nuclear-news

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

16 Japanese Financial institutions won’t invest in companies involved in nuclear weapons

Many Japanese lenders refuse to invest in companies linked to nuclear arms  https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/05/03/business/corporate-business/many-japanese-lenders-refuse-invest-companies-linked-nuclear-arms/#.Xq8zaqgzbIU

KYODO  Sixteen Japanese financial institutions say they refrain from investing in and extending loans to companies involved in the manufacturing of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, according to a Kyodo News survey released Sunday.

The survey found the lenders set guidelines for such issues in an effort to avert international criticism against conducting business with nuclear-related companies amid growing public perceptions about the inhumane nature of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.

The 16 lenders include three megabanks — MUFG Bank under Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., Mizuho Bank under Mizuho Financial Group Inc., and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp. under Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc. — as well as Japan Post Bank Co. and Resona Bank under Resona Holdings Inc.

Kyodo sent a written questionnaire to a total of 119 city banks, regional banks and online banks from late February to early March. Of those, 35 responded.

About 70 percent of the total did not answer because they said they have never discussed the issue.

A Resona Bank official said the Osaka-based lender drew up written rules in March 2018 that it will not invest in nuclear, anti-personnel mines and other such fields due to rising international criticism against conducting businesses with companies involved in the manufacturing and development of weapons of mass destruction.

Eleven other lenders possessing such guidelines are Saitama Resona Bank in Saitama Prefecture, Aozora Bank in Tokyo, SBI Sumishin Net Bank, Hokkaido Bank and North Pacific Bank in Hokkaido, Tohoku Bank in Iwate Prefecture, Ogaki Kyoritsu Bank in Gifu Prefecture, Kansai Mirai Bank in Osaka Prefecture, Minato Bank in Hyogo Prefecture, Higo Bank in Kumamoto Prefecture and Kagoshima Bank in Kagoshima Prefecture.

According to the survey, nine respondents including Hokkaido Bank, the Bank of Kochi in Kochi Prefecture and Oita Bank in Oita Prefecture said they backed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

Of 20 lenders expressing reservation about the 2017 U.N. nuclear ban treaty, five questioned the Japanese government’s reluctance to sign it.

Japan does not possess nuclear weapons but remains under the nuclear umbrella of the United States.

Twelve respondents including Tohoku Bank, Higo Bank and the Bank of Toyama in Toyama Prefecture said they think the adoption of the U.N. pact would generate risks in the future to investment in nuclear-related companies.

None of the 35 respondents said they have provided funds to companies developing intercontinental ballistic missiles, bombers capable of loading nuclear weapons and other nuclear weapons-linked infrastructure.

However, the three megabanks declined to disclose their investments in nuclear-related companies.

While welcoming the 16 lenders for supporting such guidelines, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, or ICAN, a nongovernmental organization and the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said it suspects some still continue to invest in nuclear-related businesses.

“Companies that manufacture nuclear weapons conduct businesses in other areas,” said Akira Kawasaki, a member of the International Steering Group of ICAN. “We see it as a perception gap between us and some banks that claim they abstain from investing in nuclear weapons manufacturing businesses.”

ICAN wants those banks to disclose details about their guidelines, Kawasaki said.

 

May 4, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Japan, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Offshore wind is General Electric’s great opportunity, not dodgy Small Nuclear Reactors

GE Power Plays: Wind Might Blow Coal, Gas And Nuclear Away, Seeking Alpha,  Apr. 29, 2020 Keith Williams
Summary

GE offshore wind: massive offshore turbine Haliade-X 12MW looks like a winner.

GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy may be a receding opportunity.

GE might sell its steam power business and rationalise its fossil fuel interests.

The power and renewables businesses are important in considering investment in GE.

………. Nuclear Small Modular Reactors : GE-Hitachi BWRX-300

There is a lot of talk in the nuclear industry and also in political circles from groups who are opposed to solar PV and wind developments, yet who acknowledge the need for low emissions technologies. The World Nuclear Association (WNA) has an excellent summary of many proposed developments in the area of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs). The list of projects is long but many (most) seem to be struggling. A key point from the WNA report is the following : “Licensing is potentially a challenge for SMRs, as design certification, construction and operation licence costs are not necessarily less than for large reactors.” This is a huge red flag for any SMR project.

A second objection is cost of nuclear power versus solar PV/wind plus storage. There is a lot of information about these relative costs, including well into the future. I am not aware of any studies that suggest that any nuclear technology will be able to compete with renewables and storage on price. A recent study (December 2019) by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) and CSIRO concluded that SMR nuclear reactors will generate power costing ~8x that of rooftop or solar PV and wind, with solar and wind costs of power generation being similar. 

……. With Small Modular Reactors the poster child of nuclear power supporters, it is clear that there is a lot riding on this potential saviour for the nuclear industry after Fukushima and recent delays and cost blowouts in the European (especially UK, French and Finnish) nuclear industries.

With current focus on emissions reductions and the climate emergency, this is an excellent time for low emissions technologies. However, the need is now and renewables (solar PV and wind) plus storage (pumped hydro and batteries) are making a lot of progress in addressing the needs. My question is whether the cost structure and long lead times mean that nuclear technology is too expensive and late to play a part.

A recent summary of the current state of the nuclear industry as a whole is depressing reading for someone who is enthusiastic about the nuclear industry’s prospects. A lot has to happen in the next decade and SMR technology isn’t ready yet. Is GE investing a lot in a technology that can’t compete with the dramatic advances in solar PV, wind and battery storage?……

GE’s adventures in nuclear developments seem like the kind of speculative play GE could happily fund when it was one of the world’s biggest and most powerful engineering companies. It doesn’t have that status anymore and my take is that it needs to cut its cloth and focus on projects that will have more immediate commercial outcomes. Of course, that is asking for a big rethink about how GE sees itself, but does it really have a choice if it wants to survive?

Offshore wind business

While there is some apprehension in the wind industry, especially in the US and China, as changes in regulations come into force next year, and 2020 has been messed up by COVID-19, there is a long-term future for wind power; offshore wind prospects look huge………

GE Renewable Energy is a major wind turbine supplier, with more than 42,000 of its turbines (mostly onshore) installed. Its role in the wind industry is extensive, from manufacture, digital optimization, operations and maintenance. Its onshore turbines range in size from 1MW to 5MW. GE installed ~50% of onshore turbines in the US last year, a 40% increase compared with the number of onshore turbines it installed in the US in 2018.

The offshore market is still emerging, with turbines substantially bigger than those used onshore. ….. The area that looks to me as if it could become a big winner is in offshore wind turbine developments, ….

A lot of investors have GE in their portfolios and a lot more are probably reflecting on whether GE might once again become a secure safe-haven investment. My biggest issue with GE is that it seems to me it is yet to understand that it is no longer the huge and dominant business that can afford to make big bets that burn a lot of cash. The current SMR nuclear programs in GE seem to be in this category. They have a very low chance of success but require major resources. I’d prefer not to have these distractions in a company I invest in….. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4340805-ge-power-plays-wind-might-blow-coal-gas-and-nuclear-away

April 30, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, renewable, USA | Leave a comment

Low Oil Prices May Kill Off The Next Nuclear Boom Before It Begins

Low Oil Prices May Kill Off The Next Nuclear Boom Before It Begins, Oil Price, By Alex Kimani – Apr 27, 2020
“…… the third nuclear gold rush could be dead in the water amid low energy prices and stiff public opposition towards a sector that has increasingly fallen out of favour.

Opening up the West

On Thursday, the Nuclear Fuel Working Group (NFWG) made recommendations to the U.S. Administration to open up ~1,500 acres outside the Grand Canyon for uranium production, arguing that the country needs to beef up domestic production to avoid an over-reliance on foreign sources.

The organization has recommended spending $1.5 billion over ten years buying uranium from American producers to create a uranium stockpile that would necessitate buying about 10 million pounds a year.

The working group’s report claims that the United States also needs more uranium for two other purposes:

–  Low-enriched uranium for the production of tritium for nuclear weapons through the 2040s, and

–  Highly enriched uranium to be used as fuel for Navy nuclear reactors through the 2050s

The slow and painful demise of the American uranium mining industry can be chalked up to the fact that the country is not endowed with the most abundant and most accessible uranium deposits, with resources in Canada and Australia boasting significantly higher uranium content and a lower production cost per unit.

American miners have had trouble making a profit from their operations even at the best of times. Consequently, the industry has historically had to rely heavily on government largesse.

During the golden age of American uranium that spanned from 1955-1980, the U.S. government offered fat uranium bonuses in a bid to shore up its stockpiles during the Cold War. These included 10-year price guarantees for certain kinds of ore as well as $10,000 discovery and production bonuses for new sources, which pencils out to nearly $100K in today’s dollars. The incentives set off a mad gold rush in the nation’s vast Western region as every man with a jeep and a Geiger counter set out to make the next significant discovery.

The program was a resounding success: U.S. uranium stockpiles skyrocketed so much that the government stopped paying out the bonuses sometime in the 1960s…….

By 1987, the tables had turned completely, with the country importing nearly 15 million pounds of uranium while domestic production clocked in at just 13 million.

Growing competition weighed heavily on domestic production while the country’s love affair with nuclear energy got its first dose of the harsh reality of nuclear technology thanks to the Three Mile Island nuclear disaster in 1979 as well as the Chernobyl reactor meltdown of 1986 that turned an entire Ukrainian city into a ghost town. Meanwhile, utilities began to grow weary of the time and cost of building reactors, which further depressed demand.

The result: U.S. uranium production had sunk to a 35-year low by the time the last wave of reactors came online in 1990…….

Brief Renaissance

The U.S. uranium industry enjoyed a renaissance in the early 2000s as falling global stockpiles, and booming economies in China and India drove new demand.

Unfortunately, this, too, was not to last as the financial crisis of 2008 destroyed demand, while the Fukushima nuclear disaster of 2011 led to another severe backlash that set off a new round of reactor closures while Germany set to phase out the technology by 2022.

The third nuclear gold rush is starting off on very shaky grounds, too.

First off, the world’s strategic uranium reserves are not in any immediate danger of running out. In 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency said that the global nuclear fleet has enough stockpiles for 130 years, more than enough for the markets to respond to any shortfalls rapidly as they have done in the past.  …..

But more importantly, trying to open up the west for uranium mining is bound to be met with stiff resistance and widespread public uproar.

For all its setbacks over the years, nuclear power has remained broadly popular in the United States. However, the turning point came in 2016 when the majority of people turned against the technology.

The latest poll last year revealed that American public opinion remains split over nuclear power, with 49 percent of U.S. adults either strongly favor (17 percent) or somewhat favor (32 percent) it in power generation while 49 percent either strongly oppose (21 percent) or somewhat oppose (28 percent) its use……

The funny thing is that Gallup has found that American opinion on nuclear power does not have much to do with radiation or safety concerns; rather, it is driven by prevailing fuel prices.  …..

a 2020 Colorado College Conservation in the West Poll found that 71 percent of voters in the Mountain West and 77 percent of Arizona voters oppose the development of new uranium mines on public lands adjacent to the Grand Canyon. It’s the kind of backlash that no president wants to deal with, whether they are seeking re-election or not. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Low-Oil-Prices-May-Kill-Off-The-Next-Nuclear-Boom-Before-It-Begins.html

April 30, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Uranium, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. govt disregards nuclear diseconomics, pushes new nuclear power to support nuclear weapons

On April 23 the strongly pro-nuclear results of the Nuclear Fuel Working Group (NFWG) were made public by the US Department of Energy (DoE)

Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette announced the NFWG’s results and urged:

  • Taking immediate and bold action to strengthen the uranium mining and conversion industries and restore the viability of the entire front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle.
    •    Utilizing American technological innovation and advanced nuclear RD&D investments to consolidate technical advances and strengthen American leadership in the next generation of nuclear energy technologies.
    •    Ensuring that there will be a healthy and growing nuclear energy sector to which uranium miners, fuel cycle providers, and reactor vendors can sell their products and services.
    •    Taking a whole-of-government approach to supporting the U.S. nuclear energy industry in exporting civil nuclear technology in competition with state-owned enterprises.”

www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-brouillette-announces-nuclear-fuel-working-groups-strategy-restore-american

Brouillette’s announcement also undermines the long-cultivated narrative that ‘peaceful / civil use’ and military application of nuclear power would be separate – instead, it explicitly references the connection between the civil and military nuclear sectors:

“The United States currently has two well-defined future defense needs for domestic uranium supply: low-enriched uranium needed to produce tritium required for nuclear weapons in the 2040s, and highly-enriched uranium needed to fuel Navy nuclear reactors in the 2050s.
The Strategy also recognizes that U.S. national security is truly integrated with the health of the front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle – the United States needs a strong civil nuclear industry to enable national defense.” (underlining not in the original)

US DoE at the same date published a NFWG Factsheet:  Strategy to Restore American Nuclear Energy Leadership

 

April 28, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France’s nuclear company EDF in spiralling debt crisis

April 24, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, France, politics | Leave a comment

Latest delay in Olkiluoto nuclear fuel loadings leads to Fitch revising outlook to negative

April 24, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Finland | Leave a comment

U.S. Environmental and Labor Groups Team Up to Demand COVID-19 Relief

Environmental and Labor Groups Team Up to Demand COVID-19 Relief, Candice Bernd, Truthout, 22Apr 20

 This story is published as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to devastate the U.S. economy, national environmental organizations are stepping up to support labor unions and frontline workers across the country in their push for personal protective equipment, sick and hazard pay, safe working conditions, and other forms of relief as the crisis intensifies.

The Labor Network for Sustainability (LNS), which partners labor and environmental groups, is facilitating a loose coalition of more than 100 unions and environmental organizations working to pressure the Trump administration to do more to protect frontline workers. The groups are also supporting nine days of action from Earth Day to May Day to demonstrate the interconnection of climate justice and worker justice……… This story is published as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to devastate the U.S. economy, national environmental organizations are stepping up to support labor unions and frontline workers across the country in their push for personal protective equipment, sick and hazard pay, safe working conditions, and other forms of relief as the crisis intensifies.

The Labor Network for Sustainability (LNS), which partners labor and environmental groups, is facilitating a loose coalition of more than 100 unions and environmental organizations working to pressure the Trump administration to do more to protect frontline workers. The groups are also supporting nine days of action from Earth Day to May Day to demonstrate the interconnection of climate justice and worker justice…… https://truthout.org/articles/environmental-and-labor-groups-team-up-to-demand-covid-19-relief/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=de9b2e7e-e70c-405a-830f-e0ea3203ca88

April 23, 2020 Posted by | climate change, employment, health, politics | Leave a comment

16 hour days, 86 hour weeks for nuclear workers, amid pandemic panic?

Nuclear agency clears way for long days, weeks for Palo Verde employees, azfamily.comMorgan Loew 22 Apr 20,  PHOENIX (3TV/CBS 5) – The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has given the operator of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station permission to work its employees 16 hours per day and as many as 86 hours in a week, according to a letter from the NRC obtained by CBS 5 Investigates.

“Palo Verde Generating Station requested and received this exemption from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission early and proactively so that the option to modify work hours is immediately available in response to an extreme circumstance. Work schedules are not changing at this time, nor is a change imminent,” stated Jill Hanks in an email. She is a senior communications consultant at APS…..

environmentalists, like Steve Brittle from Don’t Waste Arizona, say they don’t think exemptions like these are a good idea. “All of the money this industry has, this is the best they can do?” said Brittle.

He said he only found out about the changes because of a standing records request he has on file with the NRC. “Government agencies as well as potential polluters – they all need to have somebody watching over them,” said Brittle.

The NRC has granted similar exemptions to other nuclear reactors across the country and allowed some facilities to postpone scheduled maintenance. Environmental groups warn that reducing maintenance, worker’s protections, and oversight could lead to accidents.

