I am appalled at the idea of ”Mothers For Nuclear”
As a mother myself, I am appalled that such a group as ”Mothers For Nuclear” even exists. Dont they know about the 
effects of ionising radiation on women, especially pregnant women? Don’t they know about the breast cancers, the birth deformities in irradiated areas such as Pacific atomic bomb sites, and Belarus-Ukraine, near the Chernobyl site. No, they don’t seem to. (Perhaps that ‘s the beauty of a narrowly S.T.E.M. education?)
Both Heather Hoff and Kristin Zaitz work at the Diablo Nuclear Power Plant. Hoff worked as a plant operator, and now as a procedure writer. Zaitz works as a civil engineer.
Hoff was inspired by none other than that top nuclear schill Michael Shellenberger, and by the glossy nuclear advertising film ”Pandora’s Promise”.
They sound very sincere, but also very ignorant of the negative issues around the nuclear industry.
Why am I not surprised? The nuclear industry is busting its guts trying to get women onside. Their favourite thing is getting (preferably young and attractive) women into engineering, and at the top of nuclear companies. (This is good in two ways – good to promote the industry’s ‘gender equality’ image, and good if they muck up, as Leslie Dewan did, in her bogus claims for Transatomic’s molten salt reactor – let a woman take the flak!)
The thing is – lots of women have expertise in biology, genetics – and an understanding of the effects of ionising radiation. But the nuclear industry has got us all conned that these are ”soft”sciences. So – if you’ve got ”hard” scienvce knowledge – like engineering, then you can be an authority on nuclear issues.
These two women sound very sincere – alarmingly so.
The Activists Who Embrace Nuclear Power, New Yorker, By Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, February 19, 2021
To be fervently pro-nuclear, in the manner of Hoff and Zaitz, is to see in the peaceful splitting of the atom something almost miraculous. It is to see an energy source that has been steadily providing low-carbon electricity for decades—doing vastly more good than harm, saving vastly more lives than it has taken—but which has received little credit and instead been maligned. It is to believe that the most significant problem with nuclear power, by far, is public perception. ………..—the pro-nuclear world view can edge toward dogmatism. Hoff and Zaitz certainly seem readier to tout studies that confirm their views, and reluctant to acknowledge any flaws that nuclear energy may have. ……https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-activists-who-embrace-nuclear-power
Australia a renewables leader – or the Saudi Arabia of nuclear energy”
Northern Territory Senator Dr Sam McMahon says she is “delighted” her push for nuclear has been backed, after the Nationals announced new amendments to a bill in favour of nuclear energy and carbon capture and storage.
Nationals Senators, led by Matt Canavan and Bridget McKenzie have announced a raft of amendments to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) bill to invest in nuclear power.
Senator McMahon says the drafted legislation supports her long-established calls to unlock nuclear energy…..
The Northern Territory, with our abundance of Uranium and potential nuclear fuel Thorium, should be the Saudi Arabia of nuclear energy.
But political activist group Get Up’s national director Paul Oosting says that as Australia forges ahead with solutions to the climate crisis, such as solar technology, the push for nuclear could delay climate action.
“Nuclear power is dangerous, unnecessary and colossally expensive. It would take more than a decade to build a nuclear reactor in Australia and cost billions. It’s the ultimate climate action delay tactic,” Mr Oosting said.
“Australia has an opportunity to position itself as a world leader in renewables. It’s critical this pivotal moment in our history not be squandered on obsolete and failing technologies that will lock in irreparable climate damage.”
Mr Oosting said he was concerned the clean energy corporation could become a “slush fund” for the coal, gas, and nuclear industry, and cautioned politicians from backing the bill.
“When Taylor’s Bill comes before Parliament, politicians who accept the seriousness of the climate crisis we face – of all parties and none – must act to ensure coal, gas, and nuclear are excluded from any definition of ‘low emissions technology’, the return-on-investment requirement is kept, and the independence of the CEFC board is maintained,” he said………….he said…………. https://www.hepburnadvocate.com.au/story/7134825/the-nt-should-be-the-saudi-arabia-of-nuclear-energy-senator-mcmahon/
Federal energy and emissions reduction minister Angus Taylor wants to include dirty energy in Clean Energy Finance Corporation
Renew Economy 18th Feb 2021, The Morrison government is set for a fight from within over proposed changes to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, with a growing number of
Nationals looking to lift restrictions on investments in unproven fossil fuel technologies and nuclear energy projects.
Federal energy and emissions reduction minister Angus Taylor has introduced legislation to establish a new $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund to be administered by the Clean Energy
Finance Corporation, that the government wants to use to underwrite new gas and storage projects, which would require re-defining gas as a ‘low emissions technology’.
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation is restricted to only investing in ‘low emissions technologies’, and is explicitly prohibited from investing in nuclear energy technologies and carbon capture and storage projects.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/nationals-push-nuclear-in-new-attempt-to-highjack-cefc-changes/
Natural gas, not renewable energy, was most responsibe for Texas power failure in freezing conditions
Why is Texas suffering power blackouts during the winter freeze?
The oil- and gas-rich state is experiencing what officials call a ‘total failure’ of its electricity infrastructure Guardian, Lauren Aratani, Thu 18 Feb 2021 “…...Did renewable energy play a role in the grid’s malfunction?
While Republicans have been blaming frozen wind turbines for the state’s blackouts, officials and experts say that malfunctions in natural gas operations played the largest role in the power crisis.
Ercot said all of its sources of power, including those from renewable sources, were affected by the freezing temperatures. The state largely relies on natural gas for its power supply, though some comes from wind turbines and less from coal and nuclear sources.
Natural gas can handle the state’s high temperatures in the summer, but extreme cold weather makes it difficult for the gas to flow to power plants and heat homes. Michael Webber, an energy resources professor at the University of Texas Austin, told the Texas Tribune that “gas is failing in the most spectacular fashion right now”.
With the climate crisis likely to trigger more freak weather events like the one Texas is suffering it is noteworthy that there are places that experience frigidly cold weather that rely heavily on wind turbines and manage to have electricity in the winter. In Iowa, a state which sees freezing temperatures more often than Texas, nearly 40% of electricity is generated by wind turbines……. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/18/why-is-texas-suffering-power-blackouts-during-the-winter-freeze
Google’s Sky News Australia team-up will make it a climate misinformation powerhouse — RenewEconomy
It’s been the busiest week for renewable energy misinformers in recent years. Google’s new partnership with Sky News is going to supercharge the problem. The post Google’s Sky News Australia team-up will make it a climate misinformation powerhouse appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Google’s Sky News Australia team-up will make it a climate misinformation powerhouse — RenewEconomy
Saving one life while working to save all our lives — IPPNW peace and health blog
“When faced with a dire emergency of sudden cardiac arrest, doctors do not inquire whether the patient was a good person or a criminal. We do not delay treatment to learn the politics or character of the victim. We respond not as ideologues, nor as Russians nor Americans, but as doctors. The only thing that matters is saving a human life.”
Saving one life while working to save all our lives — IPPNW peace and health blog
February 19 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Lies, Damned Lies, And Greg Abbott” • While people were suffering and even dying in Texas, Governor Abbott was on Fox News talking to Sean Hannity about the situation. He said the Green New Deal would be a “deadly deal” for the US, and blamed renewables for the shortfall. But renewables aren’t to […]
February 19 Energy News — geoharvey
Australia’s battery and hydrogen storage pipeline jumped by massive 20GW in 2020 — RenewEconomy
Number of battery storage and hydrogen electrolyser projects in Australia soared in 2020, rivalling that of solar PV and wind energy as developers bet on a rapid transition to renewables. The post Australia’s battery and hydrogen storage pipeline jumped by massive 20GW in 2020 appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Australia’s battery and hydrogen storage pipeline jumped by massive 20GW in 2020 — RenewEconomy
Labor promises 1,000 stand-alone solar, battery and hydrogen microgrids — RenewEconomy
Western Australia to build and install 1,000 standalone power systems including solar, battery and hydrogen electrolysers, to replace poles and wires and diesel gen-sets, and boost the state’s green manufacturing sector. The post Labor promises 1,000 stand-alone solar, battery and hydrogen microgrids appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Labor promises 1,000 stand-alone solar, battery and hydrogen microgrids — RenewEconomy
Nothing clean about nuclear, coal or gas – Australian Conservation Foundation
The Australian Conservation Foundation has urged parliamentarians not to undermine Australia’s successful clean energy bank by changing its mandate to invest in dirty, dangerous energy options like gas, coal and nuclear.
The government’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill, which would give Energy Minister Angus Taylor power to direct the CEFC to invest in technologies that are not renewable and make investments that would not generate a financial return, is listed for debate today in the House of Representatives.
Some government MPs and Senators want the CEFC to be able to fund coal and nuclear.
“Undermining the popular and successful Clean Energy Finance Corporation would be a massive own goal,” said ACF campaigner Dave Sweeney.
“Talking up nuclear and new coal-fired power plants is a dangerous distraction from facing up to Australia’s very real energy challenges and choices.
“There is nothing clean about the fuel behind the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters, which produces waste that remains radioactive for tens of thousands of years.
“There is no such thing as clean coal and the CEFC wouldn’t be considered a trusted investment partner if it was expected to invest in this outdated, dirty technology.
“Despite the urgent need to cut climate pollution – which is why the CEFC was established – no country in the world is choosing to set up a nuclear industry from scratch.
“When it comes to climate action, nuclear power is a dead end. The reactors that exist are expensive and risky; the promised new reactors don’t exist. Nuclear is not a credible climate response and has been repeatedly rejected by the market and the community.
“To spruik nuclear as the world approaches the tenth anniversary of the Fukushima disaster is an act of wilful blindness and political convenience – a fission fig leaf for politicians stuck in a previous century.
“Australia’s energy future is renewable, not radioactive.”
ACF is proud to have come up with the idea of a Clean Energy Finance Corporation in a 2010 report, Funding the transition to a clean economy.
Australian Liberal National Coalition enthusiastic for nuclear power
Coalition MPs in drive for nuclear energy, THE AUSTRALIAN, 17 Feb 21, Nationals senators have drafted legislation allowing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in nuclear power as two-thirds of Coalition MPs backed lifting the ban on the controversial fuel source.
The block of five Nationals senators, led by Bridget McKenzie and Matt Canavan, will move an amendment to legislation establishing a $1bn arm at the green bank to allow it to invest in nuclear generators, high-energy, low-emissions (HELE), coal-fired power stations and carbon capture and storage technology.
The Nationals’ move comes as a survey of 71 Coalition backbenchers conducted by The Australian revealed that 48 were in favour of lifting the longstanding prohibition on nuclear power in the EPBC act.
Liberal MPs Andrew Laming, John Alexander and Gerard Rennick are among backbenchers who want Scott Morrison to take a repeal of the nuclear ban to the upcoming election ……
The new amendment proposed by the Nationals would go further than Mr Joyce’s push by ensuring the CEFC — established by the Gillard government in 2012 to invest in green energy initiatives — could help kick-start nuclear projects as well as new clean coal plants……..
Out of the 71 Coalition backbenchers surveyed by The Australian, only Queensland senator Paul Scarr was opposed to changing the nuclear prohibition enshrined in the EPBC Act, citing a lack of community support “at this stage”. A further 22 backbenchers were undecided or did not respond to questions.
Other supporters of lifting the ban on nuclear generation, including Trent Zimmerman, Ted O’Brien and Rowan Ramsey, believe the government should not move ahead with legalising the energy source while the proposal is bitterly opposed by Labor.
In-principle support for lifting the nuclear prohibition is prevalent by members in every faction of the Coalition, which has been divided over climate change action since Tony Abbott became prime minister in 2013.
City-based Liberal MPs ……. including Jason Falinski, Tim Wilson, Katie Allen, Andrew Bragg and Dave Sharma — argue that nuclear should be an option in a technology-agnostic approach …..
The Prime Minister has signalled he will not move ahead with legalising nuclear energy unless there is bipartisan support with Labor. MPs told The Australian Mr Morrison was unlikely to pursue a policy change on the issue in this term of parliament. However, small modular nuclear reactors were included as a potential technology in the federal government’s technology investment roadmap discussion paper………..
Mr Tim Wilson attacked Labor and the Greens as nuclear science deniers. …….
Many government MPs acknowledge the power source is not currently competitive on price, but say investment decisions should be a matter for private companies and lifting the nuclear ban would encourage technological advancement..
Other Liberal MPs in favour of lifting the prohibition are: Warren Entsch, Russell Broadbent, James Stevens, Ian Goodenough, Rick Wilson, David Fawcett, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Sarah Henderson, Hollie Hughes, James McGrath, Jim Molan, Julian Simmonds, Bert van Manen, Ben Small, Dean Smith, David Van, Terry Young and James Paterson.
Nationals MPs who want the energy source legalised include Anne Webster, Damian Drum, Perin Davey, Llew O’Brien, Sam McMahon, Susan McDonald and Ken O’Dowd.
Boothby MP Nicolle Flint has previously publicly backed nuclear power.
Mediation continuing over rehabilitation of Range uranium mine
Mediation continues behind closed doors, but the case is a clear reminder that commitments are not set in stone and that clean-up funding for even the most environmentally destructive projects is not guaranteed.
While national and/or state law jurisdictions regulate specific requirements for closure and associated financial assurance, which also determine the period of rehabilitation, it is essential that members of the mining community are aware of applicable law and regulation in all jurisdictions of operation……….
“In the context of price volatility, investment shifts and now Covid-19, many major companies have been mothballing operations and selling mines to juniors, smaller and/or less resourced companies around the world. The most notable may be Blair Athol coal mine in Queensland, sold for $1 in 2016.”
The socio-economic and financial arrangements for closure agreements are especially important in order to avoid dumping the costs on taxpayers and society .
How long should a miner commit to oversight? https://www.mining-technology.com/news/mining-rio-tinto/ Yoana Cholteeva11 February 2021
A subsidiary of Rio Tinto is currently in mediation with the Australian Government over continuing commitments to scientific monitoring of the Ranger mine. We examine the dispute and take a look at some positive examples of land remediation.
Land rehabilitation as part of mining oversight is an essential process where the land in a mining area is returned to some degree of its former state. Recently, a new dispute over the rehabilitation of the Ranger Uranium Mine in the Northern Territory of Australia, owned by a Rio Tinto subsidiary, once again reignited the debate over how long a miner should maintain oversight once operations have stopped.
Rio Tinto’s oversight dilemma
Brazil – another glaring example of the global corruption in the nuclear industry
A bad barrel, not just a few bad apples. Additionally, Lava Jato revealed that the type of corruption that took place was not just a matter of a few rotten apples, but rather of systemic factors.
Corruption in the nuclear industry is a known international phenomenon. The recent scandal in Ohio illustrates how the push for subsidies to nuclear plants is not the result of a real commitment to citizens’ energy needs or climate concerns, but a way for energy corporations to maintain overpayments and assure political gains to certain parties. Brazil offers a different model, one that has used new nuclear facilities to generate kickbacks to powerful political and business interests.
|
Brazil’s Angra 3 nuclear reactor: a political undertaking, not a common good https://thebulletin.org/2021/02/brazils-angra-3-nuclear-reactor-a-political-undertaking-not-a-common-good/ By Carolina Basso | February 16, 2021 In 2019 the Brazilian government decided to resume work at Angra 3, a nuclear reactor where construction has been essentially dormant for more than three decades. The work was supposed to restart last year, with the reactor entering commercial service by late 2026, but COVID-19 and the quest for private partners to invest in the project have pushed back the schedule. Brazil currently has two operating nuclear power plants, Angra 1 and 2, that have generated less than three percent of the country’s electricity since their commercial launch. So why does Brazil want to resume construction of a third nuclear reactor? Angra 3 is questionable in economic and energy-related terms. Studies have shown that the country can generate electricity much more cheaply by integrating wind power with Brazil’s considerable hydropower resources. Analysts suggest that this combined system could supply all the electricity the population demands, making any expansion of the nuclear industry sector unnecessary and costly. The decision to resume construction of the third Brazilian reactor was made by President Jair Bolsonaro, who is committed to expanding the nuclear industry. Bolsonaro’s commitment results in part from his close ties to Brazil’s Navy, which has historically shaped the nuclear sector and currently dominates the country’s uranium enrichment and fuel cycle technology. But this factor alone cannot explain the decision. It is imperative to examine who will benefit from the project, particularly through the kinds of corruption that are endemic in Brazil. Seen in that light, the political push for building Angra 3 would seem to have more to do with money and politics than with providing a public good. A web of bribes. Continue reading |
‘Clean Coal’ – ridiculed by experts, as just a marketing scam
‘Clean coal’ is nothing but a marketing scam: Energy experts, New Daily, Cait Kelly, Reporter 17 Feb 21, The Nationals’ pitch for taxpayers to invest in ‘clean coal’ is nothing but a marketing scam designed to make Australians feel better about burning carbon emissions, leading energy experts say.
It comes as the Morrison government pushes key changes to Australia’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation that would allow the green bank to invest in fossil fuel projects, and give Energy Minister Angus Taylor the power to control which investments receive funding.
Mr Taylor’s proposed bill would undo laws that stop the corporation from investing in fossil fuels and loss-making projects.
But outspoken backbencher Barnaby Joyce served up an amendment to allow for investment in clean coal, blindsiding the government and derailing the passage of the bill through Parliament on Wednesday.
Debate on the legislation started in the House of Representatives on Monday and the push was on to get ‘clean coal’ a spot at the investment table.…….
On Wednesday, Nationals Senate leader Bridget McKenzie backed Mr Joyce’s amendment intended to allow for new investment in “high efficiency, low emissions” coal-fired power.
Doctors also joined the chorus of voices warning the changes would negatively affect environment targets, saying our love of fossil fuels is already killing 5700 Australians each year, and will continue to do so until we phase it out.
Clean coal ‘doesn’t exist’
Richie Merzian, the climate and energy program director with the Australia Institute, said ‘clean coal’ was nothing more than spin.
“Clean coal doesn’t exist. That’s the first thing,” Mr Merzian told The New Daily.
“Over the last 15 years, Australian governments have invested $1.3 billion into making clean coal work.
“There isn’t a single commercial clean coal, carbon capture storage power plant in Australia. And there are hardly any overseas – you can count them on one hand.”
Australia has only one carbon capture and storage gas plant. It’s currently leaking emissions into the atmosphere, because it doesn’t work.
The Gorgon gas project in WA received $60 million in federal funding but did not start storing emissions until 2019, three years after productions started.
Recently, it has been leaking high levels of emissions out into the atmosphere because its pressure management system is broken.
“It’s still not fully operational,” Mr Merzian said.
“The level of the emissions released in the atmosphere are about the same as Australia’s annual domestic emissions of flights.
“It’s been a massive failure.”
All it boiled down to was a marketing tool, he said……… https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2021/02/17/clean-coal-scam/
‘Medical Scientific’ committee, stacked with nuclear executives, promotes nuclear power in space
“The nuclear industry views space as a new—and wide-open—market for their toxic product that has run its dirty course on Mother Earth.”
“Now it appears that the nuclear industry has also infiltrated the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that has been studying missions to Mars. ”
It’s going to take enormous grassroots action—and efforts by those in public office who understand the error of the space direction being taken—to stop it.
Nuclear Rockets to Mars?, BY KARL GROSSMAN– CounterPunch, 16 Feb 21,
A report advocating rocket propulsion by nuclear power for U.S. missions to Mars, written by a committee packed with individuals deeply involved in nuclear power, was issued last week by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.
The 104-page report also lays out “synergies” in space nuclear activities between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the U.S. military, something not advanced explicitly since the founding of NASA as a civilian agency supposedly in 1958.
The report states: “Space nuclear propulsion and power systems have the potential to provide the United States with military advantages…NASA could benefit programmatically by working with a DoD [Department of Defense] program having national security objectives.”’
The report was produced “by contract” with NASA, it states.
The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) describes itself as having been “created to advise the nation” with “independent, objective advice to inform policy.”
The 11 members of the committee that put together the report for the National Academy includes: Jonathan W. Cirtain, president of Advanced Technologies, “a subsidiary of BWX Technologies which is the sole manufacturer of nuclear reactors for the U.S. Navy,” the report states; Roger M. Myers, owner of R. Myers Consulting and who previously at Aerojet Rocketdyne “oversaw programs and strategic planning for next-generation in-space missions [that] included nuclear thermal propulsion and nuclear electric power systems; Shannon M. Bragg-Sitton, the “lead for integrated energy systems in the Nuclear Science and Technology Directorate at the Idaho National Laboratory:” Tabitha Dodson, who at the U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency is chief engineer of a program “that is developing a nuclear thermal propulsion system;” Joseph A. Sholtis, Jr., “owner and principal of Sholtis Engineering & Safety Consulting, providing expert nuclear, aerospace, and systems engineering services to government, national laboratories, industry, and academia since 1993.” And so on.
The NAS report is titled: “Space Nuclear Propulsion for Human Mars Exploration.” It is not classified and is available here. Continue reading
1 This month.
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
19 May – Webinar- Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-05-19 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-05-19 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 