UK’s subsidy to nuclear providers will hit British consumers hard
With the guaranteed price already well above what solar and wind power cost (and their costs continuously declining), the taxpayer commitment for this power plant is so crazily high that it seems this story should be coming from The Onion rather than reality.
The UK’s move to subsidize nuclear power to such an insane degree is simply astonishing.
Hinkley C Nuclear Power Plant To Get Twice The Rate As Solar PV From UK Government Clean Technica 30 Oct 13, In a demonstration of how out of touch the UK government is with public opinion, it intends to pay approximately twice as much for electricity from the proposed Hinkley C nuclear power plant near Bristol than is paid for electricity from solar power in Europe. With high public support for solar PV and low support for nuclear, that’s quite absurd. It’s also very absurd from an economic standpoint.
Dr David Toke of the University of Aberdeen writes: “Looming large over the UK Government’s EU state aid application for Hinkley C is the charge that this deal will distort the EU’s internal market, in particular to undercut solar pv arrays in Germany over 10 MW in size. Such arrays are no longer eligible to receive premium prices under the German feed-in tariff system. Such plant will only receive the wholesale electricity price, which is less than half the rates to be paid to Hinkley C.” Continue reading
Tepco’s ‘institutionalized lying’ might prevent restart of huge nuclear power plant
TEPCO must address ‘institutionalized lying’ before it restarts world’s biggest nuclear power plant – governor Rt.com October 28, 2013 Tokyo Electric Power Co must give a more thorough account of the Fukushima disaster and address “institutionalized lying” in the company, before it will be permitted to restart the Kashiwazaki Kariwa plant, according to a local governor.
“If they don’t do what needs to be done, if they keep skimping on costs and manipulating information, they can never be trusted,” Niigata Prefecture Governor Hirohiko Izumida told Reuters on Monday, adding that these limitations need to be overcome before the plant is restarted. It is up to Izumida to approve plans to restart the reactor at the TEPCO-run Kashiwazaki Kariwa – the world’s biggest nuclear complex, located on the Japan sea coast, north-west of Tokyo. His personal commission would examine both the causes and handling of the disaster at Fukushima and lay them alongside existing regulatory safeguards to ensure a similar crisis could not reoccur.
If Japanese nuclear safety regulators do lend their approval to the restart plans, Izumida remains able to essentially block TEPCO’s plans for the plant as the facility requires the backing of local officials, allotting Izumida some leverage. …….
Izumida suggested that TEPCO should be fully stripped of responsibility for decommissioning the destroyed Fukushima reactors, and the company subjected to a taxpayer-funded bankruptcy program. Presently, the company remains primarily concerned with funding the process, along with the frequently-occurring and very immediate issue of contaminated water leaking rather than overall nuclear safety.
“Unless we create a situation where 80-90 percent of their thinking is devoted to nuclear safety, I don’t think we can say they have prioritized safety,” he said. ……..
In September, a senior utility expert at Fukushima, Kazuhiko Yamashita, said that the plant was “not under control.” TEPCO downplayed his comments, saying that he had only been talking about the plant’s waste water problem – not the facility as a whole. … http://rt.com/news/tepco-address-lying-governor-879/
Niigata Prefecture Governor not ready to allow Tepco to restart world’s biggest nuclear plant
Tepco can’t yet be trusted to restart world’s biggest nuclear plant: governor (Reuters) 28 Oct 13,– Tokyo Electric Power Co must give a fuller account of the Fukushima disaster and address its “institutionalized lying” before it can expect to restart another nuclear station, the world’s largest, said a local government official who holds an effective veto over the utility’s revival plan.
“If they don’t do what needs to be done, if they keep skimping on costs and manipulating information, they can never be trusted,” Niigata Prefecture Governor Hirohiko Izumida told Reuters in an interview on Monday.
Izumida must approve the embattled utility’s plans
to restart the reactors at Kashiwazaki Kariwa, the world’s biggest nuclear complex on the Japan Sea coast some 300 kms (180 miles) northwest of Tokyo.
A former economy and trade ministry bureaucrat who has emerged as a leading critic of Tokyo Electric, or Tepco, Izumida said he would launch his own commission to investigate the causes and handling of the Fukushima crisis and whether strengthened regulatory safeguards were sufficient to prevent a similar disaster.
Izumida, 51, declined to provide a timetable for completing that review – a process that could force the utility to scrap or abandon one of the key assumptions behind its turnaround plan…….http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/28/us-japan-nuclear-tepco-idUSBRE99R0KR20131028
Damian Carrington on UK’s new nuclear delusional dream
The nuclear industry has captured the government as comprehensively as the big six energy companies have captured the domestic energy market. Don’t forget that just 48 hours after the Fukushima catastrophe, government officials were working with the industry to play down the terrible events – before they had even unfolded.
Nuclear power’s broken promises means EDF deal is a delusional dream http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2013/oct/21/nuclear-power-energy-edf-deal The cost of nuclear energy has tripled in just five years, while the cost of 
renewable energy is falling fast, making the UK government’s deal a truly terrible one Energy efficiency is cheapest and the cost of renewable energy is falling. In contrast, gas prices have risen by 50% in five years and the cost of nuclear energy has trebled since 2008. Yet the UK government today staked a large part of the nation’s energy future on the latter, by agreeing a deal with EDF which might lead to them building a new nuclear power station. Ministers have not backed the favourite, or even a speedy but erratic outsider: they have backed a horse running in reverse.
The 60-year history of the nuclear industry is one unblemished by promises kept. From “too cheap to meter” to safe as houses, every pledge has been broken. When the UK government once again fell for the renewed vows of the nuclear industry in 2008, they were promised reactors would cost £2.8bn to build. Today’s deal shows the cost is now £8bn. They were promised electricity for £31-42 per megawatt-hour: today’s price is £92.50/MWh.
The trashed guarantees stack up as steadily as the toxic waste pile that already costs billions a year to store. In 2007, David Cameron said: “The problems of nuclear waste have to be dealt with to make any new investment possible.” In January 2013, Cumbria, the only place in the running for a permanent disposal site rejected the idea.
The government pledge that the private sector would build the new reactors has collapsed too: EDF is owned by the French state and can only move ahead itself with about 40% of the money stumped up by China.
The final crushed commitment comes from the 2010 coalition agreement: New nuclear power stations “will receive no public subsidy”. If forcing energy consumers to pay roughly £38bn above the current cost of electricity is not a subsidy, what is? If a government package of insurance against accidents and loan guarantees is not a subsidy, what is?
This farrago of fictions matters. EDF and the government say the deal protects the public against the near-certainty of broken promises on costs. But read the small print: “The strike price could be adjusted, upwards or downwards, in relation to operational and certain other costs.” Perhaps the government could bail out of the deal if the costs soared? No: “Hinkley Point C would be protected from being curtailed without appropriate compensation.” If new risks came to light increasing the cost of insurance, could we get out then? No: “Protection would be provided for any increases in nuclear insurance costs as a result of withdrawal of government cover.” No wonder opponents are terrified by the lack of any independent scrutiny to date of the deal struck by the government. Continue reading
UK government heavily subsidises new nuclear power project
Critics say the new plant in Somerset will be heavily subsidised and cushioned from financial reality
- The signing of a nuclear deal between EDF and the government is a landmark event for power generation. Today’s go-ahead for the Hinkley Point C plant shows ministers are prepared to commit Britain to provide decades of guaranteed financial returns (paid for by you and me as energy users) to companies in return for winning huge slugs of investment for new power stations…..
- Ministers insist that the commitment to provide Hinkley Point with a guaranteed price of around double the market rate is not a subsidy. The final figure of £92.50 is a considerable step up from the £80 per MWhr said to be on the table when negotiations began in earnest, and that figure is said by some calculations to be worth around £80bn in guaranteed revenues, the cost of nine Olympics.
- Critics will accuse the government of providing subsidies to an old technology that should not need handouts, while pointing out the safety dangers and the unsolved waste disposal problems raised by new nuclear. Questions will also be asked about the wisdom of providing a country alleged to be involved in cyber-spying, access to sensitive energy infrastructure via the involvement of a state-owned firm……..
- Supporters of nuclear in Britain were keen to ensure that an existing industry – that arguably first started here and had operated largely trouble free since the 1950s – could gain a new lease of life. The expectations of Blair and others in the early days have been fulfilled then, even after the Fukushima accident in Japan – but only in principle. In practice, new nuclear was meant to be built by the private sector, without subsidy and only after a solution was found about where to store high-level nuclear waste.
- A decision on which community would be willing to host a deep-level waste repository is as far away as ever after plans for the north west were scotched by Cumbria County Council. The new plant in Somerset will be owned, built and operated by EDF – 85% owned by the French state – with the help of China General Nuclear Power Group, which is 100% owned by the Beijing government. It will be capable of generating 3,200 MW, around one seventh of UK needs, compared to say the London Array off the coast of Kent, the world’s biggest wind farm, which has a maximum capacity of 1,000 MW.
- The subsidy levels for onshore wind (£100 per MWhr) is close to that for the new Hinkley Point plant and much higher for offshore wind (£150). But these figures are set to fall. Craig Bennett, director of policy at Friends of the Earth, said it was astonishing that the government was planning such a long-term subsidy for foreign nuclear operators. “This is just another big bailout. Its an unbelievable wasted opportunity to spend this money in this way when the UK itself is an acknowledged leader in energy efficiency. Why give subsidies to an industry where we are not the leader any more?” he said.
Other supporters of renewable energy point out that public support is needed because these are new technologies which are coming down in price all the time. Nuclear cannot claim either, they say, and there are still questions on whether the European Commission will accept these payments.
The government has also already committed itself to providing financial guarantees of £10bn to cover the building of Hinkley Point, something not available to builders of solar or wind arrays.
Even Nick Butler, a former energy adviser to No 10 and a supporter of nuclear, believes the price is far too high. In a recent blog he warned: “Lower sources of power are available and have been rejected. When deals do not match the interests of both sides – producers and consumers – at a point of mutual advantage, they tend to unravel.”…..http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/21/china-nuclear-power-britain-outdated-technology
Ontario govt has no idea of the costs of refurbishing nuclear reactors
Ontario Liberals flying blind on nuclear reactor file, NDP says CBC News 23 Oct 13, Horwath charges Liberals ‘haven’t learned’ from $1.1-billion gas-plant fiasco The Canadian Press Oct 23, 2013 The provincial Liberal government “learned nothing” from the $1.1-billion cost of killing two gas plants and is ready to refurbish nuclear reactors without knowing the final price, NDP Leader Andrea Horwath charged Wednesday.
‘Apparently the sky is the limit when it comes to the price’ –NDP Leader Andrea Horwath on proposed nuclear refurbishments
The Liberals recently abandoned plans to build two new nuclear reactors, after spending $180 million in preparatory work, but said they would refurbish existing reactors at the Darlington power station east of Toronto to extend their service life until 2055.
“The procurement for it is going to take place in stages, and the final cost is not known at this particular point in time,” Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said.
The NDP released a statement from the Ministry of Energy showing “a final timeline and cost will not be known until the regulatory and technical scope is determined” and contracts are signed, sometime in
Check out CBC’s special report on electricity in Canada, including this profile of power in Ontario.
“We were shocked when the minister responded to our request by saying, ‘We’re spending $950 million on contracts we’ve already signed but we can’t tell you what the final cost is going to be,’ ” Horwath said. “That is frightening.”
It’s hard to believe the Liberals are prepared to waste more money on the electricity file after the auditor general reported the costs of their decisions to cancel gas plants in Oakville and Mississauga could top $1.1 billion, added Horwath….. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-liberals-flying-blind-on-nuclear-reactor-file-ndp-says-1.2187519
European Union studying UK nuclear deal
EU to examine govt aid for UK nuclear deal France 24 22 Oct 13 AFP – The European Commission said Tuesday it would examine British government support for a massive 19-billion-euro nuclear plant to be built by French and Chinese firms…….
Colombani said the Commission would shortly update its guidelines covering state aid for the energy market in general.
These “will not include specific guidelines as concerns nuclear power,” he said, and will instead feature “case-by-case assessments.”
The deal has angered anti-nuclear activists.
“Instead of subsidising nuclear energy production, the government should be investing more in safe, clean and affordable renewable energy,” said Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND).
The EU is divided over the future of nuclear energy, with some member states even arguing that it should be considered as a renewable. http://www.france24.com/en/20131022-eu-examine-govt-aid-uk-nuclear-deal
Iran pauses uranium enrichment
Iran temporarily halts 20% uranium enrichment: Tehran (AFP) – 7 News 24 Oct 13 Iran has temporarily halted its production of enriched uranium to 20 percent purity as it has sufficient stocks to fuel its Tehran research reactor, a lawmaker was quoted Thursday as saying.
“There is no production at all … as right now there is no need for the production of 20 percent (enriched) uranium,” the parliament website reported conservative MP Hossein Naqavi Hosseini as saying.
Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme is at the core of its dispute with world powers, who suspect it masks a drive for atomic weapons despite repeated denials by the Islamic republic….. Demands that the programme be halted were again put forward earlier this year in the Kazakh city of Almaty, in talks between Iran and the P5+1 group — the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia plus Germany.
The halting of the sensitive work could be crucial in resolving the long-running showdown in the negotiations, which were revived last week in Geneva and are set to resume in November.
In the talks, Iran is seeking the lifting of international sanctions which have damaged its struggling economy. World powers for their part are seeking to ensure that Tehran is not able to develop nuclear weapons. http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/19538233/iran-temporarily-halts-20-uranium-enrichment-report/
Japanese govt considering putting all nuclear reactors into one company
Nuclear industry amalgamation mulled LDP examining idea to bring all reactors under one company, Japan Times, 23 Oct 2013. BLOOMBERG The government is discussing a radical overhaul of the nuclear power sector that would combine the nation’s 50 operating reactors into a single company to rebuild an industry that’s been effectively halted by the Fukushima disaster that started in March 2011.
The company would be owned by the nine regional utilities, along with wholesalers Japan Atomic Power Co. and Electric Power Development Co., while the government and reactor makers would give financial and technical support, Taku Yamamoto, who chairs the Liberal Democratic Party’s energy committee, said in an interview.
Part of the profit from sales of the new company’s electricity would be funneled toward the cleanup of the Fukushima No. 1 power plant and victim compensation, which combined may cost more than ¥11 trillion. The plan would keep Tokyo Electric Power Co. alive to shoulder Fukushima costs……
None of the idled reactors may be restarted by the end of March 31, as preparations by power companies for the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s safety review are behind schedule, the Sankei Shimbun reported Monday.
LDP lawmakers have discussed other options to restructure Tepco. Tadamori Oshima, head of the party’s 2011 quake reconstruction task force, proposed to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that Tepco form a separate company to deal with decommissioning Fukushima No. 1 and the government provide financial aid, Kyodo News reported Sept. 21.
The Abe administration is seeking the Diet’s endorsementthis month for a bill designed to end the 60-year-old monopolies of the regional utilities, led by Tepco.
The other entities — which like Tepco dominate electricity generation and transmission in their respective regions — are Hokkaido Electric Power Co., Tohoku Electric Power Co., Chubu Electric Power Co., Kansai Electric, Hokuriku Electric Power Co., Chugoku Electric Power Co., Shikoku Electric Power Co. and Kyushu Electric Power Co.
The draft bill would unbundle generation and transmission operations and allow households to choose power suppliers for the first time. In theory, 60 percent of the electricity market has been deregulated, though in practice the dominance of the regional utilities stands in the way…… http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/10/23/business/ldp-mulls-amalgamating-all-nuclear-plants-under-one-firm/#.UmnhNnBwo7o
Even George Monbiot condemns UK government’s new nuclear power plan
The farce of the Hinkley C nuclear reactor will haunt Britain for decades The Guardian, George Monbiot, Monday 21 October 2013 “………… the government has plumped for outdated technology at the worst price imaginable “…..Nils Pratley warned in the Guardian last week that “if Hinkley Point’s entire output is tied to the rate of inflation for 40 years, we could be staring at a truly astronomical cost by the end of the contract.” The City analyst he consulted reassured him that “the government surely can’t be that dumb”. Oh yes? Payment to the operators, the government now tells us, will be “fully indexed to the consumer prices index”. Guaranteed income for corporations, risk assumed by the taxpayer: this deal looks as bad as any private finance initiative contract.
That’s not the only respect in which the price is too high. A fundamental principle of all development is that we should know how the story ends. In this case no one has the faintest idea. Cumbria – the only local authority which seemed prepared to accept a dump for the nuclear waste from past and future schemes – rejected the proposal in January. No one should commission a mess without a plan for clearing it up….
New untested nuclear reactors – a gamble for UK
U.K. Nuclear Future Relies on Reactor Plagued by Delays: Energy Bloomberg, By Tara Patel & Sally Bakewell – Oct 22, 2013 To ensure the future of its nuclear power industry, the U.K. is relying on an unproven reactor design plagued by delays and billions in budget overruns.
The government’s deal yesterday with Electricite de France SA to build a $26 billion plant at Hinkley Point in England involves two European Pressurized Reactors. The first EPR project in Finland, led by Areva SA (AREVA), the French company that designed the technology, is seven years behind schedule and won’t be completed until 2016. The second, an EDF project at Flamanville in northwest France, will cost more than twice as much as expected…..
History suggests the plan for the U.K., which needs to replace aging reactors built in the 1970s, isn’t ironclad, said Roland Vetter, head of research at CF Partners (UK) LLP, which runs a fund that invests in utilities.
“Nuclear is the biggest gamble in power generation,” said Ingo Becker, an analyst at Kepler Cheuvreux in Frankfurt. “At 16 billion pounds ($26 billion) for two EPRs, they have probably taken into account possible cost overruns.”….
The U.K. project, expected to take 10 years, will be more expensive because soft local soil means it needs deeper foundations, requiring 30 percent more concrete, EDF said in a presentation yesterday. The Paris-based company also has to build an atomic waste facility and 3.8-kilometer (2.2-mile) pipes to carry seawater to cool the reactors….
The EPR was criticized in France for being too big and costly after an Areva-led group lost a $20 billion atomic contract from Abu Dhabi in 2009.
“The credibility of both the EPR and the ability of the French nuclear industry to successfully build new reactors has been seriously undermined by difficulties” at Finland’s Olkiluoto site and Flamanville, according to a report ordered by former President Nicolas Sarkozy and published in 2010. It found the plant’s complexity was “a handicap.”….http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-21/u-k-nuclear-future-relies-on-reactor-plagued-by-delays-energy.html
Financial reality makes UK’s new nuclear not look too good
The government has also already committed itself to providing financial guarantees of £10bn to cover the building of Hinkley Point, something not available to builders of solar or wind arrays.
Even Nick Butler, a former energy adviser to No 10 and a supporter of nuclear, believes the price is far too high. In a recent blog he warned: “Lower sources of power are available and have been rejected. When deals do not match the interests of both sides – producers and consumers – at a point of mutual advantage, they tend to unravel.”
China’s need for nuclear power leads Britain to revive outdated technology , Terry Macalister, The Guardian, Sunday 20 October 2013 Critics say the new plant in Somerset will be heavily subsidised and cushioned from financial reality.
- The signing of a nuclear deal between EDF and the government is a landmark event for power generation. Today’s go-ahead for the Hinkley Point C plant shows ministers are prepared to commit Britain to provide decades of guaranteed financial returns (paid for by you and me as energy users) to companies in return for winning huge slugs of investment for new power stations…..
- Ministers insist that the commitment to provide Hinkley Point with a guaranteed price of around double the market rate is not a subsidy. The final figure of £92.50 is a considerable step up from the £80 per MWhr said to be on the table when negotiations began in earnest, and that figure is said by some calculations to be worth around £80bn in guaranteed revenues, the cost of nine Olympics.
- Critics will accuse the government of providing subsidies to an old technology that should not need handouts, while pointing out the safety dangers and the unsolved waste disposal problems raised by new nuclear. Questions will also be asked about the wisdom of providing a country alleged to be involved in cyber-spying, access to sensitive energy infrastructure via the involvement of a state-owned firm…….. Continue reading
Britain has smarter, less costly energy options, than its new nuclear deal
COLUMN-British nuclear embrace fails to convince: Wynn By Gerard Wynn Oct 21 (Reuters) – Britain’s investment in new nuclear power is a result of a previous decision to limit the country’s options, and depends on an argument for energy security that fails to convince.
Britain has ruled out new coal power and adopted tough carbon emissions targets as well as a carbon tax on energy, given concerns about climate change.
In addition, European Union pollution curbs on sulphur and oxides of nitrogen require the imminent closure of several of the country’s existing coal-fired power plants.
That has created a dependence on gas and low-carbon power.
Britain’s Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) on Monday outlined the details of a commercial agreement with French state utility EDF to build the UK’s first new nuclear power plant since 1995, to be commissioned in 2023.
The agreed contract of about 90 pounds ($150) per megawatt-hour should not be compared with the wholesale power price, which records only operating costs including those from subsidised wind and solar power, which have zero fuel costs.
It should instead be compared with the calculated, full cost of power generation, including capital and operating costs.
In those terms, the contract appears competitive with renewable power but is more costly than gas.
Nuclear has the advantage over gas that it is less carbon-emitting, and over wind and solar power that it is baseload, available on demand rather than according to the weather.
But that is before taking into account the cost of radioactive waste, for which Britain still has not identified a long-term disposal site after a tentative agreement with a local council in northwest England recently collapsed.
And the government does not appear to account for the alternative of building sub-sea interconnectors, with which Britain could instead tap lower wholesale power prices in Germany and Scandinavia…….
COST
Monday’s announcement was thin on important details, such as the rate at which the operator will be compensated when its electricity is not required, for example when demand is weak…….
“The UK’s ‘energy island’ strategy for security of supply is not practical in light of excess power capacity across the EU,” argued the UK-based corporate advisory firm Alexa Capital in a report published on Monday, “UK energy in perspective: is there a better way forward?”.
“We ask whether British business and consumers would not be better off contracting for a greater proportion of electricity from interconnection.”
The cost of building an interconnector would add only a few euros per MWh to the cost of importing electricity.
The full cost of buying electricity from German gas plants would probably therefore be cheaper than the new nuclear deal, without the worries of radioactive waste disposal.
It may have been better for Britain to invest in new subsea cables and pick up the phone to E.ON and RWE , not EDF. ($1 = 0.6178 British pounds) ($1 = 0.7302 euros) (Editing by Dale Hudson) http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/10/21/column-wynn-nuclear-britain-idINL5N0IB0TV20131021
Many a slip likely in the China-France nuclear project in Britain
China’s need for nuclear power leads Britain to revive outdated technology , Terry Macalister, The Guardian, Sunday 20 October 2013“…..while EDF has now convinced government of the need to provide these different support mechanisms, the hard work begins for the French and its Chinese partner. The nuclear industry has a terrible reputation for completing new plants years late and over budget. Areva, the French nuclear engineering company providing the EPR design for Hinkley, is involved in similar plants at Flamanville in France and Olkiluoto in Finland. Both are proving more difficult than expected: the Finnish reactors are expected to be at least seven years late and at least £1.4bn over budget; Flamanville is two years late and believed to be as much as £2bn over budget.
And there is good reason to believe that British companies are going to miss out in Somerset. Centrica has already given up its opportunity to participate as an owner, while EDF has indicated the UK may not have the high-tech engineering skills to compete for supply contracts……
Western nuclear experts claim Beijing has a lot to prove that its own regulation is up to standard, and there will be intense pressure on the UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation not to dilute standards to help Chinese firms operate their own plants here. There is already an inquiry going on into whether too many concessions have been made by George Osborne into a separate deal under which Chinese banks can operate more freely in London.
China General Nuclear Power Group is one of the biggest companies you have never heard of. In fact, it took a new name only six months ago. The change reflected its ambitions to establish itself on a world stage, outside its home base of Guangdong province. Involvement in Hinkley Point is a key part of the globalisation strategy…….http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/21/china-nuclear-power-britain-outdated-technology
China will control UK’s new nuclear power plants
Chinese companies will be allowed to own a majority stake in UK nuclear powerplants, George Osborne says Announcement is expected to hail start of ‘massive wave’ of Asian investment in British nuclear energy sector, ADAM WITHNALL The Independent, 17 OCTOBER 2013 George Osborne has announced that Chinese companies will be permitted to own a majority stake in future projects to build nuclear power stations in Britain.
The ground-breaking decision could see the first deal struck as early as next week, with Chinese investment now considered for a new £14 billion plant at the Hinckley C site….. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chinese-companies-will-be-allowed-to-own-a-majority-stake-in-uk-nuclear-power-plants-george-osborne-says-8885829.html
1 This Month
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
1st July – Webinar Waste of Space: The Environmental Harm of Military and Civil Space Activity st July, 7 pm
Report Launch Online: We are seeing an increasing exploitation of space for military and commercial purposes. This must change.
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
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 (241)
- 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 