There seems to be only one major “LLAW’s All Things Nuclear” story today and that is Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s speech at the United Nations. Here is the text from The Guardian via the Associated Press . Make of it what your will . . . llaw
Top Russia diplomat warns west not to fight ‘nuclear power’ in UN speech
Sergei Lavrov accuses west of using Ukraine ‘to defeat’ Russia days after Putin shifts Moscow’s nuclear posture
Associated Press
Sat 28 Sep 2024 14.57 EDT
Russia’s top diplomat warned on Saturday against “trying to fight to victory with a nuclear power”, delivering a UN general assembly speech packed with condemnations of what Russia sees as western machinations in Ukraine and elsewhere – including inside the United Nations itself.
Three days after Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, aired a shift in his country’s nuclear doctrine, his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, accused the west of using Ukraine – which Russia invaded in February 2022 – as a tool to try “to defeat” Moscow strategically, and “preparing Europe for it to also throw itself into this suicidal escapade”.
“I’m not going to talk here about the senselessness and the danger of the very idea of trying to fight to victory with a nuclear power, which is what Russia is,” he said.
The specter of nuclear threats and confrontation has hung over the war in Ukraine since its start. Shortly before the invasion, Putin reminded the world that his country was “one of the most powerful nuclear states”, and he put its nuclear forces on high alert shortly thereafter. His nuclear rhetoric has ramped up and toned down at various points since.
On Wednesday, Putin said that if attacked by any country supported by a nuclear-armed nation, Russia will consider that a joint attack.
He didn’t specify whether that would bring a nuclear response, but he stressed that Russia could use nuclear weapons in response to a conventional assault that posed a “critical threat to our sovereignty”.
The United States and the European Union called his statements “irresponsible”.
The new posture was seen as a message to the US and other western countries as Ukraine seeks their go-ahead to strike Russia with longer-range weapons. The Biden administration this week announced an additional $2.7bn in military aid for Ukraine, but it doesn’t include the type of long-range arms that Zelenskyy is seeking, nor a green light to use such weapons to strike deep into Russia.
There was no immediate response to Lavrov’s address from the US, which had a junior diplomat taking notes in its assembly seat as he spoke.
More than two-and-a-half years into the fighting, Russia is making slow but continuing gains in Ukraine’s east. Ukraine has repeatedly struck Russian territory with missiles and drones and embarrassed Moscow with an audacious incursion by troops in a border region last month.
The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has pushed what he calls a peace formula to end the war. Provisions include expelling all Russian forces from Ukraine, ensuring accountability for war crimes, freeing prisoners of war and deportees, and more.
Lavrov dismissed Zelenskyy’s formula as a “doomed ultimatum”.
Meanwhile, Brazil and China have been floating a peace plan that entails holding a peace conference with both Ukraine and Russia and not expanding the battlefield or otherwise escalating fighting. Chinese and Brazilian diplomats have been promoting the plan during the assembly and attracted a dozen other nations, mostly in Africa or Latin America, to join a group of “friends for peace” in Ukraine.
Lavrov said at a news conference on Saturday that Russia was ready to provide assistance and advice to the group, adding: “It’s important for their proposals to be underpinned by the realities and not just be taken from some abstract conversations.”
He said resolving the conflict hinges on fixing its “root causes” – what Moscow contends is the Kyiv government’s repression of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine, and Nato’s expansion in eastern Europe over the years, which Russia sees as a threat to its security.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
… Things have gotten really overwhelming’ · Remembering Maggie Smith: ‘Every day she and Judi would swim in their Victorian swimsuits and every day we …
Lavrov accused the United States of seeking “to preserve their hegemony and to govern everything.” He pointed to NATO’s deepening relations with four …
… all-out nuclear war, “the living will envy the dead.” UNIDIR’s Podvig is cautious about revealing his own calculations. “I just try not to think about …
… fight to victory with a nuclear power.” Addressing the U.N. General Assembly, Lavrov took aim at backers of Ukraine who support Kyiv’s peace proposal.
The specter of nuclear threats and confrontation has hung over the war in Ukraine since its start. … nuclear-armed nation, Russia will consider that a …
… attack backed by a nuclear power to be an attack by that nuclear power. … Ukraine. Related content. Red lines. Putin’s nuclear threats: empty rhetoric ..
How on planet Earth can we continue to claim that nuclear energy is clean energy? It is without question the most filthy form of energy there is, and those who ignore that fact are intentionally leading the lemming-like human population astray. Those who are in responsible positions are creating a thumb-sucking pacifier for an unaware public everywhere all around the planet.
We are already in deep, deep, trouble with the disposal of nuclear waste that seems to have nowhere to go in the business of waste disposal so it goes nowhere, but it is the most dangerous waste product by far of all waste that should be dealt with as the highest of priorities rather than adding to and ignoring the already earth-threatening substances, including waste products like greenhouse gasses that we release into the air all day everyday. Nuclear energy will not save us from global warming/ climate change. It only increases our environmental threats. Meanwhile we store nuclear waste substances like plutonium and other radioactive waste that can remain life threatening dangerous for thousands of years. Yet they are stored, often in plain sight, at or near many existing and operating nuclear power plants and rather than protect ourselves from nuclear waste we want to create even more.
And as for rehabbing old nuclear power plants, they were shut down in their old age for a reason. The reason is that they no longer are deemed able to safely control radiation from escaping the confines of their reactors. But somehow, some way, our demand for more power for all kinds of industry including AI of all things, is out of control due to corporate greed and public consumption of never-ending new comfort products. The path we are on ends at a vertical cliff we are heading headlong over, into a bottomless pit that has no way out. ~llaw
U.S. Energy Secretary Highlights Nuclear Option for Climate Action
Published Sep 27, 2024 at 3:07 PM EDT
00:20
AI: Climate Hero or Villain? A Newsweek Horizons Event
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm told Newsweek that her department is helping big tech and electric utility companies bring more nuclear power to the nation’s grid to meet the rapidly increasing energy demand for data centers.
“That is absolutely one of the pieces of the clean power solution that data centers should look at,” Granholm said in an interview Thursday during Climate Week NYC.
The boom in AI has triggered a massive expansion of bigger and more powerful data centers that consume enormous amounts of electricity. That growth challenges both big tech and power suppliers who want to meet new demand while reducing greenhouse gas emissions from their data operations and power generation facilities.
Despite ambitious climate objectives at many big tech companies, emissions from Google and Microsoft are rising due to AI’s growth.
U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said nuclear power is “absolutely one of the pieces of the clean power solution that data centers should look at.” The boom in AI data centers is driving up demand… More Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty
Granholm cited a recent projection from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation showing a 15 percent increase in demand on the nation’s electric grid just from data centers. However, Granholm said the power demand from the tech sector also provides a chance to spur the development of more low-carbon energy sources, including nuclear.
“We don’t really view the rise of AI and data centers as a challenge or an anomaly, but really more of an opportunity,” she said. “It really is a chance to revitalize communities with data centers.”
Granholm said the Inflation Reduction Act includes incentives for the reuse of sites that were once used for fossil fuel generation, such as coal-fired power plants or coal mines that closed. Data center developers find those old heavy industry facilities attractive because they have the needed electric transmission infrastructure in place.
Similarly, she said, some nuclear power facilities that had closed for economic reasons are getting a fresh look.
“The existing nuclear sites—60 gigawatts worth of power, potentially—we think it’s a real opportunity for communities and it’s an opportunity for improved grid management,” Granholm said.
Renewable energy sources are growing dramatically but the intermittent supply of wind and solar power does not always match times when electricity is in high demand, a challenge for grid managers. Nuclear power’s advantage is that it provides a reliable baseload of energy, she said.
Granholm said the DOE is developing new nuclear technology while reviving older facilities as well. Nuclear plants in Michigan and Pennsylvania that closed years ago could be coming back online in the coming years, due in part to the way data center demand is changing the economics of electricity. Granholm said the DOE is working to get those idled reactors running again.
“We have a golden nuclear regulatory regime in this country, and we know we can do it safely,” Granholm said.
Climate Week Panel on AI and Energy
The twin issues of AI and nuclear power were recurring themes this week at gatherings and announcements during Climate Week NYC, including an event Newsweek hosted Wednesday evening.
Microsoft’s Bobby Hollis (left) discussed Three Mile Island during the climate discussion on September 25 at Newsweek headquarters. Marleen Moise
Microsoft VP for Energy Bobby Hollis told the audience about his company’s announcement last week to purchase more than 800 megawatts of nuclear power from the energy company Constellation. The agreement could allow Constellation to restart a closed reactor at what is probably the country’s best-known nuclear facility, Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania.
“We’re hoping there will be a nuclear resurgence,” Hollis told the audience at Newsweek‘s New York headquarters.
“AI has accelerated and increased the need for carbon-free energy, so that requires us to look outside the box,” Hollis said.
In 1979, Three Mile Island was the scene of the most serious accident in U.S. nuclear power history when the facility’s Unit 2 reactor partially melted down. The facility’s other reactor was unaffected and stayed in operation until it closed in 2019.
The Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant in Middletown, Pennsylvania. An agreement with Microsoft could restart a closed reactor at the facility to help power data centers. Jeff Fusco/Getty Images
Duke Energy Managing Director of ESG & Sustainability Heather Quinley said her company, which serves 8.4 million electricity customers in the southeast and Midwest, is looking to new nuclear power as part of its path to cleaner electricity.
She said power demand is growing rapidly in the region Duke serves.
“We’re seeing significant load growth from data centers and advanced manufacturing,” Quinley told the audience, adding that data centers will account for 25 percent of new projects Duke will power.
Duke entered an “Accelerating Clean Energy” memorandum of understanding this year with Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Nucor, a steelmaking company, to develop nuclear and renewable clean energy, on-site generation for those large-scale energy consumers.
Shifting Attitudes on Nuclear Power
Granholm said the Microsoft agreement to restart a reactor at Three Mile Island is an example of shifting attitudes on nuclear power. The accident in 1979 elevated public anxiety about health and safety risks and opposition to nuclear power became a central tenet of environmental activism.
The climate crisis, however, has forced a reconsideration of nuclear power’s role to decarbonize our energy supply and reduce the greenhouse gases warming the planet.
“If you look at public opinion polls, there seems to be a greater acceptance of nuclear today than there has been in the past, and I’m very encouraged by that,” Granholm said.
A coming generation of new, smaller nuclear reactors will offer more flexibility for how and where those units are put to use, she said, and the DOE national laboratories are leading research on a completely different type of nuclear power, nuclear fusion.
Unlike fission—the splitting of uranium or plutonium atoms to release power—fusion occurs when two atoms slam together to form a heavier one. Fusion reactions hold the promise of enormous clean energy production but require high pressure and temperature to join the nuclei together.
DOE scientists achieved breakthroughs with fusion in the laboratory in 2021 and 2022 and Granholm said fusion energy could become reality sooner than many had expected. She said that President Joe Biden has set a “decadal vision” for the first commercial fusion plant.
“There’s a couple of companies that are really leaning in with a lot of investment support from the private sector,” she added. “So, it might even be sooner than that.”
Granholm said that with the advances in nuclear power and the rapid growth of renewable energy sources she is optimistic about the country’s ability to produce power while also meeting climate targets.
“This year we will add 60 gigawatts of clean power onto the grid,” Granholm said. “So, we will be able to meet that demand.”
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There is one Yellowstone Caldera bonus story available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
… nuclear state as a “joint attack against the Russian Federation.” … Moscow has been making not-so-veiled nuclear threats throughout its war in Ukraine …
Former President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, arrives to speak about the tax code and manufacturing at the Johnny Mercer Theatre Civic Center on Tuesday in Savannah, Georgia. Evan Vucci/AP
This article plainly points out that we humans have a made a huge mess of managing energy over the years, and that the situation is only going to get worse — especially if Trump, who operates solely on the a thoughtless ‘spur of the moment’ dimly lit path with no thought about the repercussions of taking the wrong way at every junction or even ignoring a critical emergency ‘detour’ sign.
The energy policy he will demand to use at his disposal is apparent and likely illegal. It will be based on a wartime-level exercise of presidential authority, which will only increase the surging difficulty and world-wide confusion of energy production, source, and use, which has recently become the most controversial and difficult issue for cooperative existence on planet Earth. Nuclear everything, including war and power generation, has become the vital issue, and those very serious related problems are not going to be resolved anytime soon. ~llaw
Because the 2024 election is only a few extremely nervous days away, I highly recommend this article sponsored by Politico . . .
What would a Trump 2.0 ‘energy emergency’ look like? History offers clues.
By Peter Behr | 09/27/2024 07:23 AM EDT
An expansive reading of Trump’s recent statements on energy implies a wartime-level exercise of presidential authority.
Former President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, arrives to speak about the tax code and manufacturing at the Johnny Mercer Theatre Civic Center on Tuesday in Savannah, Georgia. Evan Vucci/AP
Officials under then-President Donald Trump had an idea for how to stop America’s aging coal and nuclear plants from closing: Call the closures a threat to national security.
Under the 2018 plan, the Department of Energy would declare an “emergency” and use existing authority to order utilities to buy two years’ worth of power from coal and nuclear generators most at risk of shutting down.
Marked “Privileged & Confidential,” the memo dated May 29 set up a planned meeting a few days later inside the National Security Council.
The White House confirmed that Trump wanted the policy. But when the memo leaked, it hit like a ton of bricks. Free market Republicans saw the rescue plan for dozens of older, smaller, money-losing coal plants as just the kind of heavy-handed federal intrusion they stood against. Trump’s policy would put White House executive authority behind coal-burners in competition with cheaper power from natural gas and cleaner sources such as solar and wind energy.
Six years later, Trump the candidate — vowing to reverse parts of President Joe Biden’s largest-ever federal investment in clean energy — is again reviving the idea of declaring an “energy emergency” and using a second Trump presidency to expand fossil fuel power generation. This time, it’s to keep up with the competition.
“We will build new power plants,” he said during a stop in Savannah, Georgia, this week. “China is already building plants, electric plants, and we have a problem because we have things called environmental impact statements and various things that you have to go through. I will get them approved so fast.”
In various forms under negotiation on Capitol Hill, speedier permits for energy projects already have bipartisan support. But the prospect that Trump would take an approach similar to his plan in 2018 to intervene directly in the workings of the nation’s complex system of electricity markets is raising new questions.
Starting early this summer, the Trump campaign locked onto rising electricity prices as a problem to pin on Biden’s economic policy. He promised to cut energy costs in half inside of a year from taking office. And he’s promising to do so as Silicon Valley’s cloud computing giants and U.S. industrial growth demand more power from the grid.
In New York City this month, Trump applied the national emergency idea to oil and gas production. It is time to “drill, baby, drill” to exploit the “liquid gold” of the nation’s hydrocarbon deposits, Trump declared, as he mocked Democrats’ warnings about the planet-warming carbon emissions from coal, oil and natural gas.
Under Biden, money and policies have tilted markets toward making plans for a more dramatic shift to clean energy. Coal accounts for just about 16 percent of U.S. generation today. Natural gas is now the dominant source of electricity, and solar power and battery storage are growing rapidly.
For oil’s part, the United States is producing record volumes, even as auto companies pump billions of dollars into electric vehicle technology that would make Americans less dependent on the fuel.
‘We will build new power plants’
No U.S. president has said that “we will build new power plants” in the way Trump did since Franklin Roosevelt pushed the Tennessee Valley Authority Act through Congress in 1933 to bring economic development and flood control to blighted counties in southern Appalachia during the Great Depression.
Trump’s campaign staff did not reply to requests for details about the former president’s plans, beginning with whether “we” means Republicans in Washington, the power industry, the American people, or Trump himself.
Coupled with his pledges to open the taps further on U.S. gas and oil production and create new tax subsidies for manufacturers to build on public land (potentially powered with new streams of natural gas), an expansive reading of Trump’s brief statement implies .
Could Trump do it with a win Nov. 5 and the backing of new majorities in the House and Senate that he led to victory?
In theory, he would have to get GOP leaders to suspend the filibuster rule, create new laws to build power plants on public lands and subsidize gas-fired generation, and gut clean air rules and other environmental protections.
The electricity from Trump’s new power plants would most likely require thousands of miles of new high-voltage lines across state lines that now are watchfully guarded by governors.
“It would be the most aggressive building program [on] energy since TVA,” said Mike McKenna, a veteran Washington energy lobbyist who was a deputy assistant to the president for legislative affairs in the Trump White House.
Trump would have to activate an aggressive use of federal eminent domain to override state objections to building new power lines and gas pipelines, rewrite the Federal Power Act and challenge nearly a century of complex regulatory rulings tested by judges all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“I’m not sure of the details, but it fits right in with his approach to economic development — lower taxes, less regulation, more and less expensive energy,” McKenna said. “Given the data center demand, we are going to need more power plants and pipelines.”
Nearly half of the states, mostly run by Democratic governors, support federal action to dramatically shrink power plant greenhouse gas emissions in the next two decades. Some of the goals are written into statutes. Trump’s vision would surely doom effective federal action against extreme weather catastrophes from a hotter planet, according to scientific consensus.
Today, nearly all of the largest utilities in the Edison Electric Institute have long-term climate action goals.
TVA never lived up to the hopes of Roosevelt and progressives for public power that would create a “yardstick” for fair and competitive electricity prices in response to the power of huge U.S. utility holding companies, historians agree. But it was an enormous act of governmental authority that was furiously opposed by conservative Republicans and the power industry, led by utility executive Wendell Willkie, who became FDR’s 1940 presidential opponent.
The full exercise of presidential power over the electric power, gas, coal and oil sectors did not come into Roosevelt’s control until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, launching the U.S. into World War II.
Short of war, however, the law still gives the president executive authority to intervene in the energy economy under other scenarios.
Action on ‘Day 1’
Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, is no stranger to the politics of presidential emergency declarations.
Climate hawks in Congress and environmental groups that helped elect Biden and Harris in 2020 have pushed for a “climate emergency” declaration. Nothing like it has ever been tried. But in theory it would open up powers to slash oil exports, or boost factory orders for clean energy technology or direct more zero-carbon energy production.
“I have continuously preached the need for a climate emergency; I tried to get Biden to do it on Day 1; I‘d love for Kamala to do it on Day 1,” Oregon Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley said. “But I don’t think that’s what she’s focused on right now.”
Biden and Harris have made no suggestion they think an emergency declaration to address climate change is on the table.
The only public clues to where Trump stands on the question of emergency authority go back to his presidency.
Trump took office in 2017 promising to help out “my coal miners” as thanks to voters in Pennsylvania and parts of the Midwest and mountain states. After meeting with a coal and a utility executive shortly after his inauguration, Trump reportedly gave orders that a senior White House official should “do whatever these two want,” according to the late Robert Murray, who was chief executive of Murray Energy Corp.
“The Trump administration’s efforts to bail out aging and uncompetitive baseload plants, particularly those powered by coal, began almost immediately,” noted Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at Harvard Law School, and Sharon Jacobs, a Berkeley School of Law professor, in a 2019 paper.
The first attempt was a request from former Energy Secretary Rick Perry to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to tilt power markets toward coal. When the commission with appointees from both parties unanimously opposed the secretary’s idea, Perry’s policy staff looked to executive authority.
The 2018 memo to Trump and his national security team said emergency powers could be invoked under section 202(c) of the 1935 Federal Power Act. Congress strengthened the authority in 2015.
The section grants broad powers to order the production or delivery of power “to serve the public interest” if electricity shortages are deemed an emergency by the secretary of Energy. Under those conditions, power plants can run at maximum capacity and out of compliance with pollution limits.
The first use of the authority came in 1941, when the government ordered Florida Power & Light to keep power plants running as a massive military and industrial buildup began six months before the Pearl Harbor attack, according to an analysis by Harvard Law School graduate Benjamin Rolsma, scheduled for publication in the Connecticut Law Review.
The authority has been used sparingly since the end of the war. During Biden’s presidency, DOE authorized grid operators to max out generation as heat ravaged California and as extreme weather conditions shut down power plants in the eastern U.S. and in Texas.
‘Keeps me up at night’
A Trump victory in November could write a new chapter for the authority.
“Section 202(c) explicitly mentions wartime emergencies, but its limits are unclear,” said Travis Fisher, an economist at the Cato Institute and a former DOE official who helped develop Trump administration policies on electricity.
The Trump administration’s DOE policy memo from 2018 argued that DOE authority was designed “not merely to react to actual disasters, but to act in a preventative manner.”
“The statute provides that the DOE could, upon its own motion, with or without notice, determine an emergency exists based on energy shortages or other causes,” Fisher told POLITICO’s E&E News. “The idea that the DOE could invoke 202(c) and create a new national energy policy out of an alleged emergency keeps me up at night.”
Fisher said struggling nuclear plants might be best positioned to lobby Congress or the administration for more support.
“A blanket 202(c) order — premised on either a climate or national security emergency — could keep every existing nuclear reactor operating. I strongly disagree with using 202(c) in that fashion, but I could imagine either party doing it,” Fisher said.
Rolsma described a different scenario: “Section 202(c)’s role is set to expand,” Rolsma wrote. “Climate change and the ongoing energy transition, by disrupting the way the electrical grid has historically operated, will ratchet up the pressure” for its use.
Because the electric grid will rely on coal and gas for years to come, the emergency authority could also get a new life if Harris wins. Biden’s EPA has adopted the Federal Power Act section as a safety valve that could keep some fossil plants open to assure grid reliability while others are forced to capture and dispose of their carbon emissions or shut down.
Along with its repeated warning about a shrinking electric power reserve supply, the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC), the interstate grid’s security monitor, has urged that the 202(c) authority be used to keep particular fossil plants running when essential to keep the lights on.
“The big question is, are you going to use this tool surgically or try to pursue it more broadly?” said Devin Hartman, director of energy and environmental policy at the libertarian R Street Institute.
“The more this strays from the underlying identification of reliability needs, the more suspect it will be legally,” he said, “and the worst type of policy it will be. So you really have to contain and use these things sparingly.”
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are three Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
And NATO Allies and the United States and also all the nuclear powers, France and the United Kingdom have delivered weapons to Ukraine before the full …
Moscow has been making not-so-veiled nuclear threats throughout its war in Ukraine. Alexander Nemenov/AFP/Getty Images. The bottom line for changes to …
IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi attended the UN Summit of the Future with world leaders in New York this week and addressed its Plenary meeting. The Summit adopted a “Pact for the Future” designed to improve the present and build a better future. Read more →
Liberia has moved to fast track its accession to nuclear safety treaties, after IAEA experts helped prevent a radiological incident from shutting down the country’s main hospital. Read more →
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Government of Honduras and the Government of Japan have joined forces to expand radiotherapy services and improve cancer care in the Republic of Honduras under the IAEA’s flagship Rays of Hope initiative. Read more →
“I want to contribute to narrowing the energy equity gap to ensure more people can access affordable, sustainable and clean energy,” says Gloria Kwong reflecting on her work at the IAEA. Read more →
The following story is not in this edition of TODAY’S NUCLEAR WORLD’S NEWS, but I am posting it here this evening because it caught my attention because I began my career in the nuclear/uranium industry in the fall of 1969 as an accountant at the largest uranium mine in the state. I have many questions about the reality of all of the glamour and hope being poured into the state with the speculation involving Bill Gate’s experimental SMR (Small Nuclear Reactor)Terra Power near Kemmerer along with the much hoped for rebirth of profitable uranium mining in Wyoming (or anywhere else for that matter). Cheap, high-grade, uranium ore has been used up long ago and the lower the ore grade, the more expensive it is to mine, mill, and refine. So not only is the end-product extremely dangerous it is extremely expensive, and the costs will continue to grow so long as the nuclear power industry exists.
Then too, the entire nuclear industry seems to have forgotten or ignored the fact that uranium is not a renewable fuel, but rather a rare mineral element mined and milled (and enriched) product that is very expensive to produce and fuel nuclear reactors. It is more rare as a an energy producing product than coal, oil, natural gas, or any other of the usual fuels used for producing power —therefore extremely expensive to produce and therefore more expensive to the end user such as your local power company. It is also a non-renewable product like other fossil fuels of course, and herein lies the crux of the problem. Uranium will never resolve the global warming/climate change problem.
So at least some of the newly-designed future SMR plants, e.g. TerraPower, eventually hope to use fuel produced from what has always been considered as an ore far too low-grade rare earth element called thorium in order to have a sufficient quantity of fuel to operate for the foreseeable future. But at what price? Uranium has bounced between $100 and $70 a pound recently. and low-grade uranium and/or thorium will drive the price per pound well into the hundreds and even thousands of dollars per pound range. When I began my career in 1969 uranium yellowcake (or U3O8) was $8 per pound, and thorium was never considered economic to mine and, and probably, if the industry had any sense of practical economics, never will be.
So the most important question, other than the deadly danger of human and other life’s man-caused 6th Extinction from all nuclear fuel products like nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors, will be what happens if we blindly continue on this path? Given the unlikely event of an accident-free, or war-free, or terrorism-free lifetimes of use all around the world is this one — is there enough economic uranium to go around as the industry experiences it’s much sought-after rebirth, and if so, for how long? The answer is a resounding, “No!” ~llaw
Texas-Based Uranium Energy Buys Wyoming Processing Plant For $175 Million
Texas-based Uranium Energy Corp. is making yet another acquisition in Wyoming, snapping up the state’s only conventional uranium mill for $175 million. The move sets it up to be the largest domestic producer of uranium.
A satellite plat at Uranium Energy Corp’s Christensen Ranch site in Wyoming. TerraPower’s new nuclear plant planned for Kemmerer could run on Wyoming uranium. (Courtesy Uranium Energy Corp)
Texas-based Uranium Energy was already North America’s largest uranium-focused company with several Wyoming assets in play, but it’s about to get an even bigger Wyoming footprint with the $175 million acquisition of the Cowboy State’s only conventional uranium processing mill and its assets.
The mill, which is about 40 miles northwest of Rawlins, belonged to British-Australian company Rio Tinto, a global mining and metallurgy giant. The mill operated from 1981 to 1983, and has a licensed capacity of 4.1 million pounds of yellowcake refined uranium per year, or 3,000 tons per day.
The purchase includes around 175 million pounds of existing uranium resources, ready and waiting to be captured.
Taken in concert with Uranium Energy’s 20 or so other sites in Wyoming, this is a move that further solidifies the state’s groundbreaking position as ground zero for an innovative nuclear energy renaissance.
Not only are resources set to be mined here, but used here as well. Bill Gates-backed TerraPower has already started constructing its proposed Natrium nuclear plant in Kemmerer, while Wyoming awarded a two-year contract to nuclear submarine power plant maker BWXT to examine the feasibility of deploying 50 MW micro-reactors.
“These are exciting times for the Wyoming uranium industry, and we’re on the edge of another boom,” Wyoming Mining Association Executive Director Travis Deti told Cowboy State Daily. “What we’re seeing today is a growing interest in reliability. Fossil fuels and nuclear power fueled by Wyoming uranium are going to be critical to meet the projected increased electricity demand to power the growth in artificial intelligence and data centers in the very near future.
“And when you’re talking about emissions, nuclear is really your best option to provide emission free power with necessary reliability. This is something wind and solar simply cannot do.”
When It Comes To Uranium, Wyoming Is King
Wyoming has the largest uranium reserves in the United States but, initially at least, TerraPower had told Cowboy State Daily it would likely have to source its uranium from Ohio or New Mexico.
Not long after that, however, Uranium Energy announced that it had signed a memorandum of understanding with the TerraPower nuclear plant that Bill Gates is building in Kemmerer to supply the 345 MW sodium-cooled fast reactor with uranium from Wyoming after all.
Some further processing of that yellowcake will be required, and that is still likely to take place outside of Wyoming — at least for now.
“There’s a converter in Illinois which is in the U.S., and there’s one in Canada and another one in France,” UEC’s Senior Vice President of U.S. Operations Brent Berg said. “So there, the product will go through the next stage of processing, and then it goes to an enrichment plant, where they enrich the Uranium 235 content.”
After that, it will be formed into pellets that could then return to Wyoming for use by the TerraPower nuclear plant.
Whether all of those additional processing steps could eventually happen in Wyoming wasn’t something Berg could comment about Tuesday.
“It would be great to have all of those things right in the state,” he acknowledged.
For now, the company is focused on a rapid restart of uranium production in Wyoming.
“This acquisition really provides some synergies with shared infrastructure as well as project personnel expertise that made a lot of sense for the company,” Berg said. “We recently restarted production at Christensen Ranch and Irigaray operations. This is just another tool in the toolbox that will be not only beneficial for UEC, but for Wyoming.”
Bolt-On Acquisitions Not Rocket Science
Given that these new acres from Rio Tinto are adjacent to areas UEC is already exploring, it wasn’t rocket science to pick up the property.
In addition to the bolt-on resources and the licensed uranium mill, the acquisition includes a database of more than 6 million feet of drilling for new projects.
“This allows us to really look at those properties in greater detail than we could have in the past,” Berg said.
While UEC has started some preliminary uranium production, the company is not yet ready to report production volumes yet. That’s something Berg said it anticipates doing closer to the end of the year.
But he does expect the company will have the greatest amount of uranium resource in the U.S., as well as the most licensed production capacity, positioning it to become the “leading uranium developer, not only in Wyoming, but in the United States.”
Given what Berg has seen lately — with even the mothballed 3 Mile Island coming back to life — he’s optimistic about what the future holds for both UEC and Wyoming, which has one of the world’s richest uranium deposits.
“I think more and more people are seeing nuclear power as clean base-load energy,” he said. “And I think it just makes a lot of sense for the United States.”
On Tuesday, uranium was trading for just over $79 per pound, down from a peak of more than $105 earlier this year.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There is oneYellowstone Caldera bonus story available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
Russia’s current published nuclear doctrine, set out in a 2020 decree by Putin, says Russia may use nuclear weapons in case of a nuclear attack by an …
At a meeting with the Russian Security Council, Putin said that in light of an “emergence of new sources of military threats and risks for Russia and …
The following article from Newsweek contains no new detailed information, except for Zelenskyy’s appearance in the U.S. to update the United Nations and the United States on a first-hand, perhaps pleading, basis accenting the seriousness of the potential Russian attack on the Ukraine attack on their three nuclear power plants. I am wondering if the U.S. and NATO can come together with a plan to prevent a war-scale attack on the three plants in time to prevent Russia’s ultimate intent, whatever it is.
What is obvious to me is that both Russia and Ukraine know the terrible danger to a huge area of Ukraine and Europe should use these plants as all-out weapons of a genocide style nuclear war as has been implied several times before on prior destructive attacks, including destroying a dam for cooling-water provisions for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, that has been attacked numerous times by the Russian military. (And by the way, the Zelenskyy name has two ‘y’s at the end.) ~llaw
Russia is seeking to target three Ukrainian nuclear power plants, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has told the United Nations.
In addressing the U.N. General Assembly, Zelensky warned that, if Vladimir Putin was prepared to resort to such a move, “it means nothing you value matters to Moscow.” Newsweek has contacted the Kremlin by email for comment on the claims.
The Ukrainian president did not specify which plants were under threat, but there are three operating nuclear power plants on Ukrainian-held territory. These are located in Rivne and Khmelnytskyi in the west and Pivdennoukrainsk in the south of the country.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky speaks during “Summit of the Future” on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, September 23, 2024. He warned of the nuclear threat… More TIMOTHY A. CLARY/Getty Images
Since the start of Putin’s full-scale invasion, the threat that the war in Ukraine could have a nuclear dimension has been expressed variously through threats by Kremlin propagandists and Moscow’s statements of its weapons capabilities.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said on September 21 that possible targets for Russian forces included open distribution devices and transmission substations, which are crucial for the safe operation of nuclear infrastructure.
Separately, Zelensky had told ABC News that Russia was using Chinese satellites to photograph Ukraine’s nuclear sites, and added that “there is a threat of strikes against the nuclear objects.”
During his address to the U.N., Zelensky said that “this kind of Russian cynicism will keep striking if it’s given any room in the world,” adding that the U.N. Charter “leaves no room for that and that’s why the Peace Formula leaves no room either.”
Zelensky called on U.N. countries to support a second peace summit “to end the war” following the first event in June in which Russia did not attend.
Zelensky is in the U.S. to tout his “victory plan,” which he has not clarified publicly but will present to President Joe Biden, U.S. Congress, and presidential contenders Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
Anatol Lieven is director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft think tank based in Washington, D.C. He told Newsweek that, for Zelensky, victory is defined as the withdrawal of Moscow’s forces from all the Ukrainian territory they now occupy.
“There is nothing in the existing, or feasible, balance of forces and resources between Ukraine and Russia to suggest that this is possible, even should greatly increased Western aid be forthcoming,” Lieven said.
However, Kyiv’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region showed that Ukraine was capable of counterattacks, and the territory it has captured was “a potential bargaining chip in future negotiations, not a harbinger of Ukrainian victory.”
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
Nuclear Power Plants · Hazardous Materials · Terrorism · Drought · Extreme Heat … page for information on preparing, responding, and recovering during …
So, this discussion spreads some light for the average non-military or political citizen’s knowledge on the remarkably indefinite finer points that quietly go far beyond the agreed upon weapons systems of the Ukraine, U.S, internal skirmish over what, when, why, and where Ukraine can expect help from the U.S., the United Kingdom, and NATO. All that along with the question of who should be our next U.S. president . . .
The depth of the issue is ultimately far greater than this discussion indicates, but I posted it this evening because the elements of it have serious implications concerning who our next president is. Kamala Harris, of course, will push to continue to support Ukraine’s democratic republic, while Trump is obviously against supporting not only our own or Ukraine’s form of government but also obviously on Russia’s side both militarily and politically.
In my book, that means that Trump, as many of us already clearly know, is a traitor to America and our form of government. Remember when he said that Putin was a ‘genius’ for invading Ukraine’ not so long ago? This goes far deeper than the words, and Trump’s actions should he be elected could well be the downfall of our government we like to refer to as, “by and for the People”, not to mention a nuclear WWIII. ~llaw
Weapons systems continue to be a sticking point between the U.S. and Ukraine
Earlier today, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited an ammunition plant in Scranton, Pa. The plant produces some of the most vital pieces of equipment for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. Since the war began, the U.S. and its NATO allies have been slowly and incrementally providing military assistance to Ukraine. And in each step, the Biden administration has been cautious about both the weaponry and the training it supplied, hoping to prevent escalating the war that Russia started.
This has frustrated Ukrainian officials and its most ardent supporters in the U.S. The latest debate amid all of this? For months, the Ukrainians have been pressing for American long-range missiles with the ability to strike deep into Russia, a move that some officials fear could place the U.S. and its allies in direct conflict with Russia. NPR’s Tom Bowman joins me now to talk about this. Hey, Tom.
TOM BOWMAN, BYLINE: Hey, Scott.
DETROW: So I want to get to all the context in a moment. But first, let’s directly start with this latest question. Throughout the conflict, the Biden administration has been cautious in approving American-made missiles hitting targets deeper into Russia. Do we think that request is ultimately going to be approved?
BOWMAN: You know, it’s really hard to say at this point, Scott. We keep hearing it’s under discussion. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met almost two weeks ago with his British counterpart, Foreign Secretary David Lammy. And Blinken seemed to indicate it would happen.
ANTONY BLINKEN: We have adjusted and adapted as needs have changed, as the battlefield has changed, and I have no doubt that we’ll continue to do that.
BOWMAN: So, again, it sounds like they’re moving in that direction. And, of course, President Biden later had a meeting with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and talked about allowing long-range weapons to be used. But it appears, again, there’s still deliberations and no final decision. Now, Britain seems to be leaning forward on this issue because they see the recent move by Iran to provide hundreds of missiles to Russia – it really changed the debate. The Brits have long-range missiles, too. It’s called the Storm Shadow. And the French, by the way, have their own, the SCALP. But here’s the thing, Scott – they both have American-made components, and therefore would require U.S. approval.
DETROW: And even as, over the last few years, we have seen some of the initial hard-line warnings from Russia not play out – right? – if you do X, that we will consider it a grave threat; if you do Y, we’ll consider it a grave threat – it’s hard not to see this particular one as having some merit. We are talking about missiles partially American-made striking deep into Russia. And Putin has said that would be a move that would effectively mean Russia is now fighting NATO.
BOWMAN: No. That’s absolutely right. And again, from the start, the U.S. has been slowly ramping up military support to Ukraine while always weighing how Russia would respond. Putin has hinted at using tactical nuclear weapons, which gets everyone’s attention. These are real concerns. But Putin, again, has made similar threats after the U.S. allowed, you know, Patriot missiles, F-16s. So a lot of this people say is bluster. Now, the current issue is allowing what’s called ATACMS, an acronym that – you know, military loves acronyms. It stands for Army Tactical Missile System. Get this – it can travel 190 miles.
Right now, the U.S. is allowing Ukraine only to use them in Crimea to strike Russian military targets, and they’ve been quite successful. Now, again, getting back to the British and the French long-range missiles, they can travel about 155 miles. So you can imagine the Ukrainians are pressing for that American weapon to use deep inside Russia, which can go, you know, farther.
DETROW: Yeah. Now, when you and I have had versions of this conversation with different points of – will the U.S. allow this weapon system or that weapon system to go to Ukraine? – you have at times pointed out that sometimes it was more of a symbolic conversation than something that was really central to the war. So I’m wondering with these missiles, how necessary are these long-range weapons for Ukraine and are there sufficient targets that they’d like to hit?
BOWMAN: You know, it kind of depends who you talk with. The Institute for the Study of War says there are some 250 targets. They could be attacked with these long-range U.S. weapons, everything from airfields to oil and weapons depots, armored vehicles. And these attacks could also hurt Russia’s ability to launch glide bombs into Ukrainian cities. We’ve been seeing a lot of that. But some of the Pentagon will tell you that the Russians have moved a lot of this, even beyond the range of those longer-range U.S. missiles. And defense officials also say that Ukrainians have also used most of their long-range missiles hitting those Russian sites in Crimea. They don’t have many left.
But then the question is, of course, why can’t you just send them more? The U.S. has thousands of these missiles and want to hold them in case, let’s say, the U.S. is faced with an adversary, you know, military action in the Pacific, Middle East or Europe. So, you know, and again, that’s a question that’s out there. Can you provide more? And we still don’t have an answer to that.
DETROW: Let’s say these get approved. Would it change the course of the war? Would it have a – make a big difference?
BOWMAN: Well, no. No one is saying that, but it clearly will continue to hurt Russia, its war machine. Some officials are saying to Ukraine, listen, you’re doing a good job with your drones in attacks deep inside Russia. Scott, just last week, a swarm of Ukrainian drones hit a massive weapons depot 300 miles inside Russia, just west of Moscow, so talk about deep inside Russia. And this weapons depot had also – get this – had missiles supplied by North Korea. There’s little doubt the U.S. intelligence helped in that targeting. And American officials are telling Ukraine these relatively inexpensive drones are doing a great job, so don’t just look to our missiles. Also, officials want Ukraine to focus more on defensive measures in the eastern part of their country, where right now Russia continues to make inroads.
Of course, as we know, Ukraine pushed deep into the Kursk region of Russia. But what did that really achieve? U.S. officials are asking now. They’re saying this privately. But finally, the U.S. has been pressing Ukraine to do a better job at recruiting younger Ukrainians for its military. Right now – get this- they’re not recruiting any soldiers under the age of 25. But the U.S. military, about 87% of their new recruits are between 18 and 24 years old.
DETROW: Right. So Tom, let’s back up here for a moment. We’re coming up on the third anniversary of the war, at least the expansion of the war. Russia had already effectively invaded Crimea years before that. What is the path forward? – because in many ways, it’s a stalemate, and there are big questions about what U.S. support looks like depending on who’s elected president.
BOWMAN: Well, the big thing is, how do you define winning? Or as General David Petraeus famously said during the Iraq War, tell me how this ends. It’s kind of the same thing here. U.S. military officials have said neither side can win. Russia can’t take over all of Ukraine, and Ukraine, they don’t have the power to push all Russian forces out of their country. So what’s the way ahead? No one really answers that question. And neither side, Ukraine or Russia, at this point seems intent on negotiations. And here at home, you know, Trump, of course, has been skeptical of spending more on Ukraine. And Kamala Harris has said the U.S. must keep supporting Ukraine. So I think next year, the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you’ll see more pressure for some type of negotiation or at least talks, regardless of who’s in the White House.
DETROW: That’s NPR’s Tom Bowman. Thanks for coming in, Tom.
BOWMAN: You’re welcome.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are two Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
They are facing resistance from some House Republicans who have raised concerns about the program’s cost. “That’s really difficult for us is that when …
Kim called it a proof of U.S. ambition to “bring out its nuclear strategic assets, show off its strength and increase threats“, according to KCNA. The …
I have been avoiding, with gritted teeth, posting this story—that has been out and growing with more details for several days. Let me just say this is the most thoughtless, unbelievable, and dangerous national proposal I have ever encountered in my nearly 83 years (coming November 23rd) of life on planet Earth, much of it in the nuclear industry, and Three Mile Island was my personal reason for ending a career that had spanned parts of three decades. My reason was and still is the very same reason that nuclear plant TMI-2 (the one that is shut down forever because of a partial meltdown on March 28, 1979) and will remain under clean-up and final demolition until 2052, at least. That is a clean-up span of 73 years. Just that single accident tells us how dangerous nuclear power plants are to sustained life on planet Earth. And we want to re-open old ones and build hundreds of new ones around the world?
From the article: “The symbolism is enormous,” said Joseph Dominguez, CEO of Constellation. “This was the site of the industry’s greatest failure, and now it can be a place of rebirth.” Obviously, a major new capital infusion from a group of big banks that together control trillions of dollars in potential funding can only help jump-start a new expansion of nuclear power.
A symbolic place of rebirth? Apparently we have no common sense of values, and will spend trillions upon trillions of dollars (including bigger and stronger nuclear bombs) in order to ensure our own and other unnecessary demise of life on planet Earth for reasons that make no common sense at all. ~llaw
A Rising Mass Of Support Could Lead To A U.S. Nuclear Renaissance
David Blackmon is a Texas-based public policy analyst/consultant.
Sep 23, 2024,07:19am EDT
The huge towers of Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Londonderry Township, Pennsylvania, near … [+]Bettmann Archive
A group of the world’s biggest banks said Monday they will increase support for the expansion of nuclear power, according to the Financial Times. The banks, including Barclay’s, Bank of America, Citi, Morgan Stanley, BNP Paribas, and Goldman Sachs will make the formal announcement later Monday at an event with White House climate policy advisor John Podesta.
The stepped-up commitment from the banks is in support of goals set out at last year’s COP 28 conference to triple nuclear generation globally by 2050. It comes as expansion of wind generation – and, to a lesser extent, solar – is meeting with rising opposition from communities and struggling with profitability even while benefitting from a suite of government subsidies and tax incentives. It also comes as power grid managers struggle with increasing reliability issues as they are forced to integrate more and more intermittent wind and solar into their regional power structures.
Developers of AI and other cutting-edge technologies that require power-hungry data centers have become increasingly concerned that their needs can’t be met by intermittent generation, even with backup provided by current battery technology. U.S. companies are increasingly seeking to execute power supply agreements with traditional forms of 24/7 baseload generation to fill their needs. Nuclear generation, as a zero-emissions power source, helps such companies meet both their power needs and emissions reductions goals.
On Friday, Microsoft announced it had reached a deal with Constellation Energy to restart Unit 1 of its Three Mile Island nuclear facility in Pennsylvania to provide power to fill its own regional data center needs. Unit 2 of the Three Mile Island facility suffered a partial meltdown in 1979, an incident that released radioactive gases and iodine into the atmosphere, and which still ranks at the most severe nuclear incident in U.S. history. The U.S. nuclear power industry, which had undergone a rapid expansion during the 1970s, has struggled to restore public and policymaker confidence in the safety of its operations across the 45 years since that event.
Three Mile Island’s Unit 1 was not impacted by that incident and continued in service until it was retired by Constellation in 2019 due to economic reasons. Constellation said it plans to invest $1.6 billion to refurbish Unit 1, with a target for restarting the reactor by 2028. Its deal with Microsoft is for a 20-year power provision commitment.
“The symbolism is enormous,” said Joseph Dominguez, CEO of Constellation. “This was the site of the industry’s greatest failure, and now it can be a place of rebirth.” Obviously, a major new capital infusion from a group of big banks that together control trillions of dollars in potential funding can only help jump-start a new expansion of nuclear power.
But much will depend on regulators who oversee the permitting process for restarting existing units and building new ones. Reuters reports that Constellation has yet to file a formal application for the restart of the Three Mile Island unit. It quotes Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) spokesperson Scott Burnell as saying “It’s up to Constellation to lay out its rationale for justifying restart, so we’re prepared to engage with the company on next steps.”
The Bottom Line
Historically, the steps in America’s regulatory permitting processes have been painstakingly slow to evolve. Recent attempts by West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin and other pro-energy members of congress to streamline those processes via legislation have met with opposition from Democrats and Republicans alike.
Whether strong new commitments from major banks along with pressure from tech developers and nuclear generation companies can combine to speed things along remains to be seen. It also remains to be seen if activist groups who favor wind and solar but have historically opposed nuclear expansion – largely by exploiting the fright scenarios from the Three Mile Island incident over the last 45 years – will now work in opposition to these rapidly evolving plans for a nuclear renaissance.
Nothing related to energy and energy policy in the United States is ever simple. The only element of absolute certainty about this new pro-nuclear initiative is that it will be no exception to that rule.
David Blackmon is an energy-related public policy analyst/consultant based in Mansfield, TX.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are no Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
Continuing on with the latest on Russia/Ukraine war, courtesy of Reuters: This kind of demented reasoning, irritational as it is, as opposed to nuclear missiles attacking Ukraine, at least for now, though cruel, cowardly, and inhumane, makes far more sense than a nuclear war with nuclear bombs that could easily grow from Russia/Ukraine and part of Europe to the entire world in a matter of days if not hours.
Still, if true, this kind of nuclear use would be an extremely hideous and dangerous attack, but somewhat localized to Ukraine and Europe via drifting radioactive nuclear fallout from an assault that would destroy Ukraine’s three nuclear power plants and their multiple reactors, which also supplies about half of Ukraine’s electricity with winter not far ahead. Such an attack, no matter what else Russia decides to do to avoid losing an already lost war demonstrates the inhumanity of man toward life, human or otherwise, on our beautiful and generous life-offering planet Earth. She deserves better . . . ~llaw
Ukraine says Russia is planning strikes on nuclear facilities
By Reuters
September 21, 20247:18 AM PDTUpdated a day ago
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha attends a joint press conference with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and British Foreign Secretary David Lammy (both not pictured), amid Russia’s attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine, September 11, 2024. REUTERS/Alina Smutko/file Photo
KYIV, Sept 21 (Reuters) – Ukraine’s foreign minister said on Saturday that Russia is planning strikes on Ukrainian nuclear facilities before the winter, and urged the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog and Ukraine’s allies to establish permanent monitoring missions at the country’s nuclear plants.
“According to Ukrainian intelligence, (the) Kremlin is preparing strikes on Ukrainian nuclear energy critical objects ahead of winter,” Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha wrote on X.
“In particular, it concerns open distribution devices at (nuclear power plants and) transmission substations, critical for the safe operation of nuclear energy.”
Sybiha did not elaborate on why Kyiv believed such strikes were being prepared.
There was no immediate comment from Moscow.
The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Ukrainian president’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, called for a swift global response to the purported threat of a strike on a nuclear facility.
“This is preparation for a possible nuclear disaster scenario. Russia is a terrorist,” he wrote on Telegram.
“They must be stopped here and now. The countries of the West and the Global South must react harshly to preparations for terror.”
Russia has been waging an aerial bombardment campaign on Ukraine’s power grid since autumn 2022 after invading the country earlier that year.
It has damaged or destroyed most of Ukraine’s thermal power generating capacity and has sometimes hit dams, but has not yet struck any Ukrainian-controlled nuclear facilities.
Ukraine has previously accused Russia of nuclear blackmail after Russian forces occupied the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe’s largest, in March 2022, early on in the invasion.
Moscow denies that allegation.
Both sides have regularly accused each other of shelling areas next to the plant, which has on several occasions cut power lines to the plant, increasing the chance of a blackout that could cause a nuclear accident.
IAEA head Rafael Grossi has visited Ukraine and Russia several times throughout the war and has urged the sides not to engage each other near nuclear facilities.
“I think it is always a risk when there is a possibility of an attack on a nuclear power plant,” he said on a visit to Kyiv at the beginning of September.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There is one Yellowstone Caldera bonus story available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
There was no immediate comment from Moscow. The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), did not immediately respond to …
Although the big news today (and yesterday) is about the possibility of the long shut-down Three Mile Island nuclear power plant accident that caused a partial meltdown of one of the nuclear reactors and possibly providing nuclear power to Microsoft.
The clean-up work at that reactor (TMI – 2) is still ongoing since the accident back in 1979 — which caused me to rethink my future and exit the nuclear business soon thereafter — and clean-up/demolition is not expected to be completed until 2052. Unit 1 is being considered to possibly be re-born to service Microsoft’s AI power demands in the not-too-distant future, although the total demolishing of both Units has long been scheduled for 2079.
But the more immediate and important news concerns the Russia/Ukraine war that could soon boil over into the use of missile driven nuclear weapons in addition to the nuclear power plants in both countries that are playing important extremely dangerous nuclear war roles such that those plants are essentially doubling as stationary nuclear-weapons themselves. And with the United States, a NATO member, now re-united and reinforced by the rest of NATO, including, of course, Ukraine, seem unsure of how to proceed in a strategic war that would win the war. Russia, however, is tempted and threatening to deploy nuclear weapons to defend themselves against possible conventional missiles provided by America.
That is why I have been saying for consecutive days now that the USA is increasingly being crushed between a ‘rock and a hard place’. This war has been mishandled by both NATO and the U.S. and setting the revised strategy is going to be extremely dangerous and difficult. Following is the latest from ”Common Dreams” . . . ~llaw
Ukrainian rescuers of the State Emergency Service and firefighters continue to extinguish the forest fire after a Russian bomb explosion in Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine on September 17, 2024.
(Photo by Stringer/Anadolu via Getty Images)
A Nuclear War in Ukraine Is a Distinct Possibility
An interview with Norwegian political scientist Glenn Diesen.
The war in Ukraine has been going on for 2.5 years with no end on sight. Not only that, but we are now close to a nuclear war, according to the Norwegian scholar Glenn Diesen who predicted in November 2021 that “war was becoming increasingly unavoidable” as NATO was escalating tensions with Russia by strengthening its ties with Ukraine. Indeed, as Diesen argues in the interview that follows, NATO provoked Russia and sabotaged all peace negotiations, using Ukraine as a proxy to a geopolitical chessboard. Diesen is professor of political science at the University of South-Eastern Norway and author of scores of academic articles and books, including, most recently, The Ukraine War & the Eurasian World Order(2024).
C. J. Polychroniou: On February 22, 2022, in a move that few had anticipated, Russia invaded Ukraine by launching a simultaneous ground and air attack on several fronts. The war hasn’t gone at all as Moscow had intended and it rages on as neither side is seriously considering an end to the fighting. Yet, the invasion is in many ways a continuation of a territorial conflict between Russia and Ukraine that goes back to 2014. What lies behind the Russia-Ukraine conflict? How did we arrive at this dangerous juncture that is now dragging NATO into the conflict?
Glenn Diesen: I predicted the war in an article in November 2021, in which I argued war was becoming “unavoidable” as NATO continued to escalate while rejecting any peaceful settlement. This should have been evident to everyone if we had an honest discussion about what had been happening.
NATO was always part of this conflict, and it did not start as a territorial conflict. The conflict began with the Western-backed coup in Ukraine in February 2014, which was seen as a precursor to NATO expansion and the eventual eviction of Russia from its Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol. As the New York Times has confirmed, on the first day after the coup, the new Ukrainian government hand-picked by Washington established a partnership with the CIA and MI6 for a covert war against Russia. It is important to remember that Russia had not laid any claims to Crimea before seizing it in the referendum in March 2014. This is not a commentary on legality or legitimacy, merely the fact that Russia’s actions were a reaction to the coup.
We are very close to a nuclear war, and we are deluding ourselves by suggesting we are merely helping Ukraine defend itself.
A proxy war broke out in which NATO backed the government it installed in Kiev and Russia backed the Donbas rebels who refused to recognize the legitimacy of the coup and resisted the de-russification and purge of the language, political opposition, culture, and the church. The Minsk-2 peace agreement of 2015 laid the foundation for resolving the conflict, but this was merely treated as a deception to buy time and build a large Ukrainian army as confirmed by the Germans, French and authorities in Kiev. After 7 years of Ukraine refusing to implement the Minsk agreement and NATO’s refusing to give Russia any security guarantees for NATO’s military infrastructure that moved into Ukraine—Russia invaded in February 2022.
It is correct that the war has not gone as Moscow expected. Russia thought it could impose a peace but was taken by surprise when the U.S. and U.K. preferred war. When Russia sent in its military, the small size and conduct of the invading forces indicated that the purpose was merely to pressure Ukraine to accept a peace agreement on Russian terms. Ukraine and Russia were close to an agreement in Istanbul, although it was sabotaged by the U.S. and U.K. as they saw an opportunity to fight Russia with Ukrainians.
The nature of the war changed fundamentally as it became a war of attrition. Russia withdrew to more defensible front lines, began mobilizing its troops and sourcing the required weapons for a long-term war to defeat the NATO-built army in Ukraine. After 2.5 years of war, this has become a territorial conflict that makes it impossible to resolve in a manner that would be acceptable to all sides. As NATO refuses to accept losing its decade-long proxy war in Ukraine, it must continue to escalate and thus get more directly involved in the war. We are now at the brink of a direct NATO-Russia War.
Did NATO provoke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? Even if so, didn’t Moscow have any other options other than to resort to the use of military force?
NATO provoked the invasion and sabotaged all paths to peace. The NATO countries affirmed on several occasions that the UN-approved Minsk agreement was the only path to a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine, yet then admitted that it was merely a ruse to militarize Ukraine. This convinced the Russians that NATO was pursuing a military solution to the conflict in Ukraine that would also involve an invasion of Crimea. As argued by a top advisor to former French president Sarkozy, the U.S.-Ukrainian strategic agreement of November 2021 convinced Russia it had to attack or be attacked.
Russia considered NATO in Ukraine to be an existential threat, and NATO refused to give Russia any security guarantees to mitigate these security concerns. The former U.S. ambassador to NATO, Kurt Volker, argued during the Biden-Putin discussions that no agreements should be made with Russia as “success is confrontation.” This war is a great tragedy as it has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainians and Russians, made Europe weaker and more dependent, and taken the world to the brink of nuclear war. By failing to admit NATO’s central role in provoking this war, we also prevent ourselves from recognizing possible political solutions.
Russia and Ukraine were close to war-ending agreements in April of 2022, but apparently certain western leaders convinced Ukrainian president Zelensky to back down from such a deal. Is Ukraine a US pawn on a geo-political chessboard?
Zelensky confirmed on the first day after the Russian invasion that Moscow had contacted Kiev to discuss a peace agreement based on restoring Ukraine’s neutrality. On the third day after the invasion, Russia and Ukraine agreed to start negotiations. Yet, the American spokesperson suggested the US could not support such negotiations. When the negotiations nonetheless began, Boris Johnson was sent to Kiev to sabotage them. Johnson later wrote an op-ed warning against a bad peace. The Ukrainian negotiators and the Israeli and Turkish mediators all confirmed that Russia was willing to pull back its troops and compromise on almost everything if Ukraine would restore its neutrality to end NATO expansionism. The mediators also confirmed that the US and UK saw an opportunity to bleed Russia and thus weaken a strategic rival by fighting with Ukrainians. The US and UK told Ukraine they would not support a peace agreement based on neutrality, but NATO would supply all the weapons Ukraine would need if Ukraine pulled out of the negotiations and chose war instead. Interviews with American and British leaders made it clear that the only acceptable outcome for the war was regime change in Moscow, while other political leaders began to speak about breaking up Russia into many smaller countries.
Yes, I believe that Ukraine is a pawn on the geopolitical chessboard. Why do we not listen to all the American political and military leaders who describe this as a good war and an opportunity to weaken Russia without using American soldiers?
What does Russia want from Ukraine? Russia demands peace based on the Istanbul+ formula. The Istanbul agreement of early 2022 involved Russia retreating from the territory it seized since February 2022 in return for Ukraine restoring its neutrality. However, after 2.5 years of fighting, the war has also evolved into a territorial conflict. Russia therefore demands that Ukraine also recognizes Russian sovereignty over the territories it annexed.
Russia will not accept a ceasefire that merely freezes the front lines, because this could become another Minsk agreement that merely buys time for NATO to re-arm Ukraine to fight Russia another day. Moscow therefore demands a political settlement to the conflict based on neutrality and territorial concessions. In the absence of such an agreement and continued threats by NATO to expand after the war is over, Russia will likely also annex Kharkov, Dnipro, Nikolaev, and Odessa to prevent these historical Russian regions from falling under the control of NATO.
Ukraine has become increasingly a de facto NATO member. What are the chances that Russia might introduce tactical nuclear weapons in the battlefield to achieve its aims?
Russia permits the use of nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack or if its existence is threatened. NATO becoming directly involved in the war is considered an existential threat by Russia, and Russia has warned that NATO would become directly involved by supplying long-range precision missiles. Such missiles will need to be operated by American and British soldiers and navigated by their satellites, thus this represents a NATO attack on Russia. We are very close to a nuclear war, and we are deluding ourselves by suggesting we are merely helping Ukraine defend itself.
Can you briefly discuss the implications for world order if the West defeats Russia? And what would the international system look like if Russia wins the war in Ukraine?
The West would like to defeat Russia to restore a unipolar order. As many military and political leaders in the US argue, once Russia has been defeated then the US can focus its resources on defeating China. It is worth remarking that few Western political leaders have clearly defined what “victory” over the world’s largest nuclear power would look like. Russia considers this war to be an existential threat to its survival, and I am therefore convinced that Russia would launch a nuclear attack long before NATO troops get to march through Crimea.
A Russian victory will leave Ukraine a dysfunctional state with much less territory, while NATO will have lost much of its credibility as this was bet on a victory. The war has intensified a transition to a multipolar world, and this likely increase at a much higher pace if NATO loses the war in Ukraine.
NATO expansion that cancelled inclusive pan-European security agreements with Russia was the main manifestation of America’s hegemonic ambitions after the Cold War, thus the entire world order will be greatly influenced by the outcome of this war. This also explains why NATO will be prepared to attack Russia with long-range precision missiles and risk a nuclear exchange.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There is one Yellowstone Caldera bonus story available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
View all programs · 1A · All Things Considered · Destination Out · Fresh Air · Here and Now · Homespun · Juke Joint · Morning Edition · On Point · The …
All Classical HD 3 Music Programs · All Things Acoustic · Bama Bluegrass · Classical Music with David Duff · Getting Sentimental Over You · Something …
The only reason I have posted this short Forbes story is to point out that the whole concept of nuclear proliferation and “deterrence” is a terrible waste of all human resources including our future, and to quote Forbes on the financial part of it, which anyone with the slightest amount of common sense ought to clearly understand that ‘all things nuclear’ are a dead-end for all life on planet Earth: The quote: “A nuclear war could end humanity, but even without one, the costs are staggering. Last year, nuclear-armed nations spent $91.4 billion on their arsenals — a 34% increase from the year before. That’s $3,000 every second, or $173,000 a minute, wasted on weapons that threaten life instead of saving it.”
This is the existing ‘threat’ to all life — that we should instead be protecting and preserving; yet we continue to do the exact opposite of what we ought to be doing for life to continue to survive . . . ~llaw
Call For Disarmament And Solidarity As Trump Raises Nuclear Threats
From Donald Trump to Putin, nuclear weapons are back in the headlines. Yet, times of crisis often … [+]Getty Images
Nuclear weapons are back in focus. Donald Trump Jr. and RFK Jr. recently penned a joint article, warning that “the world is at greater risk of nuclear conflagration than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis.” North Korea shows no signs of scaling back its nuclear ambitions, while Iran blames the U.S. for walking away from its deal with world powers, pushing it to explore nuclear development. Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin hints at resuming nuclear tests, breaking a 30-year taboo. Donald Trump, whose administration abandoned the nuclear agreement with Iran, has even claimed—perhaps bizarrely—that nuclear war poses the biggest threat to American autoworkers.
Agree with Trump or not, one thing is clear: the nuclear threat is once again front and center. Experts, including the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, say the risk of nuclear Armageddon is higher today than ever before. With nuclear-armed states locked in hot and cold wars, disarmament seems like a distant dream. But history has shown that it’s often in moments of heightened danger that diplomacy can produce breakthroughs.
Some say nuclear weapons are an even bigger threat than climate chaos — and they certainly make it worse. A nuclear war could end humanity, but even without one, the costs are staggering. Last year, nuclear-armed nations spent $91.4 billion on their arsenals — a 34% increase from the year before. That’s $3,000 every second, or $173,000 a minute, wasted on weapons that threaten life instead of saving it. Imagine the impact if that money went towards clean energy — enough to power 12 million homes with wind or plant 1 million trees every minute.
Subscribed
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA”:
There are 7 categories, with the latest addition, (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are two Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
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 (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
Ukraine downed 61 drones during Russia’s overnight attack. Ukraine’s forces destroyed 61 out of 70 Russian attack drones and one out of four missiles …
That represents a big change in the way the military has historically talked about the possibility of nuclear war. It used to be that intelligence or …
List and interactive map of current and past earthquakes near Yellowstone volcano. Android App · Android App · Volcanoes & Earthquakes Upgrade the …
IAEA Weekly News
20 September 2024
Read the top news and insights from this week’s 68th IAEA General Conference. For more in-depth coverage, check out our conference blog or visit IAEA.org.
The 68th annual IAEA General Conference is coming to a close, with final discussions around possible resolutions likely to last into the evening. Read more →
Eleven countries have been newly elected to serve on the 35-member IAEA Board of Governors for the 2024–2025 period. The election took place on Thursday, 19 September, at the plenary session of the 68th IAEA General Conference. Read more →
The IAEA Scientific Forum 2024, themed Atoms4Food: Better Agriculture for a Better Life, opened alongside the 68th IAEA General Conference, focusing on how nuclear technology can help tackle global food insecurity. Read more →
From welcoming the IAEA’s newest Member States to learning about all aspects of the IAEA’s work, find out what happened on the first day of the IAEA’s 68th General Conference. Read more →
