Hillary Clinton questioned whether the U.S. should move forward with a trillion-dollar modernization of its nuclear forces and warned she would be tougher on nations that commit cyberattacks, according to leaked audio reported by The New York Times. cbsnews.com

PAKISTAN’S Defence Minister has threatened to “destroy” India – after India said on Thursday it had carried out “surgical strikes” on suspected militants preparing to infiltrate from Pakistan-ruled Kashmir. thesun.co.uk

A meeting between Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi is set to be held in Tokyo in mid-November, with a civil nuclear cooperation pact likely to be signed, a source said Friday. japantimes.co.jp

An United Kingdom investigation into clusters of cancer cases around Sellafield and Dounreay nuclear sites has found they were very unlikely to have been caused by radiation exposure. bbc.com

Entergy Corp., owner-operator of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, notified federal regulators Sept. 2 that the plant was ready to undergo a huge, comprehensive inspection of its equipment, staff and procedures. patrioledger.com

CGN Power Co., China’s biggest nuclear power operator, will acquire two nuclear power plants and an engineering unit from its parent company for 9.92 billion yuan ($1.5 billion). bloomberg.com

Hungary’s plan to build two additional reactors at Paks has reached an important milestone with the receipt of an environmental licence for the project, Attila Aszódi, the government commissioner responsible for Paks II, told World Nuclear News yesterday. world-nuclear-news.org

The joint venture with Electricite de France (EDF) and China General Nuclear Corporation (CGN) now has a name and that joint venture, called Nuclear New Builds Generation Company (NNB), has already begun signing contracts, AREVA announced Friday. nuclearstreet.com

The final agreements enabling construction of two EPR units at Hinkley Point C to proceed were signed today in London by the UK government, EDF and China General Nuclear. world-nuclear-news.org

A researcher at The University of Manchester has made a surprise finding after observing variations of a chemical bond with a radioactive metal called thorium – and this newly revealed relationship could one day contribute to improving nuclear fuel management. phys.org

The Russian Foreign Ministry is accusing the Pentagon of making a veiled threat to back its allies in an attack on Russia with nuclear weapons. foxnews.com

Russia’s R-30 Bulava submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) continues to be plagued with problems as a recent test failure shows. nationalinterest.org

       The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station near San Diego on the California coast was permanently shut down in 2013. Recently installed turbines from a Japanese manufacturer caused vibrations that damaged the steam pipes in the plant after only two years of operation. South California Edison decided to shut down the plant after the damage was discovered.

        Eventually, the U.S. will have a permanent geological repository for spent nuclear fuel but not before 2050 at the soonest. Both critics of the plant and the operators agree that it is imperative to move the fuel out of the reactor and cooling pool as soon as possible. If there is a loss of cooling water in the pool, the fuel rods will spontaneously burst into flames and spread radioactive materials far beyond the plant.

      The question of where to put the nuclear fuel in the reactor and the spent nuclear fuel in the cooling pool has aroused controversy and debate. SCE has proposed a location near the reactors on land that it owns on the coast to store the three million six hundred thousand pounds of nuclear fuel in temporary dry casks. The proposed storage site is on bluffs owned by SCE above the San Onofre State Beach just north of the site of the closed reactors. About a third of the spent nuclear fuel from the plant is already stored on the bluffs in casks. SCE proposes to place the other two thirds of the fuel in dry casks on the bluffs in 2017.  The location is between San Diego and Los Angeles, two major metropolitan areas that are home to over seventeen million people.

        Critics of the site proposed by SCE say that it is just about the worst possible choice for storing nuclear materials. The proposed storage site is in an area prone to earthquakes and tsunamis. Early this year there was significant erosion of the beach and cliffs near San Onofre. Global climate change is causing sea levels to rise and this will potentially increase the dangers of erosion of the beach and cliffs near the proposed storage site. The United States Geological Service says that there is a serious danger of extreme bluff, cliff and beach erosion which will increase over time. There is also an increasing risk of severe flooding in the area which can undercut coastal cliffs and cause them to collapse. The critics say that SCE chose the site because it was cheap and gave no serious consideration to the dangers to the people in the area.

       SCE says that its analysis of the proposed site and weather conditions indicate that there is no serious danger that the bluffs where the nuclear fuel will be stored are in any danger of collapse. They say that the dry casks are well designed and can withstand the condition on the bluff with little risk for at least eighty years by which time they expect there to be a permanent national repository available to take the fuel.

       One major concern of critics of the storage plan is the fact that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has now issued exemptions to SCE that relieve it from being responsible to provide emergency response beyond the ground of the plant to any nuclear accident at the plant. The Federal Emergency Management Agency will no longer monitor the readiness of SCE to provide emergency response beyond the plant. This worries officials who will have to provide any emergency response to the area around the plant. The California Office of Emergency Services has requested that FEMA reconsider this policy but FEMA has refused.

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in 2013 as seen from San Onofre State, photo D Ramey Logan:

 

There is no possibility of setting up nuclear plant in Punjab state in India says head of an major Punjab political party. google.com

Iran atomic chief: Trump presidency wouldn’t endanger nuclear deal. jpost.com

Jamaica applauds the technological advancement and the peaceful implementation of Russian nuclear technologies, Jamaica’s minister of science, energy and technology told Sputnik on Wednesday. sputniknews.com

The United Arab Emirates’ nuclear program is a model for other states to follow, officials have said. thenational.ae

       There have been tensions between India and Pakistan since both countries came into existence in 1949. They have gone to war three times. When India developed nuclear weapons, Pakistan quickly developed them as well. They have been engaged in simmering conflict in Kashmir for decades. A few years ago, a team from Pakistan staged a terrorist attack in Mumbai. The Indians claimed that the terrorists had connections to the Pakistani intelligence service which was denied by the Pakistanis.

       More recently, there have been anti-Indian protests which turned violent on the Indian side of the Line of Control in Kashmir. Pakistan criticized the Indian actions towards the protesters which prompted an angry response from India.

        A few days ago, a team from Pakistan crossed the Line of Control in Kashmir near the town of Uri and killed eighteen Indian soldiers. India accused the Pakistan military of being involved. The Pakistani government rejected not just the involvement of the Pakistani military but also said that the sophisticated Indian defense system on the line of control would have prevented anyone from Pakistan from crossing into India.

        India has just responded by firing artillery over the Line of Control and killing a few Pakistani soldiers. India has been charged with violating international laws  but has claimed that the shelling was part of a “surgical strike” against a terrorist camp that was planning on crossing the Line of Control. This charge has been rejected by Pakistan. Charges and counter-charges are being hurled back and forth.

       India has over one hundred nuclear warheads. India has short range nuclear ballistic missiles, submarine nuclear missile launch capability and jets that can deliver nuclear bombs. India has an official policy of not being the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict.

      Pakistan also has over a hundred nuclear warheads. They have medium range nuclear missiles, submarine nuclear missile launch capability and jets that can deliver nuclear bombs. Pakistan has a no-first use of nuclear weapons on foreign soil in a conflict. However, they have said that they would consider the use of nuclear weapons on invaders coming into Pakistan.

         The possibility of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan is increasing. Some members of the Indian public are calling for nuclear war. A member of the ruling party in the Indian Parliament has called for a nuclear attack on Pakistan. Pakistan has reacted by saying that any nuclear attack from India would be met by nuclear retaliation from Pakistan.

       Pakistan has recently announced that it was going to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to the border with India. They say that if the Indians stage an attack with ground troops and conventional weapons, the Pakistanis would retaliate with the tactical nuclear weapons. Any such conflict could easily escalate into a full blown exchange of nuclear warheads.

        An Indian – Pakistan nuclear war would be a disaster for both combatants and the rest of the world. It has been estimated that the detonation of a few as one hundred nuclear warheads could bring about a nuclear winter. Billions of people could starve to death and it might well end human civilization.

Kashmir: