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

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Africa’s Only Nuclear Reactors Extend License Despite Public Outcry, Multiple Unexpected Shutdowns

By Lydia Petersen, Project 90 by 2030, and Koeberg Alert Alliance

Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, located near Cape Town, South Africa is the only operational nuclear power plant on the African continent. The station’s two reactors were built by French nuclear giant Framatome in the 1970s, and both are 970 megawatt pressurized water reactors. Unit 1 was synchronized to the grid in 1984 and unit 2 a year later. Koeberg contributes approximately 4.8% of South Africa’s electricity generation to the national grid, providing both reactors are online simultaneously.

As the country continues to grapple with an energy crisis and rolling black-outs, Eskom, the state-owned utility, has embarked on a project to extend the operational lifespan of Koeberg by an additional 20 years. This decision to relicense unit 1 was granted by South Africa’s nuclear-overseeing agency, the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR), on July 15, 2024. The license extension has sparked significant debate, particularly regarding safety concerns found by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the handling and storage of radioactive waste produced by the reactors. Public fears were affirmed less than two months later, on September 11, when Koeberg shut down unexpectedly for 10 days after failing a routine test. Eskom was forced to announce the shutdown to the public after Koeberg Alert Alliance notified the press.

The 20-year Extension

When originally commissioned, Koeberg was designed to operate for 40 years. However, as electricity demand increased, and Eskom faced challenges with its aging coal-fired fleet, the decision was made to extend the life of the reactor. The extension and refurbishment program were budgeted for 20 billion South African Rands, or roughly $1.1 billion, including replacement of the reactor vessel head and steam generators, among other upgrades. These renovations were deemed necessary to ensure that the facility meets modern safety and performance standards.

Since the announcement of the proposed extension there has been public outcry about potential safety and environmental risks. Furthermore, many are concerned with potential accidents, considering that Koeberg is built near a fault line, and Cape Town experienced a few earthquakes in recent years. The public’s fears have been further compounded by the lack of transparency as Civil Society organizations, including Project 90 by 2030, had to intervene with legal processes to have access to vital documents regarding the extension and safe operation of the reactors. Many also reject the significant long-term environmental harm of continued radioactive waste generation. Thanks to a campaign by Koeberg Alert Alliance and Project 90 by 2030, letters appealing the license renewal have flooded the office of the Minister of Electricity and Energy.

Radioactive Waste Management

A critical aspect of nuclear power generation is the amount of nuclear waste it produces. As Koeberg’s original lifespan has come to an end, storage space in the irradiated waste fuel pools has reached capacity. This forced Eskom to re-rack the fuel rods to accommodate more highly radioactive waste material. After the waste fuel assemblies have been in the cooling pools for five to eight years, they are moved to dry casks in a specially demarcated area at the facility.

The low and intermediate levels of nuclear waste, including personal protective clothing and items used in radioactive areas, are transported to the Vaalputs Waste Disposal Unit in the Northern Cape Province some 600 kilometers (375 miles) away. It is widely speculated that this site was chosen by the Apartheid Regime due to its sparse population, particularly with marginalized communities, making it easy for the government to impose decisions without significant opposition. Apartheid policies prioritized keeping potentially hazardous or undesirable activities away from urban centers predominantly inhabited by the white population. In this way, the government adhered to its practice of environmental racism, where marginalized communities bore the brunt of environmental and health risks.

This facility is managed by the National Radioactive Waste Disposal Institute. Vaalputs is located in the Namakwaland region, known for its dry, desert-like conditions. The communities surrounding the disposal site have grave concerns about the possible leakage of radioactive waste materials into the groundwater and their drinking water. The nuclear waste is stored in drums and cement casks, buried in 8- to 10-meter (26- to 33-foot) trenches, just above groundwater level.

As Koeberg unit 1 embarks on its 20-year life extension the critical issues of safety concerns at the station and the continued generation of nuclear waste remain a bone of contention. Civil society believes that the National Nuclear Regulator acted with undue haste to extend the license. Energy experts have harshly critiqued the extension decision, mirroring the opinion of the general public.

“The NNR decision increases the public’s perception that the NNR is solely looking out after its own interests,” said Karel Beukes, a resident living near the Vaalputs Waste Disposal Unit who appealed the license decision. “The public in the … area are sick and tired of the clandestine manner in which Eskom and the NNR operate, and we demand transparency when it comes to decisions that affect us.” The call for transparency has exponentially increased during the last two years, with many observing that the license extension puts profit above people again. While Eskom and the South African government maintain that the necessary safety measures are in place, public concern persists. Civil Society is adamant that safety protocols have not all been observed and implemented during the refurbishment period, and that critical safety features were omitted. This is a glaring omission as Eskom claims to follow global safety standards. These and many additional concerns will be raised again as the license extension process gets underway for unit 2 next year, with a license decision expected by November 2025.

— Koeberg Alert Alliance, July 22; International Atomic Energy Agency, Mar. 31, 2022

— Lydia Petersen is an environmentalist and anti-nuclear activist from Cape Town, South Africa. She is the spokesperson for Koeberg Alert Alliance.

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

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fukushima: Spreading Radioactive Wastewater, Sludge, Soil

By John LaForge

Melted fuel still vexing test extraction methods

Thirteen years on from the catastrophic triple explosions and reactor meltdowns at Fukushima-Daiichi in northeast Japan, emergency responders are still trying to observe and examine the melted fuel under the reactors (sometimes called “corium”). Contractors from Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco) have repeatedly failed in attempts to robotically collect a mere three grams (0.1 ounce) of the corium from reactor 2, a project that started three years ago.

The company Amentum, working for Mitzubishi Heavy Industries, has built robotic machinery to try to retrieve a smidgen of corium. Its goal is to find out the state of the meltdown because, as National Public Radio reported, “the exact nature of the debris is currently unknown.”

Amentum is trying to build an extraction tool that can function in a radiation zone so fierce that it wrecks most machinery. A 2015 attempt to look inside reactor 1 with a device built by Hitachi-GE Nuclear failed after three hours. Amentum’s first attempt in reactor 2 was stalled August 22 after the long pipe insertion system was found to have been mis-assembled. Then Sept. 18, video feed problems halted the second try. The Associated Press reported that the probe is “maneuvered remotely by operators at another building because of the fatally high radiation emitted by the melted debris.”

Teams of workers have to do 15-minute rotating shifts — to limit their exposure to the wreckage’s radioactivity level — preparing the probe for another attempt. Industry slang for team members is “sponge.” Recovering a mere three grams is scheduled to take two weeks, because the slow-moving robotic plucker tends to get stuck in the tangled debris and takes a tortured path past meltdown-produced obstacles.

The mission of the tiny retrieval is to determine whether it’s possible to eventually retrieve and containerize all 880 metric tonnes — 300 tonnes per reactor — of the fatally radioactive wreckage, to keep it out of the environment for eons. Some critics have said decommissioning the whole site could take 100 years.

The idea of covering the site’s six-reactor radioactive blight with a roof — like the shed that was installed over the Chernobyl reactor site — is unpopular because of the risk of another major earthquake and tsunami.

Meltdown-spewed plutonium on the wind

Nuclear reactors at Fukushima (and everywhere), smash apart uranium atoms creating a lot of heat — to boil water. This atom smashing inside reactors produces radioactive poisons like cesium, iodine, strontium, and dozens of other elements — including plutonium. In addition to this reactor-borne plutonium at Fukushima, about 6% of the fuel in reactor No. 3 was made from plutonium itself.

Some of this plutonium from inside the three destroyed reactors was released to the environment by the meltdowns and explosions of March 2011. On Nov. 15, 2020, the journal Science of the Total Environment published the report, “Particulate plutonium released from the Fukushima-Daiichi meltdowns,” noting that plutonium-239 was dispersed widely by the disaster.

Plutonium, the most toxic substance known to science, was spread “up to 230 km away” (142 miles) from the reactor site, the researchers found.

Long-distance dispersion of plutonium was partly the result of micro-particles being blown by the wind. Five isotopes of plutonium were released including Pu-238, -239, -240, -241, and -242. Some plutonium persists environmentally and contaminates the food chain for 240,000 years.

In 2023, the journal Chemosphere reported on a study’s findings of large amounts of highly radioactive cesium-rich micro-particles (CsMPs) in an abandoned school building close to the Fukushima -Daiichi site.

Plumes of the micro-particles penetrated the building during the meltdowns of March 2011. Phys.org online reports that the contamination poses “a threat to human health if inhaled. The study shows that indoor CsMPs should be considered in safety assessments and in building clean-up efforts.”

Long-term effects of dumping unknown, scientist warns

Japan hosted the 10th Pacific Island Leaders Meeting in Tokyo last July, which was attended by most leaders of the 18-member Pacific Islands Forum.

A hot topic was Japan’s dumping of tens of thousands of tons of contaminated Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific Ocean. The dumping was protested by Pacific rim countries and many, including China and Russia, have banned imports of seafood products from the region’s waters. Some 60,000 tonnes of the wastewater had been discharged by August 2024.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida assured the island leaders’ gathering that the discharge of the wastewater was being done “in compliance with international safety standards and practices.” Yet the controversial dumping continues to be criticized by scientists.

At the meeting, director of the Kewalo Marine Laboratory at the Univ. of Hawaii, professor Robert Richmond, complained that questions remain regarding the effectiveness of the water filtration system, known as ALPS, and about the radioactive contents of the thousand-plus storage tanks of wastewater.

In October 2018, Tepco admitted that the ALPS had failed to remove dangerous elements and made a public apology. For years, Tepco and most media have insisted that the ALPS treatment removes everything but tritium, including strontium and 61 other radioactive elements, from the contaminated water. Tepco has promised to re-filter the wastewater, noting that 84% of the 890,000 tonnes then held in tanks (today there are 1.3 million tonnes) still had high concentrations of iodine-129, ruthenium-106, technetium-99, and carbon-14. Levels of strontium-90 (a severe human health hazard) were detected in some tanks at 20,000 times the drinking water limit.

“The long-term effects of this discharge on Pacific marine ecosystems and those who depend on them are still unknown. Even small doses of radiation can cause cancer or genetic damage,” Prof. Richmond said in a statement to BenarNews online after the gathering.

Richmond called Japan’s current radiation monitoring system inadequate and poorly designed, and said it’s failing to protect ocean and human health.

“The discharge, planned to continue for decades, is irreversible. Radionuclides bio-accumulate in marine organisms and can be passed up the food web, affecting marine life and humans who consume affected seafood,” Richmond said.

The professor also raised concerns about other severe hazards already harming the Pacific Ocean and marine life, such as pollution, overfishing, and climate change. He urged Japan to reconsider its approach. Enclosing the contaminated water in cement structures like sea walls is one alternative.

You can hear Prof. Richmond explain the risks of tritium contamination in an National Public Radio interview, here: https://www.npr.org/2023/07/09/1186674909/what-to-know-about-japans-plan-to-dump-waste-water-into-the-ocean

Water treatment leaves highly radioactive sludge in search of containment

Tons of highly radioactive chemicals collected in the ALPS filters as sludge are transferred to heavy plastic casks called “high integrity containers” or HICs, and moved to temporary storage. The Japanese daily Asahi Shimbun, published a report on the wastewater dumping August 24, 2024 that clearly outlines some problems with the sludge. The end of the article reads as follows:

In addition to the release of treated water, there are many other issues to be tackled. The amount of highly radioactive sludge, or “slurry,” produced in the process of treating contaminated water continues to increase, but no effective treatment method has been decided upon.

The increasing amount of slurry is stored in tanks, but since there is still a risk of leakage when it is in liquid form, plans call for it to be dehydrated to reduce its volume and then process the substance into solid form.

In 2021, Tepco filed an application to build a device for this purpose. But the Nuclear Regulation Authority pointed out the risk of radiation exposure to workers, and Tepco was told to review the design.

As a result, the start of the dehydration process has been delayed from fiscal 2022 to fiscal 2026.

Furthermore, no concrete method has been decided on for solidifying the dehydrated slurry.

Tepco is aiming to determine the solidification method by the end of fiscal 2025 and start solidification around fiscal 2035.

Advocates demand stricter limits on radioactive poisons

The Fukushima Fallout Awareness Network (FFAN) in Tokyo is an alliance of parents, concerned citizens, and affiliated organizations. The group writes:

“The U.S. FDA has set a potentially hazardous level of ‘allowable’ radiation in food: 1,200 Becquerel per-kilogram (Bq/kg) of cesium-134 and cesium-137.”

“Becquerels-per-kilogram” is a reference to concentrations of radioactive cesium that has been found to contaminate food, soil, and water since the March 2011 disaster. Cesium-134 and -137 was spread in large quantities from the three burning reactor meltdowns and it Cs-137 persists in the environment for 300 years.

Alarmingly, the limit of 1,200 Bq/kg in food is merely a recommendation. It is both a non-binding and unenforceable. Such a high contamination threshold exposes a significant portion of the U.S. population, particularly children and women, to considerable health risks.

Standards limiting radiation in food in Japan are 12 times more protective for adults and 24 times more protective for children than U.S. standards. Food too radioactive to be sold to Japanese consumers is allowed to be sold to U.S. consumers and served to U.S. service members and their families on military bases overseas.

FFAN is urging the FDA to lower its permitted cesium limit to five Bq/kg for all food, nutritional supplements and pharmaceuticals, and that the U.S. quickly institutes widespread, transparent testing to ensure this limit, particularly in the wake of Japan’s catastrophic and ongoing radiation releases from Fukushima-Daiichi’s triple reactor meltdowns. This aligns with a similar call by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War in Germany, which promotes a European Union-wide standard of four to eight Bq/kg. To sign FFAN’s petition see:https://nislappdc.org/fukushima-fallout/

Kimberly Roberson, Project Director for the FFAN, commented on this scandal for Food Safety News, Sept. 4, 2024. Roberson wrote, “At 1,200 Becquerels per kilogram, FDA has among the highest [allowances] in the world.”

“To confront and mitigate the growing public health threat of radioactive contamination in food, Congress should pass the Federal Food Administration Act, establish the FFA to focus like a laser beam on food safety, and empanel independent scientists and experts who understand radiation’s environmental and health effects to advise it,” FFAN said.

The IAEA: International Allowances for Environmental Assaults?

The United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency, which ignored its own guidelines in approving the dumping of Fukushima wastewater into the Pacific, has granted approval to Japan’s plan to use some of the 14 million tonnes of cesium-contaminated soil and debris collected after the Fukushima meltdowns in construction work.

The Japanese government intends to get rid of roughly 75 percent of the radioactive soil — if it’s contaminated at or below 8,000 Bq/Kg — by using it in road embankments, railways, agricultural land, and land reclamation.

“We are extremely concerned. The IAEA has consistently stated in the past that radioactive waste should be stored centrally and we have supported that position,” said Hajime Matsukubo, the secretary general of the Nuclear Information Centre in Tokyo. He said the limit for soil contamination was previously set at just 100 Bq/kg, and has now been lifted to 8,000 Bq/kg. “But now they are going against their own recommendations,” he told the South China Morning Post. “My fear is that once they relax this rule, they can then go on and ease all sorts of other rules,” Matsukubu said.

Filed Under: Environment, Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Indigenous First Nations, Local Communities Oppose Canada’s Chalk River Radioactive Waste Dump

By Lindsay Potter

This is Part II of a story from Nukewatch’s Summer 2024 Quarterly, for Part I visit nukewatchinfo.org. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) approved a license for a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) one kilometer (0.62 miles) from the Ottawa River at the famed Chalk River Site.

Industry Inside Job

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission president Dr. Timothy Berube was a “nuclear operator” at Ontario Hydro, according to the Commission’s website. Commissioner Andrea Hardie’s biography on the Commission’s site says she has 20 years of experience working “in various capacities with the Canada Energy Regulator, the Alberta Energy Regulator, and Energy Efficiency Alberta, in addition to holding industry association and private industry roles.” Commissioner Jerry Hopwood is president of the University Network of Excellence in Nuclear Engineering leading Canada’s university-industry partnership, and has over four decades of experience in the nuclear industry — including as a reactor safety specialist for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), where he held “progressively senior positions.” Hopwood also worked for SNC-Lavalin and was a consultant for the IAEA and the Canadian Nuclear Society. Dr. Marcel Lacroix worked for AECL at Chalk River and for the Gentilly-2 nuclear station — owned by Hydro-Quebec.

SNC-Lavalin and AECL, Hopwood and Lacroix’s former employers, are part of the “Canadian National Energy Alliance” — the private sector group chosen by the Canadian government to run Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), which includes Chalk River, since 2015. Many of the sites are owned by AECL.

“What we see, quite frankly, is a captured regulator … [t]here is no independence,” said Lance Haymond, Chief of the Kebaowek First Nation. Kerrie Blaise, a member of the legal team representing Kebaowek First Nation, said the commission was originally founded with the mandate to promote, as well as regulate, the nuclear industry and Natural Resources Canada.

The dump would be managed by three private multinational contractors, all with a history of legal problems including convictions for fraud. Two of the groups are based in Texas and work in the cyber, intelligence, or weapons sectors: Fluor, which also manages the Savannah River Site; and Jacobs, which won a $6.4 billion contract to clean up the Idaho National Lab in 2021.

A Dark Past, A Deadly Legacy

Threats to the Ottawa River watershed from the Chalk River Lab are an 80-year-old problem. Chalk River began as part of the Manhattan Project, building the world’s first heavy water reactors to produce plutonium for bombs in 1944. Canada sold uranium and plutonium to the U.S. for nuclear weapons production until 1965. In 1974, India used a copy of the early reactors at Chalk River, a gift from the Canadian government, to build its first bomb.

In 1952, the National Research Experimental nuclear reactor at Chalk River suffered a catastrophic meltdown and explosion which destroyed the core, unleashed radioactive gas into the atmosphere, and left intensely toxic wreckage and radioactive water. The core was removed and buried nearby, and other contaminated reactor wreckage was put in sandy trenches. “Refuse from that day remains … part of an immense toxic legacy,” according to the Ottawa Citizen. The site suffered another major accident six years later.

The Chalk River site is home to 70 percent of all the radioactive waste generated by AECL and its predecessor. In 2005, AECL began an estimated 70-year, $7 billion federal cleanup program which includes its sites at Chalk River, Whiteshell Laboratories, and several reactors.
There are several waste management areas at Chalk River that date back decades and have caused radioactive contamination of groundwater, streams, lakes, and rivers. The high-level waste includes more than 12,000 used fuel rods, used fuel bundles and assemblies, as well as depleted uranium, thorium, and plutonium — all from eight reactors across the region. In addition, there are about 300,000 liters (79,252 gallons) of liquid radioactive waste from medical isotope production and fuel processing experiments now stored in underground tanks that were built between 1947 and 1960.

Natural Resources Canada found “aging tanks that contain higher-level radioactive liquid waste are rusting.” Intensely hot, high-level uranium and thorium is kept in 750 concrete “tile holes,” 16 feet below ground, alongside fuel rods from over a half century of reactor operations. One hundred of these, housing 175 old fuel rods shrouded in aluminum, have water intrusion and are corroding.

The existing waste management areas are largely located in sandy soils that drain to Perch Lake, at the center of the site, which drains to the Ottawa River by way of a small creek. Over two million cubic meters (528,000,000 gallons) of waste has already been dumped into “unlined sand trenches” or pits with “three aquifers in the vicinity,” the Ottawa Citizen reported.

As a result, tests show more than 83 acres of land that drains into Perch Lake and other nearby basins are contaminated with radioactive cesium-137, strontium-90, cobalt-60, tritium, plutonium, as well as metals, industrial chemicals, mercury, and lead.

In addition, other toxic radionuclides found at Chalk River or at Whiteshell Laboratories — which has sent decommissioned material to Chalk River — include: carbon-14, iodine-125 and -131; argon-41, plutonium-238, -239, and -240; and americium-241, according to a report by CNL. In total, 19 of the 29 radionuclides found at Chalk River have half-lives of more than 1,000 years, 12 have half-lives of 100,000 years, and some could remain in the environment for millions of years.

“A terrible mistake and one that future generations will curse us for” – Gordon Edwards

The newly green-lighted waste site would sit less than one km (0.62 miles) from the Ottawa River and would include planned releases of radioactive tritium and “treated” wastewater into Perch Lake.

Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (CCNR), told Libbe HaLevy of Nuclear Hotseat, “They’re building basically … an Earthen mound which is essentially a glorified landfill on the surface right beside the Ottawa River.” Why? Edwards believes it is just a matter of industry convenience.

Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association, described the NSDF design as “tantamount to an ordinary domestic landfill and we know that such facilities always eventually leak to the surrounding environment.”

Edwards points out that the liners intended to prevent leakage are only designed to last at most 1,000 years, and many of the radionuclides are supposed to be kept out of the environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Though they call the waste inventory “low-level,” Edwards explains that it does not need to go to this site: “99 percent of the initial radioactivity in the mound is going to be Cobalt-60 … one of the most intense gamma-emitting radionuclides,” from imported commercial waste that is completely man-made, Edwards said. This waste is already packed for shipment and could be taken to concrete vaults further from water bodies rather than buried in the sandy ground by the river.

Tritium, one of the most impactful elements likely to leach from the mound, will “readily escape into the Ottawa River in the form of radioactive water molecules,” Edwards says. There is no way to remove tritium from water, so it will move easily downstream into people’s tap water.

The CCNR and two other groups have asked a Canadian federal court to review the decision on procedural grounds. The groups documented seven procedural errors that the regulatory industry committed.

Appeal Brought by Kebaowek First Nation

On July 10 and 11, the Kebaowek First Nation presented opening arguments in their appeal against the dump’s approval. The Kebaowek case argues the CNSC failed to meet the requirements for free, prior, informed consent under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and in Canada under the UN Declaration Act.

The Council of Canadians, a nonprofit social justice group, writes, “Kebaowek, Kitigan Zibi Anishnabeg, and Algonquins of Barriere Lake First Nations detailed the threats the NSD(F) poses to the land, water, wildlife, trees, and Algonquin inherent rights to the CNSC in August 2023. They did not give consent to the project, but approval was a foregone conclusion, consultation nothing but an afterthought.”

To the Kitigan Zibi and Kebaowek, the dump is another chapter in the “nuclearization of the Kichi Sibi” (Ottawa River). It continues the legacy of dispossession, disregard, and displacement represented by the lack of consent to the original Chalk River Laboratories site in 1944.

A group of more than 60 supporters joined the Kebaowek outside the Supreme Court on July 10th to demonstrate solidarity with protection of water, life, and the Algonquin cultural way of life, and to protest the threat to drinking water.

Kebaowek community member Rosanne Van Schie, who sat in on the hearings in Ottawa, said, “With the proximity of the potential Chalk River facility to the Ottawa River, the chances of a catastrophic event involving drinking water is … a serious concern.” Van Schie believes the appeal has a strong case and targets a clear breach of the regulator’s duty.

The dump risks the destruction of 37 hectares of old growth forest, could displace deer, moose, bears, and wolves, and would add more radioactive contamination to the watershed that provides drinking water for more than ten million people.

“It’s a betrayal of a series of sacred trusts. Anishinaabe aki was not created for business profit. Our Nation was not built to turn the [Kichi Sìbì], our great river, into a self-storage unit for nuclear waste,” said Councilor Verma Polson.

— You may make a tax-deductible contribution to the Kebaowek First Nation’s legal effort to protect the Kichi Sibi here: raventrust.com/campaigns/kebaowek/

Filed Under: Environment, Environmental Justice, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Penalties for Nuclear Weapons Resisters in Germany Getting Heavier

By John LaForge

 

After years of imprisoning only German nationals for nonviolent protests against the threatened use of U.S. hydrogen bombs stationed in Germany, nuclear resisters from outside Germany are now being imprisoned for their noncooperation. These resisters have all served time in Germany for refusing to pay financial penalties imposed mostly for go-in actions at Büchel Air Force Base: Susan Crane from California; Dennis DuVall, formerly of Arizona, and now living in Radeberg, Germany; Susan van der Hijden and Fritz ter Kuile both from Amsterdam, Netherlands; as well as Nukewatch’s John LaForge.

On June 4, Susan Crane, of the Redwood City, California Catholic Worker, began serving 229 days, the longest sentence ever handed down in 30 years of anti-nuclear protests at Büchel.* She is the first female U.S. citizen to serve hard time in the campaign. After joining a long string of “go-in” actions at the base, Crane was fined a total of $2,819 by the regional court in Koblenz. She informed the court of her conscientious refusal to pay, and later explained in an email that she “is unwilling to pay for the court’s cover-up of the illegality of U.S. nuclear weapons.”

Susan Van der Hidjen was sentenced to 115-days for the same or similar actions, and the two began their prison time together June 4. After a month in the high-security prison in Rorhbach, both women were transferred to the so-called “open prison” JVA Koblenz, where inmates with good conduct marks are permitted a few hours of free time outside the gates every week. (Because of this strangely regulated “preparation” for a prisoner’s pending release, Crane was able to attend a large anti-war rally in Berlin October 5th.) Van der Hidjen finished her stint and was released and returned home to Amsterdam Thurs. September 26.

Nuclear Resister Dennis DuVall Threatened with Expulsion from Germany

In the newest and most reactionary move by authorities, Germany intends to expel U.S. citizen and nuclear resister Dennis DuVall on October 31, 2024. DuVall, 82, a resident of Radeberg for six years, a member of Veterans for Peace, and a regular protester at the Büchel NATO base has been incarcerated twice for nonpayment of penalties stemming from various actions at Büchel.

The federal expulsion order describes DuVall as a serious threat to security and public order. He has retained an attorney to help fight the order and has won widespread support in his effort to stay. DuVall argues that he has a legal obligation to resist the planning and preparation for nuclear attacks that take place at the base. In two separate criminal court trials, DuVall explained that these nuclear attack plans are in violation of international treaty law including the 1970 Nonproliferation Treaty and the 1946 Nuremberg Charter, Principles, and Judgment.

DuVall is the second U.S. citizen ever to go to prison in Germany for nonviolent resistance at the base. He spent 60 days in Bautzen prison in 2023, and this past July 22 reported to the same prison for a 90-day sentence for spray painting “crime scene” on a roadway. He was released from Bautzen after seven days when his $1,643 penalty was paid anonymously.

In a statement announcing the expulsion threat DuVall warned, “B61-12 nuclear bombs and F-35 warplanes at Büchel will push NATO closer to war.” He invites peace and anti-war/anti-weapons groups and individuals to support his fight to stay in Germany, and to sign an online petition to the interior ministry here: www.change.org/p/keine-ausweisung-des-anti-atombomben-aktivisten-dennis-duvall.**

The government’s deportation rationale has been criticized as politically motivated and absurd, since the 82-year-old USAF veteran and retiree can’t possibly endanger the richest industrial state in Europe. German singer/songwriter Gerd Schinkel has even composed a song for Dennis that asks, “Is a demonstrator more dangerous than the bomb he is demonstrating against?”

* Please write to
Susan Crane here:
JVA Koblenz OVA
Simmerner Str. 14A
56075 Koblenz
GERMANY

** You may also urge Germany to rescind its expulsion order for DuVall by writing:
Robert Domanja
Head of Office
District Office Bautzen Foreigners Office
Bahnhof Str. 9
02625, Bautzen
GERMANY

— Felice and Jack
Cohen-Joppa at The
Nuclear Resister
contributed details
to this report.

Filed Under: B61 Bombs in Europe, Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter, US Bombs Out of Germany

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Timing of New U.S. B61 Hydrogen Bomb Transfer Unclear

By John LaForge
According to a November 2021 report by the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, the so-called ‘life extension program’ for the air-dropped thermonuclear bomb called B61-12, “is refurbishing, reusing, or replacing all of the bomb’s nuclear and non-nuclear components to extend the service life by at least 20 years.”
Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists told Politico that the upgrades to the bomb’s design are for “significantly greater accuracy.” This newfashioned H-bomb is also made so that U.S. and allied fighter jets — including F-15s, F-16s, F-35s, and European Tornado fighter jets — “are all able to carry the weapon, as opposed to the several older versions of the B61 that have been in storage for years.”
“Today, approximately 100 U.S. nuclear weapons are estimated to be stored at six bases in five countries, with one additional base (Lakenheath in England) currently undergoing modernization to potentially store nuclear weapons in the future,” Kristensen reported in November 2023. The United States is preparing to replace all older versions of the B61 now deployed in Europe with the incoming B61-12, Kristensen reported. The timeline for the first delivery has not been made public, so watchdogs are keen to observe the arrival — at any of the six NATO bases — of a U.S. Air Force C-17A Globemaster III, “the only transport aircraft authorized to move the nuclear weapons,” Kristensen noted.
Newsweek reported in 2022, “The 12-foot B61-12 bomb carries a 50-kiloton warhead — the equivalent of 50,000 tons of TNT.” The U.S. atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima killing 140,000 people was a 15-kiloton device, making the new weapon 3.3 times more powerful.
In December 2023, Kristensen reported that Dutch Air Force pilots at Volkel air base had begun training to attack with the new B61-12s. Volkel is part of the so-called NATO “nuclear sharing” program, in which “the United States Air Force equips Dutch F-16s (and aircraft of five other NATO countries), and trains their pilots to employ B61 nuclear bombs in war.”
Kristensen had earlier reported that in Germany, parliamentary “debate raised questions about whether individual soldiers could be held liable for the use of nuclear weapons. The 2008, legal guidelines for German soldiers prohibited their participation in the use of nuclear weapons, posing complications for Germany’s ongoing nuclear sharing mission. [But] revised guidelines, which were updated in 2018, reportedly no longer include this prohibition — presumably in order to allow German soldiers to fully participate in NATO’s nuclear sharing mission.”
Civil resisters tried in Germany for confronting nuclear attack training have defended their actions by pointing to treaty laws that forbid such preparations.

Filed Under: B61 Bombs in Europe, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, Quarterly Newsletter

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • …
  • 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