nuclear-news

The risks of UK surrendering to China the control of its nuclear program

Surely we, too, should be asking more questions of a chancellor who appears to think that Chinese money buys him out of the intractable difficulties and uncertain costs of nuclear power? 

 What guarantee have we that in depending on Chinese finance, we haven’t surrendered more than we bargained for?

What does China want with Britain’s nuclear industry? Isabel Hilton The Guardian, Thursday 17 October 2013 The Chinese state is not philanthropic. Questions about safety, sovereignty and cost should be asked before we take its money For a chancellor so keen on the defence of UK national sovereignty against democratic Europeans, George Osborne’s unbridled enthusiasm for Chinese investment in the UK’s critical infrastructure is striking. If all these memorandums of understanding come to fruition, Chinese entities will hold important stakes in water in the UK, airports, IT infrastructure and now nuclear power generation, all without a serious national debate on any potential risks such involvement might bring…….

Neither China’s sovereign wealth fund nor its state-owned enterprises are philanthropic. All have large war chests, and their search for profitable, secure investments around the world has stimulated competition among aspirant recipients. But good bargains are not always done in haste and a number of unanswered questions hang over China’s proposed investment, future majority stake-holding and possible future operational involvement in Britain’s nuclear power.

Some are hardy perennials: the world has 270,000 tonnes of high-level waste in temporary storage, an unlovely heap that grows by 10,000 tonnes each year. In 50 years of nuclear power, nobody has come up with a workable plan for the million years that safety regulations demand. Are the costs of that, and of decommissioning, built into the deal and if so, who pays?

Then there is public subsidy: nobody has ever built a nuclear power plant without it, but the mandatory opening up of European electricity systems to competition means consumers are no longer obliged to underwrite unlimited costs, or to pay for expensive nuclear energy. This transfers the financial risk to the owners and financiers – hence the difficulty of finding the cash. What is different here?…….

what is in it for China? China has been the global nuclear industry’s main hope of survival in recent years. It is a newcomer, starting to build its first commercial reactor only in 1985. It now has 16 in operation and a further 26 under construction, and more are planned. Now China hopes to become the world’s next big nuclear exporter and sees involvement in a British plant as a key step to gaining credibility in the market.

This is an ambitious programme, not least on the management side. Most nuclear accidents resulted from human error and today industry experts are worried by China’s weak regulatory structure and its unproven capacity to build a safe management culture at such speed. Even in China, post Fukushima, public anxiety over the nuclear programme has begun to spill out on to the streets: earlier this year, public protests halted the construction of a waste processing plant in Guangdong that the authorities had insisted was perfectly safe.

Surely we, too, should be asking more questions of a chancellor who appears to think that Chinese money buys him out of the intractable difficulties and uncertain costs of nuclear power? Will British consumers end up paying high energy prices to guarantee a Chinese investor a good return? What future leverage will Chinese investment in British infrastructure give to an emerging power that frequently says it does not accept established global rules? What degree of transparency and accountability can we, as supplicants, enforce on our new partner? What guarantee have we that in depending on Chinese finance, we haven’t surrendered more than we bargained for? Perhaps it is not too late to ask. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/17/china-britain-nuclear-industry

October 18, 2013 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, politics international