nuclear-news

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

Canada’s political leaders oblivious to the dangers in making plutonium accessible?

Our political leaders seem oblivious to the dangers to the entire planet that could result from widespread access to plutonium. If Canada can access plutonium, so can any other country. If many countries have access to plutonium, the possession of nuclear weapons must be regarded as a real possibility. In a nuclear-armed world, any conflict anywhere can turn into a nuclear war. The stakes could not be greater

Plutonium: from Nagasaki to New Brunswick,    https://nbmediacoop.org/2021/08/09/plutonium-from-nagasaki-to-new-brunswick/ by Gordon Edwards, August 9, 2021   Today, August 9, is the 76th anniversary of the US military’s atomic bombing of the City of Nagasaki in Japan. The nuclear explosive used was plutonium.

The destructive power of plutonium was first revealed on July 16, 1945, when a multicoloured mushroom cloud bloomed over the American desert – the first atomic explosion, top-secret, and much more powerful than expected. Robert Oppenheimer, the man in charge, was awestruck and thought of the words from the Bhagavad-Gita: “I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.”

Three weeks and three days later, on August 9, 1945, the City of Nagasaki was destroyed with a single plutonium bomb.

Plutonium is named for Pluto, god of the dead. It is the primary nuclear explosive in the world’s nuclear arsenals. Even the largest nuclear warheads, based on nuclear fusion, require a plutonium “trigger” mechanism. Access to plutonium is key to the construction of such thermonuclear weapons. Removing the plutonium from nuclear warheads renders them impotent.

Plutonium is not found in nature but is created inside every nuclear power reactor,

including the one at Point Lepreau on the Bay of Fundy. Plutonium is a human-made derivative of uranium. A metallic element heavier than uranium, it is created inside the nuclear fuel along with hundreds of lighter, fiercely radioactive by-products – the fragments of uranium atoms that have been split.

The countries that have nuclear weapons – the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (US, UK, France, Russia and China) as well as India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea – have all learned how to separate plutonium from used nuclear fuel for use in weapons. This is done by dissolving the solid fuel assemblies in a hot, highly radioactive chemical bath from which the plutonium is extracted using basic scientific procedures. Any technology for extracting plutonium from used fuel is called reprocessing.

Nuclear advocates have long dreamed of using plutonium as a reactor fuel, thereby increasing the options for new reactor designs and magnifying the longevity of the nuclear age. The problem is, once plutonium has been extracted, it can be used either for weapons or for fuel at the discretion of the country possessing it. Policing methods can be circumvented. As Edward Teller has observed: “There is no such thing as a foolproof system because the fool is always greater than the proof.”

That’s how India exploded its first atomic bomb in 1974, by using plutonium created in a Canadian research reactor given as a gift to India and a reprocessing plant provided by the US. Both the reactor and the reprocessing plant had been designated as “peaceful” facilities intended for non-military use. India declared that the bomb it had detonated was a “Peaceful Nuclear Explosive.”

After the Indian blast, it was quickly determined that several other clients of Canadian technology – South Korea, Argentina, Taiwan, and Pakistan – were also in a position to develop a plutonium-based bomb program. Swift and decisive international action forestalled those threats. In particular, South Korea and Taiwan were discouraged by their US ally from pursuing reprocessing.

Shaken by these shocking developments, in 1977 US President Jimmy Carter – the only head of state ever trained as a nuclear engineer – banned the civilian extraction of plutonium in America and tried to have reprocessing banned worldwide, because of the danger that this nuclear bomb material could fall into the hands of criminals, terrorists, or militaristic regimes bent on building their own nuclear explosive devices. As one White House adviser remarked, “We might wake up and find Washington DC gone, and not even know who did it.”

Japan is the only country without nuclear weapons that extracts plutonium from used nuclear fuel, much to the dismay of its neighbours. South Korea is not allowed to do so, despite repeated efforts by South Korea to obtain permission from the US to use a type of reprocessing technology called “pyroprocessing.” Pyroprocessing is currently undergoing experimental tests at a US nuclear laboratory in Idaho.

Now, New Brunswick has been enticed to take the plutonium plunge. The company Moltex Energy, recently established in Saint John from the UK, wants to use plutonium as a nuclear fuel in a type of reactor that is not yet fully conceptualized. The plutonium would be extracted from the thousands of solid irradiated nuclear fuel bundles currently stored at NB Power’s Point Lepreau reactor using a version of the pyroprocessing technology that South Korea has so far been denied.

On a site right beside the Bay of Fundy, the highly radioactive metallic fuel bundles would be dissolved in molten salt at a temperature of several hundred degrees. A strong electrical current would be used to strip the plutonium metal and a few other elements (less than one percent of the mass) out of the dissolved fuel.

After the government of Canada gave $50.5 million to support the Moltex project in March this year, nine retired US government advisors – all of them experts in preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons – wrote to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in May, urging him to authorize an independent review of the international implications of the proposed New Brunswick plutonium scheme.

These nine experts, who have worked under six different US presidents, both Republican and Democrat, are deeply concerned that Canada’s support for reprocessing and the civilian use of plutonium could seriously undermine delicate and precarious global non-proliferation efforts that have been underway for many decades.

No reply from the Canadian government has so far been received, although Trudeau’s office acknowledged receipt of the letter and said that the matter has been entrusted to Foreign Affairs Minister Marc Garneau and Natural Resources Minister Seamus O’Regan.

Without any word from these two ministers, Moltex posted a response to the US experts’ letter on their corporate web site, disputing some of the claims made in the letter to Trudeau. In particular, Moltex claims that their proposed technology is not usable for nuclear weapons purposes because the plutonium is not pure, but mixed with other contaminants that cannot easily be removed.

The Moltex response has prompted another letter to Trudeau from the US non-proliferation experts, correcting this and several other misleading comments from Moltex and reiterating their call for a fully independent expert review of the non-proliferation aspects of the Moltex proposal.

Our political leaders seem oblivious to the dangers to the entire planet that could result from widespread access to plutonium. If Canada can access plutonium, so can any other country. If many countries have access to plutonium, the possession of nuclear weapons must be regarded as a real possibility. In a nuclear-armed world, any conflict anywhere can turn into a nuclear war. The stakes could not be greater.

Citizens of New Brunswick and all Canadians who realize the importance of this issue can write to our Prime Minister in support of a non-proliferation review of the Moltex proposal, and raise this matter with candidates and at the door during the next federal election campaign. We can all raise awareness of the legacy of Nagasaki and do our best to ensure that New Brunswick is not implicated by going ahead with the Moltex plutonium extraction scheme.

Dr. Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, is based in Montreal.

August 10, 2021 Posted by | - plutonium, Canada, politics | 1 Comment

French nuclear company EDF is postponing its decision on whether or not to go ahead with the Sizewell nuclear project in Britain

 

EDF delays final decision on Sizewell C. French energy giant now expects to leave it as late as 2023 before deciding whether to proceed with Suffolk nuclear power project. The timeline for EDF to decide whether to go ahead with the £20bn Sizewell C power station has slipped amid a lengthy planning approval process that is playing out as funding negotiations with ministers continue.

The French power giant now expects to make a final investment decision on the Suffolk plant at the end of 2022 or in 2023, compared to its previous expectations of mid-2022. EDF is in negotiations with the Government about a funding deal for Sizewell C and will also need external investors. Legislation is likely to be brought forward to allow developers to recoup costs during construction from household energy bills.


However, talks have been overshadowed in recent weeks by reports that ministers are seeking ways to block CGN from Sizewell and future UK nuclear projects. CGN has a 20pc development stake in Sizewell with an option to participate in the construction phase.

 Telegraph 8th Aug 2021

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/08/08/edf-delays-final-decision-sizewell-c/

August 10, 2021 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Why China is increasing its nuclear deterrence capacity

China needs to increase nuclear capacity to maintain minimum deterrence against rising US coercion, By Hu Xijin Global Times, Aug 07, 2021 On Friday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressed his “deep concern” about the “rapid growth” of China’s nuclear arsenal with Southeast Asian foreign ministers. He accused Beijing of “sharply deviating from its decades-old nuclear strategy based on minimum deterrence.” This is the US’ official response from the highest level after various US think tanks over the past few months have claimed that China is building a great number of “new missile silos” in Yumen of Northwest China’s Gansu Province and in the Hami region in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.


Chinese officials have not directly responded to these allegations made by US think tanks. They have neither confirmed nor denied them.It is important to note that China has never abandoned its minimum deterrence nuclear strategy. However, due to the comprehensive strategic threat that the US keeps posing to China, the nuclear capabilities Beijing needs to achieve “minimum deterrence” are now different from the past. As the potential risk stemming from US nuclear coercion against China is clearly increasing, China needs to have sufficient nuclear forces to contain such a risk
Even many ordinary Chinese people feel the urgency of strengthening China’s nuclear deterrent is common sense. We don’t know if those structures shown in the satellite photos in Yumen and Hami are silos or the foundations of wind power plants as some scholars have speculated. But if it does turn out that they really are silos, Chinese public opinion will definitely support the construction of them unconditionally.

Washington is in no moral position to accuse China of this. China has only a fraction of the number of nuclear warheads that the US has. China is also the only nuclear power that has pledged not to be the first to use nuclear weapons. The US has never indicated that it would consider making the same commitment.

There is no information from Beijing on whether it is strengthening its nuclear buildup in the face of a realistic threat from Washington. But even if we were doing that, it would have nothing to do with Southeast Asian countries, or even with Japan and Australia, because China’s nuclear policy also includes another firm commitment of not using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon state.

Once China substantially strengthens its nuclear forces, its only purpose will be to deter the US. Since there is already no mutual trust between China and the US, Chinese society is fully convinced that the US’ ultimate strategic goal is to bring China down. While not giving up on maintaining peace between the two countries, we must be prepared for the possibility that a war could eventually occur in the Taiwan Straits or the South China Sea. One of China’s major strategic missions today is to make the most complete layout for that day…………….https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202108/1230817.shtml

August 10, 2021 Posted by | China, politics, weapons and war | 2 Comments

China starting new nuclear power project, with technology from Russia

China started this week construction work on a new US$17-billion nuclear
power plant project, for which it will install Russian nuclear reactors at
the Xudabao project in northeastern China, World Nuclear News reports.

The Xudabao 3 unit is the first of four units at the plant to see the beginning
of construction. Russia’s Rosatom will design the nuclear island and will
provide equipment. The Russian firm will also provide commissioning
services for the equipment it will have supplied. The Russians will also
provide the construction and equipment for the Xudabao 4 unit, whose
construction is expected to begin in 2022. The two units are currently
expected to be commissioned in 2027 or 2028.

 Oil Price 6th Aug 2021

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/China-Starts-Constructing-17-Billion-Nuclear-Power-Plant.html

August 10, 2021 Posted by | China, politics | Leave a comment

While State and Federal governments hurry to subsidise nuclear power plants, Exelon is closing Illinois nuclear stations anyway

State, federal efforts too late to save Exelon’s Illinois nuclear plants, CEO Crane says, Utility Dive  Aug. 6, 2021  Iulia Gheorghiu

Dive Brief:

  • Exelon Generation has two Illinois nuclear plants slated for shutdown and decommissioning this fall, despite recent federal proposals for both a tax credit and a fund for existing nuclear plants, and rising power prices in the state………….

Dive Insight:

Federal momentum is picking up on creating incentives for existing nuclear generation to stay online: The House and Senate introduced a $15/MWh production tax credit (PTC) for existing nuclear power plants, and the infrastructure bill now in the Senate would set aside $6 billion under the Department of Energy to support nuclear plants facing economic risks of shutdown…………

Exelon executives emphasized that the federal incentives, including the PTC, are only proposals at this point…….

[W]e need to make decisions based on laws that have actually been enacted, and nothing has yet come to fruition in D.C. as of yet,” Kathleen Barron, Exelon’s executive vice president of government, regulatory affairs and public policy, said during the quarterly call……………… https://www.utilitydive.com/news/state-federal-efforts-too-late-to-save-exelons-illinois-nuclear-plants-c/604579/

August 7, 2021 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Group of USA Republicans and Democrats united in $trillion Bill to subsidise the nuclear and carbon capture industries

Bipartisan $1 trillion Senate infrastructure bill focuses on nuclear, carbon capture, transmission, Utility Dive  Aug. 3, 2021

Bipartisan $1 trillion Senate infrastructure bill focuses on nuclear, carbon capture, transmission, Utility Dive  Aug. 3, 2021

Catherine Morehouse A bipartisan group of senators on Sunday unveiled its nearly $1 trillion infrastructure bill, formalized into text following a 67-32 consensus to advance the legislation. The vote to advance the bill included the support of 17 Republicans.

The approximately 2,700-page bill would invest billions of dollars in transmission and grid infrastructure, new advanced nuclear plants as well as current nuclear facilities, electric vehicle infrastructure, carbon capture and other clean energy resources.

Ten senators led negotiations on the bill over the weekend, and it remains to be seen whether the legislation has enough support on either side of the aisle to make it to President Joe Biden’s desk. The bill will likely face several rounds of amendments, according to multiple reports…………………

Nuclear, carbon capture a focus

The Senate bill targets two clean [whaa aa t?] energy technologies that currently aren’t an economically viable investment for most utilities: carbon capture and storage and nuclear power. It focuses less on renewables,…..

On nuclear power, the legislative package targets aging power plants as well as yet-to-be-built small modular reactors. It sets aside $6 billion for the Department of Energy to spend on nuclear facilities that are under threat of being shut down due to economic factors. It also sets aside $6 billion in funding for microreactors, small modular reactors and advanced nuclear reactors.

The nuclear industry has struggled economically for decades, and proponents of the fuel believe policy should focus on saving existing plants and financing newer, smaller facilities. 

The chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission earlier this year predicted that without congressional assistance, the nuclear industry would go under trying to compete with cheaper resources like wind, solar and natural gas. Three nuclear plants owned by Exelon in Illinois failed to clear the PJM capacity auction in June, following the utility’s announcement earlier that year that the plants might face retirement without economic assistance from the state. Only one nuclear unit has been put into service in the last 30 years, and two units are under construction in Georgia, but the Georgia Vogtle project has run over budget and been delayed for years.

The Senate package is “a welcome step forward,” said John Kotek, senior vice president of policy development and public affairs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, but “additional action must be taken” to retain the existing fleet of nuclear power plants, including through a production tax credit…………. https://www.utilitydive.com/news/bipartisan-1t-senate-proposal-focused-on-nuclear-carbon-capture-transmis/604348/

August 5, 2021 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

UK Taxpayer funding will pour in, to get Rols Royce’s small modular nuclear reactors happening

 Rolls-Royce lines up funding for mini nuclear reactor revolution. Private
backing for Rolls-led consortium to build new generation of ‘mini nukes’
unlocks hundreds of millions of taxpayer support. Britain has taken a
crucial step towards creating a fleet of mini reactors that would reduce
reliance on Chinese money and nuclear technology after Rolls-Royce secured
investment to build the world’s first production line.

A consortium led by the FTSE 100 engineer has secured at least £210m needed to unlock a
matching amount of taxpayer funding, which will make it the first “small
modular reactors” (SMR) developer to submit its designs to regulators. It
is understood heavyweight financial investors specialising in energy are
now thrashing out the final details of their backing to drive work on the
so-called “mini nuke” power plants.

State support for SMRs – which
each generate about 450 megawatts, about a seventh of the output of
conventional nuclear power stations such as Hinkley Point – was revealed
in the Prime Minister’s ten-point plan for a green industrial revolution
released in the autumn. ………..

SMRs must play a
critical role in our clean energy transition and can open new export
markets worth billions of pounds. “To realise this potential, however,
the Government needs to establish a siting and policy framework by next
year to enable the deployment of a fleet of SMRs and capture the promise of
a net zero [that’s a lie] future.” Although officials are engaging with other businesses
on SMRs, one Whitehall source described the Rolls-led consortium as “by
far the most advanced”.

The UK SMR consortium also includes the National
Nuclear Laboratory and Laing O’Rourke, the construction firm. Ministers
are expected to push for the Office for Nuclear Regulation to prioritise
assessment of the consortium’s SMR design, while simultaneously driving the
planning process to get potential sites.

 Telegraph 3rd Aug 2021

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/08/03/rolls-royce-lines-funding-mini-nuclear-reactor-revolution/

August 5, 2021 Posted by | politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Exelon keeps up its drive for subsidies to keep uneconomic nuclear reactors going.

Lacking a lifeline, Exelon’s Illinois nuclear plants to retire in fall -CEO  Aug 4 (Reuters) – U.S. energy company Exelon Corp (EXC.O) said on Wednesday it still plans to retire uneconomic nuclear reactors at Byron and Dresden in Illinois this autumn unless some state or federal program is passed to save the plants.

Exelon Chief Executive Christopher Crane said in an earnings release that the company remains “hopeful that a state solution will pass in time to save the plants,………

there is also lingering public and political anger at Exelon’s Commonwealth Edison unit after the Chicago-based utility agreed to pay $200 million to resolve a U.S. Justice Department probe over inappropriate lobbying practices in 2020…….

In 2016, Exelon, which operates six nuclear plants in Illinois, won state subsidies that analysts have said provide about $230 million a year to keep its Clinton and Quad Cities plants operating.

Exelon, however, has long sought subsidies for its other Illinois nuclear plants.

Exelon has been successful in winning subsidies in New York and New Jersey to keep reactors operating to help meet those states’ clean(?) energy goals.https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/lacking-lifeline-exelons-illinois-nuclear-plants-retire-fall-ceo-2021-08-04/

August 5, 2021 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Stalemate between environmentalists and unions on keeping Illinois nuclear reactors going


Unions, Environmentalists Declare Impasse on Energy Deal wttw, Amanda Vinicky | August 3, 2021 With possibly just a few weeks left before Exelon shutters a nuclear reactor in Byron, feuding and politically powerful interests have failed to reach a deal that would keep the plant open and otherwise move Illinois toward its renewable energy goals.After years of negotiating on a major energy deal, environmentalists and unions agree that they’re deadlocked, and that it’s time for legislators and Gov. J.B. Pritzker to take over talks.Environmental groups, under the mantle of the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition, blame organized labor working as the umbrella group Climate Jobs Illinois. “We write to regretfully inform you that negotiations between the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition and Climate Jobs Illinois around passing a climate and equitable jobs bill in Illinois have reached an impasse,” the environmental advocates wrote Monday in a letter addressed to General Assembly leaders and Gov. J.B. Pritzker. Unions likewise sent a note to the governor and legislative leaders citing “intractable differences.”……..https://news.wttw.com/2021/08/03/unions-environmentalists-declare-impasse-energy-deal

August 5, 2021 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

All logic says that UK’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power project should be abandoned now.

 

“Anything that passes nuclear’s costs on to the taxpayer — costs like nuclear waste management, nuclear station decommissioning, or delays and cost overruns — will be a total betrayal of taxpayers and cost every household in Britain a small fortune,”

Times 1st Aug 2021, David Cameron could barely hide his glee. In June 2014, the then prime minister welcomed Chinese premier Li Keqiang, who signed a string of trade and investment deals totalling £14 billion. The deal bonanza came a year before the Chinese agreed to pump billions into Hinkley Point C in a move that was meant to revive Britain’s nuclear industry, ushering in a new Sino-British golden era.

That vision is long gone and the future of the UK’s nuclear industry is up in the air after reports that the government is exploring ways to remove state-owned China General Nuclear (CGN) from the proposed £20 billion Sizewell C nuclear plant on the Suffolk coast, amid mounting concerns about Beijing’s influence in critical infrastructure projects.

If the government removes CGN from Sizewell, the Chinese could pull out of all three, leaving a multibillion-pound black hole in Britain’s nuclear plans.

One way in which the government might attract new backers to replace Chinese money would be by introducing a regulated asset base (RAB) funding model. Usually reserved for capital -intensive sectors such as water and energy where monopolies exist, RAB takes the risk away from the developer and piles it on to consumers through higher bills during the construction phase. The RAB model was used
to support the Thames Tideway “super sewer”. Steve Thomas, professor of energy policy at Greenwich University, said: “On Hinkley, intuition says it cannot possibly be abandoned now — but all logic says it should be abandoned now.

You can’t imagine that after 15 years, the government is going to say, ‘Sorry, we made a mistake with this.’ But the reality is that it will be the most expensive power on the system, so from a consumer point of view, it will be awful.” A paper authored by Thomas with Alison Downes of the pressure group Stop Sizewell C estimated that using the RAB model could pile more than £500 on to household bills during the
construction, assuming cost overruns and delays.

Sir Ed Davey, the former energy secretary and now Liberal Democrat leader said “Anything that passes nuclear’s costs on to the taxpayer — costs like nuclear waste management, nuclear station decommissioning, or delays and cost overruns — will be a total betrayal of taxpayers and cost every household in Britain a small fortune,”

Sources told The Sunday Times that EDF was also keen to eject CGN from Sizewell, as its involvement was becoming a block on securing further investment. Thomas at Greenwich University said: “The problem is going to be finding investors who think the project [Sizewell C] is attractive enough, whilst at the same time not dumping huge amounts of risk on to consumers. And I don’t see how you can square that equation.
All the experience in the past 20 years says that costs are going to go horribly over budget and construction times are going to be horribly delayed. Who’s going to take that risk?”

 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britains-nuclear-winter-wch7cg2t5

August 2, 2021 Posted by | business and costs, politics | Leave a comment

Exelon moves to shutdown 2 nuclear power stations in Illinois, amidst subsidy negotiations.


Exelon moves to shut down 2 nuclear power plants in Illinois, Pantagraph.com, Dan Petrella Chicago Tribune Jul 29, 2021  CHICAGO — The parent company of scandal-plagued Commonwealth Edison filed plans with federal regulators to shut down two nuclear power plants for which it is seeking state subsidies that have been caught up in stalled energy negotiations in Springfield.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker has proposed a deal that would put power customers on the hook for a nearly $700 million bailout of three Exelon nuclear plants, including the plants in Byron and Dresden that are facing closure. Lawmakers returned to the Capitol in mid-June to vote on an energy policy overhaul but left town without an agreement on the timeline for phasing out natural gas-fired plants.

Exelon has argued that state subsidies are necessary for its nuclear plants, which don’t emit carbon pollution,[ as long as you don’t include the full nuclear fuel chain]  to compete with plants that run on fossil fuels………….

Exelon’s threat to close the plants mirrors the company’s strategy from 2016, when it succeeded in winning approval for subsidies for two other plants. That legislation is now at the center of an ongoing federal corruption investigation in which its ComEd subsidiary has admitted to engaging in yearslong bribery scheme to win support for its agenda in Springfield.

During negotiations this spring, lawmakers were hesitant to appear to be doing the bidding of Exelon and ComEd in the wake of the scandal but also were eager to preserve thousands of high-paying union jobs at the nuclear plants.

Pritzker’s office and Exelon found common ground in the waning hours of the spring legislative session. But disagreements on other issues derailed a final deal on a larger package that would put the state on a path toward Pritzker’s goal of 100% carbon-free energy by 2050.

When the state Senate adjourned its one-day session in mid-June without voting, Senate President Don Harmon, an Oak Park Democrat, pointed to an ongoing disagreement between two of his party’s core constituencies: organized labor and environmental advocates…….

Further complicating the issue, there are discussions in Congress about potential federal tax credits for nuclear plants that could be even more lucrative than what Illinois is considering.

A proposal from U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat, would create a tax credit for nuclear generators worth more than three times the ratepayer subsidy Illinois lawmakers are considering. But that plan would subtract the value of any state support, meaning ComEd customers would essentially be picking up part of the tab from federal taxpayers…………

from the company’s perspective, any help from Washington wouldn’t come in time to preserve the plants. Byron, near Rockford, is slated for closure in September, with Dresden, in Grundy County, to follow in November…….. https://www.pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/exelon-moves-to-shut-down-2-nuclear-power-plants-in-illinois/article_2f61090a-fb68-56af-a126-8b34875b1f05.html

July 31, 2021 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Over 1.5k people sign petition against nuclear waste storage in Lincolnshire, UK

Over 1,500 people have signed a petition to say no to plans to store
nuclear waste underground on the Lincolnshire coast. Plans emerged to
dispose of nuclear waste at a site near Mablethorpe this week, as
Radioactive Waste Management (RWM) said it was in “early discussions”
with Lincolnshire County Council about using the former ConocoPhillips Gas
Terminal in Theddlethorpe as a Geological Disposal Facility, but that no
decisions had been made.

Lincolnshire County Council Leader Martin Hill
claimed it was only 10 days ago they had a presentation from the firm, and
that it was the first time they’d had a meeting with them. He also said a
“binding” local referendum would be held and “if it’s a no,
that’s the end of it”, according to the BBC.

 Lincolnite 29th July 2021

Over 1.5k people sign petition against nuclear waste storage in Lincolnshire

July 31, 2021 Posted by | public opinion, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

UK debate should not be about excluding China from nuclear build, but about whether nuclear build is even nucessary.

Given the explosive costs of large nuclear, the
debate shouldn’t be over how to replace China on these projects. It’s
whether we need Sizewell and Bradwell at all.”

The Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab observed last year that Britain could
no longer conduct “business as usual with China”. The UK’s
highest-profile action so far has been to force the Chinese telecoms
supplier, Huawei, out of Britain’s 5G network, said the FT.

But now ministers are seeking to “ditch” China General Nuclear from future UK
power projects – ending a collaboration dating back to a 2015 agreement
between David Cameron and Xi Jinping.

The move reflects growing concerns
about CGN’s “role in critical infrastructure” and follows a similar
ban in the US, which put the Chinese state-owned company on an “export
blacklist” in 2019, “alleging it had stolen US technology for military
purposes”.

The brief “golden era” of Sino-British relations has
turned “radioactive”, said Ben Marlow in The Daily Telegraph –
exposing great holes in UK energy policy. Ministers claim “the removal of
the Chinese will encourage other partners to come forward”, but “there
is no proper contingency plan”. How very unsurprising, said Alistair
Osborne in The Times. “Given the explosive costs of large nuclear, the
debate shouldn’t be over how to replace China on these projects. It’s
whether we need Sizewell and Bradwell at all.”

 The Week 29th July 2021

https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/uk-news/953642/china-general-nuclear-banned-from-britain

July 31, 2021 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Will British taxpayers end up bankrolling Sizewell C nuclear power project ?

 

The flagship of Britain’s new nuclear power fleet is under threat as the
Government prepares curbs on Chinese involvement in critical national
infrastructure. Whitehall sources admitted last night that the £23bn
Hinkley Point C project underway in Somerset could be jeopardised by plans
to block China General Nuclear (CGN) from future UK projects.

The Hinkley reactor, Britain’s first in a generation, is being partially bankrolled by
CGN as part of a wider deal with French company EDF to replace the UK’s
aging nuclear plants. Under Government proposals which have not been
officially confirmed, CGN’s involvement in subsequent planned projects, in
Suffolk and Essex, would end. Government insiders said that there are
concerns this could disrupt the linked deal under which CGN is developing
Hinkley, where work is already significantly advanced.

Ministers are preparing to introduce legislation to Parliament that would allow nuclear
power developers to recoup costs from household bills. This could spark a
significant backbench rebellion from MPs concerned about China if CGN is
involved. Industry sources also suggested that EDF would find it easier to
court pension funds and other institutional investors without the political
risk of a major Chinese state partner.

CGN owns about a third of Hinkley Point C and has a 20pc development phase stake in Sizewell C, with an
option to participate in the construction phase. Its own reactor design for
Bradwell is going through UK regulatory approval, with CGN hoping it can
then export this technology more widely. The Times reported last night that
the Government is considering buying an equity stake in Sizewell C as part
of its moves to replace CGN, reversing a long-standing wish to keep nuclear
build off the Government balance sheet.

 Telegraph 26th July 2021

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/07/26/hinkley-nuclear-plant-risk-china-crackdown/

July 29, 2021 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

China’s nuclear power firm could be blocked from UK projects

China’s nuclear power firm could be blocked from UK projects

Ministers looking at ways to exclude state-owned China General Nuclear from future UK involvement Guardian, Jillian Ambrose Energy correspondent 26 July 21 China’s state-owned nuclear energy company could be blocked from building a nuclear reactor due to rising security concerns over Chinese involvement in critical national infrastructure.

Ministers are reportedly looking for ways to move ahead with plans for EDF Energy to build the £20bn Sizewell C nuclear plant on the Suffolk coast without China General Nuclear (CGN), which owns a one-fifth stake in the project.

Whitehall sources have confirmed the report, first published in the Financial Times, which has emerged amid deepening concerns over China’s security risk after the Huawei scandal last year.

CGN holds a minority stake in EDF’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset, as well as the Sizewell C project, but it hopes to use the pair as a springboard to building a Chinese-designed reactor at Bradwell-on-Sea in Essex.

It has submitted its reactor design for scrutiny by the UK’s nuclear authorities, but industry sources have warned that even if CGN wins approval for its reactor, a Chinese nuclear plant within 30 miles of London would be “politically unpalatable”……… https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/26/chinas-nuclear-power-firm-could-be-blocked-from-uk-projects

July 27, 2021 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »