Ambient office = 118 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 109 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 104 nanosieverts per hour

Avocado from Central Market = 89 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 101 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 89 nanosieverts per hour

     The Group of Seven is an inter-governmental political forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the USA. The G7 members just held a three-day summit in Cornwall, England. According to a joint statement issued at the conclusion of the summit, the G7 countries will lead a technology-driven transition to net-zero carbon emissions. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson asked the other leaders to “to seize the opportunity to fight and build back better from coronavirus, uniting to make the future fairer, greener and more prosperous”.
     The Carbis Bay Communiqué, titled Our Shared Agenda for Global Action to Build Back Better, noted the “clear roadmap” provided last month by the International Energy Agency. The G7 members said that they would prioritize the most urgent and polluting sectors and activities. The heads of state of Australia, India, South Korea and South Africa joined the G7 members at their summit. They said, “We will continue to work together with these and all our partners in tackling global challenges.”
     In the energy section, the G7 said that they will “increase energy efficiency, accelerate renewable and other zero-emissions energy deployment, reduce wasteful consumption, leverage innovation all whilst maintaining energy security.” In their own individual countries, G7 members are committed to achieving an “overwhelmingly” decarbonized power system in the 2030s, and internationally, to aligning official international financing with the global achievement of net-zero green house gas emission no later than 2050 and for deep emission reductions in the 2020s.
     The G7 communiqué said, “We will phase out new direct government support for international carbon-intensive fossil fuel energy as soon as possible, with limited exceptions consistent with an ambitious climate neutrality pathway, the Paris Agreement, 1.5°C goal and best available science. To be credible, ambitions need to be supported by tangible actions in all sectors of our economies and societies.”
     Coal power generation is the single biggest cause of green house gas emissions. The G7 have committed to rapidly scale-up technologies and policies that further accelerates the transition away from unabated coal capacity. The communiqué said, “This transition must go hand-in-hand with policies and support for a just transition for affected workers and sectors so that no person, group or geographic region is left behind.”
      International investments in unabated coal must end now according to the communiqué. They added that they are committed to an end to new direct government support for unabated international thermal coal power generation by the end of 2021. This involves Official Development Assistance, export finance, investment and financial and trade promotion support.
     With respect to industry and innovation, the communiqué said that the G7 will focus on accelerating progress on electrification and batteries, hydrogen, carbon capture, usage and storage, zero-emission aviation and shipping “and for those countries that opt to use it”, nuclear power.
     In the first week of June, the 6th Mission Innovation Ministerial was held along side the 12th Clean Energy Ministerial. The Green Powered Future Mission was launched at this event. This mission is the third and supplements the Hydrogen and Shipping Missions. The G7 leaders said that they “fully support” launching Mission Innovation phase two and the Clean Energy Ministerial third phase.
       Sama Bilbao y León is the director general of World Nuclear Association. In response to the communiqué, she said, “If the G7 nations are committed to phasing out coal, then they will need to replace it with a low-carbon, affordable and around-the-clock proven energy source – only nuclear fits the bill. “Investing in nuclear energy will create jobs, reinvigorate economies and protect the planet. The G7 nations must turn their ambitions into actions and take all the steps necessary to maximize the contribution of nuclear power plants in operation today and ensure a rapid and substantial increase in nuclear new build.”

Ambient office = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 104 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 120 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 113 nanosieverts per hour

     Foratom, the European nuclear trade body, and Nuclear Medicine Europe, which represents the pharmaceutical and imaging equipment companies in the field of nuclear medicine, have just issued a joint position paper which states that Europe must take action to sustain the current level of the medical radioisotope supply. They say that the European Union should promote new research reactor capacity. There should be innovation in the sector and design modifications of the current fleet.
     The title of the joint position paper is Medical Uses of Nuclear Technology: Role, Challenges and Perspectives. It explains the technicalities of nuclear medicine, presents the scope of the current muclear medicine sector in the E.U. It also highlights the challenges that must be overcome both at the regulatory and supply chain levels.
     The paper points out that nuclear technology plays a significant role in the medical sector. Medical applications include the production of radioisotopes and the development of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. These technologies save thousands of live each day. Every year, over nine million patients in Europe benefit from nuclear medicine in the diagnosis and treatment of illnesses such as cancer, cardiovascular or neurological disorders.
     The paper says, “The European nuclear medicine sector, while doing its best to provide Europeans with the required medical services, is currently facing a number of challenges. These may have a significant impact on its future role in the EU if no changes are implemented.”   
     The paper mentions a number of key issues related to supply chain investment needs and the regulatory framework which must be addressed in order to maintain the edge that the E.U. enjoys today in the field globally. The current level of medical radioisotopes supply must be increased in order to address the increase in demand that has been forecast.
     Foratom and Nuclear Medicine Europe say that the E.U. should:
• promote new research reactor capacity along with innovation
• reconsider reimbursement systems and levels for radiopharmaceutical products
• develop a robust supply chain which goes beyond irradiation
• reconsider and adapt clinical research and development of new radiopharmaceutical compounds.
     They also recommend that the E.U.:
• take steps to better recognize and support the role of nuclear technology and it non-power applications
• quickly take actions identified in the European Commission’s Strategic Agenda for Medical Ionizing Radiation Applications (SAMIRA) Action Plan which was adopted in February of 2021
• support the implementation and use of low-enriched uranium
• homogenize markets across the Member State level
• support regulatory frameworks for the development of new medicines and reimbursement models for nuclear medicine application
• renovate nuclear medicine equipment, especially in the E.U. periphery countries
• secure a level playing field for the development of low-carbon technologies
     General Yves Desbazeille is the Director of Foratom. He said, “Nuclear technology offers many different important applications apart from providing low-carbon electricity at an affordable cost. Nuclear medicine is one of them as it enables access to diagnostic and lifesaving treatments technologies. Although the EU is involved in the nuclear medicine sector and its developments, more has to be done to address the current challenges in order to maintain the edge that the EU enjoys today in this field globally.”
     Antonis Kalemis, is the president of Nuclear Medicine Europe. He added that “The European nuclear medicine sector – like the wider nuclear industry – faces several challenges, from negative attitudes towards nuclear energy/radiation, uncertainty over funding in new nuclear energy capacity and the management of nuclear waste. We recommend that nuclear technology and its non-power applications should be better recognized and supported at the EU level. We also call for an EU roadmap dedicated to nuclear medicine research and development.”

Ambient office = 84 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Crimini mushroom from Central Market = 121 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 111 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 99 nanosieverts per hour

Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     Here are the recommendations of the position paper.  
Recommendation 1: The U.K. published an Energy White Paper that mentioned a demonstration reactor. Considering the current state of development of U.K. and world advanced modular reactor (AMR) technology, it is recommended that the demonstration reactor should feature high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) technology, Major consideration should be given to demonstrating hydrogen generation using nuclear heat.
Recommendation 2: A suitable body that is equipped and empowered to deliver the HTGR project should be given the task of specifying, developing and pursuing the path to a U.K.-based HTGR demonstrator. This project would include directing all the research and development that is required to define an optimum route, monitoring whether and how these optima change as the studies proceed, and re-optimizing programs as needed.
Recommendation 3:  Research and development of closed nuclear fuel cycles should be continued to allow the U.K. to follow developments in these systems and to gauge whether, or when, such systems will find a place in the U.K. energy market.
Recommendation 4: The U.K. should maintain an ongoing view of developments in AMR systems. This should be led by a body that is not conflicted by claims and lobbying by any particular system proposer. The Generic Feasibility Assessment has provided an excellent example of a platform that could host this task. However, a suitable ‘interest-free” organization would have to be established with exemplary peer review.
Recommendation 5: A suitable broadly-based advisory body should be found to provide advice to the government on the forward nuclear program. The Nuclear Innovation Research and Advisory Board (NIRAB) or a successor could fill this role. NIRAB appears to have established the possible extent and value of such advice.
Recommendation 6: The Climate Change Committee should research, with suitable assistance, the possibilities of a wider role for nuclear in the net-zero path.
Recommendation 7:  The Energy Systems Catapult (ESC) is an independent, not-for-profit, organization for industry, government, academia and research. It should benefit from other modeling expertise in setting up and running transparent level playing field models to monitor economic developments. This should motivate improvements and detect unrealistic optimism.
Recommendation 8:  A platform similar to that in Recommendation 4 should be established for all energy sources present in the net-zero path to provide a clear and unbiased view of the current status of net zero.
     The fact that the government has set out on a thirty-year action plant is a great reason for optimism according to the position paper. However, implementation of nuclear energy “where appropriate and advantageous” must avoid being “side-lined by unsupported hyperbole”.
      The position paper says that “It is to be hoped that the ‘best for the UK, best for the planet’ message can be turned into reality. Regarding timescales, the present situation is crucial, with any delays immediately manifesting themselves on the critical path for a nuclear demonstrator by 2030, and by inference the strong prospect of negatively impacting the 2050 deadline.”