Britain sends warning to China with fleet of nuclear submarines to be based in Australia express.co.uk

Whaley calls for overhaul to PUCO and state energy policy as nuclear bailout anniversary approaches woub.org

UK government approves new nuclear power station energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com

Nuclear power station shut downs will leave Ontario relying on gas to generate electricity glopbalnews.ca

 

 

Ambient office = 83 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 101 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 99 nanosieverts per hour

Avocado from Central Market = 97 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 97 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
     Sevmash is a Russian submarine builder. They just issued a press release to announce that they had delivered the first K-329 Belgorod to the Russian Navy. The Belgorod is the world’s longest submarine. Although the Russian Navy has not provided exact specification for the Belgorod, reports in the press have said that the Belgorod’s enlarged Oscar-II class hull is about five hundred and eighty-four feet long and about forty feet wide. The Belgorod’s displacement probably exceeds the ninety thousand tons of the original Oscar-II class and is bigger than the largest Western submarine which is the U.S. Ohio-class.
     According to the Sevmash press release, the Belgorod is designed to investigate scientific problems and to conduct search and rescue operations. In addition, it can serve as a mothership for deep-sea rescue vehicles and autonomous underwater unmanned vehicles.
     The Belgorod is the first carrier for the Poseidon nuclear-armed underwater stealth drone. Russia says that it can deliver a retaliatory nuclear second strike at population centers, major cities and industrial centers near a coast by triggering devastating radioactive tsunamis.
      Russia also says that the Belgorod is designed to carry the highly classified Losharik special mission submarine. In addition to carrying the Poseidon drone, there are reports that the Belgorod can also serve as a mothership for various unmanned underwater espionage platforms including the Losharik.
     There are reports that the Belgorod’s reinforced lower rudders will allow the submarine to sit on the seafloor. It also has the capability to deploy unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) that could be used for espionage missions to tap or cut submarine communication cables. Such espionage missions could blind or cripple an enemy. Ninety five percent of global internet traffic passes through these cables. This was reported by the Atlantic Council think tank.
     With respect to the mission of the Belgorod, Russian defense analyst and military expert Alexei Leonkov explained the probable role of the submarine in a recent interview. He said that the Belgorod is designed to launch the Poseidon drone. It also specializes in second strike missions. Leonkov describes the Belgorod as a “retaliation weapons” for a big nuclear war. It could launch its Poseidon drones in response to a nuclear first strike involving mobile missiles, land-based launchers and land and sea-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) against Russia. Beyond use as a second-strike weapon, Leonkov mentions that the Poseidon drones can be deployed against carrier battle groups with the Belgorod carrying them to the site of the naval battle.
     However, Poseidon transport may not be the only important mission for the Belgorod. In an article published in the Boennoe Obozreniye, Roman Skomorokhov says that the U.S. may view the Poseidon in three different ways. First, he says, the U.S. may dismiss the Poseidon drone as propaganda. He notes that for all the concern that it has caused for U.S. defense analysts, it may just be a mock-up meant to intimidate the U.S. public and defense planners. Second, he notes that the U.S. may perceive the Poseidon as an underwater research vessel, but not the nuclear-armed underwater drone that Russia claims. Third, the U.S. may perceive the Poseidon as a real weapon and rush to carry out research efforts to develop defenses to counter nuclear-armed underwater drones.
Please read Part 2 next

Syrian military expert says only true deterrence against Israel: nuclear weapons clevelandjewishnews.com

Uzatom signs MOU on nuclear infrastructure development neimagazine.com

Poll shows almost 50% in Japan support restarting safe nuclear reactors japantimes.co.jp

Energy fears dilute German taboos over nuclear power and speed limits nationalobserver.com

 

 

 

 

Ambient office = 74 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 98 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 96 nanosieverts per hour

Watermelon from Central Market =66 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 143 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 31 nanosieverts per hour

Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     Hopefully, the Biden administration realizes that Israeli leadership will be committed to taking military action to prevent Iran from developing an atomic bomb. This is true regardless of whether Israel’s interim prime minister, Yair Lapid, remains in power or Benjamin Netanyahu manages to return to power.
     So, the big question is, “Where is the Israeli red line?” Would a specific amount of enriched uranium for a nuclear warhead trigger an Israeli air attack to destroy Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities at Natanz and Fordow? It is well known that Iran can enrich uranium to ninety percent whenever it chooses. This knowledge is based on Iran’s demonstrated ability to enrich uranium to sixty percent and its work with advanced centrifuges. Israel also knows that Iran has ballistic missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to strike more than eighty percent of Israel’s civilian population.
      There is an international consensus that Iran is not currently able to reduce a nuclear warhead to a size that can be attached to their missiles. However, Iran has been making a lot of progress with that task.   Rafael Mariano Grossi is the Director General of the IAEA. Last year, he said that “inspectors had confirmed that Iran had produced 200 grams of uranium metal.” This is a crucial step for the miniaturization of a nuclear warhead. The terms of the JCPOA prohibits international inspections of Iranian military sites. Only covert intelligence work would reveal if Iran was utilizing clandestine military facilities for even more advanced nuclear weapons development. This could be an Israeli red line.
     Israel is obviously able to strike Iran to slow down its nuclear weapons project. There has recently been an acceleration of Israeli cyberattacks, sabotage and alleged targeted assassination of Iranian nuclear experts over the years. Critics of a possible Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities say that it would only delay the Iranian nuclear program by three to five years at best. However, Israeli policy makers believe that the deterrence that timeframe would afford would be worth the risk to Israel. In addition, the assumption that the Iranians would immediately restart their nuclear weapons program may not be true.
      Nuclear analysts believe that Israel will not accept a nuclear weapons armed Iran with the leverage that Iranian nuclear weapons capable missiles would give its hegemonic ambitions in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and maybe Jordan in the future. There is no analogy between the deterrence of Mutually Assured Destruction during the Cold War and what Israel would tolerate with a nuclear Iranian Supreme Leader.
      Maj. Gen. Yaakov Amidror is a former head of Israel’s National Security Council. He has said, “Israel will likely need to attack Iran directly to stop it from developing nuclear weapons.” With a nuclear umbrella, “Iran would be free to build a ring of fire around Israel” from Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Gaza and Iran. If the U.S. and Iran restore the JCPOA, “Israel will have no choice but to act militarily to prevent Iran from manufacturing a nuclear weapon.” 
     Israel’s Arab allies in the U.S. Central Command in the Middle East are expecting Israel to stop a nuclear Iran. The Biden administration should understand that Israel does not expect the U.S. to join it in any attack on Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities. Israel only wants the U.S. to not get in the way if and when it finds it necessary to strike Iran.

German official: Nuclear would do little to solve gas issue abcnews.go.com

Questions remain after false alarm sounds at Seabrook Station nuclear plant wmur.com

Nuclear industry applauds Tennessee Valley Authority request for 5 GW of clean energy by 2029 utilitydive.com

Officials: Siren Inadvertently Activated at NH Nuclear Plant usnews.com

Ambient office = 110 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 85 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Tomarto from Central Market = 111 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 133 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 122 nanosieverts per hour

Part 1 of 2 Parts
     Last May, Israel completed their “Chariots of Fire” (CoF) wargame. It was the most significant and comprehensive wargame in the history of Israel. The CoF featured hundreds of Israeli warplanes in coordination with its regular army, reserves, and elite special forces. The purpose of the CoF was to train its military in anticipation of scenarios that Israel may encounter on multiple fronts.
     The CoF emphasized being nimble to coordinate and adapt because an enemy rarely follows a nation’s war plans. (Indeed, an old saying goes “The first casualty of war is the plan.”) The scope and scale were totally unprecedented for Israel. Some of Israel’s intelligence and security agencies have corroborated that there is no ambiguity in Israel about the need to halt Iran’s goal to dominate the Middle East with nuclear weapons.
     Israel is well aware of the fact that if they attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran will launch the estimated one hundred and fifty thousand Hezbollah missiles in Lebanon and Hamas’s arsenal of rockets in Gaza and as well as attacks from Iran’s new bases in Syria and Iraq. Such a scenario would dwarf the 2006 Hezbollah Second Lebanon War and the combined five Hamas Gazan wars. There would also be Palestinian unrest in the disputed territories and inside Israel which would also complicate matters.
     New alliances are sprouting up as well as changing relationships between nations in the Middle East. These changes are driven by the prospect of an Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear arsenal. These changes include Russia’s relationship with Iran in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Russia’s contradictory relationship with Israel which allows it unrestricted access to strike Iranian weapons factories. Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is acting behind the scene but moving toward closer cooperation with Israel in response to Iranian territorial expansion and threshold nuclear weapons status. In addition, U.S. allies Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Jordan are all being affected by estimation of how far Iran might go and how far Israel can bend before it feels that it is has to take action.
     The Iranian leaders are intelligent and pragmatic in spite of their ideological Islamist extremism and hatred for Israel. They know that Israel would feel compelled to act when the Iranian nuclear program crosses a “red” line. There is a great deal of debate on just where that red line is.
     Unfortunately, the possibility of miscalculation is high. Iran has been flaunting its obligation to the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty and ignoring its restrictions on peaceful atomic development in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The situation is swiftly approaching Israel’s nuclear red line. A report recently issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) offers details about Iran increasing its nuclear enrichment on the eve of U.S. President Biden planned trip to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
      If Iran is confident that it knows where Israel red line is, Iranian leaders will probably stop before crossing it. They will then accept the Biden administration’s prompting a return to the JCPOA which will restore critical Iranian economic lifelines. Such a return to the JCPOA would have happened already if Iran could not sell oil to China at high price without any Significant U.S. sanction of penalty.
Please read Part 2 next

Nuclear waste protesters want vote over seismic testing in Irish Sea bbc.com

Construction of nuclear reactors in Korea to resume in 2024 asianews.network

OPG, X-energy to examine industrial applications for Xe-100 world-nuclear-news.org

Regulators Recommend License for Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage usnews.com