nuclear-news

OpEd by David Polden – CND UK

OP Ed by David Polden of CND UK

20 April 2014
A series of comments and information from D Polden on the state of the nuclear industry
JAPANESE GOVERNMENT CALLS FOR NUCLEAR RE-START

On April 11th,
Japan

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/japan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo
Cabinet approved a new national energy strategy calling for the restarting of
nuclear power stations that meet new safety standards. This restart was first
proposed by the government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/shinzo_abe/index.html?inline=nyt-per
Two months ago, and scraps a promise made by a previous government after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster to phase out atomic energy. Under the new plan, Japan could start as early as August to restart at least some of its 48 operable commercial reactors which were all progressively shut down
after the Fukushima accident spread nuclear radiation across northern Japan. Two reactors at the Oi nuclear power station had in fact been re-started in July 2012, but were both shut-down again in September 2013 for “routine inspections”, but have not re-opened since, so there are currently none operating..

However hostility continues to this policy among the majority of Japanese.
According to an opinion poll conducted on 15th and 16th of March by the newspaper Asahi Shimbun, 59% of the Japanese population now oppose the restart of any or all 48 nuclear reactors as against 28% who would support it. This is an increase on a parallel poll in January when 56% were opposed. Opposition is much stronger among women (66% to 18%) against than among men (51% to 39%). Also, 77% of the population would like all nuclear power plants to be shut down either immediately or gradually;
only 14% would not.

HINKLEY REACTOR SHUT DOWN OVER FEARS OF FUKUSHIMA-STYLE SHUTDOWN

The Daily Mail reported on March 19th that, unreported at the time, one of the two reactors at Dungeness nuclear power station were shut down for five months by its owners EDF last year over fears that it could be flooded – the event that caused the melt-down of three reactors at Fukushima.

This was after the flood defences at Hinkley were reviewed in an official government report in reaction to the Fukushima disaster. The report found that its shingle bank flood defences were “not as robust as previously thought” and could be breached during a catastrophic weather event. Indeed the Daily Mail reported that EDF told the Office for Nuclear Regulation in December 2012 that it “no longer has confidence” in its sea defences being able to defend against rare weather events such as the Japanese tsunami, but the reactor was not shut down till May 22nd 2013.

It re-opened again in October after a new barrier wall was built. A new permanent wall around the site was expected to be completed by the end of March 2014, which it was claimed would upgrade the defences from protecting against a one-in-a-thousand year weather event to a one-in-a-ten-thousand year event. But, as we all know, climate change is increasing the frequency of extreme weather events.

Dungeness is not the only nuclear power station threatened by the sea. In 2010 a
survey of UK nuclear stations by the Department of Energy, Food and Rural Affairs found that the flood risk was “high” at existing Sizewell and Hartlepool nuclear stations as well as Dungeness, and “medium” at Oldbury and Sellafield. It was predicted that by 2080 it would also be “high” at Bradwell and Hinkley. Earlier plans to build new nuclear reactors at Dungeness have been shelved; not so at these other sites.

CZECH POWER PLANT PLANS SCUPPERED BY “PRICE GUARANTEE” DEMANDS

Let us re-cap: last October, the UK government agreed a deal with EDF to guarantee EDF a price of £92.5/Megawatt-hour for the electricity it produces from its planned Hinkley C nuclear power station for a period of 35 years from the time it starts delivering electricity to the grid, this price to be index-linked against inflation.

This year bidders for the contract to build the two reactors at the Temelin nuclear
plant got a very different reaction when they demanded a much smaller price
guarantee from the Czech government in order for it to be prepared to go ahead and build the reactors.

CEZ, the Czech utility 70% owned by the Czech government, put out the contract to build the two reactors to tender as long ago as 2009 and received bids from Areva, Westinghouse and a Russian-Skoda consortium.

Just like the UK government in the Hinkley case, the previous Czech government was planning to offer a cost-difference guarantee for electricity from the two new
reactors “to ensure that investment was viable”. This would cover the difference
between wholesale electricity prices and price levels claimed to be needed to cover construction costs. The Ministry of Industry and Trade wanted this guarantee written into a new long-term Czech energy framework, but this was opposed by the Ministry of Finance. Estimates of its impact varied up to 10% extra on retail power bills. The Industry Ministry was working on €60/MWh; others suggested that €90 would be needed, indexed. CEZ claimed it required €70/MWh for the new units to be profitable, compared with mid-2013 forward prices of under €40.

Faced with this demand the Prime Minister of the new coalition government said it was not open to providing price guarantees that would “dramatically burden” consumers, such as the one being demanded.

Following government confirmation at the beginning of April that it would not
provide any future price guarantees, CEZ informed the bidders that it had cancelled the procurement process.

However the Czech government continues to support in principle in its draft energy policy the development of nuclear power and a new plan for this is to be prepared for this by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Trade by the end of the year. Info from World Nuclear News, 10/4/14.

HINKLEY PLANS UNDER TRIPLE THREAT

1) In March, Vesna Kolar Planinsic, Chair of the UN’s Implementation
Committee on the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context wrote to the UK’s Department of Communities and Local Government to say that there was “profound suspicion” that the UK failed to properly consult neighbouring countries, including Norway and Spain, over the possible environmental impact that Hinkley Point C could have on them and told the Department to send a delegation to be questioned by the Committee in December.

2) On 19th March, Joan Halley, Chair of the Parliamentary Environmental
Audit Committee, wrote to the European Competition Commissioner, Joaquin Almunia, to dispute government claims that the price guarentee offered to EDF over Hinkley was the same as that offered for electricity generated from renewables and also further government claims that caps on contractors’ liability for decommissioning, waste management and nuclear incidents did not constitute subsidies.

3) On 27th March, An Taisce – the National Trust for Ireland obtained leave
to take its Hinkley Point legal challenge to the Court of Appeal in London. An
Taisce argues that the UK government’s decision to approve Hinkley Point C nuclear plant (on England’s west coast) without first consulting the public in Ireland is contrary to international, EU and English law.
The High Court in London found against An Taisce’s arguments in December 2013, ruling that there was no need to consult the public in Ireland in the circumstances.
However, the letter relaying the views of the UN Implementation Committee referred to in 1) above seems to support An Taisce’s case.

NTAG SUPPLEMENT 2: NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS IN SOUTHERN EUROPE

In the February edition of Nuclear Trains & Nuclear Power I set out the current
situation with nuclear power stations in Britain, Japan, France, the US, China and Germany. In the March edition I included Supplement 1, covering the nuclear power station situation in the rest of Western Europe. The details relating to countries already covered available at request.

PORTUGAL

Portugal  has one research reactor located in the National Nuclear Research Centre. Further nuclear energy activities are not planned in the near future. In 1971, Portugal planned to build an 8,000 MW nuclear power plant to be completed by 2000. Plans were delayed until 1995 when it was decided to not proceed with the project. Since the military coup in April 1974, projects for the construction of nuclear power plants have been postponed or dismissed by the government.

SPAIN

Spain has seven nuclear reactors producing 21% of the country’s electricity, or 7,416 net megawatts. A nuclear power moratorium was enacted by the Socialist government in 1983. For a time the country had a policy of phasing out nuclear power in favour of renewables. The oldest unit (at José Cabrera nuclear power
plant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Cabrera_nuclear_power_plant )

was shut down at the end of 2006, 40 years after construction. In December 2012, the Garoña plant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Mar%C3%ADa_de_Garo%C3%B1a_Nuclear_Power_Plant
was also shut down. In 2011, the government lifted the 40-year limit on all
reactors, allowing owners to apply for license extensions in 10-year increments.
However, there are no plans for new nuclear plants.

ITALY

Italy started to produce nuclear energy in the early 1960s, but all plants were closed by 1990 following a nuclear power referendum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_nuclear_power_referendum,_1987.

An attempt to change the decision was made in 2008 by the government, which called the nuclear power phase-out a “terrible mistake”. The Minister of Economic Development

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Economic_Development_(Italy),
Claudio Scajola, proposed to build as many as 10 new reactors, with the goal of increasing the nuclear share of Italy’s electricity supply to about 25% by 2030. However, following the 2011 Japanese nuclear accident , the Italian government put a one-year moratorium on plans to revive nuclear power and then in June 2011, in a referendum, 94% of the electorate voted to cancel plans for new reactors. As 55% of eligible voters participated this made the ban binding on
the government.

SWITZERLAND

Switzerland has five operating nuclear reactors at four stations. Nuclear power accounts for about 40% of the total production of electricity in the country.

There have been many Swiss referenda on the question of nuclear power which have all supported nuclear power except one in 1990 which supported a 10-year moratorium on new nuclear power plant construction. However a 2003 referendum voted against extending this moratorium. Nevertheless in May 2011, as a consequence of Fukushima, the Swiss government abandoned plans to build new nuclear reactors. The country’s five existing reactors will be allowed to continue operating, but will not be replaced at the end of their life spans. The last will go offline in 2034.

AUSTRIA

Started building a nuclear power plant in 1972. This was never opened, as large
demonstrations against the plant were followed by a vote in the Austrian Parliament in 1978 in favour of a 10-year ban on nuclear fission being used to produce energy as well as bans on the storage and transport of nuclear materials in and through the country. In 1997, the Parliament voted to continue the ban indefinitely and remain a non-nuclear country.

GREECE

Has one operational nuclear research reactor but has never shown an
interest in building a commercial one. In 2007 its Finance Minister announced that nuclear was not part of Greece’s plans for future electricity generation.

TURKEY

Though it has had plans for nuclear power stations since 1970, none have as yet
started construction. Nevertheless Turkey has ambitious plans to open 20 nuclear reactors by 2030, the first five of which are planned to start construction by 2018, and be opened by 2023.

MALTA & CYPRUS

No nuclear power stations

April 20, 2014 - Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized