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

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

3rd ICBM War Rehearsal of 2020

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020

On September 2 for the second time in under a month, a Minuteman III missile with multiple mock nuclear warheads was test launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. It was the third such intercontinental missile test in 2020.

On August 4, two days prior to the 75th anniversary of the US atomic bombing of Hiroshima, the Air Force launched a Minuteman III missile from Vandenberg, also loaded with multiple mock nuclear warheads. Since the 1996 START II Treaty restrictions were adopted, long-range USAF missiles have each been limited to a single warhead each.

The latest test missile’s mock warheads traveled about 4,200 miles to a target on the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, the site of some 67 nuclear warhead test detonations during the ‘50s and ‘60s.

Rick Wayman, of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation in Santa Barbara, said, “We have decision makers who are willing and able to escalate nuclear threats even further by putting multiple warheads back on ICBMs—something that has not been done for decades.”

In a public statement, the Air Force said missile launch rehearsals show that its nuclear war plans are “safe, secure, reliable and effective.” Over the past 20 years, the Pentagon has rehearsed an average of three ICBM launches per year, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.

—Nuclear Age Peace Foundation; and Defense Brief online, Sept. 2; Union of Concerned Scientists, June 22, 2020

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Military Says Environmental Review Not Needed for New Plutonium Bomb Production

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020

The Associated Press reports that, “The National Nuclear Security Administration says it doesn’t need to do an additional environmental review for Los Alamos National Laboratory before it begins producing [plutonium cores] for the nation’s nuclear arsenal because it has enough information. Watchdog groups are concerned about the announcement, saying the plutonium pit production work will amount to a vast expansion of the lab’s nuclear mission and that more analysis should be done. Los Alamos is preparing to resume and ramp-up production of the plutonium cores used to trigger nuclear weapons….” Author and activist Dr. Helen Caldicott called the decision “Absolute madness!” Greg Mello, Director of the LosAlamos StudyGroup said of the decision, “The notion that comprehensive environmental analysis is not needed for this gigantic program is a staggering insult to New Mexicans and an affront to any notion of environmental law and science.”

—Associated Press; and Los Alamos Study Group, Sept. 2, 2020

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

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Radiation Plume Over Europe

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020
By Bob Mayberry

The cloud of radioactive materials that floated over Europe on the 22 and 23 of June this year seems to be part of a pattern of radioactive releases from Eastern Europe that worries European scientists.

News reports followed a familiar scenario. On June 10th, a monitoring station in northern Norway detected low levels of radioactive iodine in the air. On June 23 and 24, Sweden and Finland reported “higher than usual” levels of fission products, including cesium-134, cesium-137 and ruthenium-103.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) requested more information from its member states, but the source of the radiation plume has still not been determined. The map of the plume’s movement across northern Europe led scientists to speculate that the cloud might have originated in Russia.

The Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation, Russia’s agency responsible for overseeing the development of nuclear reactors, reported no excess radiation levels or incidents at any of its facilities.

This isn’t the first time Russia denied any connection to radiological releases occurring within its borders. In 2017, a radioactive plume was traced to a nuclear accident at Russia’s Mayak nuclear weapons complex for plutonium production and uranium fuel rod reprocessing.

Though Russia confirmed that a cloud of radiation had been detected over the Ural Mountains, they never acknowledged responsibility for the cloud or admitted a radiation accident had occurred. In 2019, an unexplained explosion took place on Russia’s northern coast at a Navy test range. Scientists speculated it was a reactor or nuclear weapons accident, but Russia neither confirmed nor denied this. The explosions and fire killed five high-level engineers. Some of the emergency responders that treated the injured workers were sent to Moscow to be treated for radiation sickness.

There’s a history of accidents at the Mayak facility, including the huge release of Sept. 29, 1957 known as the Kyshtym disaster.

Political analysts speculate that perhaps Russia has not acknowledged responsibility for this year’s radioactive plume because the source of the accident might be the weapons-grade plutonium facility at Mayak.

—Bob Mayberry is a retired English and Theatre Professor at Cal State University-Channel Islands.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance Lawsuit Vs Tennessee Weapons Complex

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020
By Bob Mayberry

On July 17th, 2020, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) released its “Final Supplemental Analysis” of earthquake risk at the Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Complex in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The report concludes that the risks from a major earthquake “would not be significantly different” from results presented in previous reports. Based on that conclusion, the NNSA will continue construction of the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) bomb plant at Oak Ridge. The UPF is part of NNSA’s Enriched Uranium Operations; in addition to the new facility, several buildings which have already been deemed “out of compliance” with current seismic and environmental standards will be used for highly enriched uranium weapons production operations until at least 2040.

The Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance (OREPA) called the latest earthquake risk analysis “inadequate,” claiming it fails to meet federal standards for environmental studies. OREPA has been joined by Nuclear Watch New Mexico, the National Resources Defense Council and several individual plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the NNSA dating back to July of 2017, aimed at stopping construction at Y-12 until adequate environmental studies are completed. In September of 2019, a federal court ruled that the NNSA had “acted arbitrarily and capriciously … in their failure to properly evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the US Geological Survey’s increased seismic hazard forecast for East Tennessee.” The judge vacated two previous Supplement Analyses and one Record of Decision, a significant victory for OREPA and its co-plaintiffs. The judge ordered the NNSA to prepare a new environmental analysis using the latest US Geological Survey earthquake data. But just three days later, Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, the NNSA administrator, authorized continued construction of the UPF and use of storage facilities without addressing any of the deficiencies or dangers identified in the judge’s ruling, although the NNSA did promise to conduct a new earthquake risk analysis.

That analysis was made public on April 10 this year. The analysis shows that the consequences of a worst-case earthquake disaster scenario are ten times greater than was previously reported. The difference lies chiefly in the continued use of out-of-compliance buildings on the Y-12 site.

On April 15, OREPA filed a Motion for Enforcement with the court asking the judge to compel NNSA to suspend construction activities at Y-12 while it prepares the legally required environmental studies for its enriched uranium program at Y-12.

On May 5 the NNSA announced that it would not renew its contract with Consolidated Nuclear Services when it expires in 2021. CNS, hired to manage operations at Y-12 and the Pantex facility in Amarillo, Texas, was cited for failing to address long-standing criticality safety deficiencies that could injure workers and release radioactive material within the Oak Ridge facility. NNSA has announced, however, that the contract change will not affect construction of the UPF; Bechtel will continue that work uninterrupted.

It’s unlikely that NNSA’s July 17th earthquake risk analysis will be the final word in this on-going legal battle. With NNSA now publicly admitting that safety violations have occurred at Oak Ridge, OREPA and its fellow plaintiffs will be evaluating new legal action to stop the construction.

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

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty Progresses

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020
By Christine Manwiller

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which opened for signatures in New York on Sept. 20, 2017, is winning increasing support from nations around the world. Malta became the 84th state to sign on August 25, 2020.

Ireland, Nigeria, Niue, and Saint Kitts & Nevis ratified the treaty in August, honoring the 75th anniversaries of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The number of treaty ratifications is now 44, just six short of the 50 required for it to enter into force as international law. The progress comes in spite of the effect that Covid-19 restrictions have on campaigning for the Ban Treaty.

On July 15, the African Commission on Nuclear Energy marked the 11th anniversary of the Treaty of Pelindaba, establishing Africa as a nuclear-weapons-free zone. The commission called on all African states to ratify the TPNW, while also noting the anniversaries of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “Bringing into force the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons would be a most fitting tribute to the victims and survivors of the atomic bombings.”

In Minnesota, a petition calling for support of the Treaty now has 23,000 signatures. Although face-to-face meetings with the state’s congressional delegation are postponed due to pandemic rules, the End War Committee of Women Against Military Madness and the Minneapolis/St. Paul chapter of Veterans for Peace have organized over 100 people who are calling the state’s US Senators monthly, urging their support of the Treaty. Please join this effort if you live in Minn., or start the ball rolling in your own state.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • …
  • 222
  • 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