nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

The energy crisis is now, new nuclear will be (at least) twenty years too late – UK’s Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA)

The energy crisis is now, new nuclear will be (at least) twenty years too late

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities were dismayed to hear that the door of Number 10 will today once more be held open for guests from the nuclear power industry as Prime Minister Boris Johnson hosts a roundtable with prospective commercial partners, ahead of a new energy statement later this week.

Following Johnson’s proclamation that he will look to ‘place big new bets on nuclear’ and with one cabinet member allegedly describing the Prime Minister as ‘really gung ho for nuclear’, the participants are likely to meet with a firm ally.  Government resolve will also be bolstered by the publication last week by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Nuclear Energy of a ‘roadmap’ to make sites, money and a pared-down regulatory environment available to the nuclear industry to enable the development of a further 15 Gigawatts of new nuclear generating capacity by 2035 and 30 GW by 2050.

The NFLA believes that this hyperbole ignores the reality that any new nuclear projects will take too long, cost too much and have too many uncertainties to provide a meaningful solution to the energy and climate crisis that Britain faces now.

“Despite the need to generate ‘more electricity more greenly’ now, the Prime Minister seems determined to ignore the obvious solution that would result from a far greater and more urgent investment in renewable technologies and is instead taking us once more along the increasingly well-trodden and costly road to no-where that is new nuclear”, said Councillor David Blackburn, Chair of the NFLA, in response to the news.

“Every pound spent on nuclear is a pound denied to renewables. New nuclear has a lamentable history of being delivered at far greater cost and far more slowly than was at first predicted.  New nuclear plants take decades to deliver with Hinkley Point C currently estimated to cost at least £23 billion.  Renewables have been proven to deliver electricity far more cheaply, far more quickly and far more safely than new nuclear ever can – and renewable energy comes without the additional eye-watering cost of decommissioning nuclear plants and managing the legacy of radioactive waste for millennia that comes with it.”

The NFLA would like the government to change tack and look to harness natural energy sources to generate power to meet our needs, whilst saving our environment.

The irony is that we already have the solutions to our energy and climate crisis to hand.  When you live in a country that is surrounded by seas and has unpredictable weather it is surely a far safer bet to invest in tidal energy, hydro power, solar panels and wind turbines to draw energy from Mother Nature.  The NFLA believes this, combined with investment in innovative energy storage solutions and in retrofitting our cold and draughty homes to a far higher standard to reduce energy use, could meet Britain’s energy needs, reduce fuel bills, and safeguard our planet in the here-and-now, not the never-never.”

Ends//…For more information please contact Richard Outram, Secretary, NFLA Email Richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk  / Mobile 07583 097793

March 22, 2022 Posted by | ENERGY, politics, UK | Leave a comment

People Against Wylfa-B (PAWB) calls for sanctions on UK importing enriched uranium from Russia

PAWB has written to Ynys Môn MP, Virginia Crosbie, who is a member of the
All Party Nuclear Group in Westminster. We urge the group to call for
sanctions on raw and enriched uranium from Russia, and that such sanctions
are imposed internationally. Russia has 35% of the world market for
enriched uranium.

We also condemn in the strongest terms, the All Party
Nuclear Group’s totally reckless and irresponsible call for 30 Gigawatts
(30,000 Megawatts) of electricity through nuclear by 2050. This shows an
astounding economic and environmental illiteracy. This would be 3 times the
peak of electricity generated by nuclear power in Wales, England and
Scotland during the mid 1990s.

It appears Boris Johnson is listening too
much to this completely misguided nuclear cheerleading by the All Party
Nuclear Group. The Group totally ignores the challenges of climate change,
rising sea levels and the severe threats from storm surges to all coastal
nuclear sites in Wales, England and Scotland. Also, in the context of the
war in Ukraine where 15 operational nuclear reactors are potential dirty
bombs that could poison the whole of Europe with radioactivity, can the All
Party Nuclear Group and Boris Johnson answer how the British state can
justify building new nuclear reactors, obvious targets for hypersonic
missiles by potential enemies?

 PAWB 20th March 2022

https://www.stop-wylfa.org/news/

March 22, 2022 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, politics international, UK, Uranium | Leave a comment

Water supply problems for planned £20billion twin reactor on the Suffolk coast

Sizewell C developer EDF is being asked by government whether a temporary
desalination plant could last for the lifetime of the new nuclear power
plant if it is built. The public examination of the plans for the
£20billion twin reactor on the Suffolk coast was told a permanent water
supply for the proposed development had not yet been secured. However, a
temporary desalination plant would run during the construction of the
project.

Kwasi Kwarteng, secretary of state at the Department of Business,
Energy and Industrial Strategy, is now asking EDF what progress has been
made on securing a permanent water supply solution. But he also says: “The
applicant should confirm if it would be possible for the proposed temporary
desalination plant to permanently meet the full water supply demand for the
lifetime of the proposed development should no alternative water supply
solution be identified.”

 East Anglian Daily Times 20th March 2022

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/business/water-supply-sizewellc-questioned-by-government-8768432

March 22, 2022 Posted by | politics, UK, water | Leave a comment

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to discuss climate mitigation efforts, including technology to remove CO2 from the atmosphere

 UN scientists are likely to weigh up technology to remove CO2 from the
atmosphere, as they gather to finalise a key report. This idea will be one
of many solutions considered over the next two weeks by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Also in attendance will
be government officials from all over the world, who will need to approve
every line in the summary report. It is due to be published on 4 April. The
kind of carbon removal approaches the report will consider will likely
include tree planting and agriculture, as well as the more advanced
technological approaches that use large machines to remove the carbon from
the air. They will also look at combined approaches, where land is used to
grow crops which can be burned for energy while the carbon is captured and
buried.

 BBC 21st March 2022

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60798220

March 22, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, climate change | Leave a comment

Climate scientists alarmed at unprecedented heat at both the Antarctic and the Arctic

 Startling heatwaves at both of Earth’s poles are causing alarm among
climate scientists, who have warned the “unprecedented” events could
signal faster and abrupt climate breakdown.

Temperatures in Antarctica
reached record levels at the weekend, an astonishing 40C above normal in
places. At the same time, weather stations near the north pole also showed
signs of melting, with some temperatures 30C above normal, hitting levels
normally attained far later in the year.

At this time of year, the Antarctic should be rapidly cooling after its summer, and the Arctic only
slowly emerging from its winter, as days lengthen. For both poles to show
such heating at once is unprecedented.

 Guardian 20th March 2022

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/20/heatwaves-at-both-of-earth-poles-alarm-climate-scientists

March 22, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Nearly 60% of USA is in prolonged drought

US drought predicted to worsen this spring as dry conditions spread to
nearly 60 per cent of the country.

 Independent 21st March 2022

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/us-drought-expand-california-southwest-b2040133.html

March 22, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Greenpeace: Nuclear power is not the solution to Philippines’ energy woes

Greenpeace: Nuclear power is not the solution to PH’s energy woes,   https://opinion.inquirer.net/151278/greenpeace-nuclear-power-is-not-the-solution-to-phs-energy-woes

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 04:05 AM March 22, 2022

We are writing to respond to Solita Monsod’s two recent columns on nuclear power and the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP). We believe these columns glossed over several important facts that the nuclear industry also wants to hide from the public eye.

First, nuclear power is not cheap. Costs for radioactive nuclear waste management and storage, decommissioning, and insurance, need to be factored in. Monsod compares nuclear prices to coal and oil, but recent reports by the International Energy Agency and the International Renewable Energy Agency have already confirmed that renewable energy (RE), primarily from solar and wind, is now the cheapest source of electricity by far. Rehabilitating the BNPP won’t be cheap either. Monsod makes a price comparison with new nuclear plants (which are prohibitively expensive) but neglects to make a comparison with RE, whose capital costs are a lot less than that of upgrading the BNPP.

We are writing to respond to Solita Monsod’s two recent columns on nuclear power and the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP). We believe these columns glossed over several important facts that the nuclear industry also wants to hide from the public eye.

First, nuclear power is not cheap. Costs for radioactive nuclear waste management and storage, decommissioning, and insurance, need to be factored in. Monsod compares nuclear prices to coal and oil, but recent reports by the International Energy Agency and the International Renewable Energy Agency have already confirmed that renewable energy (RE), primarily from solar and wind, is now the cheapest source of electricity by far. Rehabilitating the BNPP won’t be cheap either. Monsod makes a price comparison with new nuclear plants (which are prohibitively expensive) but neglects to make a comparison with RE, whose capital costs are a lot less than that of upgrading the BNPP.

There are also hidden costs, such as the costs to health and livelihoods of communities living in the vicinity of these plants, as well as the costs all Filipinos will pay to maintain a regulatory agency. But the biggest hidden cost is the price of a nuclear accident. This cost runs in the trillions of pesos and will affect generations of Filipinos. Neither the nuclear industry nor the government has mentioned anything about how these costs will be paid for should this happen.

Second, nuclear power will not solve our power woes or give us energy security. We still need to import radioactive fuel, so we will be hostage to the price volatility of this commodity. Nuclear proponents also never mention that fuel production is almost a monopoly, dominated by only four companies. This arrangement will lock us into dependence on foreign fuel and companies, where any shortage or increase in demand globally would mean Filipinos will be faced with rising energy costs that the government can’t control.

Third, the BNPP has not been confirmed by any independent study to be safe for operation, and “small modular nuclear reactors” for power generation don’t exist. All the studies so far conducted that have called the BNPP “safe” were undertaken by bodies connected with the industry, and therefore would not be subjective in their assessment. On the other hand, a safety inquiry conducted by the Union of Concerned Scientists found more than 4,000 technical defects in the plant. Meanwhile, small modular reactors being promoted by nuclear companies or agencies of Russia and the US are still currently being studied. Should the Philippines take this route, we will be among the first guinea pigs of this human experiment.


Fourth, we’ve never heard anything about permanent storage for radioactive spent fuel from nuclear promoters. The cost for constructing and maintaining this facility will likely be in the trillions of pesos, to be paid for by all Filipinos, not just nuclear power customers. But will the government find a safe place for this deadly waste in the archipelagic and volcanic Philippines? And will there be a local government unit that would willingly accept it? The problem of dealing with nuclear waste is the toxic burden we will leave today’s youth and their children, for them to additionally deal with, alongside climate impacts.

The debt we incurred because of BNPP was gargantuan. It was unfortunate that we paid for what was, in reality, the price of bad energy planning railroaded by a government that was blinded by the false glitter of nuclear power—and the kickbacks an expensive power project would bring. Will we let history repeat itself?

Monsod’s hinayang is for the past—sayang the money we paid for it, she says. It’s true we can’t get it back. But we can prevent Flipinos from bearing the same oppressive burden again. We have the opportunity to harness the cheapest power sources in the world—RE in the form of solar and wind—and redesign our energy system into flexible decentralized grids that are infinitely more efficient than the outdated centralized models reliant on inflexible baseload plants, such as nuclear. This kind of energy planning is smart, and game-changing, and is the real solution to the climate crisis. Mas malaking hinayang if we don’t take this opportunity to transform our energy system now, and create a better energy future for ourselves.

Khevin Yu,

energy transition campaigner

Greenpeace Philippines

khevin.yu@greenpeace.org

March 22, 2022 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Philippines, politics | Leave a comment

Serbia won’t be dragged into broader European war: president — Anti-bellum

B92March 21, 2022 Vučić: Serbia to respond to Priština and Podgorica; Far-reaching consequences follow Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić said that Serbia would respond to Pristina and Montenegro tomorrow. He said at the pre-election rally in Kikinda that all the effects of the war in Ukraine and everything that is happening in Europe and the world […]

Serbia won’t be dragged into broader European war: president — Anti-bellum

March 22, 2022 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment