Illinois General Assembly split on the idea of bailing out Exelon’s financially distressed nuclear station
Bill to help Clinton nuclear plant on back burner Bloomington Pantograph Dan Petrella dan.petrella@lee.net SPRINGFIELD, 20 May 16 — It remains unclear whether the Illinois General Assembly will act before the scheduled end of its spring session on legislation that Exelon Corp. says is essential to the future of its financially struggling nuclear power plants in Clinton and near the Quad Cities.
Near the end of a committee hearing Thursday that lasted more than three hours, Democratic Sen. Mattie Hunter of Chicago, chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Public Utilities Committee, said the measure won’t be coming to the Senate floor for a vote anytime soon.
Exelon has said that it will shut down the Clinton Power Station next year “if adequate legislation is not passed that properly values nuclear power for its economic, environmental and reliability benefits during the spring Illinois legislative session scheduled to end May 31.”…….
“It appears our committee is split,” Hunter said. “I don’t know if we even have enough votes to get it passed anyway.”…..
Exelon’s proposal also faces stiff opposition from groups like AARP Illinois, the Illinois Public Interest Research Group and the Illinois attorney general’s office. Opponents say a shift in the way customers are charged could result in wide month-to-month variations in power bills. http://www.pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/bill-to-help-clinton-nuclear-plant-on-back-burner/article_4f2fcbbf-84bd-52a5-a2e0-991c7e7fda74.html
New York’s proposed Clean Energy Standard a financial gift to the nuclear industry
A gift to the nuclear power industry, The River Reporter May 18, 2016 — State officials are in the midst of a round of meetings regarding the state’s proposed Clean Energy Standard (CES), which will determine how much renewable electricity will be distributed to customers by utilities in years to come. The proposed plan calls for the state to generate 80% of electricity from renewable power by 2050, which is certainly a laudable goal.
Incredibly, however, the proposed CES mandates that rate-payers keep the state’s four nuclear power plants alive by paying higher-than-market prices for the expensive electricity produced by the plants.
As Jessica Azulay, program director of Alliance for a Green Economy, wrote in a memo, “The proposed Clean Energy Standard also includes a gift to nuclear corporations operating in Upstate New York. Due to low electricity prices, declining demand, competition from wind power, and rising nuclear costs, New York’s four upstate reactors have been struggling economically. Two are on the verge of closure unless they receive a financial lifeline. Tucked into the ‘Clean Energy Standard’ is that lifeline. In addition to requiring that utilities and ESCOs [Energy Supply Companies] purchase renewable energy, the policy would mandate that utilities buy 4.6% of the electricity they deliver in 2017 from nuclear reactors ‘facing financial difficulty.’ By 2020, utilities would be required to buy 15.7% of electricity from unprofitable nuclear plants.”….
while proponents call nuclear power a form of clean energy because it doesn’t release any carbon into the air while electricity is being generated, the process of collecting uranium to power the nuclear plants could hardly be considered clean.
Again, according to Azulay, the mining of uranium is largely unregulated and there are over 15,000 abandoned uranium mines in this country that have not been cleaned up. She says, “After mining, uranium is processed into uranium dioxide ore at a mill; milling generates vast amounts of radioactive and toxic tailings that are deposited on the ground or in open ponds. The fuel is then enriched in an energy-intensive process. By the time fuel is delivered to a reactor for use, approximately 25,000 pounds of mining waste (rock, mill tailings, and depleted uranium) have been generated for each pound of nuclear fuel.”
Nuclear power plants are not the answer to present or future energy needs, and New York State taxpayers should not be asked to pay for those that become unprofitable. Comments regarding the CES are due by June 6, and a sample comment and submission instructions can be found at www.allianceforagreeneconomy.org/nukes-are-not-clean. http://www.riverreporter.com/editorial/4302/2016/05/18/gift-nuclear-power-industry
‘Generation IV’ nuclear companies desperate for tax-payers’ money
Nuclear Firms: More Federal Money for Advanced Reactors. Bloomberg BNA, By Rebecca Kern May 17 — Nuclear companies said in a Senate hearing that continued support from Congress is needed to further develop and commercialize advanced nuclear reactors, several of which are getting some Department of Energy funding.
“Successful completion of the DOE cost-share program depends on sustained congressional support and continued appropriations,” John Hopkins, chairman and chief executive officer of NuScale Power LLC, an advanced nuclear reactor company, said at a May 17 Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing on advanced reactors. “We appreciate your past support and we ask that you continue to prioritize small modular reactor programs in a tight budgetary environment.”……
NuScale has been receiving cost-share grants from the DOE since 2013 and expects to submit its first-of-a-kind small modular reactor licensing application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the end of 2016, Hopkins said……
John Gilleland, chief technical officer of TerraPower LLC—a nuclear design company developing a generation-four reactor—also said there is a need for more government funding….
TerraPower is working with the China National Nuclear Corporation, an economic corporation overseen by the Chinese government, to develop a 1,200 megawatt electric liquid sodium-cooled fast reactor that uses depleted uranium as fuel in the metallic form. They hope it will be commercially deployable in the 2020-2030 time frame, Gilleland told Bloomberg BNA May 17.
Support for Advanced Nuclear Bills
Jacob DeWitte, co-founder and chief executive officer of Oklo, an advanced reactor start-up company, lauded the work done by the committee to pass the Energy Policy Modernization Act (S. 2012) in late April (76 ECR, 4/20/16). The bill included language from a bill sponsored by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) that would establish a National Nuclear Innovation Center between the Energy Department and the NRC to establish capabilities for the private sector to test and demonstrate advanced reactor concepts.
He also supported S. 2795 introduced by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) that would promote the development of advanced nuclear technologies, which is being marked-up by the Senate Environment and Public Works committee this week…..
Also, Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) has introduced H.R. 4979 which would direct DOE and the NRC to work together on an advanced nuclear reactor framework. This bill will be marked up by the House Energy and Commerce committee this week (92 ECR, 5/12/16)……
To contact the reporter on this story: Rebecca Kern in Washington atrkern@bna.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Larry Pearl atlpearl@bna.com http://www.bna.com/nuclear-firms-federal-n57982072580/
USA House and Senate committees approve bills favouring “new nuclear” companies
environmental groups raised concerns with H.R. 4979 in a May 17 letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, saying changes to the NRC’s licensing framework could lead to safety concerns.
Ed Lyman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said he had concerns with requiring the Energy Department to split the costs of advanced reactor development, because this ultimately would be borne by taxpayers.
House, Senate Panels OK Advanced Nuclear Reactor Bills Bloomberg BNA, By Rebecca Kern May 18 — House and Senate committees approved two bills May 18 that would create a new licensing framework at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the review of advanced reactors.
During separate hearings, the House Energy and Commerce Committee favorably reported out the Advanced Nuclear Technology Development Act (H.R. 4979), and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (S. 2795)………
NuScale Power LLC will be the first company to submit a licensing application to the NRC by year-end for its advanced small modular reactor that is 50 megawatts and can be transported by rail, truck or barge (95 ECR, 5/17/16).
The bills will next go to the House and Senate floors, although no schedules for votes have been announced.
Dan Schneider, the Energy and Commerce’s press secretary, told Bloomberg BNA May 18 that the committee members look forward to working with the co-sponsors of S. 2795 once the House passes H.R. 4979 to work out differences between the bills.
Environmentalists Cite Concerns
Confronting nuclear proponents on the real costs of “new nuclear” – US Senate hearing
Hearing on new reactors turns into colloquy on subsidies Hannah Northey, E&E reporter E&E Daily: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 A Senate hearing focused on the challenges of building the nation’s next-generation nuclear fleet yesterday quickly pivoted to concerns about cost and competition from cheap natural gas, with senators needling each other over energy subsidies…….
senators on the panel repeatedly turned back to the question of cost and whether the developers could make their projects compete financially.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) said he was having a hard time reconciling the closure of nuclear power plants, including units in Illinois that had lost hundreds of millions of dollars in past years, with the industry’s push for new reactor designs. Heinrich asked witnesses what cost per kilowatt-hour they were targeting to ensure the advanced technologies would be competitive in the marketplace…….
Independent Sen. Angus King of Maine also questioned the industry’s math, noting that it could cost $7 million per megawatt to build an advanced reactor, whereas the costs for wind and natural gas are substantially lower……
The senator went on to ask Kuczynski whether a “level playing field” also meant scrapping federal support for the nuclear industry in the form of the Price-Anderson Act — a 1957 law that created a $12 billion pot of money to cover injuries and property damage during accidents.
When Kuczynski said the industry doesn’t view the law as a subsidy, King was quick to respond.
“It walks like a duck, it talks like duck, it’s a duck. It’s a subsidy,” King said. “If you had to buy that insurance, it would cost you a fortune, is that not correct?” http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060037434
Republican U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander opposes wind power
Pro-Nuclear GOP Senator Urges Tennessee to Reject Wind Farm, abc news,By ERIK SCHELZIG, ASSOCIATED PRESS NASHVILLE, Tenn. — May 19, 2016, Republican U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander is urging his fellow Tennesseans to oppose what he calls an “unsightly” wind farm near the Cumberland Mountain State Park.
The longtime supporter of nuclear power argued on the Senate floor this week that the 23 wind turbines Apex Clean Energy wants to install are “massive” and would spoil the “natural beauty of our state.”
“We should not allow anyone to destroy the environment in the name of saving it,” said Alexander, arguing that wind energy is being fueled by “billions in wasteful taxpayer subsidies” to out-of-state companies.
Apex countered that the $130 million project will emit no pollution and create no hazardous waste as it provides a safe energy alternative near wildlife and natural areas…….
The wind farm near Crossville, about 100 miles east of Nashville, is projected to power 20,000 homes. It is located on a privately-owned 1,800-acre site behind a limestone quarry, though the turbines would be visible from Interstate 40.
“This project will help bring about cleaner, healthier air, reduce pollution, and create economic growth and jobs in Cumberland County,” Chandler said……http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pro-nuclear-gop-senator-urges-tennessee-reject-wind-39229291
New York Public Service Commission hearing on nuclear power stations
New York weighs future of Indian Point, upstate nuclear power plants Thomas C. Zambito, The Journal News May 17, 2016 “……..“Work with us to plan this just transition,” anti-nuclear activist Manna Jo Greene, the environmental director for the Beacon-based Clearwater, urged workers who crowded an Albany-area hearing held by the state Public Service Commission. “The handwriting is on the wall.”
The hearing was one of 22 being held across the state this month as the Public Service Commission weighs Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s proposal to establish clean energy standards so the state can continue reducing its carbon emissions.
Cuomo wants the state to rely on renewable energy sources for 50 percent of its electricity by 2030. While he’s advocated Indian Point’s shutdown, he’s pushing for the commission to offer financial incentives that would aid three upstate nuclear power plants – two in Oswego and a third near Rochester.
The owners of the James A. FitzPatrick nuclear power plant in Scriba say they will shut the plant’s doors in January 2017 and lay off half of the plant’s 600 workers.
Cuomo’s proposal envisions keeping the upstate nuclear plants open to act as a “bridge” until the state is able to rely on renewable energy sources for its electricity.
Several anti-nuclear speakers cast Cuomo’s effort to save the upstate plants as a “bailout” that shouldn’t be borne by ratepayers.
“Right now the nuclear industry, even though it’s over 50 years old still is unable to support itself,” said Susan Shapiro, a Rockland County attorney who works with the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition. “It’s received more bailouts from the federal government than any other industry and it continues to receive bailouts from taxpayers.”…….
The Public Service Commission is scheduled to hold a vote on Cuomo’s proposals next month. http://www.lohud.com/story/tech/science/environment/2016/05/17/new-york-indian-point/84511734/
EDF hoping to extend life of nuclear reactors, postpone decommisson costs
EDF sees French energy plan shaping nuclear depreciation schedule http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-edf-nuclear-idUKKCN0YA211 PARIS | BY GEERT DE CLERCQ 19 May 16.The French government’s energy investment plan due in July will be a key indicator for whether and for how long EDF will extend the depreciation period of its nuclear plants, an executive said on Thursday.
EDF hopes to get nuclear energy regulator ASN’s authorisation to extend the lifespan of its nuclear plants to 50 years from 40, and already wants to extend the depreciation period on these assets, which would boost bottom-line profit.
Early this year ASN said it expects to give generic guidelines on French nuclear plant life extensions by 2018, but said extensions could not be taken for granted and that they would be decided reactor by reactor.
The government’s long-awaited multi-year energy investment plan (PPE) – implementing the August 2015 energy transition law – will not specify reactor lifespan, but should set targets for the share of nuclear in France‘s power mix.
President Francois Hollande has vowed to reduce that share from 75 percent to 50 by 2025, but has taken no concrete steps towards that goal.
“The PPE, and notably its nuclear chapter, expected early July, will figure largely in our decision about the accounting lifespan of our nuclear reactors,” EDF nuclear chief Dominique Miniere told reporters.
In 2003, EDF extended the depreciation schedule for its reactors in its accounts to 40 years from 30 – six years before the ASN authorised the move.
CEO Jean-Bernard Levy said in April EDF plans to extend the depreciation period by the closing of first-half results.
Miniere said the PPE should signal how many of EDF’s 58 reactors can keep operating, which will determine over what period reactors and related maintenance costs can be depreciated.
He said life extension would also impact EDF’s 23 billion euros (1 billion pounds) worth of decommissioning and nuclear waste provisions.
“Delaying reactor decommissioning also means delaying provisions,” he said. Miniere said 80 percent of EDF’s 58 reactors were built between 1980 and 1990. From 2020, many need to close or get approval operate another decade.
Miniere said every reactor has annual maintenance costs of about 50 million euros, or about 3 billion euros per year for EDF’s fleet.
Extending EDF’s reactors by 10 years and incorporating safety lessons learned from the Fukushima disaster will boost that to 4-4.2 billion euros per year in the 2014-2025 period, a total of just over 50 billion, after which costs will ease to 4.2-3 billion euros per year, he said. (Reporting by Geert De Clercq, editing by David Evans)
France’s President Hollande backs Hinkley nuclear project, despite near bankruptcy of EDF
Hollande renews support for Hinkley Point nuclear reactors http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/17/hollande-renews-support-edf-hinkley-point-nuclear-reactors
French president backs project despite fears that £18bn price tag could bankrupt EDF, which is 85% state-owned François Hollande has renewed his support for the controversial nuclear project planned by the French energy company EDF at Hinkley Point in Britain.
“I am in favour that this project goes ahead,” the French president told Europe 1 radio on Tuesday.
“It’s very important to understand that we need a high-performance, highly secure nuclear industry in France, and that we cannot let others take over terrain, including on exports, that has been French up to now,” he said.
A final decision on the plan to build two new-generation nuclear reactors at Hinkley Point in south-west England was due this month, but was delayed after unions at EDF demanded a review of the costs.
A joint project between EDF and China General Nuclear Power Corporation, it carries a projected price tag of £18bn ($26bn, €23bn) that will make it one of the world’s most expensive nuclear power plants.
Unions at EDF, which is 85% state-owned, fear it could bankrupt the company, which is already saddled with more than €37bn of debt.
Last month, the management agreed to consult the internal committee which has brought in outside experts to review the financial implications of the project.
Hollande said the review would be completed “in the coming weeks”.
There have been dissenting voices over Hinkley Point within the French government.
On Friday, France’s environment minister Ségolène Royal, who is also mother to Hollande’s children, told the Financial Times that she was worried about the “colossal sums” involved in the project and questioned whether it should go ahead
Ratings agencies Standard and Poor’s and Moody’s both lowered their forecasts for EDF last week, saying efforts to streamline the company were insufficient.
Hollande restated his vow to restructure and boost financing at EDF and rival energy giant Areva, “because they are the future”.
“The French nuclear industry has 200,000 employees. It represents our energy independence,” Hollande told Europe 1.
“EDF and Areva are public companies on which we should rely. But at the same time, we must give them new support.”
CGN, which is due to cover a third of the costs, said on Monday that it would not go ahead with the project if EDF pulls out.
United Arab Emirates sets up firm to operate first nuclear power plants
UAE sets up firm to operate first nuclear power plants, Arabian Business, 17 May 16, By Staff writer The Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) has announced the formation of a new subsidiary called Nawah Energy Company to operate and maintain the UAE’s first nuclear reactors at Barakah.
The ENEC board of directors have mandated ENEC management to proceed with the formation of the operating company and to ensure the transfer and provision of all required resources to form the operating subsidiary, a statement said.
“The formation of Nawah as ENEC’s subsidiary operating company will bring greater focus towards the safe and quality delivery of Units 1-4 at Barakah,” the statement said.
It added that Nawah’s mission will be to “safely and reliably generate electricity from nuclear energy”, and aims to become a globally recognized nuclear utility in the safe operation of nuclear energy plants…….http://www.arabianbusiness.com/uae-sets-up-firm-operate-first-nuclear-power-plants-632003.html#.VzuUJjV97Gg
America’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission set to exempt nuclear corporations from safety costs and liabilities
US nuclear industry’s plan thanks to NRC: let taxpayers carry the can for closed power plants, Ecologist Linda Pentz Gunter13th May 2016 With five reactors closed in the last three years, the US nuclear industry is in shutdown mode, writes Linda Pentz Gunter – and that means big spending on decommissioning. But now the nuclear regulator is set to exempt owners from safety and emergency costs at their closed plants – allowing them to walk away from the costs and liabilities, and palm them onto taxpayers.
Aging and dangerous nuclear power plants are closing. This should be cause for celebration. We will all be safer now, right? Well, not exactly.
US nuclear power plant owners are currently pouring resources into efforts to circumvent the already virtually non-existent regulations for the dismantlement and decommissioning of permanently closed nuclear reactors.
And sad to say, many on the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the industry’s ever compliant lapdog, are trotting happily by their side.
There is an occasional lone critic. NRC Commissioner Jeff Baran, observed that the“NRC does not currently have regulations specifically tailored for this transition from operations to decommissioning. As a result, licensees with reactors transitioning to decommissioning routinely seek exemptions from many of the regulations applicable to operating reactors.”
The inevitable result is that reactor owners will successfully avoid spending money now on decommissioning as they seek to delay beginning the actual cleanup work for the next half century and maybe longer. Later, when it comes time to finish the job, the owners – and the money – could well be long gone.
US reactor owners rely on ‘decommissioning trust fund’ investments to pay for decommissioning activities. But these are failing to accrue adequate funds to do the job. Many of the trusts are incurring annual losses on their investments.
In fact, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found the NRC’s financing formula for decommissioning trust funds to be fundamentally flawed, resulting in the utilities ability to accrue only 57% to 75% of the needed funds……..http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987679/us_nuclear_industrys_plan_thanks_to_nrc_let_taxpayers_carry_the_can_for_closed_power_plants.html
True costs of nuclear-generated electricity hidden for decades
US nuclear industry’s plan thanks to NRC: let taxpayers carry the can for closed power plants, Ecologist Linda Pentz Gunter13th May 2016 “…….Using Vermont Yankee (a relatively small 620 MWe reactor) as an example, the decommissioning cost estimate in 2015 was $1.2 billion and rising. At the same time, Entergy, the plant’s owner, had just $625 million on hand.
In early May, Entergy was reprimanded (but not fined) by the NRC for violating “federal regulations last year when it prematurely took money out of the Vermont Yankee decommissioning trust fund to cover planning expenses associated with the handling of spent nuclear fuel at the closed reactor”, the Times Argus reported.
Another factor in the current struggle to pay for decommissioning is rooted in a decades-long practice by utilities of omitting the costs of decommissioning from electricity bills in order to artificially lower rates and stay competitive in the market.
Rather than preserve decommissioning trust funds for actual decommissioning work, utilities are now asking the NRC to let them raid the funds for activities outside the parameters of the reactor decommissioning process. These activities include the payment of taxes and the protracted management of orphaned nuclear waste left on site.
In addition, while at the same time delaying the start of decommissioning, the utilities have requested and received exemptions from the NRC that allow them to eliminate radiological emergency planning and drastically reduce on-site security around hundreds of tons high-level nuclear waste, all in the name of saving money.
“The Nuclear Regulatory Commission appears to be complicit in this process and is in fact providing a significant hidden subsidy to the nuclear industry when it looks the other way by allowing public trust funds to be raided in violation of the Code of Federal Regulations”, writes Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates in a document submitted to the NRC.
Gundersen, along with other groups including my own – Beyond Nuclear – have filed comments to the NRC as part of an arcane and convoluted process known as an ‘Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Decommissioning.’ The public comment period closed on March 18, 2016.
A years long Rulemaking is underway because reactor owners are asking to streamline what were site-specific exemptions and have them issued generically instead, and across the board, without any opportunity for public review or comment. This essentially eliminates public transparency in the decommissioning process.
It further seeks to save the corporation from spending any of its electricity production profits on the costs of safety and security oversight the companies claim are no longer needed once the reactor stops power production and is defueled………..http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987679/us_nuclear_industrys_plan_thanks_to_nrc_let_taxpayers_carry_the_can_for_closed_power_plants.html
Reasons NOT to back Britain’s Hinkley nuclear power project
nuClear News No 85 May 16“…… there is anywhere between 4 and 18 months to develop the argument for an alternative to building HPC.Unexpectedly, California Public Utilities Commission re-opens case of ratepayers funding Dan Onofre nuclear shutdown
Public Utilities Commission reopens San Onofre case, Admits they “undermined public confidence in the agency”, San Diego reader By Don Bauder, May 9, 2016 In a surprise move, the California Public Utilities Commission today (May 9) reopened the 2014 agreement by which ratepayers got stuck with $3.3 billion of costs related to the sudden closing of the San Onofre nuclear plant. It became known as “the rape of the ratepayer” because management errors, such as those causing the San Onofre shutdown, should be charged to shareholders, not ratepayers.
The utilities regulator also banned all ex parte (one-sided) meetings with decision-makers or commissioners. As representatives of ratepayers expressed shock, past secret meetings between brass of Southern California Edison and commissioners came to light, clearly showing that the decision to plunk the burden of paying for San Onofre on ratepayers was reached through a series of clandestine, unreported meetings.
Up to now, ex parte meetings have been permitted as long as they were quickly revealed to all parties. The announcement today referred to the most infamous of those meetings — a Warsaw, Poland, huddle between former CPUC president Michael Peevey and Edison executive Stephen Pickett at which Peevey essentially sketched the strategy for fleecing ratepayers. The secret huddle was in 2013 and Edison did not report it until 2015. The commission in December noted eight such violations by Edison. This clandestine coziness “undermined public confidence in the agency,” said the commission today — a laughably euphemistic way of stating the situation…….http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/may/09/ticker-utilities-commission-reopen-san-onofre-case/#
How Margaret Thatcher’s nuclear dream has turned into UK’s Hinkley nightmare
Nuclear dream becoming nightmare over Hinkley Point C http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Opinion-Nuclear-dream-nightmare-Hinkley-Point-C/story-29269511-detail/story.html By WMN_MartinF May 13, 2016 By ALLAN JEFFERY Some dreams come true; others turn into nightmares. Hinkley Point C nuclear power station has been a dream to many politicians. Is it about to come true?
Margaret Thatcher was one of the first to dream of building Hinkley C. It was to be the second of 10 nuclear power stations she would build, to rescue the country from the menace of those socialist, coal-dependent generators, providing most of the UK’s electricity and too often holding the country to blackout ransom.
Her dream started well! At public inquiry, at Cannington in 1988/89, despite the hundreds of people and organisations arguing against the build, the inspector gave permission to build Hinkley C.
But her dream turned sour as her privatisation of the nation’s nuclear electricity production bankrupted British Nuclear Energy. The government had to bail out the privatised company. Even worse, the world’s largest nuclear accident at Chernobyl occurred, and the radioactive pollution spread over many countries in Europe. Mrs Thatcher gave up on her nuclear dream. Nuclear was too risky and dangerous and too expensive.
The dream passed to the French government. The dream was to sell all around the world hundreds of a new-generation nuclear reactors, of French design: the EPR. Areva designed the reactor and offered the first one to a group of energy hungry companies in Finland, STK.
It would be built in four years, for 3 billion euros.The dream continued well, the French government were going to build another two EPRs in France, China said they would build two, and many other countries showed interest, even the UK.The French then sold the dream to Labour’s prime minister, Tony Blair, convincing him that building the new French-designed EPR reactors would solve all the UK’s energy problems.
A new nuclear renaissance dream started, though this time there would be no long public inquiries. New national energy policy papers would make sure there would be no planning hold-ups, and allow EDF to build the first two EPR reactors at Hinkley.
There councillors were sold on the dream promises of thousands of jobs and the huge amounts of investment spent in the local economy. EDF ploughed on as quickly as it could; delays would increase costs. Local residents would not be allowed to question the dangers of nuclear power.
The councillors started to notice the environmental problems of such a gigantic building project. Lacking the power to challenge, they started to promote it as a dream for the local economy. They encouraged local firms to prepare for the good economic future, and young people a dream future in Hinkley apprenticeships.
Problems then started to occur with the building of this untried and untested new design of reactor. First at Olkiluoto in Finland and then at Flamanville in France, construction problems multiplied, causing long delays and causing costs to double and then treble. Energy companies in Italy, America and the UK pulled out from investing in this disastrous reactor. Western banks and investment funds all started to advise their clients not to invest in Hinkley C.
They realised that the costs of renewables are falling rapidly; the costs of nuclear are rising fast.The nightmare of problems for the funding of the most expensive power station on earth continued. The UK government, lacking Western private investments, reluctantly accepted that Hinkley has to be subsidised. Whether this financing arrangement is legal under European free-market rules is being strongly challenged in the courts.
EDF cannot fund its share of the building cost of Hinkley C, even though the Chinese government is providing a third of the investment building costs. The energy company has large debts and huge cost commitments of its own.Will EDF finally agree to finance the building of Hinkley C? The growing number of problems, constructional, technical, legal, environmental and financial, of building Hinkley C are beginning to change the dream into a nightmare.
The nuclear dreams of many people will turn to disaster, whatever EDF decides on the final investment decision.If the decision is yes, France could lose its national electricity generator and the French taxpayers will rue the day they tried to follow the nuclear dream.If EDF says no, the UK’s energy policy is in tatters leaving the hopes and dreams of politicians, councillors, aspiring businesses and some British trade unions regretting the day they put all their eggs into one nuclear basket, following the Hinkley C dream.
My dreams are coming true. All around the world I see rapidly growing investment into a decentralised, renewable, truly sustainable future for our children.This is article has been abbreviated. The full version can be read at http://stophinkley.org/StopPress.htm Allan Jeffery is assistant co-ordinator at Stop Hinkley http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Opinion-Nuclear-dream-nightmare-Hinkley-Point-C/story-29269511-detail/story.html#ixzz48ZRRn3kS
1 This Month
22 June – Virtual Event –Climate Change: New Data, New Debate
Monday, June 22, 2026 2:30 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. CT
YouTube. Register here
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
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
nuclear-news 