How wealthy countries, (like U.S., Canada, Australia, and Norway)evade responsibility for their fossil fuel exports
a remarkable new report from Oil Change International (OCI) found that those four countries (the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Norway), along with the U.K., account for just over half of the planned expansion in oil and gas between now and mid-century. In most cases the project licenses have already been granted, and unless officials intervene, the damage (enough carbon and methane to take us past the Paris climate targets) is locked in.
Bulletin, By Bill McKibben | November 30, 2023
When the world convenes in the United Arab Emirates for the next round of the endless climate slog, much attention will be paid to the pledges of individual nations to cut their emissions. This has been the basic scorecard of climate talks almost since the start. But it’s a wildly incomplete scorecard, in ways that are becoming ever clearer as we enter the endgame of the energy transition. We’ve been measuring it wrong.
That’s because a country’s exports of fossil fuel don’t count against its total. But it’s those exports that are driving fossil fuel expansion around the world, coming as they do from some of the most diplomatically powerful and wealthy nations on Earth.
To give the most obvious, and largest, example: the United States is, fitfully, cutting back on its carbon emissions; its envoys will be able to report, honestly, that the Inflation Reduction Act should soon actually be trimming our domestic use of oil, gas, and coal, as we subsidize heat pumps and build out EV charging networks. But at the very same moment, the U.S. production of fossil fuels is booming. That means, of course, that much of that supply is headed overseas.
And the numbers are truly staggering. If the liquefied natural gas (LNG) buildout continues as planned, for instance, by 2030 U.S. LNG exports will be responsible for more greenhouse gases than every house, car, and factory in the European Union. The emissions, under the U.N. accounting system, will show up on the scorecards of the EU and the dozens of mostly Asian nations that will buy the gas. But if you could see them in the atmosphere, they would be red, white, and blue.
Exactly the same thing is true of a handful of other nations — in fact, some are even more grotesque in their hypocrisy, if not their impact. Norway has, arguably, done as good a job as any country on earth on moving past oil and gas; almost every new car in the country runs on electricity. But it’s planning one of the dozen biggest expansions in national oil and gas production, almost all of it for export. Canada and Australia fall into the same basket. Indeed, a remarkable new report from Oil Change International (OCI) found that those four countries (the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Norway), along with the U.K., account for just over half of the planned expansion in oil and gas between now and mid-century. In most cases the project licenses have already been granted, and unless officials intervene, the damage (enough carbon and methane to take us past the Paris climate targets) is locked in…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
the real question here may be, how do politics work? The fossil fuel industry demonstrated its firm grip on power in the U.S. in 2015 when it got the export ban lifted. Now the industry is flush with cash: Exxon reported a quarterly profit of $9.1 billion last month. It’s using its cash to buy up even more fracking real estate; clearly it concludes it has the political juice to enable it to face Biden down and keep on pumping gas for the planet.
………………………………. Canada’s huge contribution to our global crisis is its exports. Trudeau quite honestly summed up his nation’s position in 2017 in a talk to Texas oilmen, when he told the truth about the country’s vast tar sands complex: “No country would find 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground and just leave them there.” Canada couldn’t burn 173 billion barrels of oil if everyone in the country kept their car idling 24 hours a day, and they couldn’t burn the enormous quantity of natural gas that’s been found further north in Alberta if they all turned their thermostats to 115 and wore bathing suits all winter. That’s why they’re busy building pipelines to take the oil and the gas to the Pacific.
I could do the same math for Australia or the U.K. or Norway. No matter what they stand up and say in the UAE over the next month, remember: They’ve decided to hold a fire sale at the end of the world. https://thebulletin.org/2023/11/how-wealthy-countries-evade-responsibility-for-their-fossil-fuel-exports/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ThursdayNewsletter11302023&utm_content=ClimateChange_WealthyCountries_11302023
The nuclear power renaissance has some way to run
EDF is vowing to build one reactor a year but challenges range from funding to a lack of skilled workers.
SARAH WHITE
https://www.ft.com/content/aaa33c5c-70e8-4f05-a45a-a45c7d2aba72 1 Dec 23
When France first hosted a nuclear power trade fair about a decade ago, in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, it was a low-key affair. Two years ago, organisers’ main worry was to avoid anti-nuclear protesters marring proceedings.
This week, the buzz at the vast salon on the outskirts of Paris was unequivocal. Miss America 2023, a nuclear engineering student, was on hand to help the event court the limelight, and champagne flowed on the stands displaying radioprotective gloves and designs for cutting-edge small reactors. The message was clear: nuclear power is back, and France, Europe’s atomic power champion with its 56 reactors, intends to be at the heart of this revival.
“We’re coming out of a period of taboos [over nuclear],” said Sylvie Bermann, a former French ambassador to China and Russia who heads the Paris show.
The industry and its low-emission technology would also have its moment for the first time at the COP28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates, with a dedicated event, she added.
After years in the doldrums, mindsets over nuclear have shifted, spurred by climate worries and an energy crisis last year when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine and cut gas supplies to Europe. Even Japan, home to the Fukushima meltdown of 2011, has restarted idled reactors, while a host of other nations are considering new plants, giving suppliers reasons to feel more optimistic.
What is less obvious will be the move from aspirations to reality, in a sector where building reactors is costly and slow, especially after decades without projects drained the industry of skilled workers.
Part of the promotional push by France and other pro-nuclear nations is aimed at solving some big obstacles. Chief among them, according to the head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog Rafael Grossi, is the financing, including from multilateral bodies.
Paris, which is riding high on recent EU wins to gain some subsidies for its existing plants, originally opposed by staunchly anti-nuclear Germany, has campaigned for instance for the European Investment Bank to help fund the construction of new reactors. “Nuclear has been constructed very fast when the money’s there,” said the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Grossi, citing the United Arab Emirates, which had gone from “zero to champions” in roughly eight years with a $20bn-plus project for four Korean-built reactors. They are almost all now online.
There’s also a lot to prove on the industrial front. France’s state-controlled nuclear power operator EDF aims to build roughly one 1.6 Gigawatt reactor a year once it gets going with its new orders for at least six new ones in France by the mid-2030s, according to chief executive Luc Rémont.
Considering its prototype in northern France known as Flamanville 3 has been 16 years in the making, it is an extremely ambitious goal. Rémont argues that parallel projects (the state-owned group is bidding for projects in India and the Czech Republic) would help EDF become better and faster.
There are other challenges. Many nations have long been dependent on Russian nuclear fuel, including the US reactor fleet, and finding sufficient alternative supplies could take years.
Meanwhile, the IAEA forecasts that over the next 20 years the industry’s share in the global energy mix — roughly 10 per cent of the world’s electricity generation today — will remain flat, if not decrease slightly, unless there are even more ambitious construction plans.
Developers argue, however, that the hardest battle is getting political buy-in to give them the visibility they need. Judging by the upbeat messaging coming out of Paris this week, that part of the complex nuclear equation at least is some way towards being solved.
COP 28 A sorry tale of climate hypocrisy
Yeah, we’re all whingeing about United Arab Emirates hosting the COP28 Climate Summit, while quietly making sure that their oil industry booms on.
Because we, the righteous Western nations are doing so much to slow down global heating. And we are. the USA has its worthy Inflation Reduction Act- cuts down on the home use of oil gas and coal, and USA promotes renewable energy, heat pumps, electric cars.
Canada has its Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, cutting down on domestic greenhouse gas emissions. Australia is promoting renewable energy and electric cars at home. Norway is big on electric cars, and encouraging climate-friendly systems, at home.
But the reality is- take Australia as an example – the world’s largest exporter of coal, and big exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). USA is a huge exporter of LNG. Canada – oil and natural gas exports. Norway – huge supplier of oil and gas.
All of these national governments approve and support the expansion and export of fossil fuels, while sanctimoniously bleating about “net zero” at home.
Sure, let’s criticise Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber and his lot. But the big Western players are in reality even bigger polluters.
Karina Lester addresses the Second Meeting of States Parties to the TPNW
Karina Lester, second-generation nuclear test survivor and ICAN Ambassador addresses the delegates at the UN Second Meeting of States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in NYC, November 28th, 2023.
She said “People still suffer to this day. We know our lands are poisoned. We know the fallout contaminated our country and our families, our people who move through those traditional lands…
We want recognition by governments of the day of the harms and what they’ve imposed on our people and on our traditional lands… We want respect and we want to start the conversations on repair. How do we work together to fix the damages that are there?”
She called on states parties to get to work on Articles 6 & 7 and for observers to double their efforts to sign and ratify the #nuclearban. She called on Australia, in particular, to make joining the treaty a top priority.
“Nuremberg Trial” for Israel’s Crimes Against Palestinians?
, https://www.thepostil.com/a-nuremberg-trial-for-israels-crimes-against-palestinians/
Make no mistake. Israel has committed massive crimes in Gaza and in the West Bank against the Palestinians. When will the thousands killed get justice? Or are we all supposed to just go on with our lives and pretend that it’s all the pursuit of “the right of self-defense?” Who are these IDF snipers who anonymously shoot children, and no one is even curious to know who these killers are? Is this the way of war now, according to the “international rules based order” that we should be so proud of in the West, which is supposedly the hallmark of our “civilization?”
A day of reckoning will come. There are good men and women who are wokring to make that a reality.
And what are we to make of our politcal class that utters not a peep about the slaughter that Netanyahu is doing, but who earlier could not get the ICC to issue an arrest warrant for President Putin fast enough, because Putin was assumed to have “kidnapped” Ukrainian orphans that they might have a decent life in Russia. But Netanyahu can kill as many children as he wants, since that is not a crime according to the “rule of law,” so the “jurists” at the ICC stay busy identifying “Russian crimes” that might be spotted at the backs of their cereal boxes.
Kurt Tucholsky was paraphrasing a French joke when he observed that “the death of one person: that’s a catastrophe. One hundred thousand dead: that’s a statistic!”
What Israel has done for over a month in Gaza is now a matter of statistics, for they have killed over 15,000 so far, more than 4000 of them children. It is the Palestinian Holocaust, because there are many more thousands buried under all those pancaked buildings where people once lived. And now that the Israeli assault continues, many thousands more will die.
Given these grim statistics, it becomes more and more important to remember the one person, rather than mention in passing the vast number of the now faceless thousands dead.
One such person was Elham Farah, a Christian Palestinian, living in Gaza, where she had taught music all her life. She was 84 years old and was the daughter of the Palestinian poet, Hannah Farah.
On November 12, 2023, an Israeli sniper shot her in the leg, as she came out of the Holy Family Church in Gaza City, where she had been sheltering to escape the bombing. She wanted to make sure that her home had not been hit. A sniper was waiting who are trained to shoot in the leg.
Those inside the church tried to rescue her, as she cried out for help, but people were afraid of Israeli snipers who long have had a reputation for being merciless. Elham Farah bled to death over several days. No one came to help her because of the sniping. She had just survived the bombing of Saint Porphyrios, the 850-year-old church in Gaza, which took the lives of 18 other Christians. Is such a death for a gentle old lady acceptable to those who see themselves as “civilized?” And why no one even knows about the crimes of Israeli snipers is unimaginable.
The hell unleashed by the Herod of our time in the Holy Land escapes the mind’s ability to describe horror—to see little children torn apart by bombs, dropped by pilots in their sophisticated flying machines is beyond the reach of words…
Then Herod perceiving that he was deluded by the wise men, was exceeding angry: and sending killed all the menchildren that were in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremias the prophet, saying:
A voice in Rama was heard, lamentation and great mourning; Rachel bewailing her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not (Matthew 2:16-18).
Rama” or “Ramah” is the name of several Palestinian towns, and “Rachel” stands in for all mothers whose children have been slaughtered by the powerful. Such killing was “righteous revenge” because the Hamas razzia of October 7th was fabricated as brutal, with beheaded babies and babies in ovens, when it was the IDF that did most of the slaughter of Israelis that day. Why the need to lie by Israel? The full truth about what really happened on October 7th is now coming out: Hamas killed IDF soldiers in combat. It was not a “terrorist” attack:
Thus on October 7th:
The IDF killed anything that moved;- Many Israeli captives were still alive, two days after October 7;
- Israelis were killed by the IDF with heavy shelling of houses and cars;
- Most of the civilian deaths happened because of the IDF;
- It was a razzia by Hamas because most of the captives taken were IDF officers.
And in the West, we have the war enthusiasts, eagerly cheering on Netanyahu and his ilk to kill more, to kill without compunction, for there will be no red lines drawn, because Israel is for “civilization,” because that is how you fight wars, by killing as many babies as you can with bombs.
Perhaps in the months or even years ahead, there will come a time for a “Nuremberg Trial” for the murderers that are now in power in Israel—and for the IDF soldiers snipers who shot down Elham Farah and the two liitle Christian Palestinian boys, and also for the many “journalists” and “scholars” who justified and whitewashed the crimes against humanity now permanently recorded for the world to see. Remember, they did hang Julius Streicher, even though he perosnally had killed no one.
Climate summit in an oil state: can COP28 change anything?
You are going to be hearing a lot about COP28 over the next two weeks. The
world’s most important climate meeting, beginning on Thursday, is being
hosted in Dubai by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – one of the world’s top
ten oil producers. COP28 will be the biggest gathering of world leaders of
the year. King Charles III and Rishi Sunak will be there, along with dozens
of other world leaders and some 70,000 other attendees.
Hosting a climate
conference in a petrostate was already controversial – but the BBC’s
evidence that the UAE team planned to use climate talks ahead of COP28 to
do oil and gas deals has heightened concerns. So, can a summit in one of
the world’s richest oil states deliver meaningful action on climate change?
Campaigner Greta Thunberg has said these UN climate summits are just “blah,
blah, blah” – meaning all talk and no action. But if the COP process did
not exist, we would certainly want something like it.
BBC 30th Nov 2023
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67557533
Special Report: Managing Climate Change. As world leaders meet in Dubai for
the COP28 climate summit, success will depend on whether there is an
agreement to dump fossil fuels. Plus: China under pressure; African nations
unite; EU rewilding plans; cleantech advances; rising sea levels.
FT 30th Nov 2023
Nuclear lobby’s big push to ‘shine’ at COP28.
The nuclear energy industry will be highly visible at the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28), taking place in Dubai over the coming weeks, World Nuclear Association Director General Sama Bilbao y León told delegates at the World Nuclear Exhibition 2023 in Paris.
………..” certainly we are seen as a positive force at the COP meetings”.”
…….. At COP27, held in Sharm El-Sheikh in 2022, there was the first Atoms for Climate Pavilion, a collaboration between the International Atomic Energy Agency and global nuclear trade associations. Bilbao y León said this was “truly a turning point in how nuclear is presented at COP meetings”.
…………….. in order to achieve a trebling in nuclear capacity, the industry needs to “turn this political good will that we are starting to see into actionable and pragmatic policies”. Licensing and regulatory processes need to streamlined and affordable financing must be secured. In addition, the supply chain and human resources must be expanded.
“We are going to need to bring together governments because at the end of the day our policymakers are the ones that are going to set these bold and pragmatic policies and energy markets,”……… https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Nuclear-to-shine-at-COP28,-says-Bilbao-y-Leon
Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: A Bright Constellation in a Very Dark Sky
By John Reuwer, World BEYOND War, December 1, 2023 https://worldbeyondwar.org/treaty-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons-a-bright-constellation-in-a-very-dark-sky/
For those of us unable to bury ourselves completely in our ordinary lives of family, friends, and work to avoid seeing the tragedies of horrific violence unfold all around us, these are dark times indeed. The multiple wars that started after September 11, 2001 have only multiplied, and rarely end, imparting suffering to tens of millions of people around the globe. The risk of nuclear war is greater than anytime since the Cuban missile crisis, with all nine nuclear states building new nuclear weapons, several increasing their totals for the first time in 35 years, and several practicing nuclear war games on each other’s borders. At least one is threatening to use nuclear weapons if anyone challenges its aggression. The global military budget is well over $2 trillion dollars a year to wage current wars and prepare for the next ones. Two nuclear armed alleged democracies seem determined to carry out genocide in Gaza.
So it was wonderful to spend three days at the United Nations in New York amid hundreds of bright people attending the second meeting of states parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The 63 governments who have ratified the Treaty, for whom it is now international law to eschew any activity supporting nuclear weapons and to try to remediate the enormous harms already done by them, meet yearly to see how they are doing, help each other implement the law, and encourage others to join.
Accompanying the diplomats are doctors, lawyers, scientists, activists, scholars, and victims from many organizations, living the antidote to despair – each working hard to advance the sanity of this treaty among a world awash in nuclear madness. Leading the dozens of civil society efforts was the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, which was the ten-year driving force behind the negotiation of the TPNW in 2017. This was a major international treaty driven primarily by civil society, and a potent reminder that ordinary people can make a huge difference in a world usually dominated by the rich and powerful.
Leaders of civil society organizations were allowed to present their views in the plenary sessions along with the government representives. These statements were supplemented by educational sessions on dozens of topics. Most powerful for me were the young students from many countries who condemned nuclear weapons as creating insecurity and violating their right to life, who demanded more inclusion of youth and women in policy making. Scientists reminded us of the climate and agriculture research predicting that even a limited regional nuclear war will darken the earth’s skies enough to cause mass starvation of billions after the blast and fallout kills the first hundred million people. Representatives of the indigenous peoples who were harmed by weapons production and testing in the U.S., Australia, Khazakstan, and the Pacific gave stirring testimony of the loss of their land and multigenerational health, demanding justice for what they have suffered. The parties to the TPNW formally agree to address their concerns for healing and remediation. Several of the remaining Hibakusha (nuclear bomb survivors) from Japan shared their incredible stories and pleas for never again. Lining the hallways were works of beautiful art from the dawn of the nuclear age to the present. Concerts, vigils, prayer services, and protest marches were held at city venues nearby.
Representatives from the organizations that we count on to rescue us during disasters all made statements that there will be no meaningful help after multiple nuclear explosions . This included the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, the World Medical Association, the International Council of Nurses, and the World Federation of Public Health Associations. All of these bodies agree with International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War that the only way to assure that nuclear weapons will not cause an unmitigated disaster for humanity is to eliminate them. The principle means of doing that will be educating as many people and leaders as we possibly can about the threat these weapons pose.
I noticed among the many statements decrying nuclear weapons a sentiment that I heard less frequently at antinuclear events in the past – that war itself is the problem, and that we would do well to oppose all war rather than expend energy supporting one side or the other in any given war. This created the opportunity to introduce folks to World BEYOND War, whose mission is replace war with a just and sustainable peace.
Mingling with capable people dedicated to preserving life and our future through the TPNW illuminated the world that often seems dark with hatred and killing, and energized me to continue the current work of creating space for peace and human dignity.
Sovereignty Surrendered: Subordinating Australia’s Defence Industry
Bureaucratic red tape will be slashed – for the Australian Defence industry and the AUKUS partners.
the broader object here is unmistakably directed, less to Australian capabilities than privileged access and a relinquishing of control to the paymasters in Washington.
“Whenever it cooperates with the US Australia will surrender any sovereign capability it develops to the United States control and bureaucracy.”
November 30, 2023, Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.com/sovereignty-surrendered-subordinating-australias-defence-industry/
One could earn a tidy sum the number of times the word “sovereignty” has been uttered or mentioned in public statements and briefings by the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese.
But such sovereignty has shown itself to be counterfeit. The net of dependency and control is being increasingly tightened around Australia, be it in terms of Washington’s access to rare commodities (nickel, cobalt, lithium), the proposed and ultimately fatuous nuclear-propelled submarine fleet, and the broader militarisation and garrisoning of the country by US military personnel and assets. (The latter includes the stationing of such nuclear-capable assets as B-52 bombers in the Northern Territory.)
The next notch on the belt of US control has been affirmed by new proposals that will effectively make technological access to the Australian defence industry by AUKUS partners (the United States and the United Kingdom) an even easier affair than it already is. But in so doing, the intention is to restrict the supply of military and dual-use good technology from Australia to other foreign entities while privileging the concerns of the US and UK. In short, control is set to be wrested from Australia.
The issue of reforming US export controls, governed by the musty provisions of the US International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR), was always going to be a feature of any technology transfer, notably regarding nuclear-propulsion. But even before the minting of AUKUS, Canberra and Washington had pondered the issue of industrial integration and sharing technology via such instruments as the Defense Cooperation Treaty of 2012 and Australia’s addition to the National Technology and Industrial Base in 2017.
This fundamentally failed enterprise risks being complicated further by the latest export reforms, though you would not think so, reading the guff streaming from the Australian Defence Department. A media release from Defence Minister Richard Marles tries to justify the changes by stating that “billions of dollars in investment” will be released. Bureaucratic red tape will be slashed – for the Australian Defence industry and the AUKUS partners. “Under the legislation introduced today, Australia’s existing trade controls will be expanded to regulate the supply of controlled items and provision of services in the Defence and Strategic Goods List, ensuring our cutting-edge military technologies are protected.”
Central to the reforms is the introduction of a national exemption that will cover trade of defence goods and technologies with the US and UK, thereby “establishing a license-free environment for Australian industry, research and science.” But the broader object here is unmistakably directed, less to Australian capabilities than privileged access and a relinquishing of control to the paymasters in Washington. A closer read, and it’s all got to do with those wretched white elephants of the sea: the nuclear-powered submarine.
As the Minister for Defence Industry, Pat Conroy, states, “This legislation is an important step in the Albanese Government’s strategy for acquiring the state-of-the-art nuclear-powered submarines that will be key to protecting Australians and our nation’s interests.” In doing so, Conroy, Marles and company are offering Australia’s defence base to the State Department and the Pentagon.
With a mixture of hard sobriety and alarm, a number of expert voices have voiced concern regarding the implications of these new regulations. One is Bill Greenwalt, a figure much known in the field of US defence procurement, largely as a prominent drafter of its legal framework. He is unequivocal in his criticism of the US approach, and the keen willingness of Australian officials to capitulate. “After years of US State Department prodding, it appears that Australia signed up to the principles and specifics of the failed US export control system,” Greenwalt explained to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. “Whenever it cooperates with the US it will surrender any sovereign capability it develops to the United States control and bureaucracy.”
The singular feature of these arrangements, Greenwalt continues to elaborate, is that Australia “got nothing except the hope that the US will remove process barriers that will allow the US to essentially steal and control Australian technology faster.”
In an email sent to Breaking Defense, Greenwalt was even more excoriating of the Australian effort. “It appears that the Australians adopted the US export control system lock, stock and barrel, and everything I wrote about in my USSC (US Studies Center) piece in the 8 deadly sins of ITAR section will now apply to Australian innovation. I think they just put themselves back 50 years.”
The paper in question, co-authored with Tom Corben, identifies those deadly sins that risk impairing the success of AUKUS: “an outdated mindset; universality and non-materiality; extraterritoriality; anti-discrimination; transactional process compliance; knowledge taint; non-reciprocity; and unwarranted predictability.”
When such vulgar middle-management speech is decoded, much can be put down to the fact that dealing with Washington and its military-industrial complex can be an imperilling exercise. The US imperium remains fixated, as Greenwalt and Corben write, with “an outdated superpower mindset” discouragingly inhibiting to its allies. What constitutes a “defence article” within such export controls is very much left to the discretion of the executive. The archaic application of extraterritoriality means that recipient countries of US technology must request permission from the State Department if re-exporting to another end-user is required for any designated defence article.
The failure to reform such strictures, and the insistence that Australia make its own specific adjustments, alarms Chennupati Jagadish, president of the Australian Academy of Science. The new regulations may encourage unfettered collaboration between the US and UK, “but I would require an approved permit prior to collaborating with other foreign nationals. Without it, my collaborations could see me jailed.” The bleak conclusion: “it expands Australia’s backyard to include the US and UK, but it raises the fence.” Or, more accurately, it incorporates, with a stern finality, Australia as a pliable satellite in an Anglo-American arrangement whose defence arrangements are controlled by Washington.
Bah Humbug! – to COP Climate Conference sponsored by Dubai, an oil & natural gas nation.
Only the quick, fast buck are what matter. Sustainability, “Bah, Humbug!”
paulrodenlearning 29 Nov 23
I sincerely doubt a positive outcome from this COP23 Conference. The fact that it takes place in Dubai, an oil & natural gas nation state, hosting & sponsoring this Conference is the first fact. The profit addicted, fossil fuel companies & nation states want to extract & burn every barrel of oil, cubic foot of natural gas and ton of coal on the planet before they deem “renewable energy” as ready to power the planet.
The very idea of the halting or even reduction in the exploration, extraction & burning of any fossil fuel is just uphorrent to them. They don’t give a damn about the planet or the impact of the continued extraction and burning of any fossil fuel. The “maximizing of profits,” or “return on equity to their investors,” and “stock options” for their CEO’s & Boards of Directors is all that matters to them.
The environment, the ecosytem of the planet be damned. Only the quick, fast buck are what matter. Sustainability, “Bah, Humbug!”
TODAY. Nuclear “sacrifice zones” and “sponges”- a new revelation
Only recently revealed: – “The silos are basically meant to divert and absorb the incoming nuclear missiles from important and critical areas in the country, like cities.”
OnFrom its beginning in the 1940s the global nuclear industry set up “sacrifice zones”- Nevada nuclear test sites, though the residents didn’t know this – a sort of “unconscious” one – where the outcomes of cancer and birth defects were not fully understood.
Twas the Russians who first put the concept clearly into practice – setting up City 40, Ozersk the birthplace of the Soviet nuclear weapons programme . City 40’s inhabitants were told they were “the nuclear shield and saviours of the world”. This was absolute nuclear sacrifice. The residents of this secret city knew that their role was to accept both the cancerous consequences of nuclear weapons-making and their status as a nuclear target – all for the supposed glory of making all of Russia “safe”.
The residents were compensated – financial stability, private apartments, plenty of food – including exotic delicacies such as bananas, condensed milk and caviar – good schools and healthcare, a plethora of entertainment and cultural activities.
In exchange, the residents were ordered to maintain secrets about their lives and work. For the first eight years, residents were forbidden from leaving the city, writing letters or making any contact with the outside world.
The Americans did it more subtly. They chose areas where the indigenous population would would have little awareness of the issues – a much cheaper system than the Russian one. The US military set up nuclear silos of InterContinental Ballistic Missile (ICBMs.) as “sponges” “The role of the ICBM is to force an adversary to use many nuclear weapons if they decided to attack the U.S. The silos are basically meant to divert and absorb the incoming nuclear missiles from important and critical areas in the country, like cities.”
Wherever there are nuclear weapons systems, there are these “sponges”, – places where the uninformed local community, preferably indigenous are put in danger. for the presumed safety of the more important city residents.
The very latest one is in the UK, in Suffolk, where the US is about to bring back nuclear weapons,
The women of Greenham Common previously got rid of American nuclear weapons bases.
UK needs a new Greenham Common to fight this new nuclear target, sponge, sacrifice zone.
COP28: Hopes of fossil fuel ‘phase out’ hit by revelations of Saudi plan to boost oil demand.
The scale of the challenge faced by diplomats pushing
for a new global agreement to ‘phase out’ unabated fossil fuels at the
upcoming UN Climate Summit in Dubai was underscored yesterday by reports
detailing how both the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia are
privately working to sustain long term demand for oil and gas.
Just hours after the BBC reported yesterday that COP28 hosts the UAE had used
bilateral meetings with governments ahead of the Summit to promote new oil
and gas investments, Channel 4 News and the Centre for Climate Reporting
revealed how Saudi Arabia is using its Oil Demand Sustainability Programme
(ODSP) to drive long term demand for oil from developing economies.
Business Green 28th Nov 2023
Palestine is the genocide that we as Jewish people can halt
Amanda Gelender, 24 November 2023 https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/israel-palestine-genocide-jewish-people-can-halt—
We cannot allow the moral soul of Judaism to perish with our collective silence on Israel’s genocidal war on Palestinians in Gaza.
sit down to write this – a love letter for my treasured Jewish people – as a genocide unfolds on my screen.
This letter pours from my heart to yours. It is a call to action to rise in solidarity with Palestine. I have such deep tenderness for us, our history, and the proud traditions we have preserved through centuries of unspeakable injustice.
Like some of you, I grew up attending synagogue in a progressive American Jewish community. Celebrating and supporting Israel was part of what it meant to be culturally and religiously Jewish.
When I first came to understand what was actually happening in the occupied Palestinian territories, I was 18 and enrolled in my first year of college. A Jewish peer told me about the abuse Israel commits in our name.
I’m not proud to admit that the fact she was Jewish is likely the only reason I listened: I was taught by my community that only Jewish people can truly understand how important Israel is for our safety and wellbeing. Looking back, I wish I had believed Palestinians sooner.
Palestinians are the authorities on their own freedom struggle. But the indoctrination and fear instilled in me as a Jewish child was too strong to overcome, until the bubble of Zionism burst.
When I first came to learn about the extent of Israel’s ongoing brutality against the Palestinian people, I struggled to believe it. My Jewish elders taught me about justice, human rights and the Jewish moral mandate to cultivate social change and “repair the world” (tikkun olam).
How is it possible that my own people could omit the truth about Israeli apartheid and occupation? I was taught that Israel was founded on an empty plot of land, not that Zionist terrorist squads raided villages, killing 15,000 Palestinians and forcibly displacing 750,000 more in the Nakba. Like me, did they just not know?
Zionist fallacy
The line that “everyone who criticises Israel is antisemitic” felt increasingly flimsy in the face of a mounting list of war crimes committed by Israel. If everything taught to me about Israel wasn’t true, what else was a lie?
And what would this mean for participation in the Jewish community going forward, given that virtually all of my Jewish peers are still tacitly or actively invested in the fallacy of Zionist nationalism?
Once the denial faded, the rage set in. We have been lied to by people we trusted; deceived so that we would cheer on an apartheid state that abuses children and tortures mercilessly in our name. Jewish youth, including myself, have been implicated in a 75-year, ongoing genocide against the Palestinian people.
There have been tremendous, unfathomable human rights abuses committed under the guise of protecting Jewish livelihood – when in reality, a settler’s quiet peace is made possible only by continued Palestinian repression. There is no safety for anyone under occupation.
We were taught that Israel represented a whisper of refuge carved out for Jews after the Holocaust – something precious that we must protect at all costs. It was “the only nation for Jewish people”, our homeland, our birthright: Israel.
We were taught intrinsic entitlement over a piece of land on the other side of the earth. Israel was a second, optional home for us – but the story conveniently omitted that Palestine is the one and only home for Palestinians, who have tended to the land for generations.
Israel still denies Palestinians visitation rights and the inalienable right to return home, but as a Jewish person born in California, I can visit whenever I want, and Israel will even pay me to move there and live on stolen Palestinian land.
I wasn’t taught that Israel is funded to the teeth by the US, functioning as a strategic western imperial outpost for natural resource extraction, weapons testing, US police training, and more. No one told me that the birth of Israel required the death of Palestinians, an ethnic cleansing conveniently swept under the rug so that Jewish people could have something shiny and clean; that it was a militarised nation founded on piles of scorched Palestinian bodies, a Jewish homeland built on mass indigenous graves.
Decolonial freedom struggle
The story of Israel is not new. It is deeply familiar to colonised peoples the world over. It perpetuates the same white supremacist, colonial lie that settlers arriving to Turtle Island (North America) told themselves to justify the genocide of indigenous peoples: that in the name of progress, modernity and democracy, the coloniser must demolish, kill and destroy.
Under this lie, the coloniser must pillage the land as manifest destiny, from “sea to shining sea”, and violently execute as many of the “savage native terrorists” as possible to expand territorial gains and build safe homes for settler families.
Palestine is not engaged in a holy war; it is a decolonial freedom struggle. Palestinians did not choose Jewish people to colonise their land, and they have a moral and legal right to resist occupation, regardless of who the occupier is. Jewish safety is a non-starter, so long as the violent occupation of Palestine persists. Our liberation is bound together as one.
We are at an unprecedented moment in history. A genocide is unfolding before our eyes, as bodies pile up in mass graves outside of bombed hospitals and refugee camps. A global solidarity movement for Palestine has pierced through the veil of western comfort – a jailbreak from the prison of blockade.
And as the US-backed Israeli military continues to rain down bombs on the besieged people of Gaza, many of my fellow Jewish people are sitting back and watching, or actively cheering it on.
With our silence, Jewish people globally are co-signing this genocide. Many have calculated that it’s “too complicated”, with the threat of being alienated from friends, family and colleagues. We don’t want to risk anything real.
Delusional asymmetry
But Palestinian families are being murdered while they sleep, brutalised with burning white phosphorous, sniped in hospital maternity wards, starved and made to suffer from dehydration and a lack of clean water, and forced on death marches. They are pulling dead, bloodied children from the dusty ruins of bombed rubble.
And yet, my Jewish peers in the West say they are the ones who fear genocide. This delusional asymmetry must end so that we can point resources and attention towards those who face an actual threat of extinction in this completely preventable massacre of human dignity.
The call from Palestinians at this moment is clear: ceasefire now. End the siege on Gaza and the illegal occupation. Respect the right of return. Palestinians are asking us to bear witness to their genocide, pressure our representatives for an immediate ceasefire, and boycott those profiting from the illegal occupation. Every day without a ceasefire, the death toll increases and Israel wipes more lineages from the public record.
Palestine is the genocide that Jewish people can halt. We couldn’t intervene to stop millions of our ancestors from perishing in death camps, but we can and must stop this genocide from continuing one more day. Let us not squander our urgent, sacred duty by exploiting Jewish suffering as a shield and cudgel for violence against Palestinians.
If you consider yourself a Jewish person of conscience, understand that there is no moral or legal justification for this massacre. The time to speak is now. Palestinians can’t wait for history to redeem them, because the air strikes continue to beat down as I write this letter of love and rage to you, my Jewish kin.
We cannot allow the moral soul of Judaism to perish with the sound of our collective silence on genocide. Let our voices be a prayer for our Jewish ancestors and a blessing for our descendants to say once and for all: never again.
Small modular nuclear reactors: a history of failure
Jim Green 28 November 2023 https://reneweconomy.com.au/small-modular-nuclear-reactors-a-history-of-failure/
Small modular reactors (SMRs) are defined as reactors with a capacity of 300 megawatts (MW) or less. The term ‘modular’ refers to serial factory production of reactor components, which could drive down costs.
By that definition, no SMRs have ever been built and none are being built now. In all likelihood none will ever be built because of the prohibitive cost of setting up factories for mass production of reactor components.
No SMRs have been built, but dozens of small (<300 MW) power reactors have been built in numerous countries, without factory production of reactor components. The history of small reactors is a history of failure.
The US Army built and operated eight small reactors beginning in the 1950s, but they proved unreliable and expensive and the program was shut down in 1977. In addition, 17 small civilian reactors were built in the US in the 1950s and 1960s, but all have since shut down.
Twenty-six small Magnox reactors were built in the UK but all have shut down and no more will be built. The only operating Magnox is a mini-Magnox in North Korea: the design was made public at an Atoms for Peace conference and North Korea uses its 5 MW Magnox to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons.
India’s operates 14 small pressurised heavy water reactors, each with a capacity of about 200 MW. Prof. M.V. Ramana noted in his 2012 book, ‘The Power of Promise: Examining Nuclear Energy in India’, that despite a standardised approach to designing, constructing, and operating these reactors, many suffered cost overruns and lengthy delays. There are no plans to build more of these small reactors in India.
Elsewhere, the history of small reactors is just as underwhelming. This includes three small reactors in Canada (all shut down), six in France (all shut down), and four in Japan (all shut down).
Prof. Ramana concludes his history of small reactors with this downbeat assessment: “Without exception, small reactors cost too much for the little electricity they produced, the result of both their low output and their poor performance.”
Recent history
Just two SMRs are said to be operating — neither meeting the ‘modular’ definition of serial factory production of reactor components. The two SMRs — one each in Russia and China — exhibit familiar problems of massive cost blowouts and multi-year delays.
The construction cost of Russia’s floating nuclear power plant increased six-fold and the OECD’s Nuclear Energy Agency estimates that the electricity it produces costs US$200 (A$306) / megawatt-hour (MWh). The reactor is used to power fossil fuel mining operations in the Arctic.
The other operating SMR (loosely defined) is China’s demonstration 210 MW high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR). The World Nuclear Association states that the cost of the demonstration HTGR was US$6,000 (A$9,200 billion) per kilowatt, three times higher than early cost estimates and 2-3 times higher than the cost of China’s larger Hualong reactors per kilowatt.
NucNet reported in 2020 that China dropped plans to manufacture 20 HTGRs after levelised cost estimates rose to levels higher than conventional large reactors. Likewise, the World Nuclear Association states that plans for 18 additional HTGRs at the same site as the demonstration HTGR have been “dropped”. China’s demonstration HTGR demonstrates yet again that the economics of small reactors doesn’t stack up.
Three SMRs are under construction – again with the qualification that there’s nothing ‘modular’ about these projects.
Argentina’s CAREM reactor has been a disaster. Construction began in 2014 and the National Atomic Energy Commission now hopes to complete the reactor in 2027 — nearly 50 years after the project was conceived. The cost estimate in 2021 was US$750 million (A$1.1 billion) for a reactor with a capacity of just 32 MW. That’s over one billion Australian dollars for a plant with the capacity of a handful of large wind turbines.
In 2021, China began construction of a 125 MW pressurised water reactor. According to China National Nuclear Corporation, construction costs per kilowatt will be twice the cost of large reactors, and levelised costs will be 50 percent higher than large reactors.
Also in 2021, construction of the 300 MW demonstration lead-cooled BREST fast neutron reactor began in Russia. The cost estimate has more than doubled to 100 billion rubles (A$1.7 billion) and no doubt it will continue to climb.
NuScale and mPower
In 2012, the US Department of Energy (DOE) offered up to US$452 million to cover “the engineering, design, certification and licensing costs for up to two US SMR designs.” The two SMR designs that were selected by the DOE for funding were NuScale Power and Generation mPower.
Taking its cues from the US government, in 2015 the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission commissioned research by WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff (now WSP) on the economic potential of the same two designs.
However NuScale recently abandoned its flagship project in Idaho as RenewEconomy recently reported. NuScale secured subsidies amounting to around US$4 billion (A$6.1 billion) from the US government comprising a US$1.4 billion subsidy from the DOE and an estimated US$30 per megawatt-hour (MWh) subsidy in the Inflation Reduction Act. Despite that government largesse, NuScale didn’t come close to securing sufficient funding to get the project off the ground.
NuScale’s most recent cost estimates were through the roof: US$9.3 billion (A$14.2 billion) for a 462 MW plant comprising six 77 MW reactors. That equates to US$20,100 (A$30,700) per kilowatt and a levelised cost of US$89 (A$135) / MWh. Without the Inflation Reduction Act subsidy of US$30/MWh, the figure would be US$129 (A$196) / MWh. That’s close to WSP’s estimate of A$225 / MWh.
To put those estimates in perspective, the Minerals Council of Australia states that SMRs won’t find a market in Australia unless they can produce power at a cost of A$60-80 / MWh, 2-3 times lower than the WSP and NuScale estimates.
NuScale still hopes to build SMRs but the company is burning cash and, some analysts suggest, heading towards bankruptcy.
Generation mPower — a collaboration between Babcock & Wilcox and Bechtel — was the other SMR design prioritised by the US DOE and the South Australian Royal Commission. mPower was to be a 195 MW pressurised light water reactor.
In 2012, the DOE announced that it would subsidise mPower in a five-year cost-share agreement. The DOE’s contribution would be capped at US$226 million, of which US$111 million was subsequently paid. The following year, Babcock & Wilcox said it intended to sell a majority stake in the joint venture, but was unable to find a buyer.
In 2014, Babcock & Wilcox announced it was sharply reducing investment in mPower to US$15 million annually, citing the inability “to secure significant additional investors or customer engineering, procurement and construction contracts to provide the financial support necessary to develop and deploy mPower reactors”.
The mPower project was abandoned in 2017. The joint venture companies spent more than US$375 million on the project, in addition to the DOE’s US$111 million contribution.
Iceberg Research analysts predicted the collapse of NuScale’s Idaho project, drawing a furious response from NuScale, and later drew the connections between NuScale and mPower:
“[NuScale’s] trajectory bears striking similarities to the B&W mPower project, a joint venture formed in 2010 between Babcock & Wilcox and Bechtel. Like NuScale, mPower was developing a small modular reactor and enjoyed DOE backing. Babcock & Wilcox, mPower’s 90%-shareholder, attempted but failed to sell a majority stake in the project. In a similar vein, NuScale’s largest shareholder Fluor is actively trying to sell around 30% of its equity interest in NuScale.
“There was eventually a significant reduction in funding for mPower. In March 2017, Bechtel withdrew from the joint venture, pointing to the challenges of securing a site and an investor for the first reactor. This led to the termination of the mPower project and Babcock & Wilcox paid Bechtel $30m as settlement.”
“There was eventually a significant reduction in funding for mPower. In March 2017, Bechtel withdrew from the joint venture, pointing to the challenges of securing a site and an investor for the first reactor. This led to the termination of the mPower project and Babcock & Wilcox paid Bechtel $30m as settlement.”
NuScale and mPower had everything going for them: large, experienced companies; conventional light-water reactor designs; and generous government subsidies. But they struggled to secure funding other than government subsidies. Needless to say, non-government funding is even more difficult to secure for projects without the backing of large companies, and for projects that envisage construction of unconventional reactors (molten salt reactors, fast neutron reactors, etc.).
NuScale’s failure is particularly striking given the extent of the government subsidies and given that NuScale had progressed further through the licensing process than other SMR designs (which isn’t saying much). Australia’s energy minister Chris Bowen said: “The opposition’s only energy policy is small modular reactors. Today, the most advanced prototype in the US has been cancelled. The LNP’s plan for energy security is just more hot air from Peter Dutton.”
NuScale’s failure is particularly striking given the extent of the government subsidies and given that NuScale had progressed further through the licensing process than other SMR designs (which isn’t saying much). Australia’s energy minister Chris Bowen said: “The opposition’s only energy policy is small modular reactors. Today, the most advanced prototype in the US has been cancelled. The LNP’s plan for energy security is just more hot air from Peter Dutton.”
Other failures
Many other plans to build small reactors have been abandoned. In 2013, US company Transatomic Power was promising that its ‘Waste-Annihilating Molten-Salt Reactor‘ would deliver safer nuclear power at half the price of power from conventional, large reactors. By the end of 2018, the company had given up on its ‘waste-annihilating’ claims, run out of money, and gone bust.
MidAmerican Energy gave up on its plans for SMRs in Iowa in 2013 after failing to secure legislation that would require ratepayers to partially fund construction costs.
In 2018, TerraPower abandoned its plan for a prototype fast neutron reactor in China due to restrictions placed on nuclear trade with China by the Trump administration.
The French government abandoned the planned 100-200 MW ASTRID demonstration fast reactor in 2019.
The US government abandoned consideration of ‘integral fast reactors‘ for plutonium disposition in 2015 and the UK government did the same in in 2019. (Plutonium disposition means destroying weapons-useable plutonium through irradiation, or treating plutonium in such a way as to render it useless in nuclear weapons.)
During the South Australian Royal Commission, nuclear lobbyists united behind a push for integral fast reactors and they would have expected some support from the stridently pro-nuclear Royal Commission.
However the Royal Commission rejected the proposal, noting in its May 2016 report that advanced fast reactors and other innovative reactor designs are unlikely to be feasible or viable in the foreseeable future; that the development of such a first-of-a-kind project would have high commercial and technical risk; that there is no licensed, commercially proven design and development to that point would require substantial capital investment; and that electricity generated from such reactors has not been demonstrated to be cost competitive with current light water reactor designs.
Dozens of SMR designs are being promoted — mostly by start-ups with a Powerpoint presentation. Precious few will reach the construction stage and the likelihood of SMRs being built in large numbers is negligible.
Dr. Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia and author of a detailed SMR briefing paper released in June.
Cop28: what to expect from the Dubai climate change conference.
On November 30 officials will begin to discuss an agenda in the UAE that
includes measures on fossil fuels and boosting funds for vulnerable
countries.
We were walking for 12 hours in 37 or 38-degree heat, and you
could feel the heat from the fire,” Joanna Harber said, recounting how
wildfires on Rhodes turned her summer holiday to hell. Images of thousands
of British holidaymakers evacuating the Greek island in July brought home
the widespread impacts of an era of “global boiling”, in a region that
scientists say is experiencing more fires because of climate change.
Across the year, heatwaves have blanketed large areas of the world, causing
burning in unprecedented areas of Canada and record levels of sea ice
melting in Antarctica. November looks set to be the sixth warmest month
globally in a row, with this year almost certain to be the hottest yet.
On Thursday, world leaders will meet in an attempt to slam the brakes on these
extremes. Officials from almost 200 countries will arrive in Dubai, at one
of the planet’s busiest airports, for a fortnight of talks in the
world’s seventh-largest oil-producing state.
The Cop28 summit will be chaired, controversially and for the first time, by the head of an oil
firm, Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber of the United Arab Emirates.
More than 45,000 people attended last year’s Cop27 climate summit in Egypt, which achieved a surprise deal on a “loss and damage” fund for vulnerable countries
hit by global warming. A similar number are expected in Dubai, among them
Rishi Sunak and more than a hundred heads of state.
Times 26th Nov 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cop28-dubai-climate-change-conference-what-to-expect-htjv27l9q
1 This month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
15 April – Zoom –Nuclear Power is Not the Solution
Apr 15, 2026 01:00 AM in Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney
Join the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) on Tuesday, April 14th for a timely webinar exploring the risks associated with nuclear power and challenging the myth that it offers a simple, safe, carbon-free solution to the climate crisis
21 April Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-04-21 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-04-21 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
Event Type: Virtual
A virtual link will be communicated before the event.
Host Contact Info: australia@icanw.org
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 