Japan’s murky management of Fukushima nuclear wastewater
Japan’s murky management of Fukushima nuclear wastewater https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2021/06/25/japans-murky-management-of-fukushima-nuclear-wastewater/25 June 2021
Author: Cheol Hee Park, SNU
On 13 April 2021, the Japanese government announced plans to dispose of the wastewater stored at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean over a period of 30 years.
The plant has about 1000 wastewater tanks that can hold up to 1.37 million tons of contaminated water. Currently, 1.25 million tons are being stored, which accounts for about 90 per cent of the total storage capacity. The tanks are expected to fill up by the autumn of 2022, which prompted the Japanese government to adopt the least expensive option — disposing the wastewater into the sea, starting from 2023.
The United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) remain sympathetic to the Japanese decision, saying that it meets the international standard. On the other hand, China and South Korea have voiced concerns about the decision. They are distrustful of and dissatisfied with the sudden decision made by the Japanese government. The difference is starkly highlighted in how the wastewater is being referred to by different countries. Japan and the United States call it ‘treated water’ while China and South Korea define it as ‘contaminated water’.
The Japanese government explained that it will fully treat and dilute the wastewater until the contamination level is reduced to at least one-hundredth of its original concentration. Officials say that tritium will be reduced to one-fortieth of the Japanese government’s normal standard. Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso even claimed that the treated water will be drinkable.
he Japanese government also made it clear that before the accident in 2011 the Fukushima nuclear plant disposed of 2.2 trillion becquerels of tritium into the sea each year, which caused no problems. They added that because tritium is a weak radioactive isotope, most of the material will exit the human body, meaning its negative impact will be small.
Despite the Japanese government’s efforts to convince people outside of the country, the most vocal opposition has come from within Japan. The Japan Fishermen’s Association argued that they will not accept the Japanese government’s decision. They explain that the decision went against the government’s promise in 2015 that the release would not happen without their consent. Fishermen from Fukushima and Ibaraki are particularly sensitive about the potential consumer backlash over the radioactive wastewater release, which will directly impact their livelihoods. About 70 per cent of fishermen oppose the government’s decision. It remains unclear whether the Japanese government will be able to persuade them.
Concerns from neighbouring countries are another hurdle to overcome. There is little sign that the Japanese government fully consulted adjacent countries before it announced the decision. Because of the lack of prior consultation and reliable notice, the Japanese government’s decision should be regarded as a unilateral move. South Korea and China should not approach this issue to drag down Japan’s efforts to resolve the problem. At the same time, it is Japan’s responsibility to be attentive to neighbouring countries’ legitimate concerns.
Securing transparency in the process of implementing the plan is another challenge. Despite the Japanese government’s explanation, it remains uncertain whether various nuclides other than tritium can be reliably removed using the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS). Passing on the correct and reliable information to concerned parties in and outside the country is necessary. Japan should incorporate third-party specialists to provide objective and reliable information about the process.
Finally, verifying the safety of the water with international standards would give comfort to and garner trust from concerned parties, including Japanese fishermen. The IAEA could mobilise experts or build a verification team on behalf of Japan and its neighbouring countries so that all concerned regional countries can be persuaded about the safety of the water.
The Japanese government should better fulfil its responsibilities, justify the necessity of its decision, remain transparent about its implementation of the plan and be resilient in verifying the safety of the water it disposes of.
Cheol Hee Park is Professor at the Graduate School of International Studies and Director of the Institute of International Affairs, Seoul National University.
Barngarla people hold Native Title land close to planned nuclear waste dump, but were denied a vote on this.
The nuclear waste site is planned for Barngarla Country, but the amendments will allow Traditional Owners to take the matter to court, https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2021/06/23/traditional-owners-can-challenge-nuclear-waste-dump-country-1?fbclid=IwAR0ZYwZRYOUQn58LdV3A0X4L1AeERiDi8ylqkVFcjReI5KQj7_fl6VTXcaABy Keira Jenkins
Source: NITV News, 23 JUN 2021 The Senate has passed legislation that would allow nuclear waste to be stored at a remote site in South Australia, replacing current city facilities.
The Morrison government was forced to abandon key features of the bill to gain opposition support, including a provision that would have locked in Kimba as the new storage location.
Instead, Minister for Resources Keith Pitt can issue an ‘intention to declare’ a preferred location.
The amended bill, which passed through the Senate this week, also allows for a judicial review of the location if there is a dispute.
Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation welcomed the reinstatement of the right to a judicial review on the process.
“This is a great moment for democracy, and for those who appreciate the independent scrutiny of government action,” they said in a statement.
In 2019, the Australian Electoral Commission conducted a month-long community ballot, asking the question ‘Do you support the proposed National Radioactive Waste Management Facility being located at one of the nominated sites in the community of Kimba?’
The ballot returned a 61.58 per cent ‘yes’ vote.
Barngarla conducted their own poll, saying they had been excluded from the AEC’s postal ballot.
100 per cent of the votes returned from Native Title holders said ‘no’ to the proposed nuclear facility.
Barngarla said the site selection process had been “completely and utterly miscarried”.
“No proper heritage assessment of the site was ever undertaken,” read the statement.
“… the most obvious and appalling example of this failed process was when the Government allowed the gerrymandering of the Kimba ‘community ballot’ in order to manipulate the vote.
“The simple fact remains that even though the Barngarla hold Native Title land closer to the proposed facility than the town of Kimba, the First Peoples for the area were not allowed to vote.
“…Mistakes have been made and the process needs to start again.”
Australia’s collective voice should silence the ‘drums of war’
Australia’s collective voice should silence the ‘drums of war’ Independent AustraliaBy Barbara Hartley | 24 June 2021, With Australia raising its hand to be part of joint naval exercises in the South China Sea, its departure from the G7 in Cornwall continues the “down-under” tradition of following U.S. foreign policy.
Although the beat of war drums is currently more muffled, anti-China rhetoric still echoes down the chilly halls of Federal Parliament as the winter sitting takes place.
In 2003, without parliamentary oversight, Australia followed the U.S. into Iraq. The given purpose was to initiate action against what then-U.S. President George W. Bush called the “axis of evil”: initially Iraq, Iran and North Korea, and later expanded to Cuba, Libya and Syria. This axis was in fact quite shaky.
One consequence of that unconscionable invasion was the toll on young Australian defence personnel, and others such as journalists, in terms of moral injury and stress. The compulsive loop of the Federal Government supporting U.S. wars with no direct relation to Australia – Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan – and those wars damaging Australian lives, has played non-stop since its entry into the ANZUS agreement.
Some, especially weapons trade profiteers and their political lackeys, want conflict with China to continue that unhappy pattern.
It is imperative that the now muted “drums of war” are silenced once and for all.
Readers are therefore urged to respond to the People’s Inquiry for a Peaceful and Independent Australia being conducted by the Independent Peaceful Australia Network (IPAN).
The inquiry’s purpose is to examine the impact of involvement in U.S.-led wars and the U.S.-Australia Alliance on everyday Australians. The current obsession with China and the inexplicable desire to face off with the world’s greatest military power is arguably a result of our alliance with the U.S.
The Inquiry Chairperson is Kelly Tranter, one of Australia’s leading authorities on the growing influence of weapons manufacturers on government policy in Australia.
There are also several panels addressing the various ways in which involvement in U.S.-led wars impacts our lives.
In addition, an IPAN website questionnaire can be completed in a very short time. Both submission and questionnaire suggestions will inform the Inquiry’s final report. Possible submission talking points are raised below………………………….. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/australias-collective-voice-should-silence-the-drums-of-war,15219
Barngarla Aboriginals and Kimba farmers join forces to fight nuclear waste dump plan
Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation and No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA group 24 June 21, The issue of the nuclear waste facility is something which provokes significant emotion, and community opposition. However, no one else is as affected by it like we are. We issue this joint press release as the First Peoples for the Kimba area, and the farming communities who make their livelihood from the land because we are having our home, our land and our heritage threatened. We are the groups of people whose lives will be permanently damaged,if a waste facility is placed on our home.
We have fought hard and will continue to fight against a nuclear waste facility being placed on our home. We do not want it, and we will never support it. Our voices and views have been ignored by the Government. Local member Rowan Ramsey has been one of the main influences in pushing the Government to place a nuclear waste facility at Kimba. If you do not want this facility in SA orin the Eyre Peninsula or the Mid-North, then you must vote out Rowan Ramsey. We will never end this issue, whilst he is a local member.
The Government has completely and utterly miscarried the site selection process. There are many examples of this. No proper heritage assessment of the site was ever undertaken, andthey have marginalised the voices of the farming community throughout the entire process. However, the most obvious and appalling example of this failed process was when the Government allowed the gerrymandering of the Kimba “community ballot”, in order to manipulate the vote. The simple fact remains that even though the Barngarla hold native title land closer to the proposed facility than the town of Kimba, the First Peoples for the areawere not allowed to vote. They prevented Barngarla persons from voting, because native title land is not rateable. Further, they did not allow many farmers to vote, even though they were within 50km of the proposed facility, because they were not in the Council area. They targeted us, because they knew that if they had a fair vote which included us, then the vote would return a “no” from the community.
The process also ignores the fact that the Government never sought the views of the communities which will be affected by the transport of nuclear waste. Those communities, where the waste will be transported through, have had no right to have a say. SouthAustralians more broadly have had any rights to have a say.
Mistakes have been made and the process needs to start again. Instead, the Government sought to change the law to remove our democratic right to judicial review of their actions so that no Court could ever assess what had been done. We find this staggering, as checks and balances are needed for a functioning democracy. The removal of independent scrutiny is, for all Australians, frightening, Protecting judicial review was the issue before the Federal Senate on Monday. It is important to understand that this is what the Senate was debating. We have won our right to have judicial review restored in this process. The broader failures are matters which will have to be dealt with in the future.
The Government have been forced by the Senate to preserve judicial review. The table in Schedule 1 of the Government’s revised Bill, is merely a face-saving exercise, and has no legal impact or effect. Even the Government Explanatory Memorandum makes this clear. Their own document states: “Recognition of the three shortlisted sites confirms the sites as being nominated and approved under the Act, but does not limit the Minister from approving new nominations. The Minister may declare any approved nomination as a site, and is not bound to declare one of the three shortlisted sites”
The Government’s attempt to remove judicial review was so egregious and careless, that it provoked almost unanimous opposition across the political spectrum. This is a great moment for democracy, and for those who appreciate the importance ofindependent scrutiny of Government action, this is a day that the Barngarla people and the farmers at Kimba have saved one of the fundamental rights in a Democratic Country. Because the Government were opposed by everyone from very different political backgrounds, such as: Labor, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, the Greens and Senator Patrick, we consider it appropriate to express our thanks to all of these groups. This reflects the fact that judicial review is a pivotal right no matter a person’s political background. We thank everyone in no particular order, as it remains the fact that had they not stood together, the Government would have removed the democratic rights of judicial review from us, and set a precedent which would have weakened democracy for all Australians:
Labor: The Australian Labor Party deserves congratulations from all Australians for its actions. Without of the support of the Opposition, the Government would have gotten away with removing a fundamental democratic right from us and set aprecedent to remove that right every other time they did not get their way.
Labor listened to all of us, but in particular they lived up to their commitment to listening to the First Peoples for the Kimba area. The Barngarla worked extensively with Labor, and in particular the Shadow Minister Ms Madeliene King ensured that the Barngarla were entitled to review any further amendments before they wereintroduced. We intend to write to other members of Labor, such as Senator Wong who has fought for all South Australians to express our thanks. As a party, however, they have been outstanding.
More broadly, there is the issue of what to do if Labor win Government. Many in Labor do not support a process where Aboriginal people were denied the right to vote. We believe Labor will continue to fight for us. But that is tomorrow’s issue. Monday was about judicial review, and Labor protected us and by extension all Australians, by preserving our right to judicial review. •
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation & State Leader of One Nation in SA Ms Jennifer Game: It remains a simple statement of fact that without PHON and Ms Jennifer Game, there would be a nuclear waste facility on prime farming land, in circumstances where Aboriginal people were denied the right to vote, and Aboriginals and farmers would have no right to independent legal review.
For those of you out there who might relate to this side of politics, particularly the farmers in the Eyre Peninsula, who do not want a waste dump then we strongly suggest you look at what One Nation and their representative Ms Jennifer Game have done to save South Australia from nuclear waste. They said “no” and listened to the local farming community when the Local member ignored us.
The Barngarla also recognise the great work of PHON and Ms Jennifer Game. It is a testimony of our work together that we have prevented the Government from removing fundamental basic rights for all Australians.
The Greens: Special recognition must be given to the Greens. This is an issue that is central to the Greens, they have stood up and through their tireless and passionate advocacy have helped us immensely.
All Green supporters should be proud of their party’s efforts. In particular, Senator Hanson-Young has been a tireless advocate for South Australia. She was one of the first Senators to help us, and we imagine she will be with us to the end of this fight.
We would also like to acknowledge the strong words of Senator Thorpe. We agree that the Government has been tokenistic in its approach to the Barngarla people. What could be more tokenistic than saying they want to hear Barngarla views, but then deny the Barngarla the right to vote. It is our hope that with advocates likeSenator Thorpe, no other Aboriginal group will ever have to be treated in such a despicable way.•
Senator Patrick: Senator Patrick deserves great credit for his commitment to South Australia. He deserves the recognition of everyone committed to our State. He has been actively engaged on this issue from the very beginning. He has tirelessly fought to access Government documents under FOI so that South Australian’s can have access to the information which shows how badly this process has been miscarried.
We would like to thank Senator Patrick for his regular commitment and support to us in fighting to ensure our access to judicial review. Senator Patrick has also sought to find other solutions by trying to assess additional site options, whether Woomera or Leanora or others. We hope that this work by Senator Patrick will one day paydividends, and the Government will abandon its terrible plan to place this facility on prime agricultural land, which is significant also to the Barngarla People. •
The remaining cross bench: We would also like to thank the efforts of the remaining cross bench. Although we did not ultimately need to rely on their votes, we understand that they would likely have ensured our rights to judicial review. Theyspoke to us and engaged and should be acknowledged for their efforts.
Further information contact: Barngarla: barngarlamedia@gmail.com Peter Woolford: 0447 001 493
Lowy Institute polling shows that 91% of Australians want the federal government to support renewable energy development
https://poll.lowyinstitute.org/charts/potential-federal-government-policies-on-climate/ Looking at a range of possible federal government policies, almost all Australians (91%) say they would support the federal government ‘providing subsidies for the development of renewable energy technology’. This aligns with Lowy Institute polling in 2018 in which 84% of Australians said the government should focus on renewables rather than traditional energy sources
.ight in ten Australians (78%) support ‘setting a net-zero emissions target for 2050’, suggesting they seek a firmer commitment from Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who has said that Australia’s “goal is to reach net zero emissions as soon as possible, and preferably by 2050”.
Seven in ten Australians (77%) support providing subsidies for the purchase of electric vehicles. A sizeable majority of Australians (64%) support introducing an emissions trading scheme or a carbon tax. These views have shifted significantly in the past five years. In 2016, in response to a differently-worded question in the Lowy Institute Poll, only 40% said they would prefer the government to introduce an emissions trading scheme or price on carbon.
ustralian views of coal exports and coal mines also appear to have shifted significantly in recent years. Six in ten Australians (63%) support a ban on new coal mines opening in Australia. The same proportion of the population (63%) say they support reducing Australian coal exports to other countries, in an apparent shift from five years ago when a majority (66%) said Australia should continue to export coal. In 2021, only three in ten Australians (30%) say they support the federal government providing subsidies for building new coal-fired power plants.
On a number of these policies, there is a significant gap between support from younger and older Australians. For example, 72% of Australians aged 18–44 years old support banning new coal mines, compared to 55% of Australians aged over 45. Similarly, 71% of respondents aged 18–44 support imposing a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme, compared to 57% of Australians over 4
The federal government’s promotion of a ‘gas-fired recovery’ for Australia’s economy appears to have general support, with 58% in favour of Australia increasing the use of gas for energy generation.
Australians are split over the question of nuclear power, which has been prohibited in Australia since 1998. Almost half the population (47%) would support removing the existing ban on nuclear power, but the same number (51%) are opposed to that measure.
Australian government pushes to remove the ban on nuclear power – UK’s Daily Mail
Why the government’s push to finally drop the ban on nuclear power in
Australia could be one of the most important decisions in a generation. The
federal government is reportedly considering a move to lift the ban on
nuclear energy to help reduce carbon emissions while providing reliable
power. According to The Australian, ministers from both the Liberal and
National parties have discussed taking the policy to the next election,
which is due by May.
Daily Mail 23rd June 2021
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9715061/Push-remove-ban-nuclear-energy-Australia.html
Morrison government bringing push for nuclear energy as an election issue
Morrison ministers lay the groundwork for nuclear energy election plan. The Australian 23 June 21, The option of taking a proposal for nuclear power in Australia to the next election has been considered in cabinet-level discussions as pressure grows within the Morrison government to prepare for a nuclear energy industry.
The top-level political and policy discussions including Liberal and Nationals ministers involved the argument that the moratorium on nuclear energy could be lifted in the decades ahead ….
Politically, the option of the Coalition adopting a policy of future nuclear energy was considered too dangerous without bipartisan support from the ALP.Before attending the G7 summit in Cornwall, Scott Morrison publicly said nuclear power was not an option in Australia unless there was bipartisan support for lifting the moratorium. The cabinet-level discussions were not part of a formal cabinet submission but traversed the politics and strategy of taking advantage of a shift in public opinion about the role of nuclear energy in reducing carbon emissions.
……… the Morrison government has included considering the latest modular nuclear reactor technology as part of its “energy road map” to create affordable, reliable energy…
Politically, the option of the Coalition adopting a policy of future nuclear energy was considered too dangerous without bipartisan support from the ALP.Before attending the G7 summit in Cornwall, Scott Morrison publicly said nuclear power was not an option in Australia unless there was bipartisan support for lifting the moratorium. The cabinet-level discussions were not part of a formal cabinet submission but traversed the politics and strategy of taking advantage of a shift in public opinion about the role of nuclear energy in reducing carbon emissions.
……… the Morrison government has included considering the latest modular nuclear reactor technology as part of its “energy road map” to create affordable, reliable energy…
Hersey helped Hiroshima survivors tell and preserve their stories — IPPNW peace and health blog
Hiroshima author John Hersey [This book review was originally published in IPPNW’s designated journal, Medicine, Conflict and Survival.] In 1946, John Hersey wrote a magazine article that changed the world. On the 75th anniversary of the events he described so vividly in Hiroshima, journalist Lesley M. M. Blume has given us Fallout, a timely reminder that Hersey’s courageous […]
Hersey helped Hiroshima survivors tell and preserve their stories — IPPNW peace and health blog
A controversial US book is feeding climate denialists in Australia — RenewEconomy
Australian commentator Alan Jones has been championing a contentious book about climate science which has gained traction in the US. So does it hold up? The post A controversial US book is feeding climate denialists in Australia appeared first on RenewEconomy.
A controversial US book is feeding climate denialists in Australia — RenewEconomy
Reality check from a former energy executive: Nothing about new gas stacks up today — RenewEconomy
Investing in new gas is a poor choice, risking stranded asset write-offs for shareholders and worsening climate change. I wouldn’t spend a cent on it. The post Reality check from a former energy executive: Nothing about new gas stacks up today appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Reality check from a former energy executive: Nothing about new gas stacks up today — RenewEconomy
New renewables now beating most operational coal: IRENA report — RenewEconomy
A new report from an international renewables agency shows that new renewables are beating existing coal on price, all around the world. The post New renewables now beating most operational coal: IRENA report appeared first on RenewEconomy.
New renewables now beating most operational coal: IRENA report — RenewEconomy
Senate rejects Taylor’s bid to redirect renewable energy funds to fossil fuel projects — RenewEconomy
Senate issues major blow to Morrison government, rejecting Taylor’s quest to open up ARENA funds for CCS and fossil hydrogen, blocking new regulations. The post Senate rejects Taylor’s bid to redirect renewable energy funds to fossil fuel projects appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Senate rejects Taylor’s bid to redirect renewable energy funds to fossil fuel projects — RenewEconomy
June 23 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Greener Oil Or Green Industry? Gridlock Puts Norway In A Bind” • Oslo is loath to relinquish Norway’s lucrative position as one of the world’s top oil and gas producers, accounting for over 40% of its exports. Instead it wants to make the industry greener. Critics of the plan are calling it “greenwashing,” […]
June 23 Energy News — geoharvey
Nuclear news – Australia and beyond
Pandemic. COVID-19 Is Still Raging in Much of the World South America Is Now Covid-19 Hot Spot, With Eight Times the World’s Death Rate.
Climate.Warming stripes show that climate change is here and now. Climate in a Fiery World.NUCLEAR. Not a lot is happening, probably largely due to the pandemic. There is, of course, the continued stream of articles in the mainstream media,extolling the virtues of new nuclear reactors – most look like handouts from the industry, faithfully regurgitated by relatively ignorant journalists.
A leak at China’s showcase Taishan nuclear reactor has raised global concern for the industry. Radioactive leak at Chinese reactor could finish French nuclear exports.
A bit of good news – The pandemic has revived hope that a more sustainable world is possible.
AUSTRALIA.
Resources Minister Pitt changes Nuclear Waste Bill in the effort to gain Labor’s support. Labor consults traditional owners about the Kimba nuclear waste dump Bill, considers supporting the Bill. The Greens will be standing up for a nuclear-free South Australia. The Federal government is pulling a nuclear waste confidence trick on South Australia. Nuclear waste storage facility legislation passes Senate. Some highlights from the Senate nuclear waste dump debate. Racism on show in the Australian Senate. Premier Marshall must enforce South Australia’s legislation prohibiting nuclear waste dump. Resources Minister Keith Pitt forced to back down – now must allow legal scrutiny of the ill-advised Kimba nuclear dump plan..
Nuclear waste intended for Kimba, -used to be classified as ”high level” – now called ”intermediate”. ANSTO’s dodgy classification of nuclear wastes.
NSW Productivity Commission Has “Lost The Plot” On Nuclear Power
Kalbar’s exotic minerals mine a toxic risk to Victoria’s food bowl. https://www.michaelwest.com.au/kalbars-exotic-minerals-mine-a-toxic-risk-to-victorias-food-bowl/
INTERNATIONAL.
INTERVIEW/ Daniel Ellsberg: Smart statesmen can make bad decisions leading to nuclear war. Biden and Putin agree: ‘Nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought’. Why can’t world leaders agree that a nuclear war should never be fought? ICAN chief urges Biden and Putin to push for deep cuts in nuclear arsenals, encourage China to back away from arms race.
‘‘Advanced” nuclear reactor designs – the latest version of nuclear wishful thinking.
Earth is now trapping an ‘unprecedented’ amount of heat, NASA says.
Julian Assange and the Collapse of the Rule of Law.
JAPAN. The Fukushima nuclear disaster and the Tokyo Olympics.
EUROPE. NATO’s hostility to the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty is in conflict with its true goal – to become a non-nuclear alliance . NATO readies for a collective response to attacks in space.
UK. Fire at Hinkley Point C building site. We don’t need costly, slow, nuclear power: solar, wind, tidal and wave power can amply do the job. House-building plans thrown into doubt as doubts grow about Wylfa nuclear project.
USA.
- The real welfare cheats are weapons makers. U.S. Space Force wants to use directed-energy weapons for space superiority,.
- The Pentagon’s Project, Pele Military micro-reactors – creates more problems than it solves.
- 20 Years After Pentagon Papers, Ellsberg Reveals US weighed 1958 nuclear strike on China over Taiwan,
- Why Utah really does not need Bill Gates’ small nuclear reactors.
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission launches special investigation at Southern Georgia Vogtle 3 nuclear unit.
- Tough when even a pro nuclear voice has to deplore the corruption in the nuclear industry. Countering a love letter to the nuclear industry .
- Renewable energy consumption grew in 2020 as fossil fuels and nuclear shrank.
CHINA. Is China covering up a nuclear leak? What actually happened at Taishan? French nuclear company and Chinese government once again have a problem with their much vaunted EPR nuclear reactor design. About the radiation leaks at Taishan nuclear power station. The public is always the last to know. Safety concerns on Taishan reactor, but China wants to be world’s nuclear leader by 2050.
RUSSIA. Collaboration between Russia and Europe finally cleans up the most dangerous nuclear ship in the Arctic..
FRANCE. Is the leak in a nuclear reactor in China due to a Framatome manufacturing defect ? Climate and weather hazards to France’s nuclear reactors in summer 2021.
IRAN. U.S. wants nuclear deal done before Iran’s new president takes power.
LIBYA. For the first time, drones autonomously attacked humans.
PAKISTAN. No need for nuclear arsenal once Kashmir issue is resolved: Pakistan PM.
1 This month.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 