Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

How much water do French nuclear plants use?

Figures showing that the cooling of reactors could capture 30% of water resources have been removed from the site of the Ministry of Environment.

Le Monde ,By Perrine Mouterde, March 26, 2023,

How much do nuclear power plants contribute to total water consumption in France? This simple question no longer seems to have a clear answer. At the root of the confusion lies the Ministry of Environmental Transition’s removal of a background paper on the resourcing and use of water in France on around March 10. According to this fact sheet from the statistical service, power plant cooling represented the second most water-consuming activity in the country (31%), behind agriculture (45%) and ahead of drinking water (21%) and industrial use (4%). The annual volume of water consumed in mainland France, over the period 2008-2018, was estimated at 5.3 billion cubic meters.

In the midst of the review of the parliamentary bill to accelerate the construction of new reactors, the figure of 31% was being used by opponents of atomic energy to demonstrate that this energy source was not adapted to climate change. “Once and for all, let’s say it, simply and firmly: at this rate, there will soon not be enough water in our rivers to cool the nuclear power plants!,” stated Marine Tondelier – the national secretary of Europe Ecologie-Les Verts (EELV, Greens) – on March 7, based on this data.

Three days later, the Ministry of Environmental Transition………….(subscribers only)

 https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/03/26/how-much-water-do-french-nuclear-plants-use_6020697_114.html

July 17, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TODAY. “As long as it takes” – WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

– it takes cluster bombs (to cause later mutilations and deaths, especially children)

it takes depleted uranium weapons, (to cause widespread, long-lasting radioactive pollution, cancers in soldiers and citizens of both sides)

 – it takes -by December 31 the Ukrainian army will lose between 75,000 and 100,000 dead, and up to 300,000 wounded and out of combat. Russian soldiers killed so far in Ukraine: around 47,000.

it takes – continued destruction and environmental pollution, the wreckage of the country

it takes – By May 2023, the U.S. had provided Ukraine nearly $37 billion in military aid . Total with EU funding $46.6 billion and more to come

it takes– behind-the-scenes wrangling, as European and other leaders try hold it together with USA

As long as it takes” – to do what?

Defeat Russia militarily, ruin Russia as a world power, return Crimea to Ukraine, make Ukraine a NATO country, holding U.S. weapons aimed at Moscow.

But it might not actually turn out that way.

And it might bring on World War 3.

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Taiwan solution is diplomacy rather than nuclear hell

Pearls and Irritations, By Bob CarrJul 15, 2023

I have yet to meet an Australian voter willing to go to war over Taiwan. Further, I haven’t heard of any Australian military leader with a clear idea of Australia’s role in a showdown between China and the US.

Earlier this year, NASA’s survey satellite discovered an Earth-sized world within the habitable zone of a distant star. If it hosts life, its creatures may be listening to our conversations. They are likely amazed that earthlings seem to be sleepwalking towards their first war between nuclear powers.

At the heart of the conflict is the political system that prevails on an island of 23.5 million people because of sovereignty issues left over from two Sino-Japanese wars. These far-off observers might be even more curious if they knew about the availability of a tested formula that for 50 years kept peace in one part of the small blue planet.

I have yet to meet an Australian voter willing to go to war over Taiwan. Further, I haven’t heard of any Australian military leader with a clear idea of Australia’s role in a showdown between China and the US. On the contrary, I’m told their consensus is that our naval assets would be unprotected against ocean-hugging hypersonic missiles.

One former Defence Department official told me if we sent submarines, “we’d better make sure that our submariners had their wills made out”. I’m told one now-deceased former general was fond of saying about our role in the Taiwan Strait: “We’d last three minutes.”

……………………………..The loose war talk over Taiwan led the former US secretary of state , Henry Kissinger to make a solemn warning back in May that we are facing great-power conflict like that which preceded World War I. He used the noun “catastrophe”.

Kissinger had negotiated the 1972 Shanghai Communique, which offers the diplomatic formula that preserved the peace and can go on preserving it until overtaken by any new political and economic reality 100 years off. The communique allows the world to “acknowledge” the Chinese claim that Taiwan is its province without “endorsing” the Chinese claim. And, quickly following, is the principle that “reunification” would not involve an act of war.

For its part, Taiwan steers away from a declaration of independence. Only 13 of the world’s nations see Taiwan as independent. But it has enjoyed self-government with a contestable political system and a prosperous economy. This strategic ambiguity has served us.

A Taiwan that resembles Hong Kong is not desirable. I said in my recent interview with Mark Bouris, it would be preferable to a nuclear war…………………………………….

Any hard-nosed assessment of our national interest would have us redouble – then redouble again – our commitment to guardrails and off-ramps to stop the descent into conflict. There are subtle suggestions that both the US and China have pulled back to earlier red lines, and with the support of the Taiwanese leadership. In that spirit, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in April met the President of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, on American soil and not in Taipei. The Chinese response was comparatively subdued.

In this month’s Australian Foreign Affairs, Sam Roggeveen of the Lowy Institute delicately etched how recent Canberra decisions had rendered Australian sites more likely nuclear targets. It includes having B52s fly out of RAAF Tindall near Darwin, assumedly with the mission of striking China’s nuclear infrastructure. It may include Submarine Rotational Force-West in the planned nuclear submarine base at HMAS Stirling, and Port Kembla on the east coast.

Roggeveen concludes that in a future crisis, Australia’s profile is going to be much higher in the eyes of Chinese military planners.

……… Without any retreat from deterrence or our values, more spirited diplomacy in our interests, the region’s and Earth’s might be the order of the day. https://johnmenadue.com/taiwan-solution-is-diplomacy-rather-than-nuclear-hell/

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Merri-bek City Council is a Nuclear-Free Zone

30 Jun 2023  https://www.merri-bek.vic.gov.au/my-council/news-and-publications/news/merri-bek-city-council-is-a-nuclear-free-zone/

Council stands against the use of nuclear power and weapons and has declared Merri-bek as a Nuclear-Free Zone. Nuclear weapons pose a significant threat to our world. This decision reflects our commitment to the safety and wellbeing of our community, and our support for global peace and security.

As part of our Nuclear-Free Zone declaration:

  1. We oppose the storage and transportation of uranium, nuclear waste, or any other materials connected to the nuclear industry in Merri-bek, including nuclear submarines. This excludes the use of radio-isotopes in hospitals.
  2. We oppose the establishment of nuclear facilities or nuclear submarine repair facilities in Merri-bek.
  3. We will display signage at the entrances to our municipality declaring our nuclear-free position.

In addition to this declaration, Merri-bek is one of 43 Australian councils that support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and call on the Australian Government to take this action.

Merri-bek has also joined the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons’ Cities Appeal. The Cities Appeal includes cities and towns across the world in support of the treaty.

Our nuclear-free stance aligns with Council’s Human Rights Policy 2016-2026. The danger presented by nuclear weapons impacts on humanity, our right to life, international law, and sustainability.

We encourage Merri-bek community members and other councils to join us in advocating for a safer and more sustainable future, free from the risks associated with nuclear power and weapons.

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Victoria | Leave a comment

Australia on track for exemption to accelerate AUKUS nuclear subs deal

SMH, By Farrah Tomazin, July 15, 2023 

Washington: Australia will be given an exemption from strict US export control laws to help accelerate the delivery of its $368 billion AUKUS submarine deal, under a bipartisan proposal making its way through Congress.

In a boost for the Albanese government, the plan to bolster Australia’s defences in the Indo-Pacific moved a step closer to reality on Friday (AEST) after a powerful US Senate committee approved draft legislation designed to turbocharge the ambitious three-way military pact with the US and UK.

If approved, the proposal, which was given the green light by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and is expected to be debated more broadly next week, will help facilitate the transfer of Virginia-class ships under the AUKUS agreement and strengthen the submarine industrial base of the three nations involved………………………………………………………………………………………….

But while AUKUS has received broad bipartisan support, questions remain about the lengthy time frame of AUKUS, the extraordinary cost to taxpayers, and the myriad of rules governing the deal. Among them is the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) which could delay for years the transfer of crucial

technologies unless the system is reformed or a special waiver is granted.

To that end, the approval by the Foreign Relations Committee, which has jurisdiction over armed export controls and ship transfers, was an important boost for AUKUS, however there is still a long way to go before all the relevant

AUKUS legislation makes it through Congress.

Some US politicians have also raised concerns that AUKUS could stretch America’s industrial base “to breaking point”, given the industry was already struggling to meet its target to build two attack submarines a year. ……………………… https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/australia-on-track-for-exemption-to-accelerate-aukus-nuclear-subs-deal-20230715-p5dofd.html

July 15, 2023 Posted by | weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nato isn’t defending Ukraine. It’s stabbing it in the back

So far, Ukraine’s much-vaunted “spring counter-offensive” has turned into a damp squib, despite western media spin about “slow progress”. Moscow is holding on to the Ukrainian territories it annexed. 

More than 110 states – not including the US, of course – have ratified a 2008 international convention outlawing cluster munitions. Many are in Nato.

 Middle East Eye, Jonathan Cook. 14 July 2023 

The US and its allies are sustaining the very war they now cite as grounds for disqualifying Kyiv from Nato membership .

he Nato summit in Lithuania this week served only to underscore the utter hypocrisy of western leaders in pursuing their proxy war in Ukraine to “weaken” Russia and oust its president, Vladimir Putin.

Both the US and Germany had made clear before the summit that they would block Ukraine’s admission to Nato while it was in the midst of a war with Russia. That message was formally announced by Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Tuesday. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky fumed that Nato had reached an “absurd” decision and was demonstrating “weakness”. British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace lost no time in rebuking him for a lack of “gratitude”. 

The concern is that, if Kyiv joins the military alliance at this stage, Nato members will be required to leap to Ukraine’s defence and fight Russia directly. Most western states balk at the notion of a face-to-face confrontation with a nuclear-armed Russia – rather than the current proxy one, paid for exclusively in Ukrainian blood.  

But there is a more duplicitous subtext being obscured: the fact that Nato is responsible for sustaining the war it now cites as grounds for disqualifying Ukraine from joining the military alliance. Nato got Kyiv into its current, bloody mess – but isn’t ready to help it find a way out. 

It was Nato, after all, that chose to flirt openly with Ukraine from 2008 onwards, promising it eventual membership – with the undisguised hope that one day, the alliance would be able to flex its military muscles menacingly on Russia’s doorstep.

It was the UK that intervened weeks after Russia’s invasion in February 2022, and presumably on Washington’s orders, to scupper negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow – talks that could have ended the war at an early stage, before Russia began seizing territories in eastern Ukraine.

A deal then would have been much simpler than one now. Most likely, it would have required Kyiv to commit to neutrality, rather than pursuing covert integration into Nato. Moscow would have demanded, too, an end to the Ukrainian government’s politicallegal and military attacks on its Russian-speaking populations in the east. 

Now the chief sticking point to an agreement will be persuading the Kremlin to trust the West and reverse its annexation of eastern Ukraine, assuming Nato ever allows Kyiv to re-engage in talks with Russia. 

And finally, it is Nato members, especially the US, that have been shipping out vast quantities of military hardware to prolong the fighting in Ukraine – keeping the death toll mounting on both sides. 

Damp squib

In short, Nato is now using the very war it has done everything to fuel as a pretext to stop Ukraine from joining the alliance. 

Seen another way, the message Nato has sent Moscow is that Russia made exactly the right decision to invade – if the goal, as Putin has always maintained, is to ensure Kyiv remains neutral. 

It is the war that has prevented Ukraine from being completely enfolded in the western military alliance. It is the war that has stopped Ukraine’s transformation into a Nato forward base, one where the West could station nuclear-tipped missiles minutes from Moscow. 

Had Russia not invaded, Kyiv would have been free to accelerate what it was already doing secretly: integrating into Nato. So what is Zelensky supposed to conclude from his exclusion from Nato, after he committed his country to an ongoing war rather than negotiations and neutrality?

So far, Ukraine’s much-vaunted “spring counter-offensive” has turned into a damp squib, despite western media spin about “slow progress”. Moscow is holding on to the Ukrainian territories it annexed.

So long as Kyiv can’t “win the war” – and it seems it can’t, unless Nato is willing to fight Russia directly and risk a nuclear confrontation – it will be precluded from the military alliance. Catch-22. 

Do not expect this conundrum to be highlighted by a western establishment media that seems incapable of doing anything other than regurgitating Nato press releases and cheering on bigger profits for the West’s war industries. 

War crimes

Another such conundrum is the Biden administration’s decision last week to supply Ukraine with cluster munitions – small bomblets that, when they fail to explode, lie concealed like mini-landmines, killing and maiming civilians for decades. In some cases, as many as a third are “duds”, detonating weeks, months or years later.

Washington’s move follows Britain recently supplying Ukraine with depleted uranium shells, which contaminate surrounding areas with a radioactive dust during and after fighting. Evidence from areas such as Iraq, where the US and Britain fired large numbers of these shells, suggests the fallout can include a decades-long spike in cancer and birth defects. 

The White House was all too ready to denounce the use of cluster bombs as a war crime last year – when it was Russia that stood accused of using them. Now it is Washington enabling Kyiv to commit those very same war crimes.

More than 110 states – not including the US, of course – have ratified a 2008 international convention outlawing cluster munitions. Many are in Nato.

Given the high “dud” rate of US cluster bombs, President Joe Biden appears to be breaking US law in shipping stocks to Ukraine. The White House can invoke an exemption only if exporting such weapons satisfies a “vital US national security interest”. Apparently, Biden believes “weakening” Russia – and turning parts of Ukraine into a death zone for civilians for decades to come – qualifies as just such a vital interest. 

Desperate stop gap

While the official story is that this latest escalatory move by the US will help Kyiv “win the war”, the truth is rather different. Biden has not shied away from admitting that Ukraine – and Nato – are running out of conventional arms to fight Russia. This is a desperate stop-gap measure. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

…………………………….. Tragically, Nato’s malevolence, deceit and betrayal means that the only alternative to Armageddon may be Ukraine’s downfall – and with it, the crushing of Washington’s nefarious ambitions to advance full-spectrum global dominance.  https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/nato-ukraine-not-defending-stabbing-back?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

 

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“War Effort In Shambles As Hawks Turn On Each Other” At NATO Summit

Zeo Hedge, BY TYLER DURDEN, THURSDAY, JUL 13, 2023 

Bloomberg is just out with a devastating behind-the-scenes account of a hot-headed Zelensky at the NATO summit in Vilnius, and the growing Western backlash in the face of his obvious frustration and what’s being seen as ingratitude for the steady flow of billions of dollars in arms to Kiev.

Apparently even the mainstream media agrees with our own assessment of the Ukrainian leader having thrown a “tantrum” as he complained about the “weak” and “absurd” NATO stance on Ukraine’s membership. The blistering tweet he issued in English while en route to Lithuania exposed cracks in the alliance, as Bloomberg highlights in the opening of its very revealing Wednesday piece

Volodymyr Zelenskiy was running hot ahead of his sit-down with NATO leaders on Tuesday evening. The Ukrainian president had been angered earlier in the day by what he said was an “absurd” reluctance to give his country a clear timeline on membership.

That outburst in turn riled the partners who have funneled billions of dollars of weaponry and aid into Ukraine’s defense against the Russian invasion — the US had been given no warning before Zelenskiy unleashed his attack on social media.

As Bloomberg writes: “Over dinner in Vilnius, with US President Joe Biden back at his hotel, the other leaders delivered a clear message to Zelenskiy, according to one person who was present. You have to cool down and look at the full package, Zelenskiy was told.”

While it’s not quite yet a full on ‘hero to zero’ story… things are certainly sliding in that direction, given it’s unprecedented that the Ukrainian president who previously enjoyed rockstar status in Western capitals since the start of the invasion could be told to basically ‘cool it’!

Bloomberg continues in reference to Zelensky: “He had, after all, been given a renewed commitment to eventual membership and new security guarantees from the Group of Seven nations. By the next day, the message appeared to be sinking in.” The publication was privy to some key Western leaders’ exact words, presenting the rare dressing down as follows [emphasis ZH]: 

Whether we like it or not, people want to see gratitude,” UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told reporters the following morning. “You’re persuading countries to give up their stock” of weapons and ammunition, he added.

This account of the behind-the-scenes wrangling is based on interviews with more than a dozen diplomats and officials involved in the summit who asked not to be named discussing private conversations. NATO leaders were trying to thread a needle on Ukraine’s membership bid when they arrived in Vilnius: They were seeking language that looked like progress and that Ukraine could sell as progress but fundamentally didn’t leave them any closer to getting dragged into a war with nuclear-armed Russia.

Ultimately the hawks (mainly among the Baltic and Eastern Europe states) have lost at Vilnius. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has admitted “There was a lack of political will.” Thus it appears that Zelensky’s angry, desperate tweet lashing out at Western partners was a last ditch effort at shaming NATO into conceding to its demands of being immediately fast-tracked to membership.

Bloomberg reveals further, that “Crucially, it was the US and Germany that insisted on dialing back the commitment to Ukraine joining the alliance. Earlier drafts of the communique offered a clearer pathway to Ukraine eventually joining, but Biden and Chancellor Olaf Scholz were wary of going too far.”

“Their teams demanded changes in the final days before the summit, upsetting lots of the other European nations, as well as the Ukrainians.” Indeed Biden in a CNN interview at the start of the week confessed the obvious: that Ukraine’s admission into NATO with the war still going would automatically unleash war between nuclear-armed powers – a WW3 doomsday scenario. Hence the West is now telling Kiev: just stop.

In Zelensky’s next big NATO summit appearance Wednesday following a no doubt awkward evening, things were different as he belatedly “got the message”

………………………………. The New York Times’ summation of precisely what fell short in the NATO communique explains: “NATO declared on Tuesday that Ukraine would be invited to join the alliance, but did not say how or when, disappointing its president but reflecting the resolve by President Biden and other leaders not to be drawn directly into Ukraine’s war with Russia.”

Indeed it’s being widely  called more vague–and with greater possible restrictions, or “conditions”–than even what came out of the 2008 Bucharest summit.

Below is the offending part of the official Vilnius Summit Communiqué:

Issued by NATO Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Vilnius 11 July 2023:

“……………………………………………  We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met.

But Zelensky is still holding out hope that one day– “After the war, Ukraine will be in NATO.”

However, President Biden has remained unmoved, and responded by explaining before reporters that Ukraine “will not be in NATO for a while”.

The geopolitical analysis news site Moon of Alabama observes correctly

“Well. The little comedian seems disappointed. As if the whole play had not been obvious from the very beginning. Since 2008 the Ukraine was to be used as a tool to nag Russia. It is otherwise of little value. It will end up as a discarded rag while NATO will, in the end, again recognize the Russian Federation as the super power that that it is. NATO will have to relearn to listen to and negotiate with it.”

MofA then highlights the inevitable negative impact (to say the least) on Ukrainian morale: “Now lets wait and see what NATO’s climb down will do to the morale and motivations of the Ukrainian army and people.”

Update(1740): David Sacks agrees that for the hawks of NATO-land, the way things are going for the Ukrainian war effort and the West’s prior optimism and muscular support in general have reached a low-point.

Sacks writes below [emphasis ZH’s]…

Despite Biden’s best efforts to put a happy face on it, Vilnius will be remembered as the NATO Summit where tensions boiled over. Zelensky denounced the Alliance’s admission policy as “absurd” and disrespectful.

UK Secretary of Defense Ben Wallace chastised Zelensky for ingratitude. Lindsey Graham attacked the Biden administration for weakness. Ben Hodges criticized Jake Sullivan for lack of “strategic bravery.” Even NAFO mascot Adam Kinzinger no longer appears to be a “fella.”

The optics were even harsher than the words, with the NATO elites turning their backs on a frustrated Zelensky. Biden’s assurance that Zelensky is “stuck” with the U.S. may come as cold comfort to both nations now that the Ukrainian counteroffensive has failed to meet expectations, huge amounts of expensive Western armor lay in ruins smoldering on the battlefield, Ukrainian casualties are horrific, and the U.S. has run out of 155mm artillery shells to give, forcing America to debase itself by sending cluster bombs.

The war effort is increasingly a shambles and the War Party is starting to turn on each other.  https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/nato-leaders-tell-zelensky-cool-it-rare-dressing-down-summit

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

France detonated nearly 200 nuclear ‘tests’ in French Polynesia — now this activist is calling for accountability

By Bobby MacumberDan Smith and Alice Matthews for Stories from the Pacific, 14 July 23  https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiVGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmFiYy5uZXQuYXUvcGFjaWZpYy9udWNsZWFyLXRlc3RpbmctZnJlbmNoLXBvbHluZXNpYS1oaW5hLWNyb3NzLzEwMjU4NTkzMNIBAA?hl=en-AU&gl=AU&ceid=AU%3Aen

Hinamoeura Cross was seven years old when France tested its last nuclear bomb in 1996 in French Polynesia.

It was detonated deep underground on the atoll of Fangataufa, in a deep shaft drilled into volcanic rock, and sent a white shockwave into the air, visible on grainy television cameras at the time.

“I don’t have any memory of it,” Hina told Stories from the Pacific.

“I was growing up. I never learned about the consequences of nuclear bombs at school. I didn’t even know there had been so many.”

Three to five was the figure Hina had in mind when she was younger. 

But in fact, by the time France finished its testing program on the atolls of Fangataufa and Moruroa, around 190 nuclear “tests” had been conducted.

Nuclear explosions had been conducted in lagoons, dropped from planes and suspended from helium balloons. After international pressure, testing moved underground.

The largest was codenamed Canopus, which was a two-stage thermonuclear test that exploded in 1968 while suspended from a balloon. 

It was around 200 times more powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The combined effect of the testing was equivalent to a Hiroshima-sized nuclear bomb exploding in French Polynesia every week for 14 years, Hina said

“Today, our ocean is totally contaminated. It’s like a poison,” she said.

“I really feel that in my blood I have been poisoned because of those nuclear tests and we have so many thousands of Tahitian people who are sick … you can’t find a family without cancer.

“And it’s really hard because they don’t understand the consequences of the nuclear tests because they’re not aware today.”

Subjects in school touched on the nuclear bombs dropped in Japan, but Hina said nothing was taught about her country’s own more immediate history — and the health consequences.

France initially said only 10,000 people were at risk of radiation exposure as a result of the nuclear activity.

But a later investigation by a team of researchers from Princeton University, journalism group Disclose, and environmental group Interprt claimed 110,000 people were potentially exposed to toxic radiation.

Hina herself was diagnosed with Leukaemia at 24, while her grandmother, mother, aunt, and sister all had thyroid cancer.

And, she said, to add insult to injury, the compensation scheme in place was complex and “not at all impartial”. 

There is one hospital and two clinics on the island of Tahiti, and many islanders are forced to fly to Paris for treatment.

“Today, it’s French Polynesia and all the population that pays for all this, the cost of the illness … and it costs a lot for us,” she said.

Calling a spade a spade — or a bomb a bomb

Hina’s diagnosis was a shock that jolted her into action.

Becoming an anti-nuclear activist, she started by posting articles and links online and eventually addressed the United Nations on the topic.

Now a newly elected member of Parliament in Tahiti, she’s pushing for better in-country medical treatment and to “educate and denuclearise Polynesian memories”.

It starts, she said, with “calling a spade a spade”. Nuclear tests were still nuclear bombs.

“The fact that there were no people that were being attacked … it was the same bomb,” she said.

“I really think that using the term test totally minimises the consequences.”

Another priority is getting France to acknowledge what happened and making her fellow Tahitians aware.

French Polynesia is of strategic importance to France, and Hina said the government was pushing to silence the fight.

“They don’t want to talk about the nuclear history. They don’t admit what happened.”

Hina also hopes to begin a foundation, allowing Polynesians to reclaim the nuclear narrative as well as advocate for anyone with radiation-related sickness to be treated in Polynesia.

Although chemotherapy has kept her leukaemia at bay thanks to an early diagnosis, not everyone is so lucky.

“I think it’s absolutely disgraceful that we don’t have a medical system that’s equal to the damage suffered by these 193 nuclear bombs,” she said.

“But I really thought that maybe if I have this courage, that will motivate other people to stand up and share their story, to speak about the cancers that we we have in our family, because … [many people] have cancer, but they don’t really realise the impact of the nuclear bombs.”

July 15, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nuclear power too expensive and slow to be part of Australia’s plans to reach net zero, study finds

Guardian, Lisa Cox 12 July 23

Nuclear power should not form part of Australia’s plans to reach net zero emissions because it is too expensive and slow, according to the final report of a project that models how Australia might meet its 2050 climate target.

The Net Zero Australia report, a partnership between major academic institutions and the management consultancy Nous Group, says the federal government has a major role to play in accelerating all options that could make a “material contribution” to achieving net zero.

The release of the report comes days after the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, ramped up calls for nuclear power in Australia and a debate about removing the legislative ban on nuclear power in Australia.

The report includes major investment in batteries, solar, onshore wind, pumped hydro and transmission. Among renewable options, offshore wind was found to have the most uncertain pipeline, with the report concluding first power from offshore wind projects needed to occur in 2030.

But the report concludes nuclear power should not be factored in to net zero plans and states that to “reduce renewable targets in the belief that nuclear will be deployed later at scale would create a material risk of not achieving net zero, or doing so at an excessive cost”.

Richard Bolt, principal at Nous Group, said: “Nuclear power should not be in our plans, because it’s too expensive and slow. ……………………………………………………………………….

The report was produced by the University of Melbourne, the University of Queensland, Princeton University’s Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, as well as Nous Group…………………… https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jul/11/nuclear-power-too-expensive-and-slow-to-be-part-of-australias-plans-to-reach-net-zero-study-finds

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Dutton wants Australia to join the “nuclear renaissance” – but this dream has failed before.

What stopped the nuclear noughties was a bigger problem: economics. Governments looking at nuclear saw the cost and time over-runs and decided it wasn’t worth it.

in Australia, promises to create a nuclear power industry from scratch based on as yet unproven technologies and in competition with cheap renewables is simply delusional.

The Conversation John Quiggin 11 July 23

Last week, opposition leader Peter Dutton called for Australia to join what he dubbed the “international nuclear energy renaissance”.

The same phrase was used 20 years ago to describe plans for a massive expansion of nuclear. New Generation III plants would be safer and more efficient than the Generation II plants built in the 1970s and 1980s. But the supposed renaissance delivered only a trickle of new reactors –  barely enough to replace retiring plants.

If there was ever going to be a nuclear renaissance, it was then. Back then, solar and wind were still expensive and batteries able to power cars or store power for the grid were in their infancy.

Even if these new smaller, modular reactors can overcome the massive cost blowouts which inevitably dog large plants, it’s too late for nuclear in Australia. As a new report points out, nuclear would be wildly uncompetitive, costing far more per megawatt hour (MWh) than it does to take energy from sun or wind.

The nuclear renaissance that wasn’t

Early in the 21st century, the outlook for nuclear energy seemed more promising than it had in years. ……………………………………….

The time seemed right for a nuclear renaissance – especially in the United States. Between 2007 and 2009, 13 companies applied for construction and operating licenses to build 31 new nuclear power reactors. But all but two of these proposals stayed on paper.

The first, in Georgia, is expected to be completed this year after running way behind schedule and way over budget. The other project in South Carolina was abandoned in 2017 after billions of dollars had already been poured into it. The same disastrous cost and time blowouts have hit new reactors in France (Flamanville, 10 years behind schedule), Finland (Olkiluoto, which opened this year after a 14 year delay) and the UK (Hinkley Point C, still under construction with cost and time blowouts).

China has built a trickle of new nuclear plants, commissioning three or four a year over the last decade. China currently has about 50 gigawatts (GW) of nuclear power capacity. This pales into insignificance compared to the nation’s extraordinary expansion of solar, with 95-120 gigawatts of additional capacity expected this year alone.

Nuclear falls short on cost, not politics

What went wrong for nuclear? Despite the claims of some nuclear advocates, the renaissance in the 2000s did not fall short because of political resistance. Far from it – the renaissance had broad political support in key markets.

And, unlike in the 1970s where intense anti-nuclear sentiment was tied to fears of nuclear war, environmentalists in the 2000s had refocused on the need to stop burning carbon-based fuels. Anti-nuclear campaigns and protest marches were almost non-existent.

What stopped the nuclear noughties was a bigger problem: economics. Governments looking at nuclear saw the cost and time over-runs and decided it wasn’t worth it.

As megaproject expert Bent Flyvbjerg has shown, cost overruns like these are typical. First of a kind nuclear plants offer an extreme example of the problem. To date, no Generation III or III+ design has been produced at scales large enough to iron out the inevitable early problems.

At the same time, other energy sources were growing in importance. 

In Australia, the writing was on the wall by 2007, when an inquiry found new nuclear power would struggle to compete with either coal or renewables. A string of subsequent inquiries have come to precisely the same conclusion.

Could it be different this time?

To make nuclear viable these days, advocates believe, means making it safe, cheap and easy to build. No more megaprojects. Instead, build small reactors en masse on factory production lines, ship them to where they are needed and install them in numbers matching the needs of the area.

Advocates hope the efficiency of factory production will offset the lower efficiency associated with smaller capacity. Ironically, off-site mass production and modular installation is the basis of the success of solar and wind.

To date, the most promising reactor design is NuScale’s VOYGR. It has yet to be produced and the US company has no firm orders. It does have preliminary agreements to build six reactors in Utah by 2030 and another four in Romania.

If all are built, that’s still less than the capacity of a single large Gen III plant. More strikingly, it’s about the same as the new solar capacity installed every single day (~710 MW) this year around the world.

Even with US government subsidies, NuScale estimates its power would cost A$132 per MWh. In Australia, average wholesale prices in the first quarter of 2023 ranged from $64 per MWh in Victoria to 114 per MWh in Queensland.

So why, then, is Australia’s opposition still talking about new nuclear? Dutton claims Australia’s future nuclear submarines to be built under the AUKUS deal are “essentially floating SMRs”. This is a red herring – while submarine reactors are small, they are not modular.

The simplest answer is political gain. Announcements like this yield political benefits at low cost.

The US, UK and France have decades of experience in nuclear power, even if failures outnumber successes. So yes, there is a slim chance the latest “nuclear renaissance” will succeed in these countries.

But in Australia, promises to create a nuclear power industry from scratch based on as yet unproven technologies and in competition with cheap renewables is simply delusional.  https://theconversation.com/dutton-wants-australia-to-join-the-nuclear-renaissance-but-this-dream-has-failed-before-209584?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

July 13, 2023 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Exposing the lying claims of pro nuclear shill Zion Lights

2 Response to a July 2023 article by Zion Lights:  https://nuclear.foe.org.au/zion-lights/

In Australia, for the same investment we can get three times more firmed renewable power (generation, not capacity) in one-third of the time compared to nuclear. The cost difference between nuclear and renewables is so vast that renewables are still cheaper even when transmission and storage are costed in. Perhaps the comparison is more nuclear-friendly in the UK, but I strongly suspect renewables+storage+transmission is still cheaper given the obscene costs of Hinkley Point (approx. A$50 billion for two reactors).

Specifically in Light’s latest article:

* Lights’ claims about the IPCC supporting nuclear power are dishonest, the IPCC maps out countless scenarios (including scenarios with nuclear reducing to zero) and its ‘analysis’ of pros and cons is generally reduced to dot-points.

* Lights’ claims about a “scientific consensus” in support of nuclear power are dishonest, e.g. the Climate Council, comprising Australia’s leading climate scientists, states that nuclear power reactors “are not appropriate for Australia and probably never will be”.

* Ignores profound impacts of catastrophic accidents.

* Ignores the repeatedly-demonstrated connections between nuclear power and weapons (in the UK and elsewhere).

* Light’s ‘millions of lives saved’ meme is dishonest because it assumes nuclear displaces nothing other than coal.

* Nonsense about warm water around nuclear plants providing a haven for sea-life is dishonest, she surely knows that water intake pipes kill fish by the thousands. (And she should know something about Irish opposition to radioactive discharges from Sellafield.)

* Glib, ignorant and/or dishonest claims about high-level nuclear waste: “spent fuel can be easily transported to another location, and even recycled”. The UK has given up on reprocessing (a polluting, multi-billion-dollar disaster) and has made near-zero progress on a deep underground repository and has wasted billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money in the process. The only operating deep underground repository in the world – WIPP in the US ‒ was disastrously mismanaged and under-regulated resulting in a chemical explosion in 2014.

* The UAE project came in under budget? Either Lights is ignorant or lying. The UAE project was years behind schedule and many billions of dollars over-budget.

And in other articles/interviews, even more unhinged nonsense, e.g.

* Lights saying climate change ‘could be solved overnight’ with nuclear. Seriously?

* Lights lying about her role in Extinction Rebellion.

* Lights getting sucked in by, and collaborating with, lunatic MAGA liar Michael Shellenberger.

Update: Lights deleted the above comments from the comments thread below her article, failed to address any of the substantive energy issues and failed to respond to the accusations of deceit.

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

TODAY. Zelensky mania ! But are cracks appearing in NATO?

Volodymyr Zelensky gave a stirring address to thousands of adoring fans in Vilnius, Lithuania.

He was at the top of his game – which is whipping up enthusiasm for the coming grand military defeat of Russia.

The NATO summit, though full of adoration for the sainted Zelensky, was just a little less unified in its holy purpose.

Perhaps hole -ey purpose would be more accurate

You see – while it is holy dogma now, that Ukraine must become part of NATO, -the hole in this dogma is becoming apparent. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg spelled it out: Ukraine can join NATO only when Ukraine wins the war against Russia because “unless Ukraine prevails, there is no membership to be discussed at all.”

But of course – no problem!

But wait – there is a problem – Ukraine is not winning this war. That is a realisation that is slowly dawning on some European leaders.

There probably never has been such a media magician as Volodymyr Zelensky. He has put it over politicians, journalists, people world-wide, and especially the suffering people of Ukraine.

But will Biden, Macron, Sunak and the rest just dump Zelensky, when his magic bubble bursts, when it’s all over in Ukraine, and they are forced to accept a negotiated peace with Russia?

That eventual negotiation is better than the other alternative – World War 3.

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s chances of victory in 2023 are ‘vanishingly small’

Premiered Jun 24, 2023 Ret. Lieutenant Colonel Daniel Davis elaborates on the current status of the Ukraine war and why a successful counteroffensive looks less likely.

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Indonesia Warns Nuclear Weapons Put Southeast Asia a ‘Miscalculation Away’ From Disaster

Indonesia’s Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi urged nuclear weapons states to join ASEAN’s regional nuclear-free zone.

The Diplomat, By Edna Tarigan and Niniek Karmini, July 12, 2023

Indonesia’s top diplomat warned Tuesday of the threat posed by nuclear weapons, saying that Southeast Asia is “one miscalculation away from apocalypse” and pressing for world powers to sign a treaty to keep the region free from such arms.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi raised the alarm ahead of a two-day summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which started later Tuesday in Jakarta. The agenda would spotlight Myanmar’s deadly civil strife, continuing tensions in the South China Sea, and efforts to fortify regional economies amid the global headwinds set off by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Later in the week, the 10-nation bloc will meet Asian and Western counterparts, including U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and Chinese foreign policy overseer Wang Yi.

The U.S.-China rivalry is not formally on ASEAN’s agenda but looms large over the meetings of the bloc, an often-unwieldy collective of democracies, autocracies, and monarchies, with some members split over allegiances either to Washington or Beijing.

“We cannot be truly safe with nuclear weapons in our region,” Marsudi told fellow ASEAN ministers. “With nuclear weapons, we are only one miscalculation away from apocalypse and global catastrophe.

In 1995, ASEAN states signed a treaty that declared Southeast Asia’s commitment to be a nuclear weapon-free zone, one of five in the world. However, Marsudi lamented that none of the world’s leading nuclear powers have signed on to the pact and called for renewed efforts to convince those states to sign up. “The threat is imminent, so we can no longer play a waiting game,” she said………………………………………………………………….more https://thediplomat.com/2023/07/indonesia-warns-nuclear-weapons-put-southeast-asia-a-miscalculation-away-from-disaster/

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

SCOTT RITTER: NATO Summit, a Theater of the Absurd

The scope and scale of the Ukrainian military defeat is such that the focus of many NATO members appears to be shifting from the unrealistic goal of strategically defeating Russia to a more realistic objective of bringing about a cessation to the conflict that preserves Ukraine as a viable nation state.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will attend the NATO summit. However, his demands for NATO membership will not be met.

Normalizing failure might best describe the best that NATO can accomplish in Vilnius.

By Scott Ritter, Consortium News, July 10, 2023

The unfulfilled goals and objectives from last year’s meeting in Madrid loom over the Atlantic military alliance. When the membership meets in Vilnius this week, normalizing failure might best describe the most that can be accomplished. 

The leaders of NATO’s 31 constituent member states have begun to assemble in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, for the alliance’s 33rd summit, an event that has come to symbolize the military organization’s increasingly difficult task of transforming political will into tangible reality.

Since the Wales Summit of 2014, when NATO made Russia a top priority in the aftermath of the Russian annexation of Crimea, and the Warsaw Summit of 2016, when NATO agreed to deploy “battlegroups” on the soil of four NATO members (Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Poland) in response to perceived Russian “aggression” in the region, Russia has dominated the NATO agenda and, by extension, its identity.

The Vilnius summit promises to be no different in this regard.

One of the major issues confronting the NATO leadership is that the Vilnius summit operates under the shadow of last year’s Madrid summit, convened in late June in the aftermath of Russia’s initiation of military operations against Ukraine.

The Madrid summit came on the heels of Boris Johnson’s deliberate sabotage of a Ukrainian-Russian peace agreement that was supposed to be signed on April 1, 2023, in Istanbul, and the decision by the United States in May 2023 to extend to Ukraine military assistance exceeding $45 billion as part of a new “lend lease” agreement.

In short, NATO had opted out of a peaceful resolution to the Russia-Ukraine conflict and instead chose to wage war by proxy — with Ukrainian manpower being married with NATO equipment — designed to achieve what U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith, in May 2022, called the “strategic defeat” of Russia in Ukraine.

The Madrid summit generated an official NATO statement which declared that “Russia must immediately stop this war and withdraw from Ukraine,” adding that “Belarus must end its complicity in this war.”

When it came to Ukraine, the Madrid statement was equally firm. “We stand in full solidarity with the government and the people of Ukraine in the heroic defense of their country,” it read………………

Confidently Seeking a ‘Strategic Defeat’

NATO, it seemed, was supremely confident in its ability to achieve the outcome it so very much wanted — the strategic defeat of Russia.

What a difference a year makes.

NATO assistance to Ukraine resulted in a successful counteroffensive which compelled Russia to withdraw from territory around the city of Kharkov, as well as abandon portions of the Kherson Oblast located on the right bank of the Dnieper River. Once the Russian defenses solidified and the Ukrainian attack stalled, NATO and Russia both began preparing for the next phase of the conflict……………………………….

NATO had placed high hopes on the Ukrainian army being able to carry out a counteroffensive against Russia which would achieve discernable results both in terms of territory re-captured and casualties inflicted on the Russian army. The results, however, have been dismal to date — tens of thousands of Ukrainian casualties and thousands of destroyed vehicles while failing to breach even the first line of the Russian defenses.

One of the challenges NATO will face in Vilnius is the question of how to recover from this setback. Many NATO countries are starting to exhibit “Ukraine fatigue” as they see their armories stripped bare and their coffers emptied in what, by every measurement, appears to be a losing cause.

The scope and scale of the Ukrainian military defeat is such that the focus of many NATO members appears to be shifting from the unrealistic goal of strategically defeating Russia to a more realistic objective of bringing about a cessation to the conflict that preserves Ukraine as a viable nation state.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will attend the NATO summit. However, his demands for NATO membership will not be met — U.S. President Joe Biden himself has weighed in on the matter, saying this would not be possible while Ukraine is at war with Russia.

Face-Saving Gestures

There will be face-saving gestures from NATO, such as the creation of a NATO-Ukraine Council and talk of eventual post-conflict security guarantees. But the reality is Zelensky’s presence will do Ukraine more harm than good, since it will only accentuate the internal disagreement within NATO on the issue of Ukrainian membership and highlight NATO’s impotence when it comes to doing anything that can meaningfully alter the current trajectory on the battlefield, which is heading toward a strategic defeat for both Ukraine and NATO.

…………………………………………………………………. One can expect a plethora of rhetorical spin and posturing by the NATO membership, but the fact is the real mission of the Vilnius summit is how best to achieve a soft landing from the unfulfilled goals and objectives laid out last year in Madrid.

Normalizing failure might best describe the best that NATO can accomplish in Vilnius.

Any failure to try to stop the accumulation of debacles that represent the current NATO policy toward Ukraine will result in further collapse of the military situation in Ukraine, and the political situation in Europe, which, in their totality, push NATO closer to the moment of its ultimate demise.

This prospect does not bode well for those whose task it is to put as positive a spin as possible on reality. But NATO has long ago stopped dealing with a fact-based world, allowing itself to devolve into a theater of the absurd where actors fool themselves into believing the tale they are spinning, while the audience stares in dismay.  https://consortiumnews.com/2023/07/10/scott-ritter-nato-summit-a-theater-of-the-absurd/

July 13, 2023 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment