Slovak government plans to tax nuclear power plants
Slovak government plans to tax nuclear power plants, owners threaten bankruptcy
By Michal Hudec | EURACTIV.sk 11 Feb 22, The “excessive profits” of nuclear power plants should be taxed as this would open up millions to compensate for the soaring energy prices, the economy ministry has said. But Slovenské elektrárne a.s, the owner of both Slovak nuclear power plants, claims the bill would lead to the private company filing for bankruptcy.
The government already agreed on a proposal and sent it to parliament to request a shortened legislative procedure. “The proposal introduces a tax on excessive profits for trading in electricity produced by nuclear facilities. The tax period will be a calendar month, ” the ministry wrote in an explanatory report.
According to the bill, excessive profit is a difference between electricity market prices and expenditures for their production in nuclear power plants. If parliament approves the bill, the state will get half of this difference. This year, it would be approximately €50 million………..
Slovenské elektrárne a.s. is a company owned by EPH of Czech billionaire Daniel Křetínský and Italian energy giant Enel. Together, they own two-thirds of the shares, with the rest belonging to Slovakia’s economy ministry. https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/slovak-government-plans-to-tax-nuclear-power-plants-owners-threaten-bankruptcy/
EDF predicts more cuts in nuclear output, as repairs needed for defects in reactors
Electricite de France SA said Friday that it had cut its nuclear output
estimates in France for 2023, adding to concerns after defects had led to
output revisions for 2022. The French energy company said next year’s
output would between 300 and 330 terawatt hours, compared with 340-370 TWh
under previous estimates.
Earlier this week, EDF cut its 2022 output
expectations for the second time, after it found defects at five reactors
at its Civaux and Penly sites. The estimate for 2023 takes into account the
continuation of the control-and-repair program on “pipes potentially
affected by stress corrosion,” EDF said.
Market Watch 11th Feb 2022
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/edf-cuts-2023-french-nuclear-output-estimates-271644567491
President Macron asssures France’s EDF of tens of billions of euros in public financing for new nuclear reactors

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire told C News TV on Friday that he was sure that EDF’s (EDF.PA) difficulties would “disappear” after France announced plans to build at least six new nuclear reactors in the decades to come.
President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday that the new plants would be built and operated by state-controlled energy provider EDF and that tens of billions of euros in public financing would be mobilized tofinance the projects and safeguard EDF’s finances.
Reuters 11th Feb 2022
In Ukraine, USA to finance American companies to sell nuclear technology there, and to other States

Where the Russians are coming, so is Westinghouse with its nuclear ambitions, ANYA LITVAK, Post Gazette, 7 Feb 22, Over the past few months, Joel Eaker, Westinghouse Electric Co.’s vice president for new nuclear power plant projects, has been shaking hands and posing for pictures all over Eastern Europe.
He was in Poland last month, where he plans to move in the spring. A week before that, he was in the Czech Republic to announce agreements signed with local companies in Cranberry-based Westinghouse’s bid to sell its AP1000 reactors in the region.
The nuclear renaissance never happened in the United States. But Mr. Eaker thinks Europe is headed in that direction.
The long game
The nuclear business is a long game with fits and starts.
For more than two decades, Westinghouse has been seemingly on the cusp of selling new nuclear reactors to various Eastern European countries ………….
All along, Westinghouse was pursuing a parallel strategy: making fuel that could be used in existing Russian-made reactors that are scattered across Europe.
…… Westinghouse could provide an alternate supply of fuel, which effectively delinks those countries from Russia.”
After some attempts loading the fuel in Russian-made reactors at Temelin in the Czech Republic, it was Ukraine that allowed Westinghouse to test and refine its fuel assemblies in Russian reactors.
Today, the U.S. company’s fuel is loaded into nearly half of Ukraine’s nuclear plants, and Westinghouse is trying to use those bona fides to sell fuel to existing Russian-style reactors in Finland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary, Tarik Choho, president of Westinghouse’s Europe, the Middle East and Africa division, told Ukraine’s news service in August.
Mr. Eaker said Westinghouse’s pursuit of that market was both earnest and strategic.
The company’s bread-and-butter business is supplying fuel to and servicing existing reactors. It’s what made Westinghouse, then in bankruptcy, attractive to the Canadian asset management firm Brookfield Business Partners, which has owned it since 2018.
It’s difficult to predict if this recent burst of nuclear promise in Eastern Europe will yield actual new reactor projects, Ms. Harrington said.
………… In 2014, when the continued existence of the U.S.’s Export-Import Bank became a topic of debate in Congress, Westinghouse’s then-CEO Danny Roderick said the first thing he was asked when pitching a new plant to clients in places like Central Europe is how much the U.S. government is willing to help financially.
………. Pierre Paul Oneid, the chief nuclear officer at Holtec International, a New Jersey-based company that specializes in decommissioning and nuclear fuel storage. Holtec, Mr. Oneid said, had been working for a decade to close a deal for a centralized storage facility for spent nuclear fuel in Ukraine, which would not be possible without financing from the U.S. government.
…….. While Mr. Oneid said the deal was in the “eleventh hour,” in fact it took three more years to finalize. U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corp. announced in 2017 that it was providing $250 million in political risk insurance to the Ukrainian utility. Bank of America/Merrill Lynch would then sell that $250 million commitment in the form of fixed-rate bond securities.
It was the first such deal of its type, but probably not the last.
Show me the money
If there’s another major piece, other than climate change, that’s opening doors for Westinghouse in Eastern Europe, it’s the prospect of the U.S. government’s expanded role in financing nuclear projects, Mr. Eaker said.
In 2019, then-President Donald Trump created the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group………. Among its recommendations was for the U.S. Development Finance Corp., a newly-created vehicle to fund projects in low-income countries, to lift its ban on providing funds to nuclear projects.
The development agency listened and, in the summer of 2020, it unshackled itself from the ban, which was a holdover from its predecessor and modeled on the language of the World Bank. The DFC can even provide financing to projects in higher-income countries in Eastern Europe as part of its charge under the The European Energy Security and Diversification Act of 2019.
This means the U.S. government can now offer equity financing for nuclear projects abroad, a first. It can also give larger loans and loan guarantees than what is typically handled by the Export-Import Bank, and it can offer political risk insurance.
This is the next step in Westinghouse’s advances in Eastern Europe. Once it finishes doing a $10 million front end engineering and design study for AP1000 reactors in Poland — the U.S. government funded 70% of that work as part of an intergovernmental agreement — then it hopes to submit a formal bid along with a U.S. government financing proposal this fall.
In Ukraine, Westinghouse has already signed contracts with the electric utility to start ordering long-lead equipment and doing other preparations, but the contracts won’t be fully implemented until the U.S. comes with the financing package.
Anya Litvak: alitvak@post-gazette.com. https://www.post-gazette.com/business/powersource/2022/02/07/Russia-Ukraine-Westinghouse-Electric-nuclear-AP1000-reactors-climate-change-energy-eastern-europe/stories/202201300126
Nuclear power: CO2 fix or cost disaster?

Nuclear power: CO2 fix or cost disaster? E and E News | 02/04/2022 President Biden’s plan to decarbonize the U.S. electricity sector by 2035 could give a boost to nuclear power, but that may hinge on two key questions: Can carbon targets really incentivize the technology, and can it compete cost wise with natural gas?
It’s a debate that is resurfacing, considering recent surging prices of natural gas.
Yet industry hasn’t answeredwhether nuclear will be more economic for producing power, especially after costs for two new reactors at Plant Vogtle in Georgia skyrocketed. The actual costs of 75 of the more than 90 existing nuclear power reactorsin the U.S. exceeded the initially estimated costs of the units by over 200 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
There are many facets of the cost question — existing nuclear plants in competitive markets face economic challenges that could force them to close early, saddling operators with stranded costs and removing emissions-free electrons [not really emissions-free] from the grid. Meanwhile, no large, baseload reactors are on the table. The industry is working to develop smaller, next-generation reactors by the next decade, but the fate and final costs of projects are uncertain.
“There doesn’t seem to be, in the near term, a big thing that’s going to be pushing” nuclear, said Paul Patterson, a utility analyst with Glenrock Associates LLC. Whether the nuclear industry builds new reactors could help shape the electricity mix for decades. Falling renewable energy costs and higher gas prices may also influence investment decisions for nuclear in unexpected ways.
………… Southern Co.’s Vogtle expansion project hasn’t helped the case for baseload nuclear. The project, which was supposed to lead a resurgence of larger reactors in the 2000s, remains theonly major nuclear power construction project in the United States. Vogtle’sprice tag is twice an earlier $14 billion budget, andthe project is more than seven years behind schedule.
……more than one big electric company has shelved its plans to build large reactors using similar technology because of the litany of troubles at Vogtle…………………….
it’s unclear whether SMRs will face some of the same cost challenges as traditional reactors.
In the past, the higher price tag for nuclearin comparison to expectations was tied to safety regulations, which are the most stringent of all power plants. What’s more, if any work needs to be redone to meet strict codes, that pushes out the deadline to finish the plant.
The longer it takes to get it right, the more expensive the reactors become.
“There are so many concerns about radioactive material, etc., so that’s what drives much of the cost,” Glenrock’s Patterson said. “You don’t have the same issues associated with regulations for other power plants, understandably so.”
………… A group of former nuclear regulators in the United States, Germany and France argued last month that nuclear isn’t safe, clean or smart.
It’smore expensive than renewables in terms of producing energy and mitigating carbon dioxide, even accounting for costs such as pairing renewable energy with storage, according to the group, which alsoincludes a former secretary to a United Kingdom radiation protection committee.
The former regulators said nuclear is unlikely “to make a relevant contribution to necessary climate change mitigation” that’s needed by the 2030s………………………………..
Gas and renewables
Ultimately, the trajectory of nuclear will directly affect how wind, solar, batteries and fossil fuels are used in the coming decades.
Coyle pointed out that while the cost of Vogtle has doubled during the seven-year delay, the price of renewables, including storage, has dropped. Going forward, she argues that Georgia Power should compare the cost of planned generation with not only combined-cycle natural gas but also with renewable options such as utility-scale solar and long-term agreements to buy wind power.
“This argument that, ‘Well, it’s reliable, it’s low-cost, it’s carbon-free,’ then why are we still comparing it to combined-cycle natural gas?” Coyle said.
“There are now significantly more cost-effective renewable energy options than any of us anticipated back in the day when Vogtle 3 and 4 were certified.”……………
Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) of the UK and Ireland call for clear commitment to employ LOCAL nuclear decommissioning workers.
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) of the UK and Ireland has called
for a clear commitment to offer work to local people on decommissioning
work when nuclear plants close.
In its response to the consultation just carried out by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the agencycharged with making safe and clearing closed civil nuclear plants, on its
future Business Plan, the NFLA has called for support to be made available
to staff losing employment from a decommissioned plant to enable them to be
either reengaged in a role supporting the decommissioning process or find
alternate employment’. The NFLA also wants to see local contractors
continue to be hired to supply goods and services to the work.
NFLA 1st Feb 2022
Predictions of technical problems for Hinkley nuclear design turn out to be well founded
When the scheme started, EDF were confident that the facility would be
open within five years. The cost budget was £19 billion. Today the
situation is very different and many of the concerns expressed have proved
to be well founded.
There remain major concerns regarding the technical
solution being used by EDF. The reactor is a new generation design,
produced by France and Germany. To say that there are teething problems
with this would be an understatement. This system is being used to upgrade
France’s fleet of 56 ageing nuclear reactors. They are currently building
a new reactor in Flamanville. The project cost for this has quadrupled.
North Devon Gazette 3rd Feb 2022
https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/opinion-we-should-celebrate-not-decry-nuclear-power-8649918
Electricity production at the new Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor in southwest Finland has been hit by yet further delays
| Electricity production at the new Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor in southwest Finland has been hit by yet further delays. Production had been set to begin in January, but this was postponed until early February. In a press release, the facility’s operator Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) said the much-delayed reactor will instead begin producing electricity at the end of February. “During the OL3 plant unit’s test production phase, it was observed that there is a need for modifications in the plant unit’s automation related to control functions, as well as further testing related to the modifications,” the statement said. The delay also means that regular electricity production will begin in July, and not June as planned. Production will operate at 30 percent capacity until then. YLE 4th Feb 2022https://yle.fi/news/3-12301825 |
French nuclear capacity low in February, need for vigilance remains
French nuclear capacity low in February, need for vigilance remains – RTE Nasdaq, Forrest Crellin Reuters PARIS, Feb 4 (Reuters) – French power grid operator RTE said France’s nuclear capacity in February was expected to remain around the relatively low level recorded last winter, but there was little risk to power supply as mild weather was expected in the coming weeks.
The current maintenance schedule now allows between nine and 13 reactors to be shut down during the month of February depending on the week, either for standard maintenance or following identification of additional corrosion defects, RTE said…………
In January, the nuclear fleet reached its lowest level ever with an average of around 48 GW of available capacity for the month………
State-controlled power group EDF EDF.PA and the French nuclear safety authority ASN are expected to implement a strategy to control the corrosion that took five nuclear reactors offline, which will have consequences in terms of supply beyond this winter, added the RTE.
The effect of the outages will be reported in coming seasonal analyses and balance sheet forecasts, RTE said.
The outages at the five reactors that were taken offline following the detection of welding faults were extended in mid-January……… https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/french-nuclear-capacity-low-in-february-need-for-vigilance-remains-rte-0
Raytheon and Lockheed Martin boast to investors that Ukraine-Russia crisis is a boon for their business

The statements come from leaders of an industry that exerts tremendous influence in Washington, employing an average of 700 lobbyists per year over the past five years, or more than one lobbyist per member of Congress, according to Brown University’s Costs of War project.
Everyone in D.C. knows that weapons manufacturers are helping skew U.S. policy towards militarism
WEAPONS COMPANIES BOAST UKRAINE-RUSSIA TENSIONS ARE BOON FOR BUSINESS , Popular Resistance, By Sarah Lazare, In These Times., January 31, 2022
In Calls With Investors, Raytheon And Lockheed Martin Boasted That The Worsening Conflict Is Helping Profits.As the United States weighs more involvement in the growing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, some of the largest weapons companies in the world — Raytheon and Lockheed Martin — are openly telling their investors that tensions between the countries are good for business. And General Dynamics, meanwhile, is boasting about the past returns the company has seen as a result of such disputes.
The statements come as the U.S. government escalates arms shipments to Ukraine, among them the Javelin missiles that are a joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. House Democrats, meanwhile, are trying to quickly push through a bill that would significantly increase U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, and impose new sanctions on Russia.
Anti-war campaigners warn that U.S. escalation, amid renewed tensions between Ukraine and Russia, could bring dire consequences, and spill into a much larger and more protracted war. “As we are shipping advanced weaponry to the Ukrainian military, the Biden administration has signaled that U.S. military advisors will continue to stay in the country,” Cavan Kharrazian, progressive foreign policy campaigner for the advocacy organization Demand Progress, tells In These Times. “Who will most likely set up and teach the Ukrainian army how to use these weapons systems? The U.S. military.”
Among those openly discussing the boon to profits is Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes. During a January 25 appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street,” he was asked, “Do we have anything that would make it so if you inserted 8,000 American soldiers into Ukraine, they can stop 103,000 Russian soldiers?”
In his reply, Hayes touted the role the company could play in arming U.S. allies. “Obviously we have some defensive weapons systems that we could supply which could be helpful, like the patriot missile system.” He went on to add, “We’ve got the technologies to help in these engagements, whether it’s patriot systems, some of the radar systems.”………
If it sounds like Hayes is using mounting tensions as an advertising opportunity for his company, this may not be far fetched. On a January 25 earnings call (which was noted on Twitter by Nick Cleveland-Stout of the Quincy Institute), Hayes included “tensions in Eastern Europe” among the factors that Raytheon stands to benefit from. He said: “We just have to look to last week where we saw the drone attack in the UAE, which have attacked some of their other facilities. And of course, the tensions in Eastern Europe, the tensions in the South China Sea, all of those things are putting pressure on some of the defense spending over there. So I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it.”
Raytheon isn’t alone in its projections. Among those noting the likely boost to profits is Jim Taiclet, the chairman, president and CEO of Lockheed Martin. In a January 25 earnings call, he told investors, “If you look at the evolving threat level and the approach that some countries are taking, including North Korea, Iran and through some of its proxies in Yemen and elsewhere, and especially Russia today, these days, and China, there’s renewed great power competition that does include national defense and threats to it.”
This “great power competition,” he suggested to investors, bodes more business for the company. Taiclet says, “And the history of the United States is when those environments evolve, that we do not sit by and just watch it happen. So I can’t talk to a number, but I do think, and I’m concerned personally that the threat is advancing, and we need to be able to meet it.”
The statements come from leaders of an industry that exerts tremendous influence in Washington, employing an average of 700 lobbyists per year over the past five years, or more than one lobbyist per member of Congress, according to Brown University’s Costs of War project.
Everyone in D.C. knows that weapons manufacturers are helping skew U.S. policy towards militarism, but they usually try to be less obvious,” Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy, an anti-war organization, told In These Times. “They are cashing in on tensions over Ukraine as the U.S. pours weapons into the region.”……..
Everyone in D.C. knows that weapons manufacturers are helping skew U.S. policy towards militarism, but they usually try to be less obvious,” Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy, an anti-war organization, told In These Times. “They are cashing in on tensions over Ukraine as the U.S. pours weapons into the region.”
But Kharrazian warns, “While it may not be profitable for arms manufacturers, engagement in good-faith, realistic diplomacy is what will benefit the region as a whole and mitigate unnecessary and potentially catastrophic conflict.” https://popularresistance.org/top-weapons-companies-boast-ukraine-russia-tensions-are-a-boon-for-business/
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant “debris” storage method to be reconsidered – Chairman of the Regulatory Commission, Mr. Sarada
February 2, 2022
The chairman of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), Mr. Toyoshi Sarada, has asked Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to reconsider the storage method of concrete debris with a very small amount of radioactive materials from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, with a view to temporarily burying it underground.
It has been 11 years since the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant occurred in March 2011. The decommissioning of the nuclear power plant involves the removal of nuclear fuel that has cooled down after melting down. The biggest challenge is to remove the fuel debris. On the other hand, the disposal of low-level radioactive waste, which is generated in large quantities every day at the decommissioning site, is also a major issue.
As a result of the hydrogen explosions in the three reactor buildings, concrete fragments were scattered.
At a meeting of the Nuclear Regulation Authority held on the 2nd, Mr. Sarada said, “Even if we assume that the waste will be transferred in the future, there are some areas where it would be much more advantageous to bury and store the waste,” and expressed his desire to ask TEPCO to reconsider the storage method with a view to temporarily burying it underground.
The amount of waste from the decommissioning of the nuclear power plant is increasing, but the management at the site is not up to the task, so a realistic storage method must be considered with an eye to the future, he said.
Decommissioning of the AGR nuclear power stations: National Audit Office UK
![]() |
The decommissioning of the AGR nuclear power stations, National Audit Office
| Published | January 28, 2022 |
|---|---|
| Full report | The decommissioning of the AGR nuclear power stations |
The government has entered into new arrangements to decommission seven AGR nuclear power stations. While the arrangements could deliver savings, their success will ultimately depend on the relevant parties working collaboratively to overcome risks, according to the National Audit Office (NAO).
The UK has eight second generation nuclear power stations, accounting for around 16% of UK electricity generation in 2020. Seven of the eight stations are Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors (AGRs), which are all due to stop generating electricity by 2028.
The Nuclear Liabilities Fund (the Fund) was established to meet the costs of decommissioning these eight stations, but significant additional taxpayer support has been required with more likely to be necessary. The UK government has provided a guarantee to underwrite the Fund in the event that its assets are insufficient to meet the total costs of decommissioning. In 2020, government contributed £5.1 billion to strengthen the Fund’s position and the Fund has recently requested a further £5.6 billion. The Fund’s assets were valued at £14.8 billion at the end of March 2021. The aim is that growth in the Fund’s investments will be sufficient to meet the long-term costs of decommissioning (£23.5 billion). However, cost estimates have doubled in real terms since 2004-05. If this upward trend is maintained and investment growth is not sufficient, there is a risk that the taxpayer will have to make further contributions.
In June 2021, the AGR stations’ owner EDF Energy (EDFE) agreed to defuel each of the stations in an arrangement that the Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy (the Department) estimates could save the taxpayer around £1 billion.2 Once defueling is completed, ownership of the stations will transfer to the government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) for its subsidiary Magnox Ltd to complete the rest of the decommissioning process, which is likely to take several decades.
The rate at which stations can be defueled will impact on overall costs. The estimated cost of defueling could be between £3.1 billion and £8.0 billion. A bottleneck at any point between EDFE removing fuel, and the NDA transporting the fuel to safely store at Sellafield, could have repercussions across the programme. The costs to be borne by the Fund are therefore dependent on how quickly defueling begins once a station stops generating electricity, as well as the rate of defueling. Early unexpected closures of stations may increase costs……………………
“Government needs to maintain a clear view of how the nuclear decommissioning programme is performing as a whole, and given the large amounts of public money at stake it must act decisively should performance begin to lag.”
Gareth Davies, head of the NAO………………
Contact
NAO Press Office
+44 (0)20 7798 7400 or email pressoffice@nao.org.uk https://www.nao.org.uk/press-release/the-decommissioning-of-the-agr-nuclear-power-stations/
What’s plan B if the government can’t attract investors willing to fund Sizewell C?

What’s plan B if the government can’t attract investors willing to fund Sizewell C? Guardian Nils Pratley 27 Jan 22. Development money for nuclear power station is an attempt to draw in investors that could replace China’s CGN sum of £100m is peanuts in the expensive world of nuclear power stations, so regard the business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng’s funding for a round of development work on Sizewell C as a form of advertising. The cash is intended to send a message that the government is serious about getting the plant built in Suffolk. And it is an appeal for outside investors to volunteer to sit alongside developer EDF, the French state-backed group.
There was also a definition of a desirable investor: “British pension funds, insurers and other institutional investors from like-minded countries”. Note the nationality test. It is the closest we have come to official confirmation that China General Nuclear (CGN), originally slated for a 20% stake in Sizewell, will be kicked off the project. It remains to be seen how, legally, the government will rip up the 2015 deal with CGN signed by David Cameron’s government, but the intention is clear.
So, too, is the intended funding mechanism. It will be a regulated asset base (RAB) model, a version of the formula used at Heathrow Terminal 5 and the Thames Tideway giant sewer. The key point for investors is that they will see some income before Sizewell is built, unlike at Hinkley Point C where EDF and CGN earn their princely cashflows only when the electricity starts to flow.
What, though, if those British and like-minded institutions still refuse to play? Nuclear represents unknown territory for most of them. What if competition to invest, which is meant to be the other way in which RAB lowers financing costs, doesn’t materialise? What’s the government’s plan B?

The only possible solution is for the state to invest directly. If that is so, wouldn’t it be better to run an upfront benchmarking exercise at the outset to compare the numbers? Sizewell, unfortunately, is probably inevitable given the current panic over high gas prices and long-term energy security. But taxpayers, on the hook anyway via household bills, deserve to know that the odd billion or three isn’t being diverted unnecessarily to intermediaries.
By the time Sizewell’s sums become enormous, transparency will be essential…….https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2022/jan/27/whats-plan-b-if-the-government-cant-attract-investors-willing-to-fund-sizewell-c
The escalating costs of decommissioning UK’s nuclear reactors pose a warning about new nuclear reactors.

The history of the AGR fleet provides lessons for other long-term programmes carrying significant end‑of‑life liabilities, including new nuclear energy programmes.
| The government has entered into new arrangements to decommission seven AGR nuclear power stations. While the arrangements could deliver savings, their success will ultimately depend on the relevant parties working collaboratively to overcome risks, according to the National Audit Office (NAO). The Nuclear Liabilities Fund (the Fund) was established to meet the costs of decommissioning these eight stations, but significant additional taxpayer support has been required with more likely to be necessary. The UK government has provided a guarantee to underwrite the Fund in the event that its assets are insufficient to meet the total costs of decommissioning. In 2020, government contributed £5.1 billion to strengthen the Fund’s position and the Fund has recently requested a further £5.6 billion. The Fund’s assets were valued at £14.8 billion at the end of March 2021. The aim is that growth in the Fund’s investments will be sufficient to meet the long-term costs of decommissioning (£23.5 billion). However, cost estimates have doubled in real terms since 2004-05. If this upward trend is maintained and investment growth is not sufficient, there is a risk that the taxpayer will have to make further contributions. In June 2021, the AGR stations’ owner EDF Energy (EDFE) agreed to defuel each of the stations in an arrangement that the Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy (the Department) estimates could save the taxpayer around £1 billion. Once defueling is completed, ownership of the stations will transfer to the government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) for its subsidiary Magnox Ltd to complete the rest of the decommissioning process, which is likely to take several decades. Initial ambitions that the existence of the Nuclear Liabilities Fund would help eliminate taxpayers’ exposure are being tested, with rapid increases in the estimates of decommissioning costs outstripping investment returns. The history of the AGR fleet provides lessons for other long-term programmes carrying significant end‑of‑life liabilities, including new nuclear energy programmes. National Audit Office 28th Jan 2022 https://www.nao.org.uk/report/the-decommissioning-of-the-agr-nuclear-power-stations/ |
Nuclear not competitive’ and too late for energy transition: Enel Green Power CEO.

Nuclear not competitive’ and too late for energy transition: Enel Green Power CEO, Italian renewables giant ‘obviously’ won’t invest in nuclear due to long construction times and high costs, Salvatore Bernabei says https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/nuclear-not-competitive-and-too-late-for-energy-transition-enel-green-power-ceo/2-1-1155407 By Bernd Radowitz 26 Jan 22,
Enel Green Power has no intention to invest in nuclear power despite the European Commission’s plan to label the technology as sustainable, the Italian renewables supermajor’s chief executive Salvatore Bernabei said.
Construction times of conventional nuclear power plants are far too long in relation to the need to get the energy transition done within the next 20 to 30 years, the CEO explained.
“If you think about the current technology and the current timing of development and construction of nuclear plants, it is much bigger than 10 years (from the moment) you take the initial investment decision,” Bernabei said at a press briefing.
You have the permitting, then you have the construction,” he said, adding that all projects currently being built have exceeded their planned construction time, and their completion takes “two to three times more than initially expected.”
“They are (also) out of budget. So, saying that nuclear could help in the transition with the current technology – I leave you to (make) the conclusion.”
His comments came after the EU Commission had proposed to include nuclear power and fossil gas under certain circumstances in its taxonomy that labels energy projects as sustainable and thus facilitates financing. The taxonomy proposal enjoys the backing by France, Finland and several Eastern European EU states that want to build or expand atomic power, but the inclusion of nuclear has been strongly opposed by Germany, Austria, Spain and Luxembourg.
Despite its stated wish to build new nuclear reactors and revamp existing ones to extend their operational life, France has suffered severe setbacks during the construction of the Flamanville 3 reactor, one of the few nuclear plants being built in Europe. The country this winter also had to switch off a series of atomic power stations, forcing it to import large volumes of electricity from neighbouring countries.
French state-owned utility EDF earlier this month has said the plant of the novel European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) type at Flamanville will cost another €300m more than forecast and fuel loading is being pushed back by up to six month, the Reuters news agency had reported. The 1.65GW reactor according to French media will then have cost French taxpayers a record €19.1bn ($21.5bn) instead of the €3.4bn originally budgeted, and have taken 15 years to build, ten years longer than originally planned.
Similar construction time and cost overruns have been experienced in Finland, where operator Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) has recently started to commission the Olkiluoto 3 reactor, also an EPR reactor.
Germany’s government last weekend issued a statement rejecting the inclusion of nuclear power into the EU’s taxonomy.
“It is risky and expensive. New reactor concepts such as mini-reactors also entail similar problems and cannot be classified as sustainable,” economics and climate minister Robert Habeck and environment minister Steffi Lemke said in a joint reaction.
It is clear to everyone that the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of nuclear is much bigger than €100 per megawatt hour, Bernabei agreed.
Small nuclear reactors (SMRs), which by some investors such as Bill Gates are touted to be a quick solution helping the energy transition, and supposedly are safer, may not be such a quick fix either, the EGP CEO pointed out.
“Then you talk of the next generation (of nuclear power). But in the next generation, you have this word ‘next’, (which) has to be defined yet. We are speaking about something that could be ready in 2040 – perhaps,” Bernabei said.
The first SMR reactor is slated to be built in China by 2026, “and they are the first mover,” the CEO added.
“So, whatever the taxonomy would say, the question will be ‘is there anyone available to invest in a technology that would need more than 10 years to become a reality? And perhaps when it becomes reality, the market has completely changed its dynamic with a cost that today is not competitive.”
“As Enel we don’t intend to invest in nuclear obviously.”
Italy after a referendum following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster had switched off nuclear power in the by 1990, but the far right Lega party of Matteo Salvini lobbies for it renaissance.
-
Archives
- June 2026 (193)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS





