Category: nuclear filth

  • Analysis: Attacks on Ed Miliband in UK newspaper editorials have already exceeded 2024 levels

    Spread the love

    Original article by Josh Gabbatiss republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license. 

    Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, at Downing Street, UK. Credit: Malcolm Park / Alamy Stock Photo.

    UK newspapers have already launched more editorials attacking Ed Miliband in the first four months of 2025 than they did during the whole of 2024, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.

    In the year to date, predominantly right-leaning publications have published 65 editorials – articles seen as the newspaper’s formal “voice” – criticising the UK energy secretary, compared with only 61 across the full year of 2024.

    Nearly four such editorials have been published every week so far in 2025, roughly three times the rate of the previous year.

    This is a significant escalation from a period that had already seen an unprecedented torrent of attacks levelled at the energy secretary.

    The articles, which primarily appear in the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph, frequently seek to label Miliband as a “net-zero zealot” with a “messianic” devotion to climate action.

    The newspapers have focused specifically on Miliband’s support for renewables.

    They have also tried to blame him for the potential closure of the UK’s remaining steel plant and – most recently – misrepresented the words of former prime minister Sir Tony Blair to falsely present them as a personal rebuke to Miliband.

    Many of the articles urge prime minister Keir Starmer to “sack” Miliband due to his supposedly “radical” policy ideas, referring to him as a “liability” for the Labour government.

    Despite this near-obsessive stream of criticism and constant speculation about the energy secretary’s job security, the prime minister has said unequivocally that the net-zero agenda is “in my government’s DNA” and that Miliband is “doing a great job”.

    Record criticism

    The UK’s Labour government won an election last summer, with a large majority, on the back of a manifesto that focused heavily on climate action.

    As laid out at the time, one of the government’s “five missions” was to:

    “Make Britain a clean-energy superpower to cut bills, create jobs and deliver security with cheaper, zero-carbon electricity by 2030.”

    Miliband, the energy security and net-zero secretary, is the minister overseeing this brief and the public face of much of the government’s net-zero strategy.

    This position has resulted in a relentless stream of criticism and personal attacks from right-leaning commentators and media organisations, against a backdrop of rising political and press opposition to net-zero.

    Carbon Brief analysis in January revealed the scale of the personal attacks levelled at Miliband in newspaper editorials during 2024, both in the lead up to the general election and in the months that followed. 

    However, the new analysis shows that the 61 critical editorials published last year have already been eclipsed in 2025 after barely four months of intense focus on Miliband. 

    As of 2 May, predominantly right-leaning newspapers have already published 65 editorials taking aim at the energy secretary this year. The chart below, which shows the cumulative number of such editorials, highlights this rapid escalation.

    Cumulative number of UK newspaper editorials criticising energy secretary Ed Miliband in 2024 (blue) and 2025 so far (red). Source: Carbon Brief analysis.
    Cumulative number of UK newspaper editorials criticising energy secretary Ed Miliband in 2024 (blue) and 2025 so far (red). Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

    Specific events, often only vaguely related to the energy secretary, have inflated the criticism of Miliband in the media. 

    One example was the imminent closure of the UK’s last remaining steel blast furnaces in Scunthorpe, in early April. Right-leaning newspapers blamed Miliband, among other things, for “banning new coal mines” in the UK, which they argued could have provided coking coal to the facility.

    (The Scunthorpe site’s owners prior to government control, British Steel, had said that the coal from a planned mine in Cumbria would not have been suitable for their needs.)

    More recently, right-leaning newspapers have used the furore around a report published by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI) as a further opportunity to criticise Miliband. 

    Many publications misleadingly interpreted comments by Blair as a criticism of the Starmer government’s net-zero policies and, by association, Miliband himself. They described the energy secretary as an “eco-loon” compared to the “uncontroversial” advice from Blair.

    Miliband the ‘fanatic’

    The majority of the criticism of Miliband in newspaper editorials in 2025 has come from the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Daily Telegraph.

    The Sun remains the most consistent critic of Miliband, with 26 editorials published in 2025 so far. There have only been 18 weeks in 2025 to date. As the chart below shows, this spate of 26 editorials from the Sun is already approaching last year’s record of 29.

    UK newspaper editorials criticising Ed Miliband, broken down by publication, in 2024 and 2025. Source: Carbon Brief analysis.
    UK newspaper editorials criticising Ed Miliband, broken down by publication, in 2024 and 2025. Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

    The attacks levelled at Miliband by right-leaning newspapers are often both highly personal and somewhat melodramatic.

    They frequently imply that his focus on net-zero policies is a sign of mental instability or quasi-religious devotion, rather than being part of his job title – or acknowledging that reaching net-zero emissions is the only way scientists say climate change can be prevented from getting worse.

    The Sun has referred to Miliband’s “uncontrolled fanaticism”. The Sun on Sunday has described the “madness of Ed Miliband’s green crusade” and called him the “fanatical prophet of net-zero”.

    Another editorial from the Sun stated that “Miliband is so blinded by eco-ideology that he’s lost touch with reality”, referring to his “eco insanity”.

    In an editorial lamenting the state of the UK’s oil-and-gas industry, which shed 10s of 1,000s of jobs under the previous Conservative government, the Daily Mail mentioned:

    “Energy secretary Ed Miliband’s messianic desire to sacrifice a multi-billion pound industry on the altar of net-zero.”

    The newspapers also suggest that Miliband is unwilling to listen to any criticism. “Miliband has shown himself unprepared to countenance any suggestion that his efforts to decarbonise the grid within five years might be reckless,” the Daily Telegraph claimed.

    There have also been frequent calls from newspaper editorials for Starmer to sack the energy secretary. In an article titled “Miliband’s madness”, published at the end of April, the Daily Mail asked:

    “Isn’t it time Sir Keir Starmer accepted his colleague’s ideological net-zero fervour is damaging the government – and sacked him?”

    Beyond the editorial pages, there has also been a constant stream of comment pieces, many by climate sceptics, which often go even further in their attacks on the energy secretary. “Miliband belongs in a padded cell,” Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn wrote at the start of May.

    This has come amid much media speculation from commentators on both the left and right that Starmer is considering firing Miliband.

    However, Starmer has not given any indication of doing this. 

    On the contrary, at the recent energy security conference the UK government hosted in London, Starmer stated that he was fully committed to his government’s net-zero ambitions. “That is in the DNA of my government,” he stated in a widely covered speech.

    Original article by Josh Gabbatiss republished from Carbon Brief under a CC license. 

    dizzy: Miliband has been vilified by the same right-wing climate science deniers in a similar way to Just Stop Oil and others labelled zealots. I object to his and thereby the current Labour government’s policy of supporting Carbon Capture and Nuclear for different reasons. Both are false solutions needing huge government subsidies, carbon capture and storage is an unproved, false solution proposed by the fossil fuel industry to enable them to continue destroying the planet, nuclear supports producing nuclear weapons and [ed: is] hugely capital intensive producing radioactive waste that needs to be managed for thousands to millions of years. A far better response is rapid decarbonisation including conversion to renewables and to travel far less, prevent the rich from causing so much damage.

  • ‘No One Voted for This’: #TeslaTakedown Actions Pick Up Steam

    Spread the love

    Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

    People participate in a “TeslaTakedown” protest against Elon Musk outside of a Tesla dealership in Irvine, California, March 1, 2025. (Photo: Frederic J. Brown / AFP)

    “We need an alternative to watching things unravel from our couches,” said one of the organizers behind the protests.

    Protests at Tesla showrooms and dealerships that are united by the slogan #TakedownTesla are picking up steam—with over 65 actions planned around the country and in Europe through the end of this week, and dozens scheduled for Saturday alone.

    Tesla, billionaire Elon Musk’s electric vehicle company, has become a site of resistance in the growing movement against the GOP megadonor’s central role in the second Trump administration.

    Since Trump’s inauguration, Musk and the so-called Department of Government Efficiency have helped oversee punishing cuts to the federal workforce, infiltrated government agencies, and gained access to computer systems with sensitive personal information.

    Because Musk is unelected, the protest movement urges people to make their voices heard as consumers—by selling their vehicles, getting rid of their stock in Tesla, and showing up to protest.

    Already, protests have taken place in Devon, Pennsylvania; Berkley, California; Tucson, Arizona; Washington, D.C., and elsewhere. Signs at protests include messages likes “Musk is the Fraud” and “Tesla Funds Fascists,” in part a reference to Musk’s apparent Nazi salute during a post-inauguration celebration.

    “No One Voted for This,” assert the organizing materials provided on the #TeslaTakedown website.

    Actor and director Alex Winter, one of the core organizers behind the protests and the creator of the movement’s website, said that #TakedownTesla started on Bluesky between friends and activists and grew, according to Business Insider. It grew after Winter created the website to help centralize the effort.

    “There have now been protests outside of Tesla locations in over 100 cities, and the movement is picking up speed and going global,” wrote Winter in a piece for Rolling Stone that was published on February 21.

    “We need an alternative to watching things unravel from our couches, that inspires hope and shows that we still have the capacity to oppose those who want to tear the fabric of our society apart and extract their own benefit from the wreckage,” he continued.

    https://twitter.com/GeneralStrikeU/status/1896656055591202967?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1896656055591202967%7Ctwgr%5E2c19756182eba8a550ebd34ac06413392d8f0c05%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2Fteslatakedown-elon-musk

    Tesla’s stock experienced a bump after Trump’s election, but the company’s share price has plummeted more than 40% from it’s post-election peak in December, wiping out those gains. The tumbling of its stock meant that February was Tesla’s second-worst month on record, only eclipsed by the 37% loss the stock experienced in December 2022, according to Yahoo Finance.

    In Europe, where Musk has promoted far-right political parties, Tesla sales have slumped.

    On Monday, one observer shared a visual of Tesla’s stock declining and wrote “Turns out pissing off a good deal of the global population isn’t good for business,” along with #TeslaTakedown.

    Original article by Eloise Goldsmith republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

    Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
    Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
    Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
  • Starmer’s latest con job

    Spread the love

    https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/starmer’s-latest-con-job

    SELF-DECEPTION: A 245-tonne steel dome is lifted onto Hinkley Point C’s first reactor building, at Bridgwater, Somerset on December 15 2023 – note the slogan on the banner

    The government’s nuclear power expansion plan is a hollow betrayal of working people that panders to wealthy corporations and will rip off consumers, writes LINDA PENTZ GUNTER

    …

    The restriction on building new reactors on existing nuclear sites is to be lifted so they could be built anywhere and everywhere and people who “hadn’t thought there’s going to be anything nuclear near me” will simply “get used to the idea of it,” Starmer said.

    …

    The whole thing is of course a massive con that would, if such a plan ever materialised, dramatically raise electricity rates, further fleece taxpayers, impede real progress on climate by diverting money away from already available renewable energy solutions, and put countless communities in danger.

    And of course, what will become of the radioactive waste these “small” reactors would still produce? A recent Stanford study found that small modular reactors will actually generate more radioactive waste than conventional nuclear power plants.

    Unions should not be fooled. Promising jobs that will likely never materialise and would be better created immediately in industries such as renewable energy that are here now and have a long-term future, isn’t a boon to working people, it’s yet another betrayal.

    Further, nuclear power, as the industry has itself demonstrated over and over, is the slowest and most expensive energy choice among the so-called low-carbon options.

    No nuclear reactor, small or otherwise, will ever be built in time, affordably or in enough quantities to address the climate crisis that is already upon us.

    …

    https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/starmer’s-latest-con-job

    Keir Starmer warns against following the https://onaquietday.org blog.
    Keir Starmer warns against following the https://onaquietday.org blog.

  • Elon Musk to Host X Event Promoting Neo-Nazi AfD Party Ahead of German Elections

    Spread the love

    https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/elon-musk-to-host-x-event-promoting-neo-nazi-afd-party-ahead-of-german-elections

    Image in public domain

    The billionaire Musk has downplayed the party’s extremist views in posts on X and in an op-ed in a German newspaper.

    Mega-billionaire Elon Musk, owner of the social media site X, plans to hold an online audio discussion on the platform with the leader of a far right German party, amplifying the party’s fascist and neo-Nazi ideology.

    The discussion between him and Alice Weidel, a leader for Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the party’s candidate for chancellor in the February 23 snap elections, will take place”very soon,” a spokesperson for Weidel said, indicating that it will “definitely” happen before the elections. The German-based newswire agency dpa reported that the talk between Weidel and Musk would occur on January 10.

    Musk signaled his support for AfD in mid-December, writing in a post on X that “only the AfD can save Germany.” He also penned an op-ed in a German newspaper last week, describing the party as the “last spark of hope” for the country.

    …

    https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/elon-musk-to-host-x-event-promoting-neo-nazi-afd-party-ahead-of-german-elections

  • Green Group Sounds Alarm Over Meta’s Nuclear Power Plans

    Spread the love

    This article was originally posted 6/12/24 but was deleted probably by mistake.

    Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, testifies before a U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on January 31, 2024, in Washington, D.C.
    (Photo: Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    “In the blind sprint to win on AI, Meta and the other tech giants have lost their way,” said a leader at Environment America.

    Environmental advocates this week responded with concern to Meta looking for nuclear power developers to help the tech giant add 1-4 gigawatts of generation capacity in the United States starting in the early 2030s.

    Meta—the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, and more—released a request for proposals to identify developers, citing its artificial intelligence (AI) innovation and sustainability objectives. It is “seeking developers with strong community engagement, development, …permitting, and execution expertise that have development opportunities for new nuclear energy resources—either small modular reactors (SMR) or larger nuclear reactors.”

    The company isn’t alone. As TechCrunch reported: “Microsoft is hoping to restart a reactor at Three Mile Island by 2028. Google is betting that SMR technology can help it deliver on its AI and sustainability goals, signing a deal with startup Kairos Power for 500 megawatts of electricity. Amazon has thrown its weight behind SMR startup X-Energy, investing in the company and inking two development agreements for around 300 megawatts of generating capacity.”

    In response to Meta’s announcement, Johanna Neumann, Environment America Research & Policy Center’s senior director of the Campaign for 100% Renewable Energy, said: “The long history of overhyped nuclear promises reveals that nuclear energy is expensive and slow to build all while still being inherently dangerous. America already has 90,000 metric tons of nuclear waste that we don’t have a storage solution for.”

    “Do we really want to create more radioactive waste to power the often dubious and questionable uses of AI?” Neumann asked. “In the blind sprint to win on AI, Meta and the other tech giants have lost their way. Big Tech should recommit to solutions that not only work but pose less risk to our environment and health.”

    “Data centers should be as energy and water efficient as possible and powered solely with new renewable energy,” she added. “Without those guardrails, the tech industry’s insatiable thirst for energy risks derailing America’s efforts to get off polluting forms of power, including nuclear.”

    In a May study, the Electric Power Research Institute found that “data centers could consume up to 9% of U.S. electricity generation by 2030—more than double the amount currently used.” The group noted that “AI queries require approximately 10 times the electricity of traditional internet searches and the generation of original music, photos, and videos requires much more.”

    Meta is aiming to get the process started quickly: The intake form is due by January 3 and initial proposals are due February 7. It comes after a rare bee species thwarted Meta’s plans to build a data center powered by an existing nuclear plant.

    Following the nuclear announcement, Meta and renewable energy firm Invenergy on Thursday announced a deal for 760 megawatts of solar power capacity. Operations for that four-state project are expected to begin no later than 2027.

    Original article by Jessica Corbett republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).