11/12) raises disturbing issues in regard to Australia’s future energy production and our pathway to net zero. A group of Coalition MPs have backed a pledge to increase nuclear energy output and overturn the current policy of no nuclear energy in Australia. If the Coalition is returned, its energy policy will flip the focus from renewables to nuclear. After all the hard work and investment to establish a secure power system based around renewables, under a Coalition government, renewables would play second fiddle to establishing an expensive nuclear industry that would take at least 10 years to come on line. Aside from the safety issues and emissions from mining uranium, this policy would see renewables sidelined and the path to net zero become a confusion of opposing strategies.

Labor’s attempts to base our energy supply around renewables would be in tatters under a future Coalition government and our path to net zero even more difficult – not to mention the huge costs associated with establishing a fledgling nuclear industry.

December 12, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy | Leave a comment

Ted O’Brien’s nuclear love-in at COP28 gets a brutal reality check.

Ed note. I was pretty surprised that Rafael Grossi who usually downplays all the risks of nuclear (safety, terrorism, weapons proliferation, wastes) went so far as to claim that nuclear is not even a financial risk !

Jim Green 11 December 2023,  https://reneweconomy.com.au/ted-obriens-nuclear-love-in-at-cop28-gets-a-brutal-reality-check/—

The nuclear lobby has been out in force at the COP28 climate conference in Dubai. Their main initiative was a ‘declaration’ promoting a “global aspirational goal of tripling nuclear energy capacity from 2020 by 2050”, signed by 22 countries and supported by 120 companies.

The 22 countries are Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ghana, Hungary, Japan, South Korea, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Ukraine, the UAE, the UK and the USA.

David Appleyard, editor of Nuclear Engineering International, did the math: “Now 2050 still sounds like a long way off, but to triple nuclear capacity in this time frame would require nuclear deployment to average 40 GW [gigawatts] a year over the next two and half decades. The cruel reality is that’s more than six times the rate that has been seen over the last decade.”

A dominant feature in the declaration — and all the nuclear lobbying surrounding COP28 — is the perceived need to find new methods of financing nuclear plants. In the words of the declaration, participants “commit to mobilize investments in nuclear power, including through innovative financing mechanisms”.

Nuclear power as a commercial venture is very nearly dead, and thus the participants “invite shareholders of the World Bank, international financial institutions, and regional development banks to encourage the inclusion of nuclear energy in their organizations’ energy lending policies”.

In a parallel initiative announced during COP28, the US plans to “jump start” the development of small modular reactor (SMR) exports despite the recent collapse of NuScale Power’s flagship project in Idaho. The US Export-Import Bank has approved a resolution to fund applications for the export of US SMR systems and components.

International Atomic Energy Agency director-general Rafael Grossi recently said — apparently without irony — that international financial institutions, development banks and private banks and investors should take a fresh look at the “winning” investment of financing new nuclear power plants.

In fact, US giant Westinghouse declared bankruptcy in 2017 following its disastrous reactor construction projects in South Carolina and Georgia; the British nuclear power industry went bankrupt years ago and was sold to the French, then the French nuclear industry went bankrupt and has been fully nationalised; South Korean utility KEPCO’s debt has climbed to A$224 billion; the Japanese nuclear industry is essentially a pile of ashes in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster; and so on.

Ted O’Brien says a bunch of silly things

The federal Coalition’s shadow energy minister Ted O’Brien was the lead speaker at a forum on the sidelines of COP28 titled ‘Australia’s Nuclear Energy Potential: Joining the Global Journey’.

The forum also heard from representatives of the (so-called) Coalition for Conservation (which flew seven Liberal and National MPs to the summit), the World Nuclear Association, Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, the US Nuclear Industry Council; and an Italian SMR start-up called Newcleo.

O’Brien said that a Coalition government would sign the 22-nation declaration with its aspirational goal of tripling nuclear power capacity by 2050.

The Labor government last week joined more than 120 countries in backing a pledge to triple renewable energy and double the rate of energy efficiency by 2030 — a pledge opposed by the Coalition. O’Brien reiterated the Coalition’s opposition to the Labor government’s target of 82 per cent renewable power supply by 2030.


Speaking to The Guardian, former NSW treasurer Matt Kean said “obviously nuclear is a long way away” and Australia should back renewable energy now: “Who knows what might be available in another 20 years — we may have flying cars in 20 years — but that doesn’t mean you base your whole transport around it.”

O’Brien told the COP sideline forum that Australia’s legislation banning nuclear power is “bizarre”. That would be the legislation introduced by John Howard’s Coalition government and left untouched by the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison Coalition governments over nearly a decade.

O’Brien said Australia’s track record on renewables is something to be “enormously proud of” without noting the Coalition’s decades-long efforts to slow the growth of renewables and to promote fossil fuel power generators.

He failed to mention that fellow Queenslander and Nationals leader David Littleproud recently said he wants a “pause” to the roll out of wind and solar and transmission links and a stop to the “reckless pursuit” of the government’s 82 percent renewables target by 2030.

O’Brien showed a photo of his children, whose existence apparently demonstrates his commitment to a low-carbon, environmentally sustainable future. In case anyone thought he was serious, he said that Australia needs more gas-fired power generation.

O’Brien said nuclear power is one of the fastest ways to decarbonise; that nuclear waste is “so miniscule”; that Australia should develop “capabilities in other areas of the nuclear fuel cycle”; that the Coalition was not interested in old nuclear but rather Generation 3+ (i.e. mostly non-existent) nuclear power; and that COP28 will be remembered as the “nuclear COP”.

World Nuclear Industry Status Report

The December 6 release of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) provided a welcome relief to all the nuclear nonsense at COP28, including O’Brien’s. For over 30 years, these annual reports have provided factual information that irritates the nuclear industry no end.

Continue reading →

December 12, 2023 Posted by | climate change - global warming, politics | Leave a comment

Australia’s Opposition Coalition opposes Australia tripling renewable energy, backs nuclear power pledge at Cop28

Ted O’Brien declares global climate summit ‘the nuclear Cop’ despite only 11% of nations backing the pledge

Guardian Australia, Adam Morton in Dubai 10 Dec 23

The federal Coalition has declared at the Cop28 climate summit that it will back a global pledge to triple nuclear energy if the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, becomes prime minister, but will not support Australia tripling its renewable energy.

Speaking on the sidelines of the conference in Dubai, the opposition’s climate change and energy spokesperson, Ted O’Brien, also said a Coalition government would consider supporting Generation III+ large-scale nuclear reactors, and not just the unproven small modular reactors it has strongly touted.

The statement at the global summit confirmed the Coalition was on a markedly different path to Labor. The Albanese government last week joined more than 120 countries in backing a pledge to triple renewable energy and double the rate of energy efficiency by 2030, but did not sign up with 22 countries that supported tripling nuclear power by 2050.

While only 11% of countries at the talks – mostly nations that already have a domestic nuclear energy industry – backed the nuclear pledge, O’Brien declared “Cop28 will be known as the nuclear Cop”.

“Under a Dutton-led Coalition, at our first Cop in office we would sign Australia up to that pledge, together with our allies and our friends,” he said.

O’Brien’s speech was at a side event hosted by the World Nuclear Association and the Australian group Coalition for Conservation, which flew seven Liberal and National MPs to the summit. About 30 people attended, including Coalition members Bridget McKenzie, Andrew Bragg, Perrin Davey, Dean Smith and Kevin Hogan.

Asked if the Coalition would back the pledge to triple renewable energy by the end of the decade, O’Brien said he would not support Australia acting on it. “What we don’t need is all of our eggs in one basket, we need a balanced mix of technologies, and that includes renewables,” he said.

The Australian climate change minister, Chris Bowen, gave a different vision for Australia’s electricity future in his national statement to the summit, urging countries “not to drift further apart” and said those such as Australia with “massive renewable potential” had a responsibility to share it with others.

Hence Australia’s determination to become a global renewable energy superpower,” Bowen said. “We must look at our future and our fates and redouble our efforts to bring down our emissions and get our world back on track.”

In his speech, O’Brien said the Coalition would advocate for removing bans on uranium mining and exploration because Australia had “a moral obligation” to provide it to the world.

Asked why he did not accept the advice of the Australian Energy Market Operator, which found the country’s optimal future electricity grid would run on more than 90% renewable energy backed by firming support, O’Brien said he had looked at operator’s integrated system plan “in great detail”, but a Cop was “probably not the right place for going through it”.

“Nevertheless, if your question is ‘do we agree with Labor’s plan for 82% renewables in the grid by 2030?’ Well, no, we don’t,” he said.

Some observers questioned how the Coalition’s plan to slow renewable energy expansion would avoid power blackouts as old and increasingly failing coal-fired power plants closed over the next decade. O’Brien acknowledged in his speech that 80% of Australia’s “baseload power” was expected to leave the grid by 2035.

Experts say the country would not have a nuclear industry before 2040 even if the national ban on the technology was lifted now, and nuclear energy is more expensive than alternatives.

New South Wales Liberal MP Matt Kean, a former state treasurer, acknowledged O’Brien’s commitment to reaching net zero emissions but said “obviously nuclear is a long way away” and the country should back renewable energy now.

“Who knows what might be available in another 20 years – we may have flying cars in 20 years – but that doesn’t mean you base your whole transport around it,” he said.

The chief executive of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, Darren Miller, said there would be no room for nuclear energy if the country was headed towards 80% renewable energy by 2030. “It is not a flexible technology that helps you go from 80% to 100%,” he said………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/10/coalition-tells-cop28-it-will-tback-tripling-of-nuclear-energy-if-peter-dutton-becomes-prime-minister

December 12, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

US Defense funding bill to include OK for nuclear subs, AUKUS tech for Australia

Riotat, December 2023 | Andrew McLaughlin

The US Congress is set to approve the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) this week, green-lighting the transfer of at least two Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to the Royal Australian Navy.

Democratic Senator Joe Courtney (left) and Australian Ambassador to the US Kevin Rudd (centre) at the General Dynamics Electric Boat shipyard in Groton, Connecticut. Photo: Senator Courtney LinkedIn.

The US Congress is set to approve the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) this week, green-lighting the transfer of at least two Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to the Royal Australian Navy.

After months of wrangling, the $US874.2 billion ($A1.324 trillion) bill will put into US law the AUKUS Pillar 1 agreement between Australia, the UK and the US. It will also clear the way for a $US 3bn ($A 4.5 billion) investment by the Australian Government in US shipyards to expand their submarine manufacturing capacity and the release of sensitive US technologies to Australia.

The bill still needs to be voted on by Congress, but apart from pushback by the Republican ‘Freedom Caucus’, which has seen many of its proposed amendments unrelated to AUKUS removed, passing the largely bipartisan bill is expected to be a formality and completed before Congress rises for the Christmas break.

Importantly, the bill includes four key authorisations that are needed to enact the AUKUS agreement into law.

These include more time to approve a ”defense supplemental spending request’’ required to expand US submarine production capacity; the acceptance of the $US3 billion payment from Australia, allowing Australian industry personnel to train on the maintenance and use of nuclear-powered submarines; and an exemption for Australia and the UK from the US export control regimen if both countries develop comparable laws of their own.

That last authorisation will not only cover the nuclear reactors and other systems for Australia’s submarines but also a large number of technologies that will be required to develop many of the planned AUKUS Pillar 2 capabilities, including cyber, quantum computing, autonomous systems, artificial intelligence, space-based capabilities and hypersonics.

The bill will also give Australian and British companies access to US federal grants under the Defense Production Act…………………………………………………….. https://the-riotact.com/us-defense-funding-bill-to-include-ok-for-nuclear-subs-aukus-tech-for-australia/729587

December 12, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »