About me

My photo
Teacher, activist, interested in energy technology, climate change, environmental issues and global security.

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

North Korean Nasty Surprise Is about to Blow up - Can We Save the World from a Nuclear Nightmare?

The Trump Washington Headquarters is underestimating the North Korean Military Capabilities. It may cause the death of millions!

I wrote about North Korean Issue a few years back. Meanwhile the things have developed to a nasty and much more worrying and risky direction - now we are counting days to one of most horrible miscalculations by a superpower in human history.

USA will get beaten as in Pearl Harbor. Ignoring the fact that even one nuclear device is enough to fry electronics and paralyze a modern war machine and large area infrastructure for months or years is very dangerous policy.

“For a nuclear explosion at an altitude of 50 miles, for example, the affected area on the ground would have a radius of roughly 600 miles and for an altitude of 100 miles the ground radius would be about 900 miles. For an explosion at 200 miles above the center of the (conterminous) United States, almost the whole country, as well as parts of Canada and Mexico, could be affected by the EMP. “

This is the approximate radius of EMP destruction of electric infrastructure for a nuclear device exploded in the altitude of 50 miles over the island of Ulleung-gun. (Map: Google Maps,126.3674441,6z?hl=fi)

This type of EMP-strike would cause also long lasting environmental catastrophes when nuclear reactors and spent fuel pools would have meltdowns after loss of power and chemical industry processes would also experience fires and spills because of long outages. Death toll would be in millions without any nuclear missile hitting the ground.

We have no time to loose. Negotiations must be started immediately with help of China. USA must reduce their military threat during the negotiations as an act of good will.

How to Avoid a Nuclear Conflict that Now Seems Unavoidable!

Make a Deal that is hard to resist by North Korea :

1. US$ 100 Billion in twenty years to develop North Korea in cooperation with its now being leaders to a modern state, funded by USA, China, Japan, EU. Russia and G7 and UN.

2. China will take care of decommissioning of the nuclear weapons arsenal of North Korea

3. Decommissioning all the North Korean nuclear reactors in ten years. Taking care of nuclear waste and bomb grade uranium and plutonium.

4. Constructing a modern renewable energy power generation infrastructure with smart grids and distributed power systems for also the distant rural areas. Modernizing the food production and industry of the country. Modernizing the health care and education system. Modernizing the social security system.

5. Truth commissions (like in South Africa after apartheid and in other conflict areas with severe crimes against humanity and human rights). Channeling hatred, anger, bitterness to power reconstruction work. Positive future as source for amnesty and forgiveness.

6. General amnesty for citizen level actors guilty of crimes part of state operated violence. 

7. Legal immunity against legal charges for the leaders of the country. Twenty years duty to cooperate in reconstruction of the country.

8. China central governed system would be the model to lead the country gradually to full  democracy in 20 years.

9. The goal would be a Union of Two Koreas in 20 years. Two different countries with different economies and political systems but common destination of wider cooperation and increased trade and cultural change as well as scientific research. Both countries reduce their military power and mutual tensions. 

10. The security and souverenity  of both Koreas is guaranteed by China, USA, Russia, Japan and UN. These countries are following the disarmament of both countries so that the threat of aggression against each other or against third parties can be reduced.

This list is just a getting started menu. Diplomats and politicians must have now brain storms to create additive or alternative plans. But please, don't stay still and wait for the black swan to land. We know it is already flying.


Thursday, March 24, 2016

We Almost Lost Brussels - Can We Really Afford Nuclear Power?

Yesterday ISIL-terrorists made a terrorist strike in Brussels, Belgium. Sad and disgusting!

...It could have been worse, a lot worse than that. Thousands of deaths and injured people. And hundreds of thousands of people could have been forced to leave their homes for decades. There could have been a large no-go-zone of thousands of square kilometers. Radioactively contaminated.


...The terrorist group, that made the suicide-bombings could have realized their Plan-A: a strike against nuclear power plant of three reactors. It seems that they could have got help from the personnel of the NPP. Bombs and bomb vests were ready.


...They had to accept Plan-B and blow up themselves at airport and in a subway car. The police had earlier found one of their headquarters and arrested one member of their group. They had to change target and act quickly. So the nuclear power plant was saved - police and military had by then some glue what they had been planning and they had 140 special troops armed soldiers and policemen guarding the Belgian NPPs.

We have entered in the era of nuclear terrorism. We have been told that this kind of scenario is impossible or highly improbable to become reality. Nuclear industry keep on telling that nuclear power plants are safe and large scale nuclear accidents don't happen.

But this seems to be a taboo. Nobody should talk about it  - so the terrorists don't hear about it - and we'll be safe.

But they already have. WTC strike was also a Plan-B. Plan-A was to strike against US NPPs with passanger jet planes. But the mullahs were suspicious whether it would cause too many victims. And so they chose plan-B: WTC and Pentagon.

Environmental organisations have been warning about nuclear-terrorism for decades. It seems that politicians have not been willing to listen to them. I think they should. The alternative may be extremist-made Fukushima-2, somewhere in Belgium, France, Great Britain or even here in Finland. Can we really afford that? Or should we choose renewables and decommission our nuclear fleets before it is too late.


Friday, January 22, 2016

Case Litvinenko and Hanhikivi-1 Nuclear Power Plant

Case Litvinenko

Yesterday we got the Litvinenko Inquiry published It was about the time!

The Litvinenko Case seems to be quite clear: two members of Russian FSB got rid of former FSB employee Alexander Litvinenko by giving him tea tainted with Polonium-210 - lethal radionuclide produced in nuclear reactors. There was still not 100% certainty of FSB being behind the murder or whether the two FSB officers were really quilty of this cold blooded murder. But it seems obvious that this is just the case.

And if this is the case so it is most probable that the 5 micrograms of Polonium-210 originated from a Russian nuclear reactor. A reactor owned and controlled by Russian ROSATOM. And the company is strictly under the rule of Mr. Vladimir Putin, the president of Russian Federation. As well as FSB is.

Hanhikivi-1 Nuclear Reactor and Case Litvinenko

ROSATOM is also the company building the sixth nuclear reactor for Fennovoima in North-western Finland. After several quite strange political swings and despite of majority of Finns being against the project.

And Mr. Putin said just a few weeks ago that he is happy that the Finnish government allowed the Hanhikivi project to be licensed  . Getting the green light was very important for the Russian nuclear industry. I would say it was a question of life and death. Finland seems to be the nuclear guinea pig of the world - when Olkiluoto-3 deal was made the other western countries started their nuclear projects anew after Chernobyl depression. And now Hanhikivi-1 NPP will offer Russians their long awaited first western Europe NPP-construction deal. Their geopolitical plan is moving on.

But What Is the Price for Finland - Democracy?

A terrorist attack made by a nuclear state using nuclear poisoning should be strictly condemned by all democratic societies. If that is not done, such countries continue to use this kind of dirty weapons as a means of their foreign policy. And it was not only Litvinenko that was targeted: tens of thousands of innocent people were possibly harmed by super-poison Polonium-210: 
"British Airways later published a list of 221 flights of the contaminated aircraft, involving around 33,000 passengers, and advised those potentially affected to contact the UK Department of Health for help."

The only thing that could affect this kind of dirty tricks would be economical means. If Finnish government would put Hanhikivi on hold it would make the Russians think twice about their means of foreign policy.

But there is big money involved - the Fortum gas power plants in Russia, worth billions of euros - which were indirectly mentioned by Mr. Putin when he thanked Finns for the continuation of Hanhikivi construction.
 And the fear of loosing these investments forced Finnish government (and obviously also Fortum) to continue with a project that will bring big losses to Finnish people, towns, cities and taxpayers.

A suspected murderer as a member of Russian Duma

The situation is even more complicated as the other of main suspects of the murder of Litvinenko, Mr. Andrey Lugovoy, enjoys immunity from prosecution because his membership of the Russian Duma. 

But should a country like Finland be making nuclear deals with a country that uses energy as geopolitical weapon? Or should we be accepting the policy of making and threatening other countries with radioactive dirty bombs and customized murdering weapons by a powerful nuclear arms state neighboring us? Or should we put moral before money?

I just ask.


Photos by Jukka Seppälä/ C.F.

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

It Smells Like FSB, It Sounds Like FSB and It Looks Like FSB - but They Tell It Is FENNOVOIMA-Migrit Solarna Energija-ROSATOM (and Some of Finnish Politicians believe it......?)

We have a strange theater play going on in Finland. It's called Fennovoima Hanhikivi -1 nuclear power plant.

The latest news tells us that Finnish ownership of Fennovoima NPP-company has risen over 60% because of a new owner Migrit solarna energija  from Croatia with a 9% piece of cake! Finnish ownership! Yes, indeed!

 Shareholders have invested huge Euro 26. 000 (Yes, correct, you just read it: twenty six thousand euros) on the company, which would be one of the main owners of a 8 Billion euro NPP with 9% ownership!

Well, you guessed right again! There will be Russian money behind the company. Lots of Russian money. Laundry? Who knows. My gut feeling is that there isn't everything OK on this case. Smells like geopolitics. Smells like Moscow driven  we want it - we'll get it -project. Smells like a Rosatom-FSB-overseas -project.

I just can't help it. And I guess I'm not the only one.

English Wikipedia tells about FSB:
"Putin emphasized three major tasks of the agency: neutralizing foreign espionage, safeguarding economic and financial security of the country and combating organized crime." 

"Safeguardin economic and financial security...." Hmmmm.....!

Now this is a test for Finnish politicians: do they have guts to whistle blow game-over signal to Kremlin and Fennovoima-Rosatom coalition or are they just puppets singing old songs of 70ties.

 Finnish national interests demand finishing this project now.

I hope Finnish Security Intelligence Service (SUPO)  will really use its international contacts to find out who really stands behind Migrit solarna energija and where do the money come from needed for Fennovoima ownership! This is also a question that EU want certainly get decent answers. Russian invasion on European energy industry while the conflict in Ukraine continues should ring some kind of alarm bells in Brussels.

We'll wait and see what happens!

Let's hope for the best!


Sunday, March 8, 2015

Energy Change Movement Launches Its Campaign - the Goal: 100 % Renewable Energy Finland in 2050

Last Thursday - 5th March 2015 - there was a campaign launch for the Energiaremontti2015 campaign. Here is the press release:

Press Release 5 March
Finland is starting an Energy Renewal! Old energy policy has reached dead end.
The Energiaremontti2015 campaign, which translates as “energy renewal or renovation 2015”, has gathered support from all Finnish parliamentary parties. The campaign was published today, and is also backed by an excited group of supporters from companies and the scientific community nationwide. Young candidates from all parliamentary parties support the campaign.
They have a common message: Renew our Energy! Let’s seize the opportunities provided by the breakthrough of new energy technologies and renewable energy and make them a competitive advantage for Finland.
The aim of the campaign is Finland’s transition to a 100 % renewable, energy efficient and smart energy system. The change starts right now, and it must be ready by 2050. The use of coal in electricity and heat production must be stopped by 2025 and the use of oil and natural gas by 2035. By 2050, transportation must also operate on renewables only. The campaign does not call for prematurely closing currently operational nuclear reactors nor for revoking permits already given to new reactors.
The campaign was initiated by citizens who are excited about the possibilities that new energy provides. “Finland has been hitting the breaks when it comes to energy policy, relying on obsolete assumptions about energy. It’s finally time to take some bold steps towards a new energy future”, says Campaign Manager Piia Kuosmanen.
Updating our energy system will bring new clients to Finnish companies that can then hire new employees. When the domestic market is working, our most competitive energy solutions can compete on the world market, bringing vital export opportunities.
Professor Peter Lund, who studies new energy systems in Aalto University, supports the campaign: “Energy and climate issues are the biggest challenges of our time. They can’t be solved by looking back but by investing in new energy opportunities. It’s high time for Finland to step into the new era of energy thinking. Favoring Finnish products brings us jobs, exports and growth, also when it comes to energy. At the same time we can solve pressing climate challenges.”
A group of politicians supporting the campaign demand that the goal to go 100 % renewable is written in the next government’s program. “Finland as a nation needs a common energy vision that extends from the left wing to the right wing of politics. This vision must be a Finland that is 100 % renewable. Change has to start now”, the group says in their statement.  
To learn more about the Energiaremontti2015 campaign, please contact:
Campaign Manager Piia Kuosmanen, +358 45 138 3184,
Links (In Finnish):
Energiaremontti2015 on Twitter @Energiaremontti
Energiaremontti2015 on Facebook 

*       *       *

Let's do it now!


Friday, December 5, 2014

Could Countries that Do Not Have Nuclear Weapons Have a Counter Strike Possibility After Being Attacked with Nuclear Weapons?

After the mankind has opened the Pandora's box of nuclear age it seems quite clear that the only thing that keeps us avoiding nuclear war is the threat of a nuclear counter strike. This balance of fear is maintained by nuclear states controlling each other not least with treaties and agreements reducing their arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

Arts-photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

But for me, personally, being a pacifist by heart, it has been of great concern when nuclear states like USA or Russia have directly or indirectly mentioned the possibility of a preemptive tactical nuclear strike against countries that do not necessarily have nuclear weapons.

Especially the situation in Ukraine has been reminding us of the possibility of first use of nuclear weapons against a nation that does not own one. The new military doctrine of Kremlin mentions nuclear weapons as a possible countermeasure in a situation where the existence of the Russian state is threatened by attack with conventional weapons. But it is left open when this kind of situation could occur - this can be freely translated by the Russian government. And what makes me to worry about it is how some Russian military leaders have taken the possibility of using nuclear weapons as a part of the political discussion on  Ukrainian war.

But should the countries with no nuclear weapons arsenal start gaining the Bomb?

There is evidence of a nuclear renaissance based on some government's will to create a nuclear weapons arsenal of their own. For some Arabic countries the threat they believe to occur because of Israeli or Iranian nuclear arms it seems obvious that they are participating on nuclear programs having their own Bomb in mind. And there are many countries around the world that are secretly the friends of the Bomb, though officially they have nothing to do with it. Their nuclear power is only for peaceful purposes. So does Iran also claim. Who believes these promises.

Building up new nuclear reactors is creating new nuclear weapons states.

And I can understand the point behind this thinking: why should only the U.S.A. , China, Russia, India, France, the UK, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, Iran have nuclear weapons? Why not others? Russians and Americans did not ask anybody for permission to build up their Bombs. Nor did the others. Why should us?

Well, we have gone way too far that road to turn back - or have we?

Imagine if!

We could just make a little imaginary exercise: we could think what will happen, if the countries without nuclear weapons were creative enough to find out their very own possibility of counter strike (in the case their land has been targeted with a nuclear strike) without having their own nuclear weapons.

All they have to do is realize, how they could cause an equivalent economical loss to the nuclear invader, than the strike causes them. And there is a clever and simple - as well as much cheaper than creating your own nuclear arms program - way to do it.

You just train, say a few hundred commandos, to attack the nuclear power plants and spent nuclear fuel pools for the possibility that some government would run a  nuclear attack on your country.

 Then you have only to officially announce of having this kind of special force. That's it. No nuclear state is so stupid that it risks of attacking with nuclear weapons such a country, that is capable of having a counter strike with conventional weapons / special commandos that will cause hundreds of billions to thousands of billions of dollars loss to the target country and leave more severe radioactive fallout than after a limited strike with nuclear weapons.

But is it against international treaties about warfare to attack nuclear reactors or spent fuel pools?

Sure it is, but as well the nuclear strike against any country is. And if it is remained as a counter strike threat, it is as ethical as having nuclear weapons ready to be launched if someone attacks you with nuclear missiles. This is only fare for the poor countries that have no possibility to produce their own nuclear bombs....

Well, after seen this imaginary possibility to have their own counter measures for tactical nuclear attacks, some countries may announce of this possibility. Or most probably not. But one thing I hope will happen is that the strategists of nuclear powers will abandon all plans to attack with nukes on countries without nuclear weapons - because they know now: even a single nuclear detonation on others territory could cost them thousands of billions of dollars - it's simply too risky a business!

And some people still think that nuclear power is safe......

No nukes is better!

Renewable energy is the only safe, ethical, democratic and environmentally reasonable power source we have. And it is also economically competitive now! Let's make the change - together!


Saturday, October 11, 2014

Finland - 20 years behind others - in energy politics

Finland is seen as a country of leading technologies and a superior schooling system. And I'm proud to be Finnish for many reasons.

Thinking of the 70'ies: the energy policy of Finland   Photo: J.S. / C.F

But there is one sector in our society that has never left 1970'ies. And it is the centralized power generating policy.

We are hearing the same arguments about cheap base load power generated in nuclear power plants year after year. The same thesis and phrases we are used to hear for many decades.


The rest of the world does not speak the same language any more.

Nuclear power is out.

It is out without state (taxpayers) subsidiaries. Hinkley Point is the last fortress of nuclear industry to survive, asking for common money to be paid for their save-the-earth nuclear nightmare: world-record-expensive new Areva-reactors. And the case is not yet closed....

Or then there is still this Russian nuclear-arms-and-power-combination-giant, ROSATOM. It is trying to get leading role on worlds nuclear power and nuclear fuel market. Nobody knows (perhaps except Mr. Putin) how much Russian state is dumping money on it to keep it going. But if it were an ordinary company running only with private money, it's story could have ended long ago....

And the Chinese and Indian nuclear projects are still running..... (they have the Bomb....)

But solar power is the answer. And wind. And geothermal. And tidal waves. And bio-energy. 

Renewables are the winners of the future. And the future is already here.

But we, the Finns (or at least our politicians), are slow to learn.

We have high quality science. We have skilled scientists. We have talented professors demanding energy change.  We have over 60 % of our citizens opposing the construction of Fennovoima nuclear power plant. Most of Finns are interested in solar energy and other renewables. But our government is showing green light to Fennovoima and nuclear power in general, keeping on shouting the old mantras of 70'ties about cheap power for the industry, while gaining the most expensive one.

Perhaps it would now be the time for them to read the news and think twice before they continue repeating their outdated phrases. The times they are a changing!

Stop Fennovoima NPP project!           Photo: J.S. / C.F.