Morgan Loew’s hard-hitting investigations can be seen weekdays on CBS 5 News at 6:30 p.m. and 10 p.m.https://www.azfamily.com/news/investigations/cbs_5_investigates/nuclear-agency-clears-way-for-long-days-weeks-for-palo-verde-employees/article_116ace1e-844a-11ea-890d-b3c0d57fab8c.html 

April 23, 2020 Posted by | employment, health, USA | Leave a comment

Fitch downgrades EDF’s Outlook to Negative

Fitch Revises EDF’s Outlook to Negative; Affirms IDR at ‘A-‘22 Apr, 2020
Fitch Ratings – Milan – 22 Apr 2020: Fitch Ratings has revised Electricite de France’s (EDF) Outlook to Negative from Stable, affirming the utilities group’s Long Term Issuer Default Rating at ‘A-‘. A full list of rating actions is below.

The Outlook revision mainly reflects a large production cut in nuclear generation in France related to the coronavirus pandemic, and ongoing problems with new nuclear, adding to an expected increase in leverage to slightly above our rating sensitivity on average for 2020-2022. It also reflects growing uncertainties about the nuclear-market reform in France – which we still expect to be finally implemented – in terms of timing and final impact.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Production Cuts due to Pandemic: The pandemic and the lockdown have caused daily electricity demand to fall up to 20% yoy and depressed both spot and forward electricity prices. EDF has announced a cut of French nuclear production to 300TWh in 2020 and to 330TWh-360TWh for 2021-2022 (from our earlier assumption of 385TWh annually for the whole period), due mainly to the operational impact of the pandemic on the outages scheduled for these years and, to a lesser extent, to the drop in demand. While the announcement led to a rebound of forward prices 2021-2022 to around 45EUR/MWh, we do not expect EDF to fully benefit from it due to the ARENH reference price of 42EUR/MWh. For 2020, EDF is largely protected from the low price environment through hedging.

Large Working Capital Outflows: Another immediate consequence of the pandemic has been an increase in the number of end-customers struggling to pay their bills. In this respect, EDF will continue to supply power to households and small companies with overdue bills without penalties. ,……..

Company’s Reaction Uncertain: EDF has not yet communicated revised financial targets to the market, and we do not know what actions it will focus on to mitigate the impact of the pandemic.  …….

Problems with New Nuclear: At Flamanville, fuel loading would occur at best at end-2022 (compared with the previously estimated late-2019), implying an increase of construction costs by EUR1.5 billion (in 2015 real terms and excluding interests during construction) compared with previous estimates. HPC – the other key nuclear project of EDF – following another cost review in September 2019, sees an increase in construction costs of GBP1.9 billion-GBP2.9 billion (2015 real terms) compared with previous estimates. It remains to be seen if the pandemic will further increase the delay and cost overrun for these projects…….. https://www.fitchratings.com/research/corporate-finance/fitch-revises-edf-outlook-to-negative-affirms-idr-at-a-22-04-2020

April 23, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Georgia’s Nuclear Plant Vogtle, workforce cut due to coronavirus, costs increase, and costs flow through communityflow

April 18, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Covid 19 outbreak causes EDF to extend outages of nuclear reactors for several months

EDF extends nuclear reactor outages as virus outbreak hit maintenance plans  PARIS (Reuters) 17 Apr 20, – French utility EDF on Thursday extended outages at three nuclear reactors including the Flamanville 1 and 2 facilities by several months as it adjusts its maintenance schedule due to the coronavirus outbreak.

The utility said earlier on Thursday that it expected a sharp drop in its domestic nuclear power output to a record low in 2020 as a result of the fall in business activity caused by the coronavirus.

EDF extended the outages at the 1,300 megawatt each Flamanville 1 and 2 reactors in the north of France by five months until the end of October.

It had already reduced staffing at the nuclear power plant to around 100 from 800 because of a cluster of coronavirus outbreaks in the area.

The reactors have been offline since September and January 2019 respectively for maintenance and had been scheduled to resume production at the end of May.

The company said that the outages could be extended due to complex maintenance activities.

It extended the production shutdown at its 1,300 MW Paluel 2 reactor by four months until Dec. 31, saying the “duration of the outage maybe be longer due to technical issues requiring the implementation of a new and complex process”.

The Paluel 2 reactor was halted in October for refuelling and maintenance and had been expected to resume on at the end of August.

April 18, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, safety | Leave a comment

Impacts of coronavirus on the technical, financial and legal mess that is the Vogtle nuclear project in Georgia, USA

April 16, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, health, Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

EDF cutting back on its nuclear energy goals

EDF pulls financial targets in response to pandemic, WNN, 15 April 2020   EDF said on 23 March it would lower its 2020 nuclear power production target of 375-390 TWh, but did not say by how much. On 8 April French transmission system operator RTE said that electricity demand in the country had fallen between15% and 20% since the lockdown.

“The economic turmoil that follows from the current health crisis is causing a drop in power demand and is significantly impacting many of the group’s businesses, namely nuclear generation (which EDF indicates is currently under review and will be adjusted significantly below the initial assumption), new-build projects and services,” EDF said. “Consequently, the EDF Group withdraws all its financial targets for 2020, including the lower end of the EBITDA range of EUR17.5 billion, as well as for 2021.”…….

A new decree – published in the Official Journal on 27 March – postponed the deadline for loading of first fuel at EDF’s EPR unit at its Flamanville site in Normandy by four years, to April 2024. Under the currect schedule, the loading of fuel is planned by the end of 2022. …… https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/EDF-pulls-financial-targets-in-response-to-pandemi

April 16, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Bankrupt FirstEnergy Solutions is resuscitated as Energy Harbor, House Bill 6 subsidises Perry and Davis-Besse Nuclear Power plants

Perry leaders assess impact of Perry Nuclear Power Plant staying open, By Bill DeBus bdebus@news-herald.com @bdebusnh on Twitter   10 Apr 20, “…………House Bill 6, signed into law on July 23 by Gov. Mike DeWine, provided financial subsidies to keep the Perry and Davis-Besse Nuclear Power plants open……

In March 2018, the owner of both plants, known then as FirstEnergy Solutions, announced that it would close both plants if subsidies were not approved. ……..

In addition, FirstEnergy Solutions filed for bankruptcy.

While H.B. 6 went into effect in October, it was announced on Feb. 27 that the former FirstEnergy Solutions, under the new name of Energy Harbor, emerged from bankruptcy……

Perry area government leaders recently offered their views on how the Perry Nuclear Power Plant staying open will impact the future financial outlook for their respective towns or entities, as well as the community as a whole. ……

Under terms of House Bill 6, charges paid by residential, commercial and industrial customers on their electric bills will generate an estimated $170 million a year. Of that total, $150 million annually will go to the Perry and Davis-Besse nuclear power plants. The other $20 million is earmarked to support six solar energy projects in Ohio.

The nuclear plants will receive money between 2021 and 2027. …… https://www.news-herald.com/news/perry-leaders-assess-impact-of-perry-nuclear-power-plant-staying-open/article_ac6bb456-78f5-11ea-ba51-d72a1e490038.html

April 11, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

More delay in planning application for UK’s Wylfa Newydd nuclear project

Wylfa Newydd planning decision delayed again, NEI, 6 April 2020  A planning decision over the Wylfa Newydd nuclear power plant in Anglesey has been deferred, the UK Government has confirmed.

The Wylfa Newydd project, which envisaged the construction of two UK advanced boiling water reactors (ABWRs), was suspended in January 2019 after Hitachi, failed to reach a funding deal with the UK government. However, the government had been expected to grant a Development Consent Order to construct the £12 billion power station on 31 March……  The Secretary of State (Alok Sharma) has decided to re-set the statutory deadline for this application to 30 September 2020….'”

…..EDF Energy announced last month that it was delaying submission of its planning application for Sizewell C by a “few weeks” due to the coronavirus crisis. Construction work at Hinkley Point C has also been scaled back.  https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newswylfa-newydd-planning-decision-delayed-again-7859280

April 7, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »