”End Nuclear Insanity Before Nuclear Insanity Ends Humanity”
The Lucky Mc Open Pit Uranium mine (1976) in central Wyoming
LLAW’s COMMENTARY TODAY:
How it came to be that I joined the uranium/nuclear business ‘Back in the Day’ in January, 1968 . . .
More than fifty years have passed since I first learned that nuclear power plants and weapons of mass destruction were fueled by uranium, an element my well-worn dog-eared Webster’s 1930s-something dictionary defined essentially as a “worthless low-level radioactive mineral found in the ground.” The reason I remember this definition is because of a letter I received in January of 1969 from a mining company in central Wyoming’s “Gas Hills”, oddly named Lucky Mc (pronounced “Lucky Mac”) Mine, inviting me to an employment interview at the mine site and to please call to set up a date and time for the meeting. I had that old broke-spine 1940s Webster’s dictionary on my bookshelf in our small trailer house, so I looked up the definition. What the hell had changed? What were nuclear plants’ and nuclear bombs’ ingredients if not refined uranium? Of course I was pretty sure I knew the answer.
The mine, I was told in the letter, was owned by a company known as Utah Construction and Mining Company, which was then best known for building the Hoover Dam, but was now a major player in mining, primarily of coal and uranium. Intrigued, I found a pay phone at the General Store in Elk Mountain, Wyoming, and made the telephone call.
The interview took place a couple of weeks later in mid-January, and I was offered a job as a senior accountant, which I immediately accepted, ending my old job as a field office manager for a highway construction company that had recently transferred me from Grand Junction, Colorado, to a new project between Laramie and Rawlins in southern Wyoming. So I had set up shop in an office trailer halfway between the two towns, preparing for road construction to begin in early spring.
But having a growing family with two young pre-school children and an infant daughter, I was thankful for the opportunity to settle into a new life in a more permanent location than highway construction offered, so I was pleased to accept the job offer.
As I learned my new job, I soon became the chief accountant and then the administrative manager at the mine, directly overseeing more than one hundred employees in white collar jobs. The company grew rapidly in its uranium branch to include a new mine known as the “Shirley Basin Mine,” blossoming Utah Construction and Mining Company into a new and more sophisticated reformed Utah International Inc, and a bit later, a major subsidiary of General Electric Company, which, among other well-known products, manufactured not-so well-known nuclear reactors. Eventually, the uranium mining division was spun off as Pathfinder Mines Corp. to avoid potential conflicts of interest.
During those early days, I learned a lot about the mining and milling operations, including security, health and safety, as well as how the fuel production, the multi-step enriching process, governmental regulation, and how the marketing and selling of uranium was accomplished. In the beginning the only customer the company, as well as the entire uranium industry, had was the United States’ Atomic Energy Commission, and we were the major producer and provider of relatively stable basic enriched uranium (U308), which would be refined into U238, the active isotope in nuclear reactors, to the government (including the TVA) until deregulation allowed us to sell mill refined U3O8 uranium to operational nuclear power plants as well as plants under construction and in development.
One of these new nuclear power stations was Pacific Gas and Electric’s under construction facility, known as the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, in San Luis Obispo County, California, near Avila Beach. The original facility, Unit 1 of course, began construction in 1968 followed by Unit 2 in 1970. During the following decade Utah Construction & Mining Company, by then known as Utah International Inc, profited immensely from our sale of uranium to American, Canadian, French, German, and other nuclear power facilities around the world. But that is another story—still in progress. ~llaw
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
The prospect of six more years in power for Russian President Vladimir Putin is likely to mean no let-up in nuclear … war on Ukraine’s side. “How can …
For the Pentagon, there are expectations the modern Sentinel will meet threats from rapidly evolving Chinese and Russian missile systems. The Sentinel …
Tonight we take a recent look at the Chernobyl nuclear disaster from 1986 to this year. The human toll of death and displacement has been well into the hundreds of thousands and a work force of near a quarter of a million are still working in Ukraine to control the radiation expelled from the nuclear power plant more than 37 years ago. The city remains a disturbingly quiet ghost town symbol of dread.
Coupled with the 2011 tsunami caused Fukushima nuclear disaster, where we are now insanely dumping nuclear waste into the Pacific ocean, along with the Three-Mile Island near meltdown in 1979, I have to wonder if our renewed commitment led by the USA delegation to the just closed COP28 world summit with more than 20 nations in agreement to triple our nuclear power plants around the world by 2050 is a reasonable idea made by reasonable people with their heads on straight. I am pretty sure they don’t . . .
Thanks for reading All Things Nuclear! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Subscribed
I have long contended that we humans are incapable of designing, engineering, constricting, and operating anything nuclear for an extended period of time without accidents, from our own mistakes or forces of nature. And nuclear accidents of all kinds do not forgive and recover from whatever massive damage is accidentally or purposely done to them, particularly in an environment of war among nations that we face today. Additionally, in the light of war, I sense the revelation that nuclear power plants can also be used as nuclear weapons of war and definitely would be in a global nuclear war like the one we are threatened with daily.
In that light all things nuclear, including radioactive fuels, plants, bombs, operating machinery, buildings ,and facilities, must be disabled, removed and buried in deep underground man-made disposal caches similar to, or even the same as, the excavations the fuel initially came out of, and never again allowed to be recovered. If we do that, we can also deal with concentrating on global warming and climate change before it is also too late for the survival of life on planet Earth. ~llaw
The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Disaster & Its Long-Lasting Effects
The Chernobyl disaster caused by operator errors and reactor design flaws spread dangerous radioactive elements throughout the atmosphere in Central and Eastern European countries.
Feb 24, 2023 • By Amy Hayes, BA History w/ English minor
The 1986 Chernobyl disaster took place at a nuclear power plant in the Ukrainian SSR. One of the four reactors in the plant exploded due to unstable conditions and a lack of safety procedures. The disaster left areas surrounding the reactor exposed to harmful radioactive materials, which also traveled to other areas, including present-day Belarus and the Russian Federation. Studies conducted on the radiation in the area have revealed that the disaster led to a number of health and environmental issues, along with the deaths that occurred shortly after the event.
What Caused the Chernobyl Disaster?
The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant was constructed in the late 1970s and early ‘80s. It consisted of four RBMK reactors, which could generate up to 1,000 megawatts of electric power per reactor. RBMK is a Soviet-designed boiling light water reactor that uses uranium dioxide fuel. The plant was stationed in present-day northern Ukraine, about 130 kilometers north of Kyiv and about 20 kilometers south of the Belarus border. RBMK reactor Units 1 and 2 were constructed in the 1970s, and Units 3 and 4 were completed by 1983. Plans for additional reactors were in place when the disaster occurred.
On April 25, 1986, a test was conducted during a routine maintenance shutdown to see if the reactor could produce electrical power for emergency equipment in the event that the station lost power. However, the test was performed when the reactor was in an unstable condition. The power was reduced significantly below the level it should have been to stabilize the reactor’s condition prior to shutdown. The RBMK reactor has a positive void coefficient, which means that steam production increases when power is increased, or water flow is decreased. This process causes fuel temperatures also to increase. When power levels are very low, it causes the positive void coefficient to become dominant. As a result, it creates unstable conditions for the reactor and makes it vulnerable to sporadic power surges.
Plant operators attempted to increase the power level to a stabilized condition. Control rods are used to help keep the reactor controlled. However, only a handful of rods were used during the test compared to the minimum 30 rods required for safe operations. In an effort to maintain constant power, operators removed most of the control rods. This compromised the condition of the reactor even further. As operators continued to try and maintain power and steam pressure, they decided to lessen the amount of water needed to cool the reactor. A steam explosion occurred due to increased heat and steam production, and a second explosion followed seconds later.
The first explosion destroyed the reactor core and caused the cover of the reactor to be lifted. It also caused more than 1,500 pressure tubes to rupture. The reactor core was exposed following the second steam explosion, which is largely responsible for the release of radioactive materials into the environment. The explosions occurred at around 1:23 a.m. on April 26, 1986. Assessments of the accident determined that the cause of the explosions was due to a lack of safety procedure practices on part of the plant operators and some flaws in the design of the reactor.
Immediate Aftermath of the Accident
Fragments and hot graphite were thrown out from fuel channels and the reactor. A number of fires started, which contributed to more radioactive materials being released into the atmosphere. Throughout the day of April 26, hundreds of tonnes of water were injected into one-half of the reactor that was still partially intact. Injecting water into the reactor was halted after concerns grew over water possibly leaking into the Unit 1 and 2 reactors. Thousands of tonnes of sand, clay, boron, and other materials were dumped onto the reactor core to extinguish the fire at the core and prevent the release of any more radioactive particles. This process took place for about nine days.
One operator died when the explosions occurred, and another died in the hospital hours later as a result of injuries. Within 36 hours of the accident, about 49,000 residents in the nearby town of Pripyat were evacuated from the area. Within three weeks of the accident, about 116,000 people living within a 30-kilometer radius of the Chernobyl plant were relocated to less contaminated areas. In 1986 and 1987, about 240,000 emergency workers were called in to help clean up the site. Within the first few weeks of clean-up, 28 individuals died as a result of Acute Radiation Syndrome (ARS) due to high amounts of radiation exposure.
Radioactive Materials Released into the Environment
Map of the radionuclide deposition of caesium-137 in Chernobyl and surrounding areas, via United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
The Unit 4 reactor explosion released more than 100 radioactive elements into the environment. Some elements had shorter lives, while others were still present within the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ). The CEZ is known as the area within 30 kilometers of the plant. Some of the most dangerous radioactive elements released into the atmosphere after the explosion included iodine, caesium, and strontium. Most radiation exposure that occurred shortly after the accident was caused by Iodine-131. This radioactive element has a half-life of eight days. Caesium-137 was more hazardous long-term, with a half-life of about 30 years.
Scientists conducted a study on the crops in the Chernobyl region to test their level of radioactive contamination 25 years after the accident occurred. Almost half of the samples they collected still contained Strontium-90, considered very dangerous for human consumption. A small population of inhabitants who were previously evacuated from the site at the time of the accident has since returned. The CEZ is illegal to live in; however, some inhabitants have decided to resettle in the area.
Throughout the years since the accident, scientists and researchers have studied how different concentrations of radiation in materials surrounding the site have affected the health of inhabitants. These studies also provide insight into how long-term exposure to certain radioactive elements affects human health. Dust and debris dispersed most of the radioactive elements into surrounding areas. The soils in the CEZ also contained radioactive elements.
Wind and weather conditions caused some of these materials to travel to other regions. Radioactive fallout occurred in many parts of the northern hemisphere. Large parts of Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia experienced heightened levels of radioactivity. Some parts of Scandinavia and Europe also experienced minor contamination. The amount of contamination in these areas varied due to the inconsistent distribution of radioactive elements caused by natural weather conditions. About 190 metric tons of fission products and uranium dioxide fuel were in the Unit 4 reactor. Soviet scientists estimate that up to 30% of these products were released into the environment.
Effects of Chernobyl Radioactive Elements on Humans & Wildlife
People who were most impacted by exposure to radioactive elements were the emergency responders who spent time cleaning up the Chernobyl disaster site. Many suffered from ARS, which causes burns, headaches, fevers, and gastrointestinal issues. High amounts of exposure to radiation were more dangerous to these individuals compared to those who have been exposed to lower levels long-term.
A study conducted by researchers at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) concluded that children exposed to radioactive iodine had an increased risk of being diagnosed with thyroid cancer. Iodine from the accident gave off radiation that disrupts the chemical bonds in a human’s DNA. Tumors were also found in individuals exposed to high radiation doses.
Scientists and researchers used the Chernobyl disaster as an opportunity to conduct studies on how animals were affected by radioactive fallout. One study showed that eastern tree frogs in the CEZ went through a quick evolutionary change. The frogs located near the Chernobyl site were pitch black in color compared to other individuals of the same species in other places. This evolutionary process took place over ten generations of the eastern tree frogs living in the CEZ.
Genetic changes and mutations also affected other animals in the CEZ. Birds that were exposed to high levels of radiation had visible tumors. Some birds and mammals also exhibited partial albinism. Researchers determined that the Chernobyl disaster would have long-term effects on the biological systems of species and ecosystems present in the CEZ.
Responses to the Chernobyl Disaster
The Chernobyl disaster devastated the area surrounding the plant and directly affected the nearby inhabitants of Pripyat. Thousands of people were directly exposed to harmful radioactive materials released from the reactor core upon its explosions. Fires that broke out from the accident caused radioactive elements to be distributed into the atmosphere. Present-day Ukraine, Belarus, and the Russian Federation were most affected by radioactive contamination. Approximately 6.4 million people were living in areas that were contaminated.
Radioactive materials are still present in Chernobyl, but exposure levels are much more tolerable. However, long-term exposure continues to pose a threat to human health. Several safety measures were taken in response to the Chernobyl accident to prevent future accidents from occurring. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stepped in to assist countries in the former Soviet Union and Central and Eastern Europe in identifying issues in the RBMK reactor design. Design improvements and upgrades were made to the RBMK reactors to eliminate any deficiencies. The IAEA also assisted in increasing operational safety awareness.
The Unit 4 reactor was covered with a temporary concrete and steel shield, known as the “sarcophagus,” to prevent more radioactive elements from being released into the environment. The sarcophagus was built in May 1986 and encloses the entire Unit 4 reactor. Concerns over the condition of the sarcophagus and its deterioration due to radiation led to the launch of a new project to shelter the reactor. The New Safe Confinement was built off-site and placed over the sarcophagus in 2016. The structure is made of steel and is expected to last for at least 100 years.
The Chernobyl disaster was an eye-opening disaster that led to increased safety efforts. The effects of the accident led the Ukrainian government to push sustainable energy measures to reduce the need for nuclear energy. A solar power plant with 3,800 solar panels sits across from the Chernobyl disaster site, which provides power to thousands of apartments. All reactors were shut down over time, with the last reactor closed in December 1999. Decommissioning of the site officially began the following year, which included the removal of wastes and decontamination of the area. Due to the presence of radioactive elements, clean-up of the CEZ is expected to take several decades.
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
… nuclear weapons testing capabilities from Soviet era. The recent brandishing of nuclear threats evokes the Cold War days of the 1950s and early 1960s.
It seems our government(s), in particular the U.S. government and military, aren’t satisfied with the probability of destroying the world with existing earth-bound nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants, but suddenly require them, and even nuclear powered space transportation.
So now our dear leaders want more ‘all things nuclear’ in orbit to ensure that we continue the nuclear insanity effort in space. And to make us auto-appreciative, but ignorant everyday folks feel like we’re wanted and needed as a financial contributor (disguised as an investor) and a necessary partner, we will be allowed to proudly invest in the ever-expanding genius-of-man-made construction of space-planes (for all kinds of travel) and missiles (for war), as well as for generating in-space power plants and lloyd knows what else to make you happier and more comfortable, kindly taking your hard-earned money to help champion the cost of building the final frontier of likely ongoing nuclear destruction. In the end, the Manhattan Project did no one any benefit nor future comfort from war – so why do we keep on believing in its value for anything of value or purpose?
Read on from an article by “The Motley Fool” posted in LLAW’s “ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” extracted from ”TODAY’S NUCLEAR WORLD’S NEWS relating to the latest about new uses for nuclear reactors and the things we humans want to do with them in space when we can’t control the ones we have right here on the ground. Insanity seems to build obsession and aggression, or maybe it’s the other way around. ~llaw
Once again, when the US government wants to put nuclear power plants in space, Lockheed is the company it calls for help. ~ from the Motley Fool
The U.S. military likes nuclear power — and I mean, it really likes nuclear power.
Powered by highly enriched uranium nuclear reactors, U.S. Navy submarines and aircraft carriers can operate for as long as 30 years before needing to add fuel. This frees them from the need to have oil tankers tag along on missions for periodic refueling. It allows the submarines to operate underwater without the need to come up for air for the combustion of hydrocarbons. For that matter, not needing to burn hydrocarbons helps the military burnish its environmental credentials as a user of green energy.
Given all these advantages, therefore, it should perhaps come as no surprise that the Pentagon would also like to put nuclear power in its spaceships. The big surprise is that 65 years after America launched its first satellite, we’re finally making progress toward building nuclear-powered spaceships.
Lockheed goes nuclear
Several months ago, if you recall, I wrote about the DRACO spaceship that NASA and DARPA — the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency — were building. For $499 million, Lockheed Martin would build a small craft to test nuclear-powered spaceflight in Earth orbit, and its partner BWX Technologies(BWXT -0.56%) would build a high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) nuclear engine and provide the fuel to power it.
The DRACO project is expected to launch in late 2025 or early 2026 and begin testing in 2027. Before this project has even gotten off the ground, however, it turns out that Lockheed is already working on another nuclear spaceship project.
As SpaceNews reported last month, the U.S. Air Force Research Lab has hired Lockheed Martin, along with Intuitive Machines and Westinghouse Government Services, to design and build a different kind of space nuclear reactor to extend the lives of satellites in orbit.
Meet (George) JETSON
Dubbed the Joint Emergent Technology Supplying On-orbit Nuclear Power — “JETSON” — project, this is a relatively small bet on nuclear power’s potential in space. In total, AFRL is doling out only $60 million — $33.7 million for Lockheed, and a bit less than that split between Intuitive Machines and Westinghouse.
Intuitive Machines’ role will be to design a spacecraft to house the JETSON reactor. Westinghouse will design and build a nuclear fission system (i.e., the power plant). Lockheed’s role appears to be that of overall general contractor on the project, bringing Intuitive’s and Westinghouse’s contributions together, getting them ready for a “preliminary design review,” and guiding the project all the way through “critical design review.”
Which explains why the JETSON contract is so much smaller than the DRACO project earlier this year. Whereas DRACO involves the actual building and testing of a nuclear-powered spaceship, for the time being, all Lockheed Martin and its partners are being asked to do is prepare plans to build one.
Getting the band back together
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time these three companies have worked together.
In June of last year, if you recall, NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy awarded a total of $15 million to these same three companies (plus a few other partners working with them) to draw up plans for a 40-kilowatt mini nuclear power plant. As the government explained at the time, that would be enough electricity to power about 30 average American homes…or one lunar outpost, once Project Artemis gets around to building one on the moon.
What it means to investors
Admittedly, $15 million, $60 million — even $499 million — all of these may seem like piddling sums to a defense contracting behemoth like Lockheed Martin, which pulled in nearly $66 billion in revenue last year, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence. The question may arise: Should even space investors give any attention to contracts this small?
I’d argue the answer is yes. Remember, even the $499 million DRACO construction contract began in 2021 with a trio of DARPA contracts valued at less than $28 million combined. Just two years later, as construction of DRACO begins, the contract size has swelled roughly 18 times that size. If the JETSON contract follows a similar course as it transitions from planning to construction, its value could easily eclipse $1 billion — a material sum even for a giant like Lockheed.
And again, that’s the price to build just one single spacecraft, and a small spacecraft at that. Assuming all goes well and nuclear propulsion proves a viable option for spacecraft, further contracts can be expected, generating even more money for Lockheed Martin.
This, I’d argue, is one segment of the space business that is worth keeping an eye on.
Should you invest $1,000 in BWX Technologies right now?
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
Now everything is getting modernized at once. The Sentinel work is one leg of a larger, nuclear weapons enterprise-wide $750 billion overhaul that is …
Research groups, including the International Energy Agency, have called for an aggressive expansion of carbon-free nuclear technology to help rein in …
India To Raise 1st Squadron Of LCA Tejas Mark 1A Near Pakistan Border Amid Rising “Nuclear Threats” … war experts, is the first in South Asia to have …
”End Nuclear Insanity Before Nuclear Insanity Ends Humanity”
LLAW’s COMMENTARY TODAY:
The Sharing of Communication, Language, Voice, and Knowledge by the Muses of Greek Mythology That Once Upon a Time Linked Mankind Together Collectively.
LLAW’s COMMENTARY TODAY:
A personal verbal (written) visit with whomever listens or cares about the future of us all seems in order for me tonight to be passing along to you . . .
There are many people on this planet far more ‘brilliant’ of mind than I am, and these are the ones whom we should be paying much closer attention to than we do. They come from all walks of life and thousands of occupational ways of endeavor, too. Their ‘brilliance’ exists in so many different world(s) of endeavor are what educates us and runs the ultimate protection of humanity’s future. It has always been that way, but in these days of selective ignorance and other purposely imposed lack of educating ourselves. It is the ones who only ‘think’ they are ‘smart’ who are not . . .
Over time we have virtually forgotten how to talk back and forth, read and write, and otherwise communicate one on one or within small groups with constructive influences involving ourselves as individuals for a couple of generations and thousands of reasons, de-evolving us to little more than becoming mindless and angry ruthless, sometimes dangerously so, in our reasoning. We know languages, but we have forgotten how to share it and share them. Worse, we don’t know how to write them either, or more likely, we have become to lazy and resistance to the ‘writing’ effort beyond a Facebook ‘like’, which is already written for us.
We are in a headlong race toward destroying ourselves, and in some cases, destroying a planet of others, from inside out by some kind of burden of self-denied impotence and uselessness weighing heavily on our happiness, comfort, love, peace, felicity, and humanitarian care for our own species as well as all other life. We are, in fact, creating a 6th Extinction all by our human selves. I am far from the only one saying such stuff, and though I observe and teach myself a lot, I also learn from them!
We claim to be the top dogs on planet Earth, yet our ken has thoughtlessly destroyed an estimated one million animal and plant life forms, including 680+ vertebrate animal life similar to our own, for no particular reason other than our own selfish comfort, greed and self-aggrandizement.
Our growing occupation with ‘all things nuclear’ and our refusal to remove ourselves from the use of fossil fuels is the ultimate tale of truth that mankind has lost its sense of common sense and values, including thoughtful pro and con consideration about sensitive issues (including politics, by the way). Most of all, we have forgotten our once active personal mindset to evaluate and judge for ourselves what is okay and what is not. Either we correct that mental block and return to staunchly controlling and growing individually and therefore collectively among us moreso every day, or we will not live to sustain our own lives on this beautiful blue, green, and brown planet Earth much further than one well-frazzled unrepaired rope of a single day at a time, relying on no more than tomorrow to see us through.
Think about all of this, and once again begin to communicate with others about what you’re thinking about before it’s too late and the rope breaks (if it’s not too late already, that many of those other mindful and thoughtful luminaries I mentioned above already believe). ~llaw
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
The first new traditional nuclear reactor in three decades just came online in Georgia and although advanced nuclear technologies have made promising …
As the Israel-Hamas War Governs the World’s Attention, Iran Is Quietly Marching Towards Nuclear Breakout. IRAN-POLITICS-NUCLEAR Iran’s Bushehr nuclear …
… war in Ukraine in exchange for Russian technology assistance to upgrade his … threats in 2024, possibly including the country’s seventh nuclear test.
Tonight I yield my space here to a review of Dwight Eisenhower’s 1983 speech to the U.N. regarding the world(s) concerns about the future of atomic or nuclear weapons and how they could become a symbol of peace. The only problem with the speech was that it backfired by bringing about nuclear proliferation as an imagined defense against nuclear threats . . . ~llaw
Thanks for reading All Things Nuclear! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Subscribed
Seventy years ago, on December 8 1953, US president Dwight D. Eisenhower delivered a speech to the United Nations general assembly, setting out his concerns about “atomic warfare”.
In the speech, later known as Atoms for Peace, he outlined a plan for new forms of international cooperation around nuclear technology, calling for “lasting peace for all nations, and happiness and well-being for all men”.
In 2023, nuclear technology has been very much in the headlines, from the potential of nuclear threats during the war in Ukraine to cinematically capturing the history behind the first atomic bomb in Oppenheimer.
The speech is largely forgotten but it fundamentally shaped the nuclear world we live in today, and remains highly relevant to how decision-makers engage with such cross-border developments as generative AI. For all their differences, when they were created both nuclear reactors and AI represented newly emerging technologies that “spurred a global race for dominance”, fundamentally challenging existing systems and with potential for both peaceful and military uses.
Why the speech happened
In 1953, eight years after the second world war, an armistice concluded the Korean War (1950-1953) but the wider cold war was characterised by an accelerating nuclear arms race. US nuclear technology was under tight control, restricting any exports, even to wartime allies.
Nuclear reactors mainly created fuel for warheads. The first power plants and first nuclear submarines were only just being constructed.
Eisenhower’s speech, and the US Atoms for Peace programme that followed, completely changed this, proposing a sharing of technology and nuclear material with different countries. There was wide dissemination of Eisenhower’s words beyond the UN.
Hundreds of thousands of pamphlets of the speech were sent out, printed in ten languages. US and foreign media were inundated with information and advertising.
Public spread of ideas
One of the speech’s public legacies was encouraging wider public engagement with the idea of what “nuclear” actually was. This inspired new popular culture and educational materials promoting ideas of atomic-powered futures, such as the iconic Walt Disney 1956 science book and TV programme Our Friend the Atom.
Eisenhower’s speech called for a UN-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), eventually founded in 1957, promoting peaceful nuclear use while discouraging weapons proliferation. It remains a crucial international entity in nuclear verification, nuclear safety, and promotion of peaceful uses of nuclear technology, most recently through activities such as monitoring the safety of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant during the Ukraine war.
Paradoxically, however, Atoms for Peace also had opposite effects. The reactors and technical expertise, supplied for civilian energy or research, provided crucial foundations for proliferation.
The tools and knowledge were repurposed by some countries to develop their own nuclear weapons, including, in the first instance, India and Pakistan. Israel is widely believed to have benefited, although it continues to deny it has nuclear weapons.
One of the speech’s most visible impacts was in signalling, both to domestic and international audiences, a significant change in US policy towards supplying other nations with nuclear science.
It paved the way for the restrictive US Atomic Energy Act to be revised the following year, to allow sharing of technology and building of reactors in different countries. This significantly increased global development of nuclear power and nuclear research in areas from agriculture to medicine.
However, it’s worth remembering that Atoms for Peace took place in parallel with a wider US cold war strategy of pursuing nuclear superiority. Just over a month before his UN speech, Eisenhower approved a significant expansion in America’s nuclear arsenal.
Eisenhower also tried to set up an international uranium bank, with US and Soviet joint contributions from their stockpiles of “normal uranium and fissionable materials”. These would be contributed to a pool, shared with other countries for peaceful purposes, both to help restrict the arms race and “provide abundant electrical energy in the power-starved areas of the world”.
However, this bank was never created, partly because of Soviet concerns that it would continue to allow US leadership of nuclear weapons technology. Instead, bilateral agreements were struck to supply nuclear energy and materials.
Unfortunately, spreading “peaceful” technology, supplying nuclear reactors and material for energy and civil research, became a cold war and commercial “weapon”, aiming to tie uranium and technology exports to fulfilling conditions or continued dependence on the selling countries to supply fuel.
Ironically, this echoed one US fear which had helped motivate Atoms for Peace: the prospect of the Soviet Union sharing nuclear energy as a way of influencing other countries and creating alliances.
These developments are particular relevant today. Russian attacks on Ukraine’s nuclear power plants during the current war have received much attention, but what is less well known is Russia’s nuclear energy empire, with contracts and construction spanning 54 countries.
This has remained “largely below the sanctions radar”, while remaining a significant source of international influence for Russia.
Nuclear’s reach today
As of November 2023, approximately 10% of the world’s energy was supplied from more than 400 nuclear reactors, while 40 million nuclear medical procedures are performed each year, using radioactive materials to diagnose or treat different diseases.
Faced with such challenges, Eisenhower’s words: “If a danger exists in the world, it is a danger shared by all; and equally, that if hope exists in the mind of one nation, that hope should be shared by all” seem as relevant today, as they did in 1953.
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are three Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
Within this process, Rosatom, Russia’s putatively civilian state nuclear corporation, has emerged as a major player on the battlefield. Our new report …
A general view of the South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant near the city of Yuzhnoukrainsk in … Lower temperatures, emergency repairs and a lack of solar …
Research suggests supereruptions at Yellowstone involved multiple explosive events. “It’s not a single explosion that empties the chamber all at once, …
Thanks for reading All Things Nuclear! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
I’ve decided to beat the drum about this nightly Post tonight to try to toot my own horn just a bit in order to explain more about what it is actually supposed to do for the reader and how it works and why.
First, I will explain the how the media articles, separated by five categories of related but associated topics so that you the reader can select the stories that are more interesting to you personally. The categories are listed at the end of this comment section describing how the media stories are separated into those categories by the general area they relate to. Sometimes a news story may appear, depending on its potential importance and/or its popularity. Each category has three articles, each one picked as the best and most informative pertaining to that category. Generally speaking, they are the very best stories available, and they are chosen from media outlets all around the media world so that you can get a feel for what other countries are most serious about. And there is never an article posted on my own political, personal opinion, territorial, or any other kind of bias.
These articles are collected for me by my own Google AI daily collection for me to personally choose from and post within the six categories (including one bonus category I call “Yellowstone Caldera” for closely related issues, both good and bad, concerning needless nuclear power plants for reasons of world-wide importance). But since I was born and raised in Wyoming, I am most partial to the Yellowstone caldera and the news generated about it – although I often include information and news from other calderas spread around the planet. (I know that breaks my ‘no prejudice’ rule, but Yellowstone is also of world-wide interest, so to that extent I am considered excused.)
As for what I write in my nightly commentaries, the thoughts, ideas, technical issues, and opinions are my own and they vary in subject matter and meaning considerably from day-to-day and week-to-week, in presentation, technical intellect and knowledge, coupled with the psychology of massive awareness, fear, hope, courage, humanity, and world peace, and most importantly, my purpose which is always clearly written somewhere between the lines, no matter the written material.
That purpose is to raise global awareness, through both technical knowledge and a sudden peaceful global relationship and instant realization that we are all in this together in a new kind of world-wide unity. That unity will allow us to recognize the immediate and heart-thumping threats we are posing to our own species as well as other life everywhere around the world; and that to save ourselves from ‘doomsday’, or our own self-created 6th Extinction, we must as one newly united species come together in a desperate effort to save all life on planet Earth. We must do it immediately because every day lost brings us a day closer to self-destruction. We have a very long way to go with a short time to get there.
We presently have two silent death wishes (or three if you count nuclear war separately) and our concern, awareness, and desire to remove the danger of all three is terribly lacking in the human psyche. Climate Change/Global Warming, created by greenhouse gasses, is threatening to asphyxiate a living world as well, and its partner in crime, radiation from uranium fuel that powers both nuclear bombs and nuclear power plants will, one day, either separately or together, annihilate us. But that short extension of our lives only if we somehow avoid nuclear war, which could do us in on any unfortunate day now if humanity continues to fail to do a one-eighty-about-face and migrate back in the exact opposite direction from where we came.
The only other choice is from some unknown, perhaps alien, help from someone, something, from somewhere that we are most likely unaware of who may well be watching us while on alert, waiting for the universal command to save this beautiful life-giving planet Earth a day or two before the ‘armageddon’-like day of self-destruction arrives. Or maybe that day has already arrived and we are too mentally thoughtless, busy, dense, lazy, arrogant, or proud to turn back . . . ~llaw
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 5 categories (plus a bonus category at the end for news about the Yellowstone caldera and others that also play an important role in humanity’s lives) as do ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 linked most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none. The Categories are listed below in their usual appearing order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear War
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (per above). There are three Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
Silence the guns. “All attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure must stop immediately. · Nuclear plants at risk · Winter freeze threatens …
He refused to push the button, but the Russian president has presented threats of nuclear warfare before, even launching ballistic missiles in Belarus …
Research suggests supereruptions at Yellowstone involved multiple explosive events. “It’s not a single explosion that empties the chamber all at once, …
List and interactive map of current and past earthquakes near Yellowstone volcano. IOS App · IOS App · Volcanoes & Earthquakes Our popular app is now …
I have to laugh every time I see the following statement about nuclear power. Especially when I might see another statement right next to it that states that nuclear power emits absolutely “Zero GHG (or GreenHouse Gasses”:
“Nuclear power is the second-largest source of low carbon energy used today to produce electricity, following hydropower. During operation, nuclear power plants produce almost no greenhouse gas emissions.” ~ Sep 22, 2020
What the hell does “almost no” mean? It means some, for sure, but the industry doesn’t want to tell us straight out what “what almost no” means, nor that some plants emit more greenhouse gasses including carbon (CO2) than others,
Anyone in the industry knows better. Another non-considered factor is that providing one new nuclear power plant can take well over a decade while, all the while, the plant it is supposed to replace continues to belch GHG into the atmosphere until the replacement plant comes online, by which time we are all likely to be dead anyway from a combination of GHG and nuclear radiation from older nuclear power plants or WWIII! In other words it is just plain ignorance and stupidity to build new nuclear power plants. Yet 20+ nations have signed up at the current energy conference (COP28 in Dubai, ending December 12th) to increase nuclear power by 300% by 2050, led by the United States. Why bother? And worse than the bothering is that we are selling nuclear fuel to non-nuclear nations expecting them to use the uranium nuclear fuel to build nuclear power plants rather than nuclear bombs. llolloll!
You are being lied to, folks! It’s all about money and short term financing, not clean air or nuclear radiation safety, and not even about common sense or hope for the future. ~llaw
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category. There are three Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
… nuclear weapons or missiles. China saw seven organizations added. Of all the Chinese entities, about 90% are possibly involved in missile development.
In the cold war, for example, the USA, Russia and Britain scrambled to produce as many different types of nuclear weapon as possible – bombs, missiles …
I continually get so emotionally tired and heart-sick over the media’s irresponsible headlines such as this one today from Time Magazine (Posted in its entirety below( — especially so when the absolute opposite of the headline and leadline is the reality. The article is basically factual and very well written; pointing out many of the nuclear industry’s ongoing major difficulties and immediate problems. But it is fundamentally dead wrong about being a necessity for the future.
However well written, the overlying difficulties of nuclear power will only get worse if more nuclear power plants are brought on line. And keep in mind that the decade or more that it takes to bring a single nuclear power plant online means that the heavy doses of greenhouse gasses continue to be emitted into the atmosphere and collected in the warming waters of the oceans as well.
We see the danger here, but we excuse it or ignore it. So the headline becomes a huge misnomer, supporting the nuclear industry and the industry knows that most of the text, if not all, will never be carefully considered or even read by the everyday public. The industry and its propaganda machine (including many nuclear industry financed “Think Tanks”) are misleading the general public about the cost, productivity, safety, and health and welfare of nuclear energy. In fact, “all things nuclear” are by far the most dangerous products on planet Earth . . .
To say that “Nuclear Power is the only solution” is entirely irresponsible, and also the statement that the world “has to embrace nuclear power in order to solve the climate crisis” is flat-out wrong. The reasons are right in front of our faces and even alluded to in the story itself.
But yet there is another far more simple solution, and that is to outright ban all power generation except for wind, solar, and hydro, thereby forcing the industry to do without any fossil fuels (which, I will add, except for some slight relief from emissions from nuclear power plants, that nuclear produced energy is the most dangerous of all to mankind and other life because the process uses radioactive fuel (highly enriched uranium) that easily outdistances other fossil fuels in terms of degree of danger to life.
Solar energy, with technological development has far greater future power production, and the natural steam of volcanic calderas around the world could provide enough energy to allow us to stop worrying about not having enough — perhaps forever. The Yellowstone Caldera is ultimately capable, all on its own, of providing clean energy with absolutely no greenhouse gasses nor radiation for the entire North American continent with plenty left over for others continents and countries as well.
Finally, what I want to say is that we got ourselves into this mess by the very industry that is pushing more of the same, but wrongly looking at non-fossil fuel as industry competition when it should be, by now, well into the concept of conversion to non-fossil fuels entirely. Always remember that uranium is not only a fossil fuel, it is also a radioactive fossil fuel, and that makes it doubly dangerous for the current condition of providing electrical power for the world. More nuclear power plants would only increase our already disastrous rapidly approaching the 6th Extinction.
And, thankfully for you, the reader, I haven’t even mentioned the “threat” of nuclear war — and that nuclear power plants, should WWIII become a reality, will become a nuclear weapon of mass destruction just like its radioactive brother – the nuclear bomb. ~llaw
Time: The world has to embrace nuclear power in order to solve the climate crisis.
Nuclear Power Is the Only Solution
The cooling towers of the Mochovce nuclear power plant on November 6, 2023 in Mochovce, Slovakia. The key to Slovakia’s nuclear strategy, Unit 3 of Slovakia’s Mochovce NPP, has achieved 100 per cent power. The power plant is expected to cover 13 percent of the country’s electricity needs, making Slovakia self-sufficient, according to the plant’s administrator Branislav Strycek, CEO of Slovenske Elektrarne. Janos Kummer-Getty Images
Jayanti is an Eastern Europe energy policy expert. She served for ten years as a U.S. diplomat, including as the Energy Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine (2018-2020), and as international energy counsel at the U.S. Department of Commerce (2020-2021). She is currently the Managing Director of Eney, a U.S.-Ukrainian decarbonization company.
COP28 is underway and grand commitments to triple nuclear power by 2050 are recognition of the following reality: There is no way, absolutely none, that the world’s energy transition away from fossil fuels can be achieved without a massive increase globally of nuclear power. Yet, western governments and companies are failing to get new nuclear technologies and projects off the ground. Outdated anti-nuclear opinions, massive initial capital costs, risks that governments haven’t found a mechanism to share with the private sector, and a crushing and irrational regulatory framework are all holding the industry back.
Wedged between energy crises and climate change natural disasters, there is no longer the luxury of choice. The industry has responded by seeking to develop new technology that can assuage public concerns about safety. Some are designing micro reactors or SMRs. Others are working with new materials or techniques, such as replacing water in cooling systems with molten salt, or using boiling water instead of pressurized water to make the NPP more efficient. Still others are working on new safety systems, or fuel fabrication innovations, or new approaches to storage of nuclear materials. In the U.S., top tier research outfits like the Electric Power Research Institute are finding their expertise in demand all round the world, creating something resembling nuclear diplomacy. The U.S., U.K, Canada, and South Korea are leading the pack on investment in nuclear.
The nuclear industry has been riding high on a wave of enthusiasm for a few years. In recognition of the cost savings of “going nuclear,” smart companies are already making plans to transition to nuclear power. This includes Microsoft, which announced in September that it will use nuclear plants to power its artificial intelligence operations. With electrification the foundation of any coherent energy transition plan and grids struggling to balance themselves with an abundance of non-dispatchable renewables, nuclear is increasingly acknowledged to be the solution. Just as apex science fiction writer Isaac Asimov fantasized in his 1940-50s Foundation books, nuclear energy may save humanity.
And yet, recent headlines have revealed some major setbacks. Small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) company NuScale, once lauded as the leading SMR developer and despite receiving almost $2 billion in U.S. government support, has cancelled its flagship project due to rising costs and mismanagement. It is now facing investor lawsuits for fraud. TerraPower, Bill Gates’ SMR company, was delayed several years by the Russian invasion of Ukraine—Russia was the only country that produced the nuclear fuel needed for TerraPower’s SMR design. X-Energy has walked back its plans to go public. The U.K.’s Rolls Royce SMR is plagued by financial problems. France’s EDF is posting record low power outputs and financial status reports. Others are also delayed, struggling, or facing bankruptcy.
Setbacks are normal for new technologies and emerging markets, but for nuclear power such bumps in the road have outsized potential to disrupt because many people are still hesitant or downright hostile to nuclear power. The Chornobyl, Fukushima Daiichi, and Three Mile Island catastrophes loom large in the imagination. “Meltdown” itself has entered idiom to mean falling apart rapidly and irrationally and beyond control. The world’s preoccupation with Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhye nuclear power plant (NPP), the largest in Europe, shows how gripped we can be by nuclear disasters. In keeping, a March 2023 Gallup poll found that although support for nuclear is increasing slowly, 44% of Americans still somewhat or strongly oppose it, down from 54% in 2016. Similar polls in Switzerland and the U.K. peg support for nuclear at just 49% and 24%, respectively. In Germany, despite still being in the middle of an energy crisis and desperate for additional power sources, 50% of people under 34 want nuclear power eradicated.
With the exception of France, which is 69% nuclear, many of the developed world’s leading economies and governments have been too scared of nuclear power to allow it to flourish. Germany was so spooked by Fukushima it completely phased out its nuclear power program, finally turning off its last three (of an original 17) reactors on April 15, 2023. Belgium and Switzerland decided not to build new plants and to phase out those existing, although the 2021-2023 energy crisis has forced a reconsideration. In the U.S. the trigger was the March 28, 1979 partial meltdown of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. No one died or even suffered negative health effects, in the aftermath dozens of planned NPPs were cancelled and almost nothing has been built in decades.
Unfortunately, unencumbered by popular opinions against nuclear, the Western world’s great geostrategic rivals are years if not decades ahead. There are sixty nuclear projects in various stages of construction around the world, and 22 of them are in China; and 22 use Russian technology, and 18 use Chinese technology, or technology China stole from other countries and rebranded. Some European countries, notably Hungary and Serbia, and some NATO countries, such as Turkey, are planning new NPPs using Russian designs and supply chains. Ironically, and tragically, even all four of Ukraine’s NPPs are Russian VVER models, entirely reliant until quite recently on Russian fuel. And Russia controls much of nuclear supply chains.
The Western world ended up so far behind because of fear. Governments around the world are now struggling to catch up, slowed by still-high public opposition rates and regulatory regimes that institutionalized fear of nuclear into licensing and permitting processes. In countries that never had nuclear power, such as Poland and Egypt, opposition is not baked into law, and so they can paradoxically move faster than some countries with longstanding nuclear programs.
In the U.S. the opposite is true; it keeps tripping over the fear-based regulatory regimes that govern its nuclear industry. Tasked by Congress in the 2019 Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act with liberalizing the licensing process to foster innovation and accelerate the commercialization of nuclear power, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2022 released draft rules and processes for consideration of new nuclear technologies that managed to take all the worst and most burdensome aspects of existing rules and, instead of reducing them, added some new hurdles and standards, some of which nuclear engineers say are scientifically impossible to meet. The draft is twice as long (1252 pages) as the one it was supposed to simplify. Many requirements, both old and new, shouldn’t apply to SMRs and other advanced nuclear designs. The result was decried by experts and companies as a complete failure that will continue to hobble the industry for decades, adding further time and expenses to the already billion-dollar licensing process. The Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group, said the proposal will “increase complexity and regulatory burden without any increase in safety and reduce predictability and flexibility.”
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category. There is one Yellowstone Caldera bonus story available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
Current EAS stations and other important emergency planning information for residents, workers and visitors within 10 miles of a Constellation nuclear …
The following article from “In Depth News” will help to clarify and support what I discussed on my recent Post #468 on “All Things Nuclear” on December 2, 2023, that was tied to an earlier Post #60 on August 20, 2022. There are also several other discussions on my early Posts about what’s wrong with the insane concept of nuclear “deterrence” as a defensive “agreement” among nuclear nations that is now little more than torn up bits and pieces of paper in File 13s around the nuclear world(s). “Deterrence” to my way of thinking, is nothing more than akin to one of many gambits in a poorly played game of chess.
This well-reasoned and written article points out similar reasons to my own why ‘deterrence’ means nothing now, and has always meant nothing. The article’s point of view looks at “deterrence” from the ‘defensive’ side of a possible war rather than nuclear threats being looked at as offensive aggression — a way to defend ourselves by barking louder, baring more fangs, than the other dogs. The first question of the article (in the second paragraph) is a key point: . . . would the Russians have invaded Ukraine if it was a nuclear power?
And the story fits very well into my multiple reasons why nuclear war will not be avoided by a roomful of political diplomats making “rules” of engagement that nuclear endowed countries will follow with honor. The fact is that “rules” in wartime mean nothing. If they did, we would never have had any wars since language and writing was invented. We need (and we need it now) a massive around-the-world change of hearts and attitudes if humanity is to survive, and if we don’t do that, plus, while we’re at it, also rid our world-wide selves of ‘all things nuclear’ we will not only bring ourselves down, but all other life on our beautiful blue, green, and tan planet Earth. ~llaw
A view of the 2nd meeting States Parties to the TPMW. Photo credit: ICAN | Darren Ornitz. – Photo: 2023
UNITED NATIONS | 3 December 2023 (IDN) — Is it justifiable for a country to go nuclear—on the grounds that it is doing so to protect itself from nuclear attacks?
The argument is based on the concept of “nuclear deterrence”: a widely-challenged theory that nuclear weapons are intended to deter nuclear attacks prompting the question: would the Russians have invaded Ukraine if it was a nuclear power?
The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the ouster of Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi, were perhaps facilitated by one fact: none of these countries either had nuclear weapons or had given up developing them (as in the case of Libya).
“And that is why we will never give up ours,” a North Korean diplomat was quoted as saying, while pointing out that the invasions by the US and Western nations would not have taken place if those countries were armed with nuclear weapons.
But the 2017 Nobel Peace laureate, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), a coalition of non-governmental organizations in over 100 countries, says “deterrence is an unproven gamble—a theory on which the future of humanity is being risked—that is based on the implicit threat to use nuclear weapons that has brought the world close to nuclear war on a number of occasions.”
The weeklong UN meeting of members of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which concluded December 1, called out the doctrine of nuclear deterrence adhered to by the nuclear-armed states and their allies as a threat to human security and an obstacle to nuclear disarmament, according to ICAN.
The nuclear deterrence doctrine condemned
The Executive Director of ICAN, Melissa Parke, said: “The condemnation of nuclear deterrence doctrine by the members of the TPNW at their meeting at the UN in New York is a highly significant move”.
Never before has a UN treaty laid out the threat that nuclear deterrence poses to the future of life on our planet. Deterrence is unacceptable. It is based on the threat to wage nuclear war, which would kill millions outright and lead to a nuclear winter and mass starvation that recent research shows would kill billions of people, she declared.
Tariq Rauf, former Head of Verification and Security Policy at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), (and who provided inputs during the drafting of the TPNW in 2017 on verification and other matters), told IDN the second session of TPNW meeting of states parties (MSP2) was noteworthy in that there was a thematic discussion on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, consideration of the status and operation of the Treaty.
This included victim assistance, environmental remediation and international cooperation and assistance, complementarity with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and a report of a scientific advisory group (SAG) on verification of nuclear disarmament.
The political declaration adopted at MSP2 was heavy on rhetorical and hortatory statements but light on concrete calls for action, he argued.
TPNW States agreed to set up intersessional working groups in the lead up to MSP3 in 2025, and to consider modalities for an international trust fund for victim assistance and environmental remediation, as well as a consultative process on security concerns of TPNW States.
As regards the international trust fund, he said, “I am concerned that some ardent TPNW opponent States, such as Canada, Germany and Norway, may try to “whitewash” their credentials by offering funds for victim assistance but still resolutely continue to oppose and undermine the TPNW.”
A scientific advisory group set up
One important outcome of MSP1 was the establishment of a Scientific Advisory Group (SAG). It submitted a useful report to MSP2 on the status and developments regarding nuclear weapons, nuclear weapon risks, the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, nuclear disarmament and related issues.
This report using available open source information provided a compilation of data on the status of nuclear forces based on the data and reports published by the Federation American Scientists and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on the inventories of nuclear warheads and related nuclear materials, Rauf pointed out.
The is the second time that a scientific advisory group has been set up in support of multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations. The first time such a scientific advisory group was set up was in 1976 with the establishment of the Ad Hoc Group of Scientific Experts to conceptualize a verification and international seismic data-exchange system for a nuclear test-ban treaty.
Rauf said existing nuclear disarmament verification exercises such as the US-led International Partnership on Nuclear Disarmament Verification (IPNDV) and the QUAD basically have replicated existing IAEA practices and procedures on verification of the nuclear fuel cycle.
“There is, as yet, no agreement among States on any feasible or practical measures for verification of dismantlement of nuclear warheads. Indeed, the US is on record that it shall never allow any international oversight of nuclear warhead dismantlement,” he pointed out.
As such, for practical reasons, whether it should not be the focus on a variation of TPNW Article 4 (1), pursuant to which a nuclear-armed State divests itself of nuclear weapons and related infrastructure and accedes to the Treaty even though this would now occur after the TPNW entered into force in January 2021? he asked
And further to that, the verification effort be on the nuclear material from the dismantled warheads utilizing attribution verification with information barrier (AVIB). Also, understand that it will not be possible to get an accurate, complete and reliable accounting of weapon-usable nuclear material produced since 1945, he noted.
UN chief lauds successful conclusion of the second TPNW meeting
In a statement released December 1, UN Secretary-General António Guterres congratulated States Parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) on the successful conclusion of their Second Meeting.
The Secretary-General said he is “encouraged by the work done by States Parties in collaboration with other stakeholders, which showcases what is possible within multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations and bolsters the global disarmament and non-proliferation architecture”.
He welcomed the adoption of the political declaration, “contributing toward our shared goal of a world free of nuclear weapons”.
Meanwhile, at the meeting, about 700 individuals, representing over 100 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) took part in an interactive process with the member states. And in what could be viewed as a much broader, week-long nuclear disarmament conference, more than 65 side events, including panel discussions, art exhibitions, concerts, and awards ceremonies were held inside the UN and around New York City. Jackie Cabasso, Executive Director, Western States Legal Foundation, told IDN compared to the rancorous August meeting of the States Parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which could not even agree on a Chair’s factual summary report, the TPNW meeting manifested a unified and unambiguous recognition that growing threats of nuclear war are intolerable and that the only solution is the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
“It is evident that even though the TPNW cannot achieve nuclear disarmament without the participation of the nuclear-armed states, its members are energetically using it as a platform to develop and disseminate information and analysis that is valuable in the broader global context’ she pointed out.
Examples of this were the report on gender impacts, including the disproportionate effects of radiation on women and girls’ health, and the first report of the Scientific Advisory Group on developments regarding nuclear weapons, nuclear weapon risks, the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons, nuclear disarmament, and related issues.
The Scientific Advisory Group also called for a new UN study on the consequences of nuclear war, given the last comprehensive studies were done in the late 1980s.
“In an important development”, Cabasso said, “States parties, for the first time, mandated member states, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), ICAN and other stakeholders and experts, to engage in consultations to “challenge the security paradigm based on nuclear deterrence by highlighting and promoting new scientific evidence about the humanitarian consequences and risks of nuclear weapons and juxtaposing this with the risks and assumptions that are inherent in nuclear deterrence,” and to present their findings at the third meeting of States parties in March 2025.”
Nuclear deterrence is the Gordian knot
Over half the world’s population live in countries whose national security postures explicitly depend on nuclear weapons and the doctrine of “nuclear deterrence”- “In my view”, she said, nuclear deterrence is the Gordian knot blocking the path to nuclear disarmament.
The Latin root of the word deterrence means to “frighten away, fill with fear”. In other words, to threaten. Deterrence undergirds entire military-industrial establishments and the national security states and elites they serve, she said.
It is an ideology which has outlived its Cold War origins and is used by nuclear-armed states to justify the perpetual possession and threatened use—including first use—of nuclear weapons.
The hard truth is that neither the NPT nor the TPNW can achieve disarmament until the nuclear-armed states are willing to reimagine a global system that puts universal human security above the narrow interests of “national security” enforced by nuclear coercion — euphemistically called deterrence, declared Cabasso.
Elaborating further, Rauf said: “In my view, chasing modalities for verification of nuclear warhead dismantlement is going down an endless rabbit hole”.
“The uncomfortable truth is that we cannot achieve 100% nuclear warhead dismantlement verification, we can do so for missiles, submarines, and bombers but not for the warheads—period!”
While this might be an interesting intellectual challenge for scientists and universities, it is not a practical option.
Recall, that at the height of the Cold War it was estimated that the global number of deployed nuclear warheads peaked in 1986 at an estimated 70,374. In all, it is estimated that more than 125,000 nuclear warheads were built since 1945.
Today, he said, there are about 12,500, What happened to the difference of nearly 58,000 warheads between 70,374 and 12,500; and the 112,500 from the 125,000? All were unceremoniously dismantled – unilaterally, without direct verification!
“I would recommend that TPNW States set up an International Panel of Scientific and Technical Experts (IPSTE) to advise the SAG on practical relevant aspects of nuclear disarmament verification comprised of experts with nuclear weapons and verification expertise – that is retired weaponeers and inspectors dealing with nuclear weapons matters,” declared Rauf.
Meanwhile, according to ICAN, the meeting also demonstrated that the TPNW is growing in strength. Several observing states announced their intention to join the treaty in the near term, bringing the number of states that have either signed, ratified or acceded to the treaty to more than half of all UN members.
Indonesia announced that its parliament recently approved ratification of the treaty and Brazil, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique and Nepal announced their intent to ratify soon.
The meeting was also attended by several NATO states and countries that rely on American nuclear weapons in their defence, including Australia, Belgium, Germany and Norway. [IDN-InDepthNews]
A view of the second meeting States Parties to the TPNW. Photo credit: ICAN | Darren Ornitz.
This article was produced as a part of the joint media project between The Non-profit International Press Syndicate Group and Soka Gakkai International in Consultative Status with ECOSOC on 3 December 2023.
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category. There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
By clicking “Accept All Cookies” or continuing, you agree to the use of cookies, similar tracking and storage technologies, and information about your …
Let’s get real tonight for just a few moments, and face the reality of what humanity is doing to our world and ourselves. We are approaching an inevitable collective death for life on Earth that by now is irreversible, and the indifferent non-action of indecision and empty promises of politics will never change, nor will the deceitful language and promises of the buzzwords of impossibility from “Think Tanks” who are very well compensated by the uranium and other fossil fuel-burning power industry to keep right on polluting the atmosphere with their meaningless and never-to-be fairy tale industry solutions to Green House Gasses (née GHG) and Carbon Dioxide (née CO2) that create the guilty emissions, releasing them into the air because they have nowhere else to go, but somehow still manage to calm us down by using fancy buzz word phrases that that the average guy on the street has no idea about what the words mean nor how it might work, but the sound of these words, such as “Net Zero Carbon Emissions”, which sounds great but doesn’t really mean what the words say it means. Even if something like “Net Zero” were possible, it would take, in a best case (that the industry and politics would never seriously attempt) if all went well until 2050 and no doubt beyond, and if all goes well, another 100 years or more for the global heat trapped in the atmosphere and oceans that is already there to gradually dissipate (if we’re lucky). So, you see, generations of us and other living critters would slowly come and rapidly go until we are all dead — which would happen sooner rather than later.
And all that brings me back to my favorite subject, “All Things Nuclear”, which will most likely kill us all quicker than global warming and its horrendous climate change. But rest assured one or the other or a combination of both will leave Mother Earth bare naked and lonely. ~llaw
The following article from the “Union of Concerned Scientists” tells us why. All we have to do is read between the lines of progress that nothing we are doing is going to change that allows us to escape the death wrath of Climate Change. But like all worthwhile (or not) think tanks, they all need money to continue to operate . . .
Climate change is one of the most challenging problems that humanity has ever faced. At stake are hundreds of millions of lives, innumerable species and ecosystems, the health and viability of the economy, and the future habitability of this planet.
Fortunately, climate change is solvable. We have the technologies. We have the science. We now need the leadership—and the courage to change course.
With concerted action, the US can meet its climate goals—and see huge benefits to the economy and public health.
Carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are the main drivers of global warming. While climate change cannot be stopped, it can be slowed.
To avoid the worst consequences of climate change, we’ll need to reach “net zero” carbon emissions by 2050 or sooner. Net zero means that, on balance, no more carbon is dumped into the atmosphere than is taken out.
To achieve net zero emissions, we need a massive transformation in how we produce and consume electricity. We need a newer, better transportation system. We need to stop deforestation. We need a climate-friendly agricultural system.
The scale of these changes will require significant federal policy that puts a price on carbon. It also requires international cooperation: the Paris Agreement, signed in 2016, reflects the world’s best effort to solve climate change so far, though it doesn’t include the emissions reductions we need.
Much remains to be done—and we need to do it as quickly as possible.
Solving the climate crisis isn’t just about cutting carbon emissions. It’s about protecting people from harm.
No matter how quickly we reduce emissions, the reality is that certain climate impacts are inevitable. The seas are rising. Temperatures break records every year.
Droughts, floods, and extreme weather are damaging communities today.
Cutting carbon is the only long-term solution for avoiding climate impacts. In the short-term, we need to adapt. That means everything from discouraging development in high-risk areas, to planning for water scarcity, to building more resilient cities and communities. Investments should be scientifically sound and socially just, and focused where the impacts are greatest—often in low-income communities and communities of color.
Five tactics business interests use to sideline science, deceive the public and buy influence at the expense of public health and safety.
For years, media pundits, partisan think tanks, and special interest groups funded by fossil fuel companies have raised doubts about the truth of global warming.
These contrarians downplay and distort the evidence of climate change, lobby for policies that reward polluters, and attempt to undercut existing pollution standards.
This barrage of disinformation misleads and confuses the public about the growing consequences of global warming and makes it more difficult to implement the solutions we really need. Until the influence of these special interests is sufficiently diminished, climate action will be that much harder.
Remove carbon dioxide
To reach net zero emissions, we need to do more than just reduce our emissions: we need to actively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or offset its effects.
The easiest way to do this is by planting new forests (afforestation) or restoring old ones (reforestation). Other enhanced land management practices can help, as can new technologies that suck CO2 out of the air (“direct air capture”), or prevent it from leaving smokestacks (“carbon capture and storage”).
Scale, speed, and cost are the main barriers to all these technologies and approaches. In the United States, strong state- and federal-level policies—and large-scale investment in research and development—are crucial.
Act
The best policy ideas in the world aren’t worth much if we don’t have activists, experts, and everyday people fighting for change. From school groups to churches; from corporate boardrooms to mayors and local leaders: we need action.
The Union of Concerned Scientists has worked on global warming solutions for over 30 years. Our experts and activists are campaigning to cut emissions from the energy and transportation sectors; highlighting climate impacts; and fighting for accountability from major fossil fuel companies.
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category. There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this Post. If a category heading does not appear, it means there was no news reported from this category today.
(Just a reminder: When linked, the access to the media story will be underlined. If there is no link to a media story of interest you can still copy and paste the headline and lead line into your browser to find the article you are seeking. Hopefully this will never happen.)
“We have a robust restart plan which will include countless projects, plant inspections, equipment upgrades and modifications, acquiring new fuel. All …
Comments243 · Albanese government ‘betrayed’ every Jewish person in Australia: Rowan Dean · ‘How far things have fallen’: Harry and Meghan not invited …
