Latest news with #TrinityTest
The Hill
20-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Hawley challenges Democrats over bipartisan RECA language in ‘big, beautiful bill'
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who scored a big win by getting Senate GOP leaders to add language extending the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to President Trump's budget package, is challenging Democrats not to contest the provision with the Senate parliamentarian. Hawley noted the bipartisan support behind RECA in urging Democrats to not challenge its presence in the Senate version of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' 'Democrats will soon have to decide whether to try to strop RECA out of the reconciliation bill (using the 'Byrd rules'). It stays in unless Democrats challenge. Don't do it! Survivors have waited too long. Let's get this done now!' Hawley posted on X. Hawley announced last week that GOP leaders agreed to include the largest expansion to date of the radiation exposure compensation program in President Trump's signature first-year legislation. It would expand the program to make residents affected from radioactive exposure in Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky and Alaska eligible for compensation and would fully cover people affected in 'downwind' areas such as Nevada, Utah and Arizona. 'The federal government dumped nuclear waste in the backyards of Missourians for decades—and then lied about it. These survivors sacrificed their health for our national security at the advent of the Manhattan Project, and their children and grandchildren have borne the burden of radioactive-linked illness for generations since,' Hawley said in a statement last week. Hawley is challenging Democrats who have supported the expansion of RECA to urge their leadership not to attempt to strip the language from the budget reconciliation package by litigating the issue with the Senate parliamentarian. Democrats are challenging an array of provisions in the massive package as violations of the Senate's Byrd Rule, which governs what legislation may be protected from filibusters under the budget reconciliation process. Democrats have already successfully knocked out several provisions, such as a funding cap that would have eliminated the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a key accomplishment of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act. The expansion of RECA has had strong bipartisan support in the Senate. Hawley joined Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) and Democratic Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) in January to reintroduce the Radiation Exposure Compensation Reauthorization Act to compensate Americans exposed to radiation by government nuclear programs. Heinrich said at the time that 'it's long overdue for Congress to pass an extension and expansion of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act that includes Tularosa Basin Downwinders whose communities and families were harmed by the fallout of the 1945 Trinity Test.' The Trinity Test, which took place in July of 1945 at the Alamogordo Bombing Range in New Mexico, was the first detonation of a nuclear weapon as part of the Manhattan project. Luján, when he joined Hawley in reintroducing the legislation in January, said that 'individuals affected by nuclear weapons testing, downwind radiation exposure and uranium mining are still waiting to receive the just they are owed.' A Democratic aide on Friday declined to say whether Democrats would challenge specifically the RECA language championed by Hawley. The source said that Senate Democratic staff are conducting a comprehensive review of policy provisions in the package.
NDTV
19-06-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
India, US, Israel And Others: How These 9 Countries Acquired Nuclear Weapons
For over three decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu consistently claimed Iran was months away from becoming a nuclear power and that it posed an existential threat to his nation. His alarms, dating back to the 1990s, have often clashed with assessments by US intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), both of which say Iran halted its weapons programme in 2003. In June, a day before the US and Iran were to discuss a new nuclear deal, Israel launched preemptive strikes on Tehran 's nuclear sites in Natanz and Arak, citing urgent intelligence. Israel called the move necessary to stop an "irreversible" nuclear threat and avert a potential "holocaust." Nine countries currently possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, France, China, the United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea. Together, they hold nearly 13,000 nuclear warheads, with the US and Russia alone accounting for about 90 per cent of the total. Here's how each became a nuclear power: How They Got the Bomb United States The US was the first country to develop nuclear weapons during World War II under the Manhattan Project. In July 1945, it conducted the world's first nuclear test (Trinity Test) and dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August that year. Russia (Formerly The Soviet Union) The Soviet Union tested its first nuclear bomb in 1949, four years after the US. Aided by homegrown research and intelligence obtained through espionage from the Manhattan Project, the USSR, by the 60s, built the world's largest nuclear arsenal, eventually surpassing the US in total warheads. United Kingdom The UK, initially part of WWII nuclear research, was later excluded from the US Manhattan Project. It developed its own bomb and tested it in 1952, later strengthening its programme through a nuclear cooperation deal with the US. France France developed an independent nuclear programme to assert global power post-WWII, testing its first bomb in Algeria in 1960. It later built thermonuclear weapons and maintained a "force de frappe", a fully French-controlled deterrent delivered by air and submarines. China With early help from the Soviet Union, China tested its first nuclear bomb in 1964 at Lop Nur. After the Sino-Soviet split, it advanced independently, achieving thermonuclear capability by 1967. Today, China is rapidly growing its arsenal, with over 500 warheads reportedly in development. India India carried out its first nuclear test in 1974, called "Smiling Buddha," under the label of a "peaceful nuclear explosion." India's nuclear weapons programme is purely indigenous, with scientists from the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) and DRDO playing a critical role that led to India becoming a nuclear weapons state after a full test series in 1998 (Pokhran-II). India cited deterrence, particularly against China and Pakistan, as its motive. Pakistan In response to India's 1974 test, Pakistan ramped up its nuclear programme under physicist AQ Khan, allegedly with help from China. It conducted its first nuclear tests in May 1998, shortly after India's Pokhran-II. Pakistan continues to expand its arsenal, with a focus on short-range tactical nukes that raise concerns about regional escalation. Israel Israel is widely believed to have developed nuclear weapons by the late 1960s, aided by France in building the Dimona facility. Though it has never confirmed or denied its arsenal, US intelligence estimates it holds around 80-90 warheads. Israel follows a policy of "nuclear opacity" and has never conducted an acknowledged test. North Korea North Korea began developing nuclear infrastructure in the 1960s with Soviet support. It joined the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) in 1985 but withdrew in 2003, and conducted its first nuclear test in 2006. Since then, it has carried out several tests and claims to have miniaturised warheads for missiles. Nations That Gave Up Nuclear Weapons Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, formerly part of the Soviet Union, became independent nations after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991 and acquired a huge cache of warheads. These countries voluntarily gave up their nuclear arsenal and became signatories to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. South Africa reportedly collaborated with France and Israel in the 1970s to develop a nuclear weapon. A planned nuclear test in the Kalahari Desert was first halted in 1977. Roughly 12 years later, following continuous international pressure, the country dropped its plan to become a nuclear power.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
New Mexico delegation, radiation victims renew call for compensation
Tina Cordova, a founder of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, protests at the Trinity site on Oct. 21, 2023. (Danielle Prokop) In the one year since the federal Radiation Exposure Compensation Act expired, New Mexico survivors of federal nuclear testing programs said they have continued to watch family members and friends die. The RECA legislation, passed in 1990, compensated people who developed cancers or other illnesses as a result of radiation exposure from the United States' atomic programs. New Mexico's Trinity test downwinders and uranium miners who worked in the industry after RECA's coverage period (post-1971) have been notably excluded. New Mexico's congressional delegation have made numerous attempts to expand and extend the bill, with the U.S. Senate passing the bill to do so twice last year. But the bill never made it to the U.S. House floor for a vote, and expired on June 10, 2024. Time's run out for the Radiation Exposure and Compensation Act Tina Cordova, co-founder of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, which includes victims and descendants downwind from the 1945 Trinity Test, told attendees during a Tuesday news conference marking the RECA-expiration anniversary, two of her cousins have died in the last year, one 'after battling brain cancer for many, many years.' Her youngest brother, Cordova noted, also had also been diagnosed with kidney cancer and is fighting the disease alongside his daughter, who also has cancer. 'My family has five generations of cancer now,' said Cordova, herself a cancer survivor, whose battle for justice serves as the centerpiece for Lois Lipman's award-winning documentary First We Bombed New Mexico. 'My family is not unique. We've documented thousands of families like mine exhibiting four and five generations of cancer. That's the face of the legacy that we've been left to deal with.' Loretta Anderson (Pueblo of Laguna), a patient advocate and co- founder of the Southwest Uranium Miners Coalition Post-71, said she works with 1,000 uranium miners and their families and, in the year since RECA expired, counts 10 who have died. 'They died with no compensation, no apology from the government, and many of them were part of our coalition,' Anderson said. 'We mourn, we hurt, we cry, we suffer. Many of our people are sick. Our young are now being diagnosed with cancer and other horrific diseases. We're losing our young. We're losing our future.' We're losing our young. We're losing our future. – Loretta Anderson, Pueblo of Laguna and Southwest Uranium Miners Coalition Post-71 Congress 'is responsible for those deaths,' Democratic U.S. Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, who represents the state's 3rd Congressional District, said during the call, in which she exhorted her Republican colleagues in the U.S. House 'to stand up for their constituents. 'Congress has failed its moral obligation…Speaker [Mike] Johnson needs to let us vote.' Nuclear survivors have lobbied for decades for inclusion in RECA. The current push comes amid the Trump administration's push for renewed uranium mining in New Mexico and elsewhere, which both Cordova and Anderson oppose. 'Our government has not cleaned up the mess they made in the beginning,' Cordova said. 'They have not done anything to address the first round of uranium mining. And as it relates to downwinders, this is the 80th anniversary since Trinity. We have no faith in the government coming back to take care of the mess they made, and they want us to support new mining? Personally, we cannot do that.' Long-stalled NM uranium mines now 'priority projects' at Cibola Forest, leader tells employees Anderson noted that she lives 11 miles from the former Jackpile-Paguate uranium mine, now a Superfund site. 'And so, we're going to fight,' any new mines, she said. 'We need to compensate, take care of the lands that they destroyed…before any mining is done, because people are sick, people are suffering… I know many of our people here on the reservations and surrounding communities do not support uranium mining here ever again.' U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) noted that the Trump administration's push for more uranium mining should serve as yet another reason to support RECA. 'The fundamental issue here is like,' let's own up to what we did as a as a government,'' Heinrich said. 'That's just the right and moral thing to do…you can't expect communities to embrace new mining if you haven't fixed the problems that you created 50, 60 years ago.' As for reintroducing RECA and pushing it through Congress, Leger Fernández said she has spoken directly with Johnson, whose concerns, she said, had more to do with the cost than the concept of compensation. Cordova noted that if survivors could sue the federal government in civil court, they'd likely receive millions in dollars in settlements — far more than is expected in the event that RECA passes. That being said, 'there is no amount of money that anyone could ever pay me for the pain and suffering that my family has seen…and there is absolutely no way that the government could ever make my family whole again,' she said. U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), who has sponsored RECA legislation every year since he entered Congress in 2008, and most recently co-sponsored the RECA expansion bill with GOP Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri. Luján noted the irony of Republicans worrying about the cost of RECA, given that Republicans in the U.S. House are 'about to pass a bill for a third time that's going to add over $2 trillion to the debt.' Nonetheless, Luján noted, ultimately RECA is a 'bipartisan issue and it has a bipartisan solution — I would argue bipartisan solutions. Alongside our congressional delegation, I commit to continue to work with our bipartisan coalition to keep RECA moving forward.' And to the victims 'still living and suffering…I'll never stop fighting for your stories to be heard and for justice to be delivered.'
News.com.au
30-05-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
Going nuclear: Trump's EOs offer atomic opportunities for Australian uranium industry
President Trump has signed sweeping executive orders promoting the US nuclear industry The EOs set out a plan to quadruple US nuclear power production Australia has the largest uranium reserves in the world The morning of July 16, 1945, a thunderstorm washed the Jornada del Muerto desert clean, delaying a test that would change the course of history. By about 5am, the skies had cleared and winds had died to nothing. At exactly 5:29 and 21 seconds, the pre-dawn darkness was engulfed in blindingly bright light, transforming from yellow to red to purple and finally white in a matter of seconds. A massive shockwave thundered through the earth as a 600-metre-wide fireball punched up into the heavens, scattering what cloud remained. As the dust settled, where once had stood a 30-metre-tall steel tower topped by a plutonium bomb, there was now only desert sand – transformed into radioactive-green glass. The Trinity nuclear weapon test was a success. Humans had harnessed the power of the atom, if only for a single, stunning moment. A nuclear future Fast forward almost 80 years, and nuclear power produces 9% of the world's electricity generation. No longer the bogeyman of our grandparents' generation, nuclear power has become a standard component of the global energy mix, regarded with caution and optimism rather than outright fear. Today, there are about 440 nuclear reactors operating in 31 countries, providing about 25% of the globe's low-carbon energy. The United States is home to 94 of those reactors across 54 nuclear power plants, but that number is almost certain to rise in the next decade. US President Trump has signed sweeping executive orders aimed at kick-starting a new era of production within the US nuclear power industry, positioning it as a leader in nuclear technology once again. The EOs outline a plan to quadruple nuclear power generation in the US from 100 gigawatts to 400GW by 2050. To achieve that, the US government intends to ramp up power production at existing nuclear plants and initiate construction on at least 10 new large reactors by 2030. Supported by federal grants and funding from the Department of Energy, much of that new nuclear energy capacity will be used to support data centres and similar Artificial Intelligence infrastructure. Of course, building more reactors is all well and good, but you still need enriched uranium to power them. Russia and China dominate enriched uranium production One of the core focuses of Trump's new nuclear power EOs is divesting uranium imports away from Russia and China, which collectively account for about 57% of the world's enriched uranium production. They're followed by France (12%), the US itself (11%), the Netherlands (8%), the UK (7%) and Germany (6%). There are only four major companies that enrich uranium – Rosatom, CNNC, Urenco and Orano, all majority state-owned. Russia and China also have outsized control over global uranium mining production. Kazakhstan is the largest uranium miner globally, producing about 43% of total supply, followed by Canada (15%) Namibia (11%) and Australia (9%). As a former soviet bloc country, Kazakhstan has had close ties with Russia for decades, enriching much of its uranium with its northern neighbour. It's estimated about half of Kazakhstan's uranium is exported to China, with the rest going to Canada, Europe and the US. Trump is expected to invoke the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to declare a national emergency over America's reliance on Russian and Chinese enriched uranium and expand domestic conversion capacity. To that end, the administration intends to build out a commercial nuclear fuel recycling and reprocessing sector, a distinct departure from previous government policy which forbade the use of recycled fuel in commercial reactors. The EOs also detail a plan to expand domestic uranium conversion capacity and enrichment capabilities, with the end goal of producing enough enriched uranium to meet both civilian and defence reactor needs. What does it all mean for Australia? While the social, economic and environmental impacts from this step change in US energy strategy are bound to be far reaching and potentially world changing over the next few decades, today they represent an opportunity. Although much of it is locked away by state-based uranium mining bans, Australia holds about one third of total global resources of uranium. South Australia is home to the only producing mines at present, but the deposits themselves are scattered across the country, many in premier mining districts. As a political, economic and geographically strategic ally of the United States of America, Australia – alongside our cousins over in Canada – is incredibly well placed to take advantage of increased uranium demand. 'The latest Executive Orders reflect a clear, strategic shift in US energy policy,' Recharge Metals managing director Felicity Repacholi said. 'With projections suggesting the US will need up to four times more uranium to meet its clean energy and national security goals, the focus is finally returning to where it all begins – the mine gate. 'You can't expand nuclear energy, conversion, or enrichment capacity without a reliable supply of uranium.' Stepping into the uranium demand gap Recharge Metals (ASX:REC) is an ASX-listed uranium and lithium mining company with projects in the US and Canada. The company's US-based Carter project in Montana holds two uranium deposits with a total of about 5.1 million pounds of the yellow stuff. REC is currently moving through the permitting process for Carter, a regulatory requirement that could be drastically expedited under Trump's new EOs. 'There's now real momentum from the US government to reduce reliance on foreign uranium supply. That sends a strong signal to markets, developers, and explorers alike,' Repacholi explained. 'The increased regulatory flexibility and positive sentiment are making it more feasible than ever to bring new supply online. The US needs uranium and Recharge aims to be part of that solution.' Australian uranium companies are already benefiting from a surge in positive sentiment for the industry, which has been under pressure from short sell positions in recent months. At time of writing, Boss Energy (ASX:BOE) has climbed 24% in the last month, with several fellow ASX uranium companies adding materially to their share prices in the same period. Deep Yellow (ASX:DYL) shares have jumped 16.7%, Terra Uranium (ASX:T92) 16.67% and Recharge Metals 80% in the last 30 days. Trump's push to accelerate the US nuclear energy industry isn't without its flaws, and critics no doubt have a raft of valid concerns, but even without this new administrative push the demand for uranium has only been growing. AI data centres hungry for low-carbon energy Ever since the artificial intelligence arms race between major technology companies like Microsoft and Apple kicked off, tech companies have been starving for more energy generation capacity. As many of them have climate and emissions targets, nuclear power has emerged as a highly desirable, low-carbon option. Last year, Microsoft signed a 20-year deal to reopen the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor, while Google has ordered six or seven small nuclear reactors from California'sKairos Power and Amazon purchased a nuclear-powered data centre from Talen Energy. Goldman Sachs estimates some 85-90GW of nuclear capacity will be needed just to meet data centre power demands by 2030. 'In the US alone, big tech companies have signed new contracts for more than 10 GW of possible new nuclear capacity in the last year, and Goldman Sachs Research sees potential for three plants to be brought online by 2030,' a research note stated. The World Nuclear Association's 2023 Nuclear Fuel Report predicts a 28% increase in uranium demand from 2023 to 2030, and a 51% increase from 2031-2040. That would take global uranium demand from 80,000 tonnes today, to about 102,000 pounds in 2030 and 120,000 pounds by 2040. Whether it's the Trump Administration or the Nasdaq's Magnificent Seven driving demand, the appetite for uranium is growing, and Australia is very well placed to meet it. At Stockhead, we tell it like it is. While Recharge Metals is a Stockhead advertiser, it did not sponsor this article.
India.com
02-05-2025
- Science
- India.com
India Pakistan war: What is the difference between Atom and Hydrogen bomb and which is more dangerous? How and when they were invented? Most powerful bomb…
(AI image) New Delhi: A major revolution in the arms race came when America invented the atomic bomb. The devastation caused by this weapon in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan shocked the entire world, though it was just the beginning of these destructive weapons. After this, the hydrogen bomb or thermonuclear bomb was developed, which has not been used in any war yet and whose power is many times greater than that of the atomic bomb. Here, let's understand the difference between the atomic bomb and the hydrogen bomb (thermonuclear bomb) and how they work. The atomic bomb, also known as A-bomb (atomic bomb), works on the process of nuclear fission to produce energy after the explosion. In this process, the nucleus of an atom is split into smaller parts, which typically produces free neutrons and photons, and releases a massive amount of energy. The most notable examples of the use of atomic bombs are the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The Atomic Bomb was developed during World War II under the Manhattan Project and tested for the first time in 1945 (Trinity Test) and later dropped on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Nuclear Bomb was developed during the Cold War when nations were seeking more powerful weapons. The first thermonuclear bomb test (hydrogen bomb), Ivy Mike, was conducted by the United States in Soviet Union tested the Tsar Bomba in 1961, which was the most powerful bomb ever detonated. The process of an atomic bomb explosion involves Nuclear Fission: Heavy isotopes such as Uranium-235 or Plutonium-239 undergo fission. Chain Reaction: The fission of these isotopes releases neutrons that trigger further fission in nearby atoms. Energy Release: This chain reaction releases a large amount of energy in the form of an explosion. What is a hydrogen bomb? A hydrogen bomb is a device that operates on a broad process involving both an atomic bomb (fission bomb) and a thermonuclear bomb (fusion bomb). Thermonuclear bombs, also known as hydrogen bombs or H-bombs, utilize nuclear fusion, where light atomic nuclei combine to form a heavier nucleus, releasing energy. How does a nuclear bomb work? Nuclear fusion: Hydrogen isotopes like deuterium and tritium combine under extreme pressure and temperature. Stepwise process: The atomic bomb or thermonuclear device, also referred to as a hydrogen bomb, typically involves a two-step process in which the fission bomb triggers the fusion reaction. Release of energy: Fusion releases even more energy compared to fission, resulting in a significantly more powerful explosion.
