Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

November 12, 2026 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

As Sentinel ICBM Costs Skyrocket, Air Force Hosts Photo Op

By John LaForge

At Vandenberg Space Force Base in California September 14, the Pentagon trotted out for the cameras the first full-scale model of the planned Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). While little more than a photo op, General Dale White, the Director of Pentagon’s Critical Major Weapon Systems in Arlington, Virginia, called the demonstration a “milestone.”

Sentinel is the missile the Air Force plans to put into 400 newly built underground silos spread around F. E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana, and Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota. The missile is intended to replace today’s 400 Minuteman III ICBMs. Stars and Stripes reports that the Air Force has said the massive project of replacing the current missiles “is expected to take well into the later part of the century,” or around 50 years. Air Force contractors intend to build new underground missile silos, new underground launch control centers (where personnel try to stay awake while maintaining launch readiness), and replace hundreds of miles of buried cables that connect the weapons to their controllers.

In July 2024, the Pentagon’s estimated total costs for the Sentinel program (not including warheads) was $141 billion in constant 2020 dollars, which was 81% (or $63 billion) above the program’s first estimate of $78 billion. The estimated life cycle cost of the Sentinel program was estimated then to be $260 billion, but is undoubtedly higher today.

Meanwhile, according to the ICBM Act, sponsored by Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass), the National Nuclear Security Administration which builds U.S. H-bombs, is developing a new replacement ICBM warhead for the Sentinel, the W87–1, and is expanding plutonium production for the warhead’s cores, costing at least $14 billion and $18 billion, respectively.

Gen. James Cartwright, former Vice-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former Commander of U.S. Strategic Command, wrote, with former Secretary of Defense William Perry, “[T]he greatest danger is not a Russian bolt but a U.S. blunder — that we might accidentally stumble into nuclear war. As we make decisions about which weapons to buy, we should use this simple rule: If a nuclear weapon increases the risk of accidental war and is not needed to deter an intentional attack, we should not build it…. Certain nuclear weapons, such as … the [intercontinental ballistic missile], carry higher risks of accidental war that, fortunately, we no longer need to bear. We are safer without these expensive weapons, and it would be foolish to replace them.” (Washington Post, Nov. 16, 2017)

⸺ Stars and Stripes, Sept. 14, 2026; the Congressional “ICBM Act”

Filed Under: Military Spending, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

November 12, 2026 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

We Oppose the U.S. Call to “Control and Dominate” Outer Space

Nukewatch wholeheartedly supports the demand by the Directors and Advisors of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space to halt the U.S. weaponization of outer space. This is their recent declaration:

The September 14 disclosure by U.S. Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink that the U.S. has deployed space weapons in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) confirmed what many had always thought and is a consequence of the competition between the United States, Russia, and China over access to LEO. Whoever controls the increasingly limited parking spaces in LEO will be at a considerable [military and commercial] advantage and will be able to see and direct weapons not only to targets in space but also on the Earth.

Elon Musk is being paid to fill up LEO with military satellites as fast as possible for the U.S.

The U.S. Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability with huge radars in Texas, Australia, and possibly Wales — where grassroots opposition is massive — would be part of a system to guide anti-satellite weapons to hit targeted satellites in space.

Other options for the U.S. appear to be space-based lasers and electro-magnetic guns to blind or fry spacecraft electronics.

The Trump administration’s proposed “Golden Dome” missile defense system is bringing lots of lucrative contracts to aerospace companies but is nowhere near likely to be completed by Trump’s end-of-term. The American Physical Society and the Congressional Budget Office also report it would cost trillions of dollars and would not likely be effective against Russian or Chinese hypersonic missiles.

However, Mr. Meink’s announcement could really be about attempting to make Golden Dome sound inevitable, thereby forcing Congress to appropriate the massive funds needed to secure the controversial project in the Pentagon’s space strategy.

One other long-term issue is the “mining the sky program.” The U.S. and its fellow NATO allies want to move their 500-year western colonial domination to the Moon, Mars, and other celestial bodies for resource extraction. During a keynote speech at the Air, Space, and Cyber Conference, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine said, “the Joint Force is prepared to fight, endure, and win in global contested environments from the seabed to cislunar space.” Cislunar space is the space between the Earth and the Moon.
The plan is to establish nuclear powered mining colonies. Nuclear powered rocket engines are being developed to cut-in-half the amount of time it would take to get to Mars. The Department of Energy labs that fabricate these space nuclear devices have a long history of worker, air, and water contamination.

The 1989 Congressional study entitled “Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years” called for the U.S. to control the pathway off Earth to space (also called the Earth-Moon Gravity Well).

As the Space Command’s “Vision for 2020” stated, the U.S. must “control and dominate space” and “deny” others the use of space. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has recently stated, “I’m not interested in orbital equity or parity. We demand orbital dominance plain and simple.” Those are fighting words.

In the end, taxpayers should be wondering who will pay the trillions of dollars for these collective offensive space programs — especially when the U.S. is already over $40 trillion in debt! Long ago, the aerospace industry identified the “entitlement programs” as their preferred source of funds to pay these enormous costs. By this they mean Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the now tattered social safety net. Trump has announced that the already fiscally strapped states should take over Medicare and Medicaid due to recent war spending.

In 1989 Apollo Astronaut Edgar Mitchell (the 6th person to walk on the moon) spoke at a Peace in Space rally organized by Bruce Gagnon at the now re-named Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. Mitchell told the assembled that a war in space would be the “one and only” because so much space junk would be created (on top of the existing huge debris field) that we would not be able to get a rocket thru the deadly space trash orbiting the Earth. He said it would be like trying to “get thru a piranha laced river” in the Amazon.

There is a name today for this phenomenon — the Kessler Syndrome. Much of life on Earth would grind to a halt, as the satellites that make our high-tech world function would be smashed to bits.
The 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty, signed and ratified by 118 states including the U.S., calls for the peaceful use of outer space, prohibits the deployment of any weapons of mass destruction, and prevents treaty members from claiming sovereign control. However, it does not prevent the stationing of other types of weapons in space. The U.S. has repeatedly voted against a resolution, supported by China and Russia, for “no first placement of weapons in outer space.” Now we know why.

For many years the U.S. and Israel have also voted against the annual call by China, Russia, and others to negotiate a new treaty on PAROS — the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space. The official position of the U.S. has been, “There are no weapons in space, we don’t need a new treaty.”

We see this as a spiritual disconnection in the minds and hearts of those “leaders” in Washington who believe that 4% of the global population living in the U.S. should be the “Masters of Space.” It is a deep sickness.

Space should be a realm for exploration and inspiration, a place for humans to grow further in knowledge and wisdom. A few morally impoverished souls are ruining space even as they poison the Earth. This will not end well.

The time has come for people in the U.S. to rise up and demand their government halt [its] march of the human race to annihilation.

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

November 12, 2026 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Unavailable, Unusable, Deterrentless: Stranded U.S. H-bomb Unit in Germany Should be First to Go

By John LaForge

For the last three years, the U.S. B61 hydrogen bombs stationed in Germany have been stranded at Büchel Air Force Base, separated from the fighter-jets and pilots that are trained and ready to drop the H-bombs on Russia. The H-bombs have been perfectly unavailable for nuclear attacks, i.e. deterrence.

The nuclear “deterrent” mission that the U.S. claims the transferred nuclear weapons provide to Germany vanished in 2022, when massive remodeling of the Büchel Air Base began. A major runway extension forced the base’s 46 Tornado fighter jets to be moved in the meanwhile to Nörvenich Air Base, 28 miles away. The billions of euros being spent on Büchel’s rebuild (widening of taxiways and airfield intersections; total rebuild of the runway; new cargo apron for a taxiway; and a new F-35 “campus”) is in preparation for the delivery of new U.S. B61-12 thermonuclear bombs, and the 2027 arrival of new F-35 fighter-jets that Germany is buying to carry them.

Anti-nuclear activists placed sunflowers, a symbol of nuclear disarmament, in the fence at Germany’s Büchel air base Thur., July 24, marking the 30th anniversary of protests at the base. Photo by Luthar Lange.

Since the major reconstruction has meant that Germany’s “nuclear deterrent” was absent for years — with the H-bombs locked in underground vaults, and the jets that carry them stationed elsewhere — the deterrentless U.S. Air Force’s 702nd Munitions Support Squadron (or MUNSS) has proven to be needless. It should be the first unit withdrawn from Germany under Trump’s surprise announcement that the number of U.S. military personnel in Germany would be cut.

Declaring he would slash the U.S. military presence in Germany, Trump said May 2, “We are going to cut way down, and we’re cutting a lot further than 5,000.” Liana Fix reported for the Council on Foreign Relations that 5,000 troops were about one-seventh of the roughly 38,000 GIs currently stationed in Germany. The Pentagon promptly claimed that the decision to withdraw 5,000 troops followed a “thorough review of the force posture in Europe.”

The factual, fatuous reason for the draw-down was Trump’s temper tantrum that followed German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s daring public statement that the U.S. was being “humiliated” by Iran. The Guardian reported that Merz said to students in April, “[T]he Iranians are … letting the Americans travel to Islamabad and then leave again without any result. An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership….”

The Pentagon says the 702nd MUNSS is needed since it “receives, stores, maintains, controls, and employs war reserve munitions in support of the 33rd Tactical Air Wing’s role in NATO’s strike mission.” Of course, this has proven over the last four years to be mission impossible because of the ongoing construction.

At the Büchel Air Base’s website a “Commander’s Welcome Letter” for new personnel, explains: “The 702nd consists of approximately 170 personnel across 26 different Air Force Specialties, responsible for maintaining, operating, and securing $6B [billion] in Protection Level-1 assets….”

“Protection Level-1 assets” refer to the twenty U.S. B61 gravity-drop hydrogen bombs that are stationed at Büchel. This arsenal is the crux of the so-called “nuclear sharing” arrangement between the United States and Germany (and four other NATO countries). According to a Shaw Air Force Base manual, “Protection Level-1” resources “include nuclear weapons and … systems critical to the success of active nuclear missions….”

For decades, Germany’s Tactical Air Force Wing 33 has been operating about 46 Tornado jet fighters, which can deliver the twenty U.S. H-bombs — the only remaining U.S. nuclear weapons in Germany — which are maintained by the 702nd MUNSS. The Tornado jets are flown by German pilots who train to carry the U.S. bombs, and to detonate them against Russia if a U.S. president so orders.

The old Tornado warplanes are being replaced by Lockheed-Martin’s flashy new F-35A fighter jets, and Germany is paying over ten billion euros, or $11.4 billion, according to Aero.de Dec. 12, 2022. Aero reported June 24, 2025 that the F-35s are “intended to support Germany’s so-called ‘nuclear sharing’ program — a NATO strategy under which allies have access to U.S. nuclear weapons in the event of war.”

The Tornados have recently returned to Büchel, but their 4-year absence shows that the stationing of U.S. nuclear weapons and the 702nd MUNSS in Germany is absolutely unnecessary.

Filed Under: Military Spending, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter, US Bombs Out of Germany

November 12, 2026 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

What’s Wrong with Deep, Underground Reactors?

By Ace Hoffman, Carlsbad, California

Editor’s note: Plans to place nuclear power reactors one mile underground are moving ahead in Parsons, Kansas. The company Deep Fission is conducting an experiment called Gravity Nuclear Reactor intending to sell electricity from a small, modular pressurized water reactor placed into a deep borehole. Ace Hoffman sees at least ten predictable problems:

1) It will have two cables, each one mile long, for placing and possibly retrieving the unit. Since reactors are extremely dense and heavy items, the possibility of a cable break should not be ignored. If one cable breaks or merely stretches a smidgen more than the other cable, the reactor will likely turn sideways and jam in the hole. This could happen near the surface or deep inside the hole. Furthermore, one dropped bolt, wrench, brick, rock, etc. could ruin everything. [A dropped wrench socket caused a nuclear-armed Titan II missile to explode inside its launch silo, Sept. 19, 1980 near Damascus, Ark., killing one and injuring 20 others.]

2) Multiple holes, if they are close together, could mean that a single reactor meltdown and steam explosion could affect nearby reactors. And the proper definition of “close” is very uncertain.

3) Mile-long drill holes can collapse at any point, making retrieval and operation impossible.

4) If a glitch blocks control rod insertion in the reactor, a meltdown could continue essentially forever.

5) It does not appear that the boreholes will be lined in any way. Natural fissures can cause large rocks to come loose, or the drilling process itself could loosen chunks of the walls. Perfect smoothness would require numerous drill bit changes, increasing the drilling cost significantly. Will dull drill bits be used to save money during construction (when no income is being made and costs mean everything)?

6) Earthquakes can destroy every borehole at once, causing as many meltdowns as there are reactors. Even a fraction of an inch misalignment could mean the reactor(s) could never be retrieved or serviced.

7) If water intrusion occurs from an unrealized already-existing deep fissure, everything goes boom and continues to spew radioactive steam essentially forever. Plugging up the hole would be extremely difficult, unlikely to be permanent, and only mean the underground area would continue becoming the most polluted place on Earth. Any warning signs above ground would not last nearly as long as the waste would be toxic, spreading, and unmanageable.

8) If either the down spout or the steam pipe breaks anywhere along the mile-deep tubing, it may be impossible to retrieve anything below the break point.

9) The only way for this to pay back the builders and operators is to run these reactors for a long, long time. Pulling any reactor up to inspect or repair it means pulling up the entire mile-long tubing, which means the whole length must be sectioned and separable. Each joint has to be 100% leak-proof. How many sections do they plan to have? (If each segment is 50 feet tall (about five stories), the full length would need over 100 segments for each reactor, with more than 100 leak-proof joints.

10) Operating reactors need electrical control cables as well as steam and water piping. These cables, dropping a mile straight down, will have to remain in perfect condition and be retrievable along with the reactor. Running right next to the hot steam and water is a very unsafe place for electrical cables.

There are undoubtedly many other problems with any deep-borehole reactor design, but these come to mind — without even requiring any deep-thought!

— The author has studied nuclear power as an independent researcher for more than 50 years.

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

November 12, 2026 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Coalition Vows to Fight Restart of Mich. Reactor, Cites Unacceptable Risks to the Great Lakes Watershed

By Kevin Kamps

On July 24, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a final notice to support the restart of reactor operations at the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan which was retired in May 2022.

The “zombie reactor” restart scheme is unneeded, insanely expensive for the public, and extremely high risk for health, safety, security, and the environment. NRC staff has determined there are “no significant hazards” to consider. How about the catastrophic accident risks foisted on the Great Lakes Basin — 21% of the entire planet’s surface fresh water — and all who call it home?

A 1982 study commissioned by the NRC, and carried out by the Sandia National Lab — “Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences” — estimated that a meltdown at Palisades would cause 1,000 acute radiation poisoning deaths, 7,000 radiation injuries, and 10,000 latent cancer fatalities, as well as (inflation adjusted) $168 billion in property damage.

The coalition challenging Holtec’s Palisades restart scheme includes Beyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future, Nuclear Energy Information Service of Chicago, and Three Mile Island Alert of Pennsylvania. Terry Lodge of Toledo, Ohio, and Wally Taylor of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, serve as the coalition’s co-counsel. Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen, as well as Stanford University professor and world-renowned climate mitigation researcher Dr. Mark Z. Jacobson, serve as the coalition’s expert witnesses.

Our environmental coalition first petitioned to intervene and request a hearing, in opposition to the Exemption Request in early December 2023. We did so again on October 7, 2024.

The NRC ruled against our coalition’s intervention petition and request for hearings, but we have appealed the adverse rulings and are awaiting a response. We also have challenged the adequacy of NRC staff’s “Environmental Assessment” and “Finding of No Significant Impact.” Sixty-six organizations and 145 individuals submitted extensive comments on the draft assessment, and our coalition filed related contentions.

In addition, we have challenged the Holtec company’s proposed band-aid fixes to the reactor’s severely degraded steam generator tubes, a self-inflicted wound. Holtec — which has no reactor operating nor construction experience — neglected critical safety maintenance from 2022 to 2024, a “rookie error,” as our expert witness, nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen, has called it, with potentially dire consequences. Holtec’s neglect allowed corrosive chemical attacks on both the inside and outside of the exceedingly thin-walled steam generator tubes.

As Gundersen has testified in these proceedings, the failure of a single tube would result in a release of radioactivity to the environment. But a cascading failure of multiple tubes could cause a reactor core meltdown, and catastrophic release of hazardous radioactivity onto the winds and waves. He warned about the potential consequences more than a decade ago, when he first served as our expert witness at Palisades, concerning yet another still-unaddressed pathway to reactor core meltdown: the worst case of neutron-embrittlement of a reactor pressure vessel in the country, and likely in the world.

Holtec recently submitted yet another request to postpone implementing fire protections that have also been neglected at Palisades for decades, despite related scandals, and the fact that fully half of all reactor core meltdown scenarios can be initiated by fire, according to retired Union of Concerned Scientists Nuclear Safety Project Director David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer.

For these reasons, we will continue to resist at every opportunity Holtec’s Palisades “zombie reactor” restart scheme, enabled by a complicit and colluding NRC. There is too much at stake to do otherwise.

— Kevin Kamps, the long-time nuclear waste specialist at Beyond Nuclear, is now the Executive Director of Don’t Waste Michigan, in Kalamazoo.

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 266
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch