Community batteries
To power Australia without fossil fuels will mean using batteries to store
power from solar and wind. We often think this means home batteries – or
large grid-scale installations. There’s another size too: community-scale
or neighbourhood batteries, which are growing rapidly in Australia due to
support from state governments like Victoria and Western Australia and,
more recently, from the federal government.
They seem to solve a lot of
problems we know people are concerned about – such as enabling more
rooftop solar and helping to speed up a transition to renewables. But the
popularity of these batteries shouldn’t be the only factor in decisions
about where they are rolled out. Sometimes – and in some parts of the
grid – they make sense. At other times, they may not be the best
solution.
Renew Economy 17th May 2023
The question of nuclear in Australia’s energy sector
In Australia’s transition to net zero emissions, the energy sector has a major role to play. But does nuclear power have a place in our future grid?

CSIRO, 15 May 23
Key points
- Nuclear power does not currently provide an economically competitive solution in Australia.
- Lead author of Gencost, Paul Graham says the main area of uncertainty with nuclear is around capital costs.
- There is a lack of robust real-world data around small modular reactors (SMRs) due to low global use.
As Australia attempts to hit ambitious emissions reduction targets during the transition to net zero, we know the energy sector has a major role to play. We also know that it makes sense to be informed of and assess a full range of technologies: some new and emerging, some established and proven.
In this context, it’s unsurprising that a debate around nuclear power has been reignited. Nuclear proponents believe there is potential for small modular reactors (SMRs) to be used for low-emissions electricity generation in Australia, providing essential firming capacity to support variable renewables.
However, a review of the available evidence makes it clear that nuclear power does not currently provide an economically competitive solution in Australia – or that we have the relevant frameworks in place for its consideration and operation within the timeframe required. Without more real-world data for SMRs demonstrating that nuclear can be economically viable, the debate will likely continue to be dominated by opinion and conflicting social values rather than a discussion on the underlying assumptions.
GenCost 2022-2023: the cost of electricity generation
Each year CSIRO works with the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) to produce GenCost – a detailed report that provides current and projected costs for electricity generation and storage technology.
The annual GenCost process is highly collaborative and draws on the deep expertise and knowledge of a large number of energy industry stakeholders. There are opportunities for members of the energy community to review the work and provide pre-publication feedback to improve its quality.
Paul Graham, CSIRO energy economist and lead author of the report, says it’s an open, public process that many people can participate in.
“AEMO wants to know that the data they use for planning and forecasting results is from a good level of consultation and lots of quality checking. Everyone in the industry has a fair chance to take part,” Paul says.
On 16 December 2022, the fifth GenCost report was released as a draft for public consultation. It remained consistent with findings from previous years, showing that renewables, led by onshore wind and solar PV, remain the lowest cost power generation technologies………………………………………………………
Using the standard formula for levelised costs plus the additional calculations specific to storage and transmission, wind and solar come in at a maximum of $83 per megawatt hour in 2030. This is a useful point in time for comparison because this is the earliest date at which nuclear SMR could be built in Australia.
In contrast, SMRs come in at $130-311 per megawatt hour. This range allows for nuclear SMR capital costs to halve from where we think they are at present. ………
A lack of real-world data on nuclear
One of the key principles that guides the GenCost process is the need for high quality data to base the report’s calculations on. According to Paul, the lack of robust data has been a challenge when it comes to nuclear – and for SMRs in particular.
…………………………………. Only two SMRs are known to operate in the world, located in Russia and China, and both have experienced cost blowouts and delays.
…………………….. Australian frameworks are not ready
Beyond the unfavourable economics, is the long time to build nuclear capability. The opportunity for the technology to play a serious role in emissions reduction for Australia is fast running out.
According to Renewables 2022, the latest edition of the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) annual report on the sector, renewable energy will surpass coal by early 2025 as the largest source of global electricity. Over the forecast period, their share of power will increase by 10 percentage points, reaching 38 per cent in 2027. Electricity generation from renewables is the only energy source that is expected to grow, while shares for coal, natural gas, nuclear and oil will decline.
………………..in Australia, where there are a range of other considerations at play: not least the fact that that nuclear power is currently not permitted by law. Two separate pieces of Commonwealth legislation – the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 – expressly prohibit the approval, licensing, construction, or operation of a nuclear plant. The only exception to that rule is a research reactor near Sydney, which is used for research and the production of medical isotopes.
“Plenty of other people have made the case against nuclear on the basis of issues like a lack of social licence, or the challenges involved with siting. Those issues are not unique to nuclear – but unlike other technologies, nuclear hasn’t had to go through siting or approval processes before in Australia,” Paul says.
“Taking all that into account and knowing that the longer it takes to build something the more likely it is that real costs will increase rather than decrease, it’s very clear that nuclear is going to find it very challenging to compete against renewables.” https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/nuclear-power-at-least-15-years-away-says-regulator/news-story/6b8c4ec9c94cd4d05471783678abdb59
‘Dumb idea’: Energy minister fires at Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan, urging him to ‘come clean’ about the facts
The Climate Change and Energy Minister took aim at the Liberal leader’s “dumb” nuclear power plan, telling him to “come clean” about the facts of the alternate energy source.
Yashee Sharma, Digital Reporter,14 May, https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/dumb-idea-energy-minister-fires-at-peter-duttons-nuclear-power-plan-urging-him-to-come-clean-about-the-facts/news-story/c98bcf8500bcc643c93b008b19bc9995
Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has debunked nuclear power statements spruiked by Coalition leader Peter Dutton.
Mr Dutton in his second budget reply on Friday said that “any sensible government must consider small modular nuclear as part of the energy mix”.
He disputed the Labor government’s climate change policies, warning they were putting the country “on the wrong energy path”.
In response, senator Bowen took to social media with an almost 2-minute-long video on “why Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan is a dumb idea for Australia”.
He took aim at the Opposition leader, questioning why the former Liberal government had nine years to introduce the nuclear energy but “never got around” to it.
“Because it’s a very bad idea,” he answered in the video.
The Labor Minister factchecked Mr Dutton with three reasons why nuclear power was not suitable for Australia, with the first being its hefty $400 billion price tag.
He referenced CSIRO findings that detail how renewable energy is the cheapest form of power while nuclear energy the most expensive.
“Wherever nuclear power plants are being built around the world, they are taking longer and costing much more than budgeted for,” he said.
“Even small modular reactors would cost a massive $5 billion each to build and proponents say we need as many as 80 small nuclear reactors spread across the country.
“That’s a whopping $400 billion in cost.”
Mr Bowen then fired at the “huge delays” in nuclear reactor construction, claiming that it would take more than a decade to establish a nuclear power industry.
Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has debunked nuclear power statements spruiked by Coalition leader Peter Dutton.
Mr Dutton in his second budget reply on Friday said that “any sensible government must consider small modular nuclear as part of the energy mix”.
He disputed the Labor government’s climate change policies, warning they were putting the country “on the wrong energy path”.
In response, senator Bowen took to social media with an almost 2-minute-long video on “why Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan is a dumb idea for Australia”.
He took aim at the Opposition leader, questioning why the former Liberal government had nine years to introduce the nuclear energy but “never got around” to it.
“Because it’s a very bad idea,” he answered in the video.
The Labor Minister factchecked Mr Dutton with three reasons why nuclear power was not suitable for Australia, with the first being its hefty $400 billion price tag.
He referenced CSIRO findings that detail how renewable energy is the cheapest form of power while nuclear energy the most expensive.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.572.0_en.html#goog_1312684880
| SKYNEWS.COM.AU03:37Government must ‘at least consider’ nuclear as part of energy mix: Dutton |
UP NEXT
04:37The budget ‘didn’t go far enough’ on issues which affect all Australia…
07:04Australia should have an ‘open mind’ to nuclear energy
05:41Budget measures ‘left middle Australia behind’: Ley
06:50‘Quarter acre block dream is gone’: Capital cities will have to build …
09:32‘Do this properly’: Ley urges government to ‘start again’ on housing bill
04:13‘Serious constitutional risk’: Liberal MP weighs in on Voice to Parlia…
05:20Don Farrell received ‘visibly warm’ reception during China visit
Government must ‘at least consider’ nuclear as part of energy mix: Dutton
“Wherever nuclear power plants are being built around the world, they are taking longer and costing much more than budgeted for,” he said.
“Even small modular reactors would cost a massive $5 billion each to build and proponents say we need as many as 80 small nuclear reactors spread across the country.
“That’s a whopping $400 billion in cost.”
Mr Bowen then fired at the “huge delays” in nuclear reactor construction, claiming that it would take more than a decade to establish a nuclear power industry.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.572.0_en.html#goog_2088505775
| SKYNEWS.COM.AU05:29Labor ‘denies’ that Australia is already a ‘nuclear nation’ |
UP NEXT
07:49Prince William and Kate’s royal ‘one-up’ on Harry and Meghan
02:26Meghan Markle missing from King’s coronation was reportedly a ‘blow to…
01:53’Very arrogant’ of sporting codes to suggest they can ‘influence Austr…
05:01’Their bias is on show’: Majority of ABC’s airtime ‘given to those who…
04:36Big Help Out was a ‘huge hit’: Russell Myers
03:49’Nasty and semi-racist’: Media’s spin about Dutton’s ‘obvious point’ o…
04:47‘Big questions’: Prince Andrew wears Garter robes at coronation
Labor ‘denies’ that Australia is already a ‘nuclear nation’
“Even if we started today, the first small reactor wouldn’t be in operation to meet the urgent need to deliver dispatchable power now,” he said.
“We don’t have a nuclear power industry, a regulatory or safety framework, nuclear power expertise or nuclear power workforce.”
The Energy Minister concluded his video, saying Australia is already struggling to store nuclear waste from one small medical reactor and probed Liberals over how they would dispose of waste from 80 reactors.
“If the Liberals want lots of nuclear power plants across Australia, they would need to explain where they’re going to store the nuclear waste,” he said.
“If Mr Dutton and the Liberals want to be taken seriously on their nuclear energy plan, they need to come clean on a few key things.
“Where will these nuclear power plants go? What will they do with the radioactive waste that generate? And when will they be operational? And how on earth are we going to pay for it?”
Former prime minister Malcom Turnbull threw his support behind Senator Bowen after the scathing attack.
“Very good video and absolutely right,” he wrote to Twitter.
Stanford-led research finds small modular reactors will exacerbate challenges of highly radioactive nuclear waste

Small modular reactors, long touted as the future of nuclear energy, will actually generate more radioactive waste than conventional nuclear power plants, according to research from Stanford and the University of British Columbia.
BY MARK SHWARTZ, 30 May, News Stanford
Nuclear reactors generate reliable supplies of electricity with limited greenhouse gas emissions. But a nuclear power plant that generates 1,000 megawatts of electric power also produces radioactive waste that must be isolated from the environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Furthermore, the cost of building a large nuclear power plant can be tens of billions of dollars.
To address these challenges, the nuclear industry is developing small modular reactors that generate less than 300 megawatts of electric power and can be assembled in factories. Industry analysts say these advanced modular designs will be cheaper and produce fewer radioactive byproducts than conventional large-scale reactors.
But a study published May 31 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has reached the opposite conclusion.
“Our results show that most small modular reactor designs will actually increase the volume of nuclear waste in need of management and disposal, by factors of 2 to 30 for the reactors in our case study,” said study lead author Lindsay Krall, a former MacArthur Postdoctoral Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). “These findings stand in sharp contrast to the cost and waste reduction benefits that advocates have claimed for advanced nuclear technologies.”
…………………………………. In the U.S. alone, commercial nuclear power plants have produced more than 88,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel, as well as substantial volumes of intermediate and low-level radioactive waste. The most highly radioactive waste, mainly spent fuel, will have to be isolated in deep-mined geologic repositories for hundreds of thousands of years. At present, the U.S. has no program to develop a geologic repository after spending decades and billions of dollars on the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada. As a result, spent nuclear fuel is currently stored in pools or in dry casks at reactor sites, accumulating at a rate of about 2,000 metric tonnes per year.
Simple metrics
Some analysts maintain that small modular reactors will significantly reduce the mass of spent nuclear fuel generated compared to much larger, conventional nuclear reactors. But that conclusion is overly optimistic, according to Krall and her colleagues.
“Simple metrics, such as estimates of the mass of spent fuel, offer little insight into the resources that will be required to store, package, and dispose of the spent fuel and other radioactive waste,” said Krall, who is now a scientist at the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company. “In fact, remarkably few studies have analyzed the management and disposal of nuclear waste streams from small modular reactors.”
Dozens of small modular reactor designs have been proposed. For this study, Krall analyzed the nuclear waste streams from three types of small modular reactors being developed by Toshiba, NuScale, and Terrestrial Energy. Each company uses a different design. Results from case studies were corroborated by theoretical calculations and a broader design survey. This three-pronged approach enabled the authors to draw powerful conclusions.
“The analysis was difficult, because none of these reactors are in operation yet,” said study co-author Rodney Ewing, the Frank Stanton Professor in Nuclear Security at Stanford and co-director of CISAC. “Also, the designs of some of the reactors are proprietary, adding additional hurdles to the research.”
Neutron leakage
Energy is produced in a nuclear reactor when a neutron splits a uranium atom in the reactor core, generating additional neutrons that go on to split other uranium atoms, creating a chain reaction. But some neutrons escape from the core – a problem called neutron leakage – and strike surrounding structural materials, such as steel and concrete. These materials become radioactive when “activated” by neutrons lost from the core.
The new study found that, because of their smaller size, small modular reactors will experience more neutron leakage than conventional reactors. This increased leakage affects the amount and composition of their waste streams.
“The more neutrons that are leaked, the greater the amount of radioactivity created by the activation process of neutrons,” Ewing said. “We found that small modular reactors will generate at least nine times more neutron-activated steel than conventional power plants. These radioactive materials have to be carefully managed prior to disposal, which will be expensive.”
The study also found that the spent nuclear fuel from small modular reactors will be discharged in greater volumes per unit energy extracted and can be far more complex than the spent fuel discharged from existing power plants.
“Some small modular reactor designs call for chemically exotic fuels and coolants that can produce difficult-to-manage wastes for disposal,” said co-author Allison Macfarlane, professor and director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia. “Those exotic fuels and coolants may require costly chemical treatment prior to disposal.”
“The takeaway message for the industry and investors is that the back end of the fuel cycle may include hidden costs that must be addressed,” Macfarlane said. “It’s in the best interest of the reactor designer and the regulator to understand the waste implications of these reactors.”
Radiotoxicity
The study concludes that, overall, small modular designs are inferior to conventional reactors with respect to radioactive waste generation, management requirements, and disposal options.
One problem is long-term radiation from spent nuclear fuel. The research team estimated that after 10,000 years, the radiotoxicity of plutonium in spent fuels discharged from the three study modules would be at least 50 percent higher than the plutonium in conventional spent fuel per unit energy extracted. ……..more https://news.stanford.edu/2022/05/30/small-modular-reactors-produce-high-levels-nuclear-waste/?fbclid=IwAR3hUe5R3zYb25eJ-8dJzM_vXATq4Du7Hk_XEhdeED_BTvwCqm0XLo3mE8o
Zelensky plotted attacks deep inside Russia – Washington Post

https://www.rt.com/russia/576237-zelensky-hungary-russia/ 15 May 23
The Ukrainian leader reportedly wanted to “occupy” Russian cities to gain leverage over Moscow
Despite public assurance that he would limit military action to his own country’s 1991 borders, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky formed plans to conduct attacks deep inside Russia and suggested that Kiev “destroy” the industry of Hungary, the Washington Post reported on Saturday, citing leaked Pentagon documents.
Citing US intelligence reports recently published on a gaming server, the Post described how Zelensky suggested at a meeting in January that his troops “conduct strikes in Russia,” while moving across the border to “occupy unspecified Russian border cities” in order to “give Kiev leverage in talks with Moscow.”
Less than two months later, the Ukraine-based Russian Volunteer Corps launched a cross-border raid that left two civilians dead in Russia’s Bryansk Region. A member of the group told Western media that Kiev had approved the attack, and further assaults have taken place since.
With Ukraine’s Western backers reluctant until recently to provide him with long-range missiles for fear he would use them against targets within Russia, Zelensky suggested to his top military commander, General Valery Zaluzhny, that he use drones to “attack unspecified deployment locations in Rostov” in February, the Post reported.
Prior to and after the alleged meeting, Ukrainian forces used drones to attack infrastructure in Rostov Region, which borders the formerly Ukrainian territory of Lugansk.
In a meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svridenko in February, Zelensky reportedly suggested that Ukraine “blow up” the Druzhba oil pipeline, which transports Russian oil to Hungary. According to the US report cited by the Post, Zelensky suggested that “Ukraine should just blow up the pipeline and destroy…Hungarian [Prime Minister] Viktor Orban’s industry, which is based heavily on Russian oil.”
American spies listening to his meeting with Svridenko concluded that Zelensky was issuing “hyperbolic, meaningless threats.” Nevertheless, the Druzhba pipeline has come under attack on several occasions since the meeting, most recently when it was hit by drone-dropped explosives on Wednesday.
The Post’s article corroborates a CNN report last month claiming that US spies have been intercepting Zelensky’s communications.
Contacted by the newspaper, Zelensky dismissed the incidents described in the report as “fantasies,” and claimed that “no one in our country has given orders for offensives or strikes on Russian territory.”
Contacted by the newspaper, Zelensky dismissed the incidents described in the report as “fantasies,” and claimed that “no one in our country has given orders for offensives or strikes on Russian territory.”
Washington Post censors its own report of interview that showed President Vladimir Zelensky in a poor light

https://www.rt.com/russia/576284-zelensky-wapo-transcript-deleted/ 15 May 23 Washington Post deletes ‘treason’ quotes from Zelensky interview
The Ukrainian president reacted angrily when confronted about his own intelligence agents’ supposed “dealings” with Russia’s Wagner Group
The Washington Post has cut a large segment from an interview with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, in which he pushed the newspaper to reveal alleged traitors in his ranks and angrily accused its reporters of aiding Russia by publishing information from leaked documents.
The Post published a transcript of a lengthy interview with Zelensky on Saturday. After a discussion of a Ukrainian counteroffensive against Russian forces, the newspaper asked whether his military intelligence agency – the GUR – had “back-channel contact” with Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Russian private military company Wagner Group.
Citing recently leaked Pentagon documents, the Post explained to Zelensky that American spies noted a meeting between the president and GUR chief Kirill Budanov in February in which Budanov told him that he had learned of a Wagner plan to “destabilize Moldova,” but could counter this alleged plan by exposing his own “dealings” with Prigozhin, thus portraying the Wagner boss as “a traitor who has been working with Ukraine.”
Zelensky responded angrily, first asking who within his government had handed this document to the Post. Whoever it was, he said, was committing “treason,” which “is the most severe felony in our country.”
Despite being told that the document did not come from Kiev, but from Washington, Zelensky asked his interviewer to reveal “with which Ukrainian official did you talk?”
The Post has not yet published a story based on the document, and when informed that he was the first Ukrainian official the newspaper had spoken to, Zelensky urged his interviewer not to run the story, arguing that doing so would “demotivate Ukraine,” and accusing them of “playing games with me.”
“You are right now playing with, I think, things that aren’t good for our people,” he warned, asking the Post’s reporter “is your goal to help Russia?” When the reporter said that it was not, Zelensky countered “well, it looks different.”
By Sunday, however, the explosive exchange – during which Zelensky did not dispute that the meeting with Budanov had happened – was missing from the Post’s transcript. The entire 1,400-word back-and-forth about the document was removed, with no explanation given.
The Post’s edit is not the first incident in which Western governments or media outlets have scrubbed information potentially embarrassing or damaging to Kiev. Back in December, the European Commission deleted a video and its associated transcript in which Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said that the Ukrainian military had suffered 100,000 fatalities since Russia’s military operation began ten months earlier.
Kiev keeps its losses a closely guarded secret, and when asked by the Washington Post to comment on this policy, Zelensky sniped “if you have the relevant documents, maybe you can tell us how many people have died…and what their names were.”
Biden too scared to come to Australia because of protests about Julian Assange?

Darn it! I was just about to buy my “Free Julian Assange” shirt – to wear in Canberra, and at the Sydney Opera House, and join thousands of others protesting – wherever Joe Biden dares to show his face in Australia.
USA Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said on Tuesday that a deal on the debt ceiling negotiations might be made by the end of this week. So – perhaps all the panic about the US Debt Ceiling will not be necessary? So – does Biden really need to cancel his visit to Australia?
Never mind – he’s still going to Hiroshima for the G7 summit. That’ll be OK. Everyone will say worthy things about how there must never be another nuclear bombing, and how we must all send drones, tanks, missiles etc to Ukraine . And they’ll say it politely -that’s the thing.
As for those bloody uncouth Australians – heck – someone might throw a rotten egg at Biden, – such is our rage about the persecution of Julian Assange. I mean – the Australian Prime Minister will of course bend over backwards to be polite, and not mention Assange. And Julian’s family and his other prominent supporters will be courteous.
But ya can’t count on the rest of us downunder colonials to be nice about it.
Yes Joe, – safer to go straight home from the G7 – give Australia a miss.
Nuclear news (too much) this week

A bit of good news – What is Black Climate Week? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1YQWBoDN_w
Climate. 75 active wildfires rage in Alberta, Canada. Wildfires, heat waves in Canada, Russia, Mongolia Kazakhstan.
Nuclear. Hard to know which issue to tackle. There’s the frenzied pro nuclear propaganda (type “nuclear” into Google News and see what you get). There’s Zaporizhzhia. There’s waste. And there’s Zelensky and Ukraine – where the Washington Post forgot that its job is adulation, and quickly has to correct any suggestion that Zelensky is less than a saintly hero. USA and its lackeys (UK, Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan etc) are not actually at war against Russia. But the Western media must think that we all are, so its infra dig to publish anything other than war-mongering propaganda worthy of the WW1 British style.
AUSTRALIA.
- Assange and the Australian government’s persecution of alleged Afghan war crimes whistleblower.
- Australian Radioactive Waste Agency a “zombie measure”– no funding left by Morrison government.
- ‘Dumb idea’: Energy minister fires at Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan, urging him to ‘come clean’ about the facts . Boring new pro nuclear push in Australia – same old excessively optimistic arguments. Nuclear advocates energised despite economic reality Nuclear power at least 15 years away, says regulator. Peter FitzSimons takes aim at schoolboy campaigning for nuclear energy with scathing Twitter post,
- Very bad advice: $368b nuclear submarines and the Federal budget. Weakening of Australia’s nuclear prohibition laws – necessary to develop the submarines. Budget reveals cutbacks on funding for Australia’s military and navy, in order to pay $billions for nuclear submarines. This week’s budget confirms the death of Labor’s nuclear disarmament diplomacy.
- A Warrnambool artist recalls the physical and emotional effects of nuclear testing in Maralinga.
- Nuclear waste is a $476m problem even before AUKUS.
CLIMATE. How a campaign to keep fossil fuels underground is gaining traction. Weatherwatch: concerns over climate impact on UK nuclear power sites.
CIVIL LIBERTIES. Chris Hedges: Julian Assange – A Fight We Must Not Lose. Threats to journalism posed by UK National Security Bill brushed aside by Parliament.
ECONOMICS.
- Sowing Seeds of Plunder: A Lose-Lose Situation in Ukraine.
- Putin Still Selling U.S. Nearly $1 Billion in Nuclear Fuel. UK government’s own workplace pension scheme won’t back nuclear projects. Rolls-Royce falls 6% as update lacks oomph and news on small nuclear business.
- Counting the rising costs of Scotland’s nuclear testing facility.
- Marketing. Bill Gates, Rolls Royce, and others, in the scrum to con the UK government into buying useless nuclear reactor minitrash.
EDUCATION. Nuclear enthusiast Jennifer Granholm ‘hopeful’ about $1B in federal loans to restart Palisades nuclear plant.
ENERGY. Germany’s Nuclear Energy Phase-Out, Explained,
ENVIRONMENT. Campaigners claim permit change at Hinkley Point would kill billions of fish. What to Know About Fukushima’s Exclusion Zone and Nuclear Mutations. Japan’s nuclear contaminated wastewater dump plan a cause of concerns even for New Caledonia.
HEALTH. The terrible toll of A-bomb tests — Beyond Nuclear
INDIGENOUS ISSUES. The Quiet Warrior: Russell Jim’s Struggle Against Nuclear Colonialism.
LEGAL. New Mexico State law and multiple federal court challenges may yet block the Holtec nuclear waste project.
MEDIA. Washington Post censors its own report of interview that showed President Vladimir Zelensky in a poor light. THE NUCLEAR CLUB. Christopher Nolan’s New ‘Oppenheimer’ Trailer Sees U.S. On the Brink of Nuclear War. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CXFpWTxS3M The Women of Three Mile Island. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is3jlNhicFY
NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY. Microsoft just made a huge, dodgy bet on nuclear fusion. Helion and Microsoft Lead World Down Nuclear Fusion Rabbit Hole, China’s nuclear ambitions get a boost from Russia, but is energy the only goal?.
OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR. Save our sceptred isle: NFLAs issue appeal to King over Lincolnshire Nuke Dump. UK’s Nuclear Waste Services ignore overwhelming local council opposition to siting plan for waste dump. Pacific leaders remain steadfast against nuclear waste disposal.
POLITICS
- Nuclear power and the technocratic system are not compatible with democracy: France’s group in Grenoble that fights this system.
- US nuclear companies urge Congress for $billions, as Russia’s nuclear industry profits from both sides of the Ukraine war . Power alert: Be wary of lifting moratorium on new Illinois nuclear plants. Robert Kennedy Jr: America needs a revolution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY89a_zXi9s Understanding The Highly Complex World Of Western China Analysis.
- Campaigners against UK nuclear waste dump plan claim victory in local elections. How the Greens are conquering the Tory countryside. No more Hibakusha: Nuclear Free Local Authorities urge PM to make peace pledge at Hiroshima Summit.
- Jamaica’s government planning for small nuclear reactors – but there’s been no public discussion.
- Philippines unprepared for nuclear-related dangers,
POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. The success of the Zelensky regime coming unstuck? France to host pro-nuclear meet to push for EU recognition of climate benefits. Whitewashing history. Estonia to issue fines for celebrating WW2 victory over Nazis. Five years after Trump’s exit, no return to the Iran nuclear deal. NATO – a great predatory bird – now keen to gobble up Japan, too.
PROTESTS. 8 arrested at nuclear protest on Mother’s Day
SAFETY. Luck is not a safety plan. Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant facing ‘catastrophic’ staff shortage amid Russian evacuation. Russia orders evacuation of civilians around Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia power plant amid warnings of ‘severe nuclear accident’. Ukraine war: ‘Mad panic’ as Russia evacuates town near Zaporizhzhia plant. Risks too high at Zaporizhzhia.
Experts urge G7 leaders to discuss nuclear security. Vogtle-3 nuclear reactor flunked cybersecurity inspections, still at 0% power (7 May) French nuclear group Orano (previously Areva) evacuates foreign workers to Niger capital following security threat.
SECRETS and LIES. The US silence on Israeli nuclear weapons and the right-wing Israeli government.
SPINBUSTER. Missteps deliver Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez into the hands of the pro-nuclear propagandists – REPROCESSING IS NOT RECYCLING.
WASTES.
- Nuclear’s Dangerous Waste Is ‘Rapidly Catching Up’ With Industry
- Canada’s radioactive waste and decommissioning policy is a failure.
- Regulator issues permit for New Mexico nuclear waste facility against wishes of local, state, and federal leaders. New Mexico shouldn’t be the nation’s nuclear dump.
- Prevent, protect, consult – the NFLA (Nuclear Free Local Authorities)’ three priorities for UK radioactive waste policy. Profitable industry in trying to clean up dead nuclear reactors. The Nuclear Industry Thinks It Can Get Away With Dumping Far Hotter Wastes Because Cumbria Has a Short Memory?
- Stanford-led research finds small modular reactors will exacerbate challenges of highly radioactive nuclear waste.
- Fukushima greets summer with dread as nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping approaches.
WAR and CONFLICT. Leak reveals Zelensky privately plots bold attacks inside Russia.(Is his halo slipping?) Zelensky plotted attacks deep inside Russia – Washington Post. As Donetsk civilians live in constant fear of Ukrainian shelling, from on the ground, I detail the terror.
Poland: Pentagon, NATO reach milestone in plans for direct confrontation with Russia. NATO Weapons Go Boom, British Missiles Strike Russia – Ukraine War Escalates Russia’s Nuclear-Capable Tu-95, Tu-160 Bombers Deployed Near NATO Border As Tensions Escalate With Ukraine. NATO holds submarine warfare exercise to block Russia’s entry to Atlantic .
US Politicians Suggest Bombing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) in Event of Cross-Strait Conflict. Japanese protesters call for US military to be evicted.
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. Biden is selling weapons to the majority of the world’s autocracies. Britain leads the way in escalating the Ukraine war with long range missiles. US to Provide Ukraine $1.2 Billion in Long-Term Security Aid. Pentagon chief pledges Abrams tanks to Ukraine soon.
US and Taiwan in talks for US$500 million in free weapons after arms deliveries stalled. Pentagon: U.S. deploys warplanes, warships, interceptor missiles to Europe, troops to Mexican border . Links between Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power. U.S. transfers F-22s from Poland to Estonia to “defend NATO’s eastern flank” . Pentagon wants authority to start work on new technologies without Congressional approval.
Boring new pro nuclear push in Australia – same old excessively optimistic arguments

Bro Sheffield-Brotherton
etnoprSods0ch79hfluh37559ml06c1272a93947f96u8t1220ctltff1gfh ·
On the current unoriginal nuke push from “lovers of science” and “believers in informed public debate”:
If they knew a lot more I would be unsurprised if they even recommended that we should go back in time and watch a vid of Phil Baxter, Ernie Titterton or even “young” Leslie Kemeny to edumacate ourselves?
It is coming up to 47 years since the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry Commissioners wrote in their first detailed report:
What has surprised us more is a lack of objectivity in not a few of those in favour of [nuclear energy], including distinguished scientists. It seems that the subject is one very apt to arouse strong emotions, both in opponents and proponents.
There is abundant evidence before us to show that scientists, engineers and administrators involved in the business of producing nuclear energy have at times painted excessively optimistic pictures of the safety and performance, projected or past, of various aspects of nuclear production.
There are not a few scientists, including distinguished nuclear scientists, who are flatly opposed to the further development of nuclear energy, and who present facts and views opposed to those of others of equal eminence. We note that a few of the government officials who appeared before us showed reluctance in communicating matters of importance to the Commission.”
Not that any of that surprised me. The claim was made repeatedly in the 1970s [and, of course, is popular in the boring new pro-nuclear push in this country] that any negative views that people may have about brittle power were entirely due to their “ignorance” of the subject matter. It was but one reason why some people felt the importance of participating in a public debate on the subject in Australia – most concentratedly 45-50 years ago.
And the experience and evidence is beyond clear; the more that debate continued the greater was the opposition to the mining and export of Australian uranium AND to the use of inefficient, expensive, dangerous electricity generating nuclear reactors in Australia despite the reverse exhortations of the nuclear club of powerful vested interests.
Nuclear advocates energised despite economic reality
Canberra Times By Jacob Shteyman, May 15 2023
Australia could develop a domestic nuclear energy system within 15 years but it would not be economically competitive, a Senate committee has been told.
A procession of energy experts, and a 16-year-old boy, lined up to give their two cents on a proposal to remove the prohibition on installing nuclear power in Australia on Monday.
Gillian Hirth, chief executive of nuclear regulator ARPANSA, told the committee it would take 10 to 15 years to develop nuclear energy facilities, but regulatory frameworks would need to be established first.
There would also need to be a significant uplift in the capability of the nuclear industry, she said.
While new technologies being developed overseas, like small modular reactors, are safer and produce less radioactive waste [a dubious claim!] than traditional nuclear generation, the committee heard the economics behind nuclear doesn’t stack up in the Australian context.
Department of Energy deputy secretary Simon Duggan said work done by the CSIRO found the abundance of low-cost renewable energy in Australia would make it difficult for nuclear technology to compete financially by the time it was ready to be deployed.
The government’s focus is instead on getting as much renewable energy, firming and transmission infrastructure into the grid as possible to provide more stability for consumers, Mr Duggan said.
Will Shackel, 16, told the committee he created advocacy group Nuclear for Australia because he wants to encourage the country to have an open mind on nuclear energy and a fact-based debate.
“Young people are energised by the prospect of nuclear energy, yet government is not reacting,” he wrote in a submission.
“Despite bids to pander to us with utopian fantasies of a clean energy transition through renewables, young people are calling for the commonwealth government to acknowledge that the only pragmatic solution lies in the tabooed energy generation capability of nuclear energy.”
But Dave Sweeney, nuclear policy analyst at the Australian Conservation Foundation, said radioactive waste remains the achilles heel of the industry.
“We get three years with existing commercial reactors of reliable electricity and then we get 100,000 years of an intergenerational carcinogenic, mutagenic waste burden,” he told the committee.
“We need to back a winner and that winner is the renewable sector.”……………………………
The committee is due to report back by June 15 https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8196744/nuclear-advocates-energised-despite-economic-reality/
Fukushima greets summer with dread as nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping approaches

Global Times, By Xu Keyue and Xing Xiaojing in Iwaki, May 15, 2023
The Fukushima Prefecture in northeastern Japan is known as “the island of happiness,” which embodies people’s longing for a better life. Summer began in Fukushima in early May when locals normally look forward to intimate contact with the sea.
However, despite strong opposition at home and abroad, the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) are set to go ahead with the plan to dump the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea this summer.
As summer approaches, the Global Times reporters went to the Fukushima Prefecture. In this first installment of this field investigation, the Global Times reveals the palpable sense of fear and unease hanging over Fukushima, paired with intense opposition from locals who chanted “Never allow arbitrary dumping into the sea!”………………………………………………………………………………………………………
About 54 kilometers away from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the city looks subdued with few passersby along the streets. The excavation of an underwater tunnel for the project to drain the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant was completed in April, and TEPCO announced that it is expected to complete the construction of the tunnel by the end of June. Measuring 1,031 meters long and 1 kilometer away from the coast, the tunnel will allow radioactive wastewater to be dumped into the sea.
…………………………………………………….. Chiyo Oda, co-chairperson of an environmental NGO and city assembly “Stop polluting the oceans!” was one of them.
“Summer is coming. What’s going to happen? Fukushima greets summer with fear!” said Oda, who expressed strong concern about the dumping of nuclear-contaminated wastewater at a conference themed “Don’t Nuke the Pacific” on May 7. “The Japanese government has reached an agreement with the fishing community that nothing will be done without [the fishing community and other stakeholders’] understanding.” Nevertheless, the Japanese government is apparently breaking its promise and is preparing to dump the water which is likely to start this summer.
When the Global Times reporters met Oda, the 68-year-old woman had just returned to Iwaki from Fukushima city, the capital of Fukushima Prefecture. Early that day, with Kazuyoshi Sato, another co-representative of the city assembly, Oda had driven for two hours to the Fukushima prefectural office to hold a press conference to announce that a mass rally called “May 16 Tokyo Action” will be held in Tokyo on May 16 to urge the Japanese government and TEPCO to stop dumping the nuclear-contaminated wastewater.
Oda told the Global Times that the campaign will last all day on May 16, when anti-sea pollution campaigners from all over Japan are meant to gather in Tokyo. As planned, they will gather in front of the TEPCO headquarters at 10:30 am, and then head to the House of Representatives with lawmakers to hold the rally. The rally and petition to the Japanese government and parliament will be followed by a speech at the Hibiya Open Air Concert Hall in the evening. It will then be followed by a massive demonstration in Ginza, Tokyo, which is expected to be attended by more than 1,000 people.
“The sea of my hometown, the Sea of Japan, and the seas of the world must not be polluted,” said Oda.
Oda noted that the Japanese government, TEPCO, the Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Associations, and the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Associations of Japan signed an agreement in 2015, stating it would not “do anything about the nuclear-contaminated water from Fukushima without the understanding and consent of the relevant people,” but now the Japanese government and TEPCO insist on dumping the water despite opposition from all parties, including fishermen. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
“Look! This is the sea we want to protect!” Ikarashi told the Global Times that he and his family have fond memories of living by the sea, eating the catch from the same sea, surfing, and frolicking with their children. The people of Fukushima live just like them, having enjoyed the bounty of the sea for generations. If the nuclear-contaminated wastewater is dumped into the sea, future generations will no longer be able to enjoy the beautiful nature.
Ruiko Muto, who lives in Tamura, Fukushima, is the head of the association for the victims of the Fukushima nuclear accident. After the accident, she worked hard to hold the former management of TEPCO accountable as a member of the legal team for the Fukushima nuclear accident and the criminal prosecution team.
Muto told the Global Times in an email that “ALPS-treated water” used by the Japanese government and TEPCO contains many other radioactive substances besides tritium, making it “not safe at all.” Under such circumstances, attempts to release the radioactive wastewater from Fukushima into the sea must not be allowed.
Muto said that as summer approaches, her group will join forces with other civic groups and continue to express opposition through protests and rallies.
Dumping not only way
In an on-the-spot interview, Global Times reporters noted the intense concern over whether “ALPS-treated water,” as the Japanese government and TEPCO refer to it, is safe, and whether there is an alternative to dealing with the wastewater.
Hideyuki Ban, a Japanese nuclear expert and co-director of the Tokyo-based Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center (CNIC), told the Global Times that “the nuclear-contaminated wastewater contains 64 radionuclides, including tritium, some of which are very long-lived and cannot necessarily be diluted. [The compounds] can accumulate in the ocean and attach to fish and shellfish, and some of them can enter the body of marine organisms, causing human beings to be exposed to nuclear radiation after consumption. Even if [the wastewater] is treated and released into the sea, it is not safe.”
“There is no precedent in the world for dumping such wastewater containing 64 radionuclides into the sea,” he said.
“The capacity of ALPS to remove radionuclides and the amount of the nuclear-contaminated wastewater to be discharged are not fully understood, let alone gaining the understanding and consent of stakeholders. Under such circumstances, it is not allowed to arbitrarily discharge the wastewater,” he said.
Ban noted that there are other ways to dispose of the wastewater. For example, there is the option of “mortar solidification,” where the nuclear-contaminated wastewater is mixed, solidified, and stored in mortar as in cement production. What the Japanese government has done is based on a political decision, not one based on scientific research, Ban criticized……………………………………………………………………….
The problem, however, is that even if the nuclear-contaminated wastewater is disposed of, key issues such as whether nuclear fuel debris can be removed from the Daiichi plant remain unresolved. The government plans to decommission the reactor in the next 30 to 40 years, but it has yet to give a clear explanation of how long it will take to complete the project and in what condition the facility will have to be in order to qualify as successfully decommissioned, according to Muto.
Surrounded by the sea, Japan gives thanks to the gracious sea as a prosperous maritime nation, on “Sea Day” held annually on the third Monday of July, which is one of the statutory holidays in the country.. Born by the sea, the locals reached by the Global Times could not help but express their deep concern and fear that if the sea is polluted, it will be difficult to enjoy the sea’s succor in the future. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202305/1290745.shtml
![]() |
Britain leads the way in escalating the Ukraine war with long range missiles

Robert Stevens10 May 2023 WSWS UK deepens warmongering in Ukraine with plans to supply long-range missiles
The UK is again leading the way in a massive further escalation of the NATO war against Russia.
On Monday, the Washington Post reported that the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) had issued a call to weapons manufacturers, on behalf of the International Fund for Ukraine (IFU), to supply missiles capable of striking Russian-annexed Crimea or cities deep inside Russia’s borders. Over £300 million in funding has been made available through donations from the UK, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, plus Iceland and Lithuania.
The MoD’s notice referred to “Missiles or Rockets with a range 100-300km; land, sea or air launch” and “Payload 20-490kg”. Listed as “Desirable requirements” were: “Low Probability of Intercept (LPI); includes Mission Planning Capability; Assured navigation (with hardened Global Navigation Satellite System capability) in the face of advanced countermeasures and EM spectrum denial; Air defence penetration methods to increase probability of successful strike; Technical Readiness Level of at least 8”.
This fits the profile of the UK’s own Storm Shadow missile which has a range of in excess of 250km. Costing £2.2 million apiece, the weapon is manufactured by the UK/French/Italian arms group MBDA for the British and French armed forces. According to the Forceswebsite, the Storm Shadow was “developed primarily for stealth strikes,” is “capable of engaging the targets precisely in any weather conditions during day and night” and boasts “long-range low attitude paths combined with subsonic speed.”…………….
The Guardian reported Wednesday, “A British official, speaking anonymously, said the tender requirements were ‘rather consistent’ with the Storm Shadow.” An MoD spokesperson said that a final decision to supply Ukraine with long-range Ukraine would rest with the main five countries in the IFU.
This was just for public consumption. Everyone knows that it is Britain, acting in tandem with the United States, that will decide what gets sent. This was made clear by the statements cited in the Washington Post made by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in February in his speech to the Munich Security Conference:…………
Sunak added definitively, “The United Kingdom will be the first country to provide Ukraine with longer range weapons.”
His pledge was all but confirmed this week by UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, in Washington to hold talks with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the Atlantic Council think tank “on the United Kingdom’s role in an increasingly adversarial world.”……….
Cleverly commented, “Air defense missile systems became increasingly important over time, and in the next stage we’ll see another evolution of the support.”
Britain’s role as chief provocateur in the lead up to and during NATO’s war against Russia is a matter of record. It has also led the way in ensuring ever-more lethal military hardware has been flooded into Ukraine, with the resulting mass loss of life, both Ukrainian and Russian, not even an afterthought.
Yuriy Sak, an adviser to Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov, told Reuters, “We would welcome it if the UK takes on a leadership role with the long-range missiles, in the same way they did with the Challenger 2 main battle tanks.”
Politico responded to the MoD’s announcement with a piece declaring, “The Biden administration has no plans to follow Britain’s lead in sending long-range missiles to Ukraine—with some officials saying the U.S. is now off the hook thanks to the U.K.’s planned delivery.”
……………………………………….. At every stage in the conflict, NATO has escalated the conflict with the supply of weaponry that US President Joe Biden himself and NATO officials had previously unconditionally ruled out. The Guardian noted, “Britain is unlikely to want to go ahead without US support, and getting to this point may have required diplomatic wrangling.”…………………………………………….. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/05/10/dvvj-m10.html
How the Greens are conquering the Tory countryside

In the vote on May 4, the Greens won Mid Suffolk district council from the
Conservatives, taking 24 of the 34 seats and securing their first ever
majority-held council in the UK. It was the biggest wave in a national
tidal surge of rural support for the party. The Greens doubled their
councillors nationally from 240 to 481 — and became the largest party in
East Hertfordshire and Lewes in East Sussex. They also took 12 seats in
East Suffolk, and made gains in Cumberland, South Tyneside, Hastings and
Worcester.
Times 14th May 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-the-greens-are-conquering-the-tory-countryside-fjzw6mhvv
Japan’s nuclear contaminated wastewater dump plan a cause of concerns even for New Caledonia
By Global Times: May 14, 2023
Japan’s plan to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean has been strongly condemned by the international community. Nonetheless, Tokyo is still going its own way and speeding up the plan to make the rest of the world pay for it. What harm will it cause to the Pacific island countries and local residents if the contaminated water is discharged into the Pacific Ocean by Japan? What efforts has the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) made to stop Japan? Global Times (GT) reporter Wang Wenwen discussed these issues with Johanito Wamytan (Wamytan), the vice-president of the association of friendship between New Caledonia and foreign countries.
GT: What do you think of Japan’s decision to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean? If it is carried out, how will it affect Japan’s regional and international image?
Wamytan: Twelve years after the Fukushima disaster, the nuclear power plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), is preparing to dump more than 1 million tons of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean. The plan has caused concerns among fishermen and angered Japan’s neighbors.
Storage was the solution put in place at Fukushima. The affected nuclear power plant produces hundreds of cubic meters of contaminated water each week. To cool the fuel in the affected reactors, TEPCO is forced to inject water permanently. Add to that the rainwater and groundwater that is sitting in the basements of buildings. This water loaded with radioactive isotopes is then pumped to be partially treated and placed in tanks.
According to a TEPCO count in February 2021, 1,061 tanks were piled up at the Fukushima site, containing 1.25 million cubic meters of wastewater. In a document dated April 2020, the IAEA reiterated its position that storage “can only be a temporary measure and a more sustainable solution is needed.”

Japan’s nuclear contaminated wastewater dump plan a cause of concerns even for New Caledonia
By Global TimesPublished: May 14, 2023 07:21 PM
A view of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Photo: VCGEditor’s Note:
Japan’s plan to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean has been strongly condemned by the international community. Nonetheless, Tokyo is still going its own way and speeding up the plan to make the rest of the world pay for it. What harm will it cause to the Pacific island countries and local residents if the contaminated water is discharged into the Pacific Ocean by Japan? What efforts has the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) made to stop Japan? Global Times (GT) reporter Wang Wenwen discussed these issues with Johanito Wamytan (Wamytan), the vice-president of the association of friendship between New Caledonia and foreign countries.
This is the fifth piece of the series.
GT: What do you think of Japan’s decision to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean? If it is carried out, how will it affect Japan’s regional and international image?
Wamytan: Twelve years after the Fukushima disaster, the nuclear power plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), is preparing to dump more than 1 million tons of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean. The plan has caused concerns among fishermen and angered Japan’s neighbors.
Storage was the solution put in place at Fukushima. The affected nuclear power plant produces hundreds of cubic meters of contaminated water each week. To cool the fuel in the affected reactors, TEPCO is forced to inject water permanently. Add to that the rainwater and groundwater that is sitting in the basements of buildings. This water loaded with radioactive isotopes is then pumped to be partially treated and placed in tanks.
According to a TEPCO count in February 2021, 1,061 tanks were piled up at the Fukushima site, containing 1.25 million cubic meters of wastewater. In a document dated April 2020, the IAEA reiterated its position that storage “can only be a temporary measure and a more sustainable solution is needed.” Tanks were filled by 2022 and TEPCO needs room for further dismantling.
The accumulation of these open-pit tanks also raises the risk of accidents. It is likely that Japan’s decision will have a negative impact on the country’s image in terms of nuclear safety and environmental management. The decision can also lead to boycotts or trade restrictions by countries in the region which oppose it.
So far, this decision has been widely criticized by countries in the region, as well as by fishermen and some Japanese. Like them, we in Kanaky-New Caledonia are concerned about the long-term effects of the contamination of the Pacific Ocean on human health and the environment……………………………………………………………………..
GT: New Caledonia is a member of the PIF. What efforts has the PIF made to stop Japan and how effective are they?
Wamytan: The PIF has publicly expressed concern about Japan’s decision to dump contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean, calling on Japan to work closely with Pacific countries to develop an appropriate and environmentally friendly solution to water management. The PIF also requested Japan to provide detailed information on the composition of the contaminated water and on measures taken to minimize risks to human health and the environment……………………………………………………………………… https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202305/1290677.shtml
May 15 Energy News- geoharvey
Science and Technology: ¶ “Oceans Have Been Absorbing The World’s Extra Heat. But There’s A Huge Payback” • In March, the surface temperature of the world’s oceans was above anything seen in the forty years that satellites have been measuring it. But two kilometers below the surface, heat has been rising relentlessly for decades, thanks […]
May 15 Energy News — geoharvey



