About me

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

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.


Friday, September 19, 2014

Nuclear Finlandisation - Finnish Government Agrees on 100 years Russian Nuclear Dependency

“It is a 100-year-long project. 10 years to construct, 60 years to operate, then hopefully 20 years to operate to get an extension approved by the state, and then 10 years to decommission,” (ROSATOM Overseas’ representative Roman Dyukarev)

There is a hell of a discussion going on in Finland about finlandisation. I think that is just a part of modern finlandisation. You are not allowed to talk about the subject - economical-political decisions based on not conflicting the Russian interests if our own business interests are threatened at the same time.

Our former Minister of the Environment, Mr. Ville Niinistö made the discussion by mentioning the word finlandisation on Financical Times interview a few days ago . Leading politicians have called Minister Niinistö unpatriotic for his outcome on the issue. Also leading opposition parties have been criticizing Niinistö for using that ugly word. And president Sauli Niinistö was also giving a statement that he cannot see any finlandisation now. 

But is it really so? I'm afraid it is not.

If we are closing our eyes to the fact that Russian influence on our energy policy will be sealed for next 100 years if we accept this Fennovoima-ROSATOM -project when 2/3 of Finns are against it as well as most of energy experts, so this could be called FINLANDISATION in it's gravest form.

So Finland is accepting a Russian nuclear weapons company under straight control of Vladimir Putin to be running a nuclear power plant for a century, causing huge losses to Finnish taxpayers and making it very difficult to develop domestic renewable energy industry. That is what I would call UNPATRIOTIC.

*  *  *

By the way, Ville Niinisto used to be a researcher on political history - especially on finlandisation, before he entered to political career....


Monday, September 15, 2014

ROSATOM's Mission and the Interests of the Finnish People and EU

"ROSATOM's Mission is to maintain national interests in defence, nuclear safety and nuclear power by achieving global leadership in advanced technologies, competencies and innovations."

Should we be more critical to ROSATOM-Fennovoima NPP-project?    Arts Picture by Jukka Seppälä / Creator's Fingerprints

This mission statement on ROSATOM's own website should have been read with care by Finnish politicians and ministers long ago. 

Wishful thinking belongs to real politics of Finland on areas where it can lead to severe difficulties when it's time to pay the bill.

The owner and operator of Olkiluoto NPP, TVO, pays a hard bill of about 100 million euros for planning costs for Olkiluoto-4 nuclear reactor. The company was just today denied the licence to construct the 4th reactor of Olkiluoto NPP in Eurajoki, South-Western Finland.

Olkiluoto-3 NPP in 2012                                           Photo: JS / C.F.

And they have to manage to run a super-expensive OL-3 EPR-reactor, having electricity price somewhere between 65-120 e/MWh, while Nordic market price for power varies somewhere between 25-39 e/MWh. And the reason for building nuclear power was 'cheap power for the industry'.....

It is quite strange how many Finnish politicians ignore to see the geopolitical importance of nuclear power business to Russian leaders, though ROSATOM openly tell it on their official website. 

Finnish government (all parties but the green movement) are giving a false signal to the Russian people and to president Vladimir Putin by accepting cooperation with a Russian state owned nuclear weapons company that is governed by -  Mr. Putin. If we are willing not to accept the Russian invasion on Ukraine, so we shouldn't be playing atomic games with the Russian army nuclear arms manufacturer - and funding it's activities. It is a risky and rough way to go and it seems that most part of the funding for the Fennovoima-ROSATOM NPP project is coming from Finnish taxpayers, EU-citizens. The recent polls show that 2/3 of Finns are against Fennovoima-ROSATOM plan. Private money and plenty of energy companies and consulting companies have found it to be too expensive, risky and unprofitable to be realized.

Olkiluoto-3 Fiasco should be ringing the alarm bells for the nation. The 10 billion euro project is not scheduled to be generating power to the grid before late 2018 - the original deadline for on grid was 2009. Nobody knows if it will be finished by this latest time estimate. I hope not. I have written about it several times before on my blogs:  and .

It is widely known fact that OL-3 is one of the most problematic  NPP projects in the world. And now our own politicians admit it too: (in Finnish).

*   *   *
The Russian should now face the renewable energy future            Photo: JS / C.F.

If we are willing to cooperate with the Russian Federation on energy business, it should be mainly on renewable energy. 

That would support heavily EU's sustainable energy plans and give the Russians a clear signal which way to go in the future. Distributed power generation and intelligent grids are here to stay - and they should belong to the future of modern Russia - because we share the same planet.

*   *   *

By the way, I Highly appreciate the outcome of our Minister of the Environment Ville Niinistö on Fennovoima-Rosatom issue! He's a brave man and a honest, good politician! Wishing him Good Luck! (in Finnish).


Thursday, August 14, 2014

Mr. Putin and Mr. Niinistö - the World is Waiting for a Peaceful Solution for Ukraine

According to YLE-news, Finnish president Sauli Niinistö will be meeting the president of Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin tomorrow in Sochi, Russia.

The Ukrainian crisis is one of the most severe conflicts  ongoing at the moment on our planet, and one highly related with energy issues. I have been writing about this on my previous blog article last March,

but now  it's time to return to the subject.

Russian Federation is a great country, one of leading powers of the future world, and a land of opportunities and one rich of natural resources. This should be admitted by everyone and overlooked by no-one. Russian people are famous of being friendly and warm-hearted to their quests, where ever they come from. Sharing and caring belong to the Russian national tradition.

So I see no reason not to believe the negotiations to bring good fruit: the Russian people is willing to live in peace with its neighbors, as well as its leaders do.

And the Ukrainian people is willing exactly the same - live in peace, co-operate and trade with Russia. But they will ride on their own horse, their own way, and be independent. And they have the right to do so.

It's regrettable that things have escalated to civil war in Ukraine. But more than anything else we need now good solutions, win-win structures that can be accepted by every player of the game which of a great deal is innocent civilians not willing to play this kind of ugly war game.

The winter is coming. Houses of civilians in eastern Ukraine are badly damaged, electric power is lost, water and sewage systems don't function etc. This problem must now be addressed by international community. But fighting must come to an end before that. The sooner the better.

Mr. Putin: 

I would like to ask you if you are interested in getting back the good reputation of Russian Federation that it had among western countries before the Ukrainian crises? And getting back the respect of wider audience in Russia? The economy is as important for Russia as it is for Europe or the U.S.A. - would you like to take a quick way to win back what has been lost and achieve a little bit more?

Russia could be winner as well as Ukraine and other European countries. We could turn this demanding situation into a good end. And turn a new, brighter page in the history of European  - Russian relations and whole the mankind. You, Mr. Putin, are a key player.

We had a rental agreement with former Soviet Union after the WWII to let Hankoniemi in Southern Finland as a military base for the Soviet Union for some decades. Soviet leaders found later on that arrangement unnecessary and terminated the use of that military base before the original deadline of that agreement. The key words were co-operation and trust of political leaders of both Finland and Soviet Union.

I think nobody seriously denies the fact that Crimean is very important to Russia. But the means to reach that strategic goal could be rethought. How about 50 year agreement with Russian Federation and Ukraine about renting the area for Russian military base on Crimean peninsula? The rest of the peninsula could be demilitarized zone like Ahvenanmaa (Åland) in Finland. UN could be controlling that both sides respect the agreement and that the Russian population on that area is respected and treated equally with Ukrainian and other nationalities. Crimean peninsula could be declared also a free trade zone to boost the economy on the area. So Russia would have its military base and capability to keep its defensive power on the area. And the international community could once again see Russia as a responsible and trustworthy companion.

And about the energy issues, Mr. Putin:

You know very well as every wise leader on this planet today that oil, gas, coal and nuclear power are each a no option to mankind if we like to survive. We have perhaps five to fifteen years to turn the CO2 -emissions into a sustainable level. And there we need renewable energy, masses of renewable energy. Russia is a great country with massive potential to produce renewable energy and also manufacture means to generate it for others. Russia could be among the leaders in new technology. But for that we need international co-operation. Finland have clean technology know-how, so does Germany and many other European countries. But as well we need China and the U.S.A. to join the common fight against greenhouse effect. And in the future African countries as well as India, Australia and Southern America will be joining the front to fight climate change.

The Ukrainian people including Russian speaking East and South-East Ukraine need an energy change. Being dependent on Russian natural gas is no good for Russia nor for Ukraine in the long run. They need heating and power for winter and it could be organized by international co-operation including Russian efforts. Bio-energy and solar and wind power should be the main power mix of the future Ukraine. Natural gas could be as backup for some decades. Building solar and wind power takes only a few years and it will be boosting local economy greatly giving working opportunities to tens of thousands. Russia could be part of the solution and learn how to make the energy change that is needed also in Russia. Time for oil, coal and gas economy is simply running out, and you know it, Mr. Putin.

The world is creating the energy change to renewables quicker than anybody thought, people around world are more than ready for it:

"Although only a handful of respondents (9
percent) have solar products, 55 percent
say they are considering purchasing
or signing up in the next five years.
Given rising interest and adoption,
we continue to observe a variety of
innovative companies entering the
market. We also see a growing array of
solar home solutions and community
solar projects, as well as a host of
supporting services—from automated
support to financing instruments."
("In 2014, more than 13,000 residential consumers were surveyed across 26 countries.")

And nuclear power is dead. You know it too, Mr. Putin. 

Selling nuclear reactors for power generation will be in five years like trying to sell steam engines to automotive industry. it's simply outdated, risky and far too expensive way to generate power. And selling reactors for nuclear weapons grade plutonium production is not a good deal either. We really don't need Vietnam or Egypt to have nuclear weapons, or any other (new) country. We don't need any new nuclear reactors in Finland, neither Fennovoima-Rosatom, nor Olkiluoto -TVO-Areva. We have enough power without NPPs and the majority of Finnish people are opposing Hanhikivi-1 and other new NPPs.

Now it could be time for Russia to enter into wind power era and start large projects with technical leaders on that area. We have know-how of arctic wind generation in Finland - our best generators are running up to -30 degrees centigrade (Sensors specified for -40°C) while southern manufacturers stop at -20.. There are plenty of arctic areas suitable for large scale wind power generation like Siberia, northern U.S.A. and Canada. There could be a big market for Russian industry in the future. And biomass or bio-gas heat and power generation could be another sustainable clean tech market for the Russian industry to enter in the near future.

But we need to stop fighting in Ukraine first. We need to get everyone understand that Russia is a powerful country that has its own important interests and that it is also taking care of its international responsibility to respect the other states on the area. Everyone involved on Ukrainian crises has made mistakes but solving the crisis is based on new positive steps everyone must now take to reach the goal: just, quick and lasting peace on the area.

And Mr. Niinistö:

I hope you will have a good meeting with president Putin! I hope that you will appreciate the opinion of Finnish people when according to new opinion polls 2/3 of Finnish people are against the building of Hanhikivi-1 nuclear reactor. People in Finland want to see renewable energy projects - surely in co-operation with Russian companies also. And Finnish people is surely wishing for a peaceful solution to Ukrainian crises - a solution that is acceptable for both Ukraine and Russia.

Good Luck for both Mr. Presidents!


Monday, May 26, 2014

How to Reach 100% Renewable Energy Goal?

Photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

Well, most people are saying "You're a dreamer! Never in a Real World!" if you try to speak about energy change being possible in the near future to 100 % renewable, clean energy.

How about the winter and heating, or how about the high temperatures and peak consumption? Wind doesn't always blow and the sun refuses to shine every day! We'll have the grid down and that would be a catastrophe! Our industry needs cheap, constant power supplies - and renewables just don't fit there!

Over and over again I keep hearing this stuff. And it is quite natural - people aren't just used to think that wind and solar power together with geothermal and wave power generation as well as biogas and biomass based combined heating/power generating systems have become a profitable, large scale industry in just a couple of recent years. And the decision makers and  CEOs of the powerful energy industry are mainly offline on this process. Everything has changed so quickly. No time to think.

Perhaps it's now - time to think. And rethink.

Arts photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

A professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University, Mark Jacobson, has made with his research group a road map for the U.S.A. to enter to a new renewable energy era.

His group gives the tools to make The United States running 100 %  with renewable energy by 2050. And this is how it works:

If you consider this as pure fantasy or theory, it could be quite useful to find out what others have done - in real life - during the last five years when most of the countries have been only speaking about the climate change.

In Northern Germany, in Schleswig-Holstein, They are going to reach the goal of 100% renewable energy in a few years and they'll rise the goal up to 300% to be reached by 2020.

And the little Scottish isle of Eigg is reaching already 85-90% renewable energy generation and is aiming to 100 %  in the near future.

And nearly a third of US new electricity came from solar - a trend that continues.

It's time for a national and international debate. The climate change won't wait. We have the tools. Let's start working!


Thursday, April 24, 2014

Apple - A Global Leader - Also in Renewable Energy!

Apple showed some statistics (adding it to their mega profits just announced) where they show how their 3 -year program succeeded to transform this leading mobile / IT-company from bad guys of Greenpeace black list to the best example of almost zero-carbon / renewable energy user that generates most of energy it is using.

According to Apple the company is now 73% renewable powered and its data centers have reached full 100% renewable energy milestone!

A long time winner is born!

LINK - the9billion:

Who's the next?


Thursday, March 13, 2014

WIPP - Mess: a Bad Signal for Finnish "Onkalo" and other Nuclear Waste Disposal Plans - BREAKING: AREVA Withdrawing from Olkiluoto-3 EPR Constructing Site?

Well, there was an incident at WIPP

( LINK - Wikipedia: ) in New Mexico, U.S.A. a few weeks ago. Several WIPP - workers were contaminated with Plutonium and Americium isotopes. The plant has been releasing Plutonium and Americium since the incident and the latest estimates tell 1 % of radionuclides to bypass WIPP filtering system instead of 0,13 % initially announced. The nearest city of Carlsbad, situated 42 km from the site, has also received small amount of Plutonium and Americium airborne particles. There is no detailed plan yet when the facility is able to return to normal operation because of high radiation levels inside the WIPP-plant.

Radioactive release is always a serious issue - the WIPP -incident is one of the worst nuclear dump accidents up to date. Nuclear industry is living on probabilities, not on reality. NPPs are releasing radioactive substances like tritium on daily basis, even when running normally.  - Arts-photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F. 

The probability of a spontaneous explosion of a plutonium waste container has been estimated to occur once in 10 000 years. And the other possible cause of an incident resulting this kind of leak - collapsing ceiling or roof  of the cave - is estimated to happen once in a million years. WIPP -plant has now been running for about seven years.

WIPP Happens!








*   *   *  

What about Finnish "Onkalo", then? 

This nuclear waste dump is also calculated to be safe for 100 000 years. But is it really? Three studies show that inner copper cylinders containing the spent fuel may corrode in 1 000 years instead of 100 000 years promised by the industry. And now after 7 years of operating WIPP we have this one-million -year-event happening! Is nuclear engineer / geologist this clever?

Copper cylinders for Onkalo - Photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

We should think twice before we dump nuclear waste. We should not produce any new nuclear waste by nuclear power generation. Unless we don't want to be the generation that becomes famous to kill its own children and grandchildren. We still are able to choose!

*   *   *  

And what about Areva?

Making big losses - 500 million euros last year, most of it from Finnish Olkiluoto-3 NPP -project - the company is rumored abandoning or freezing Olkiluoto EPR- construction site which is causing the project additional delays. The last estimate for Olkiluoto-3 to be finished is somewhere between 2018 to 2020, according to Finnish Kauppalehti:

Last year Areva estimated the total costs of Olkiluoto-3 EPR to rise up to 8,5 billion euros. Each extra year adds the cost. ( My estimate in 2012 was 10 Billion euros - time will tell which one was closer to reality  )

Olkiluoto-3 construction site - Photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

Let's hope this crazy project to build the most expensive building mankind has ever built will be mothballed and abandoned 

before it is contaminated with radioactive isotopes. We still could make it a gas (biogas as well) powered power plant to give back up power for renewable power generation like wind and solar.



Sunday, March 2, 2014

Finnish Government to Force Fennovoima to Abandon Agreement with Russian Rosatom due to Russian Illegal Military Operation in Ukraine?

After last days illegal military operation run by Russian Army in Ukraine there is a good reason to believe that Finnish Government is taking the initiative to freeze the negotiations of Finnish Fennovoima nuclear power company with Russian military nuclear complex Rosatom.

There has been a lively discussion whether Finns should allow Rosatom to enter Finnish energy markets, especially when we are dealing with such a sensitive and important technology for national security as nuclear power generation.

There has been opinions criticizing the military role of Rosatom - it is a part of Russian nuclear weapons industry, although it is selling "peaceful atoms" abroad. How peaceful are Russian atoms - that must be now questioned after Vladimir Putin's grave mistake to invade Ukraine illegally.

Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen should now take initiative to freeze the Fennovoima - Rosatom NPP-project due to Russian military aggression against Ukraine. / photo: Jukka Seppälä / C.F.

It would be a clear signal to Russia if Finnish Government, backed up with the Finnish Parliament, would announce that nuclear reactors capable of producing raw material for nuclear weapons must not be bought from a country that is running an illegal war and  aggression against a smaller neighbor country - against UN resolutions.

According to Finnish law it is illegal for any Finnish company to sell weapons or military material to any country that is involved in a war. This is just what Rosatom is doing: it is helping Russia to build its nuclear strike ability by manufacturing raw materials to nuclear weapons.

*  *  *

And if you dig deep enough you will find the basic reasons for increasing tensions in Ukraine and in other former Soviet Union republics in the energy sector.

Russia is blackmailing the poorer independent republics with threatening to shut the gas pipes. During the winter it is a serious threat. Also Germany has felt the Siberian freezing winds a couple of times.

But the world is quickly changing, and that must Mr. Putin also recognize, the sooner, the better! Renewable energy is cutting the rope of Russian gas and oil around Germany's neck pretty fast. Windy and sunny days are now giving more than half of  the electricity Germany produces, and they have coal just in case....


Imagine if Ukraine had a large scale renewable energy project funded by EU, the U.S.A and China. Imagine if they would produce 50 % of their energy with Wind, Solar and Biomass.

This would boost their economy and give them lower unemployment rates. And it would cut their dependence on Russian gas and oil. Mr. Obama, Mrs. Merkel and Mr. Xi Jinping, please receive this call! 

And the same with other east European countries. True independence comes with regional, renewable energy production. And it could benefit the economies of their partners by giving their renewable energy utility suppliers plenty to sell.

What about Russia then? Mr. Putin, please think twice! You could have a win - win situation.

And I don't mean now war - there you'll loose in the end -  but pulling your troops back and offering Ukraine a new fair deal: let's create a new, independent Ukraine - that kind of Ukraine that the people living there really want. Russia could also be funding renewable energy projects - together with western countries and China - and benefiting also by gathering experience and know-how for the future energy change of the great, innovative new Russia that was quick to learn of its mistakes of the past (and present).