King Charles wants to honour nuclear test heroes but medals are being delayed by MoD red tape
King Charles wants Britain’s nuclear test heroes honoured before his coronation, but the MoD is accused of creating “unreasonable delay”
Mirror, By Susie Boniface. Reporter , 27 Jan 2023
King Charles wants to give a medal to Britain’s nuclear test heroes within months – but Ministry of Defence red tape could hold up the process for at least a year.
The King has told friends he has pencilled in a full “investiture” type ceremony in April, before his coronation.
But two months after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced a gong for victims of the Cold War radiation experiments, civil servants say it will take more than a year for the design of the medal to be signed off.
Alan Owen, whose dad died after witnessing 24 bombs in 78 days, said: ““It beggars belief that this country can organise a coronation in 8 months but we’ve been told it will take even longer to do one, simple, medal.
“It took them 70 years to get around to asking the monarch for what we should have had on day one. They know how to make medals, this is just another unreasonable delay by the MoD so that there are as few veterans as possible left to collect it.”
A source close to the King said: “His Majesty is taking a close interest in the issue of nuclear test veterans, and wants to see some form of official ceremony as soon as possible.
“He recognises that those who can be given it are not going to be around for long.
“His staff have pencilled in something for April, depending on approval from government.”…………………………………………….
The Mirror has campaigned for official recognition on their behalf for 40 years, and last year saw the first sign of change when the PM finally asked the King to approve a medal.
Cabinet Office staff have told campaigners that “the usual process” for medal design and delivery is handled by the MoD medal office according to “set procedures”.
It is understood they are still working out criteria, with no date for inviting applications, or for it to be made by the Royal Mint…………………………………….
Mr Sunak also promised a face-to-face meeting with veterans to discuss war pension reform, education packages, and missing records on nuked blood. Despite No10 acknowledging the request, no date has been set.
Campaigners have also been promised meetings with Office of Veterans Affairs staff to discuss grant applications to a £200,000 fund, but none have been arranged.
Labour’s Rebecca Long-Bailey, who campaigns for the veterans, said: “When he announced the medals, the PM witnessed their decades of pain and grief. The families wept as he promised them a meeting. They are still waiting, and time is running out. I urge the PM to meet us as soon as he can.” ………………………………………………
more https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-britains-nuclear-test-veterans-28544461
Donald Trump warns of NUCLEAR WAR as Joe Biden sends 31 tanks to Ukraine

omigawd! It’s a weird world when we find Donald Trump saying something sensible!
Former president Donald Trump has hit out at Joe Biden’s decision to send 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine ahead of a fresh Russian attack as he admitted they could lead to a nuclear war
Mirror, By Liam BucklerNews Reporter, 27 Jan 2023
Donald Trump has warned of a nuclear war as President Biden prepares to send 31 battle tanks to Ukraine in the war against Russia.
Biden’s administration confirmed on Wednesday it would be sending 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine after President Volodymyr Zelensky’s demand for more heavy armour.
The US are also providing 500 armoured vehicles as part of the help to Ukraine in addition to the $26 billion already committed to Kyiv since Russia’s invasion nearly a year ago.
But in a post to Truth Social, the former president believes sending the thanks could lead to a possible nuclear war.
Donald Trump wrote on Thursday: “‘FIRST COME THE TANKS, THEN COME THE NUKES. Get this crazy war ended, NOW. So easy to do!”
President Zelensky made a visit to the US in December to personally plead for more tanks and weapons as he believed Ukraine were struggling to make inroads with their Soviet-era T-72 tanks.
It comes after Germany confirmed they would send 14 Leopard 2 tanks to Kyiv. Berlin’s decision to send 14 of the world’s most deadly tanks to Ukraine means other western countries can follow suit with their own Leopard 2s.
Germany had been trying to persuade the US to send tanks to Ukraine but top officials in Biden’s administration were wary of the move as they require extensive training.
However, Biden has since u-turned after he originally said last March: “‘The idea that we’re going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews, just understand … that’s called World War III, okay?
“Let’s get it straight here, guys. We will not fight the third world war in Ukraine.”
His remarks were similar to Donald Trump who believes giving tanks to Ukraine will be followed by “nukes.”
However, Mr Biden told reporters the tanks will “enhance Ukraine’s capacity to defend its territory and achieve its strategic objectives.”
The tanks heading to Ukraine are set to “take time” as they are “extremely, extremely complex to operate and maintain.”…………….. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/donald-trump-warns-nuclear-war-29063832
Rolls Royce wants to make sure that the tax-payer cops the cost of their small nuclear reactor folly

Rolls-Royce calls on government for more clarity on nuclear. https://www.energylivenews.com/2023/01/26/rolls-royce-calls-on-government-for-more-clarity-on-nuclear/
Executives of the engineering giant have cited Britishvolt as an example of a company which committed to a factory without having orders.
Dimitris Mavrokefalidis
Rolls-Royce has urged the government to provide more clear vision of its target to roll out 24GW of nuclear power generation by 2050.
During a session at the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee, asked when Rolls-Royce will start the process of building its first Small Modular Reactor factory, Alastair Evans, Director of Corporate and Government Affairs at Rolls-Royce SMR, said: “If you look at the Britishvolt example, that is an example of a company that committed to a factory without orders. We don’t have clarity on orders in the UK.
“So, as soon as we have that clarity that the UK Government wants to deploy Rolls-Royce SMRs, we will be able to get the first factory moving, but our shareholders need that clarity. Britishvolt is a very good example of where you try and run a business and build a factory and get things moving without that certainty, orders and customers.”
A few days ago, company representatives visited the first four sites which have the potential to host 15GW of new nuclear power capacity.
Mr Evans confirmed that once Rolls-Royce receives the green light from the government, then the whole process around the development of its first SMR facility will accelerate.
He said: “That was the purpose of doing our planning processes, getting the selection of our heavy pressure vessel sites – we’ve got 600 people in the Rolls-Royce SMR business today. So we are set up to deliver at pace. We are 600 UK-based workers looking at manufacturing, assembly, lead skills, and module concept. We are ready to go.”
Julian Assange and the US government’s war on whistleblowers
Chris Hedges, The Real News Network, Fri, 20 Jan 2023
Thirteen years ago, WikiLeaks published extensive leaked US government documents detailing a range of criminal and unethical acts, from the slaughter of civilians in the “War on Terror” to acts of espionage against foreign heads of state. Since then, the persecution of Julian Assange has not ceased. This year, Assange is expected to stand trial in the US for violations of the Espionage Act. Journalist Kevin Gosztola joins The Chris Hedges Report to review the cases of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, and discuss Washington’s wider war against whistleblowers and the truth itself.
Kevin Gosztola is the managing editor of Shadowproof, where he writes The Dissenter. He is the author of Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case Against Julian Assange.
TRANSCRIPT
Chris Hedges: The long persecution of Julian Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, is set to culminate in its final act: a trial in the United States, probably this year. Kevin Gosztola has spent the last decade reporting on Assange, WikiLeaks, and the wider war on whistleblowers. His new book, Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case against Julian Assange, methodically lays out the complex issues surrounding the case, the gross distortions to the legal system used to facilitate the extradition of Julian, now in a high security prison in London, the abuses of power by the FBI and the CIA, including spying on Julian’s meetings when he sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London with his family, doctors, and attorneys, and the dire consequences, should Julian be convicted, for the press.
Joining me to discuss his new book is Kevin Gosztola. So Kevin, you do a very… I think your book and Nils Melzer are the two books I would recommend for people who don’t understand the case. I use this show in this interview to really lay out for people who are unfamiliar with the long persecution of Julian and the legal anomalies that have been used against him. You know, what those are. So let’s just start with what are the charges, what are the allegations, which is where you begin your book.
Kevin Gosztola: Yeah. And the intention was to look ahead and say, Julian Assange is likely to be brought to the US by the end of 2023, maybe 2024. We need something out there for the general public so they can wrap their head around the unprecedented nature of what’s unfolding. And so the charges against Julian Assange, he was first indicted back in April of 2019. Or sorry, that was when it was unveiled. He was charged first with a computer crime offense. They alleged, essentially, a password cracking conspiracy. And that was of intrusion, of essentially agreeing to help Chelsea Manning anonymously access military computers.
And then the other charges were 17 espionage act offenses. ………………………………………………………… https://therealnews.com/julian-assange-and-the-us-governments-war-on-whistleblowers

Canada: Federal gifts for the nuclear and mining industries
The government needs a more transparent and evidence-based approach to decision-making when assessing choices for decarbonization.
Policy Options, by Mark Winfield, January 25, 2023
Canada’s nuclear industry got an important pre-Christmas gift from the federal government in the form of the announcement of its decision not to conduct an assessment under the 2019 Impact Assessment Act of a proposed small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) at the Point Lepreau site in New Brunswick.
The Lepreau SMR proposal has been highly controversial, given its reliance on technologies where the performance, costs and risks are essentially unknown. Moreover, serious questions have even been raised about whether the project, intended to reprocess fuel from the Lepreau CANDU reactors, would violate the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. It would have seemed precisely the kind of situation where a very thorough, public review is needed before a project can proceed. The federal government has chosen otherwise.
The Lepreau decision capped a string of federal decisions and multi-billion-dollar announcements around technologies claimed to be essential to decarbonizing Canada’s economy. There was the $970-million investment through the Canada Infrastructure Bank in another SMR project at Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington facility. A “critical minerals strategy,” also released in December, reads like a mining industry wish list. Billions had already been committed to “critical minerals” projects and infrastructures. A tax credit for carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), with a value in the range of $1.5 billion per year, was introduced in the March 2022 budget. Hundreds of millions more have gone into fossil-fuel-based “blue hydrogen-related” technologies…………………………………………………………………
The SMR component of the federal government’s approach to “clean” electricity, for its part, carries high trade-off risks, ranging from direct impacts to questions of geopolitical security. At the same time, the technology remains immature and unlikely to make any contribution to the achievement of Canadian or global emission-reduction targets for 2030 or even by mid-century. Rather, it may represent a “dead-end” pathway – albeit one with very significant risks of major legacy costs and impacts………… more https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/january-2023/federal-gifts-for-the-nuclear-and-mining-industries/
2022 saw the slow demise of the Bradwell B nuclear plan

That was the Year That Was…
https://www.banng.info/news/that-was-the-year-that-was/
Andy Blowers summarises the past year for the Bradwell B project in the BANNG column for the January 2023 edition of Regional Life
A year is a short time in the glacial progress of a nuclear power station as it slowly moves through the various hurdles until it falls or proceeds eventually to the point where it goes critical and its long-term legacy becomes eternal and irreversible. So, with Bradwell B’s faltering progress over the past seven years until its fall last year. It may seem, in the words of Charles II, that it has been ‘an unconscionable time a-dying’, but the year just ended has witnessed the slow demise of Bradwell B.
Bradwell B entered 2022 with diminishing prospects. From the moment in early 2020 when it disclosed its preposterous plans to an outraged public, it had struggled for credibility. It’s true that in 2021 the Chinese-designed reactors gained Generic Design Approval (GDA) from the UK regulatory authorities. But, also in 2021, CGN (China General Nuclear Power Group) announced it was pausing its activities indefinitely. No doubt this was, in part, a result of the overwhelming and sustained opposition from BANNG, BAN, local councils and communities that it had encountered over the years.
During 2022 any lingering hopes for the project appeared to vanish amid deepening fears about Sea Level Rise and destructive impacts on our vulnerable coast. And it became clear that Chinese participation in UK nuclear projects was unwelcome for reasons of national security. By the year’s end, CGN informed stakeholders that it was effectively decommitting from its activities on the site with no plans for resumption.
It’s over. Let it go…
So, Bradwell B is over and we can let it go. But the threat of new nuclear at Bradwell will remain as long as the Government categorises the site as ‘potentially suitable’. Other developers may try to muscle in and we know that Rolls Royce has made a ranging shot at Bradwell as a ‘deployable site’ for its non-existent Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). It must be finally and unequivocally demonstrated that the Bradwell site is utterly unsuitable for the deployment of nuclear development, whether big Gigawatts (GW) or big SMRs That has been the nub of BANNG’s campaign over many years and it remains so as we enter 2023.
Ukraine steps up preparations for new nuclear reactors (NO this is not a joke!)

WNN 23 January 2023
The Cabinet of Ministers in Ukraine has given the go-ahead to begin work on project documentation for the construction of two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors at the Khmelnitsky nuclear power plant.
Ukraine’s Minister of Energy, Herman Halushchenko, said the decision was a key moment for the country.
He said: “The Cabinet of Ministers decided that we are starting to develop technical documentation for a new type of reactors that have never been built in Ukraine. In other words, we have ended the era of the creation of nuclear energy based on Soviet technology.”
According to the country’s energy’s ministry, the target date to complete construction and start-up of the two power units at Khmelnitsky is 2030-2032, subject to the impact of the current war. It estimates the cost of each unit at about USD5 billion. Then cabinet decision means that a technical and economic feasibility study and other project documentation can be taken forward……………………………………….
In June last year, Energoatom agreed to increase from five to nine the number of Westinghouse AP1000 reactors to be built in the country, which will include unit 5 and unit 6 at Khmelnitsky, plus a switch to supply all of the country’s nuclear fuel………………………….more https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Ukraine-begins-preparations-for-first-AP1000-react
French government moves to fully nationalise the nuclear industry

The French state acquired enough EDF shares on the market to start
squeeze-out proceedings as it fully nationalises the nuclear energy giant,
the finance ministry said on Friday.
The government now holds 92.71% of
voting rights in EDF, the ministry said, marking the successful end of the
full takeover proceedings, launched by President Emmanuel Macron’s
government last summer, which cost Paris some $10 million.
Debt-laden EDF, Europe’s biggest nuclear power operator, runs France’s nuclear reactor
fleet, some hydropower plants and other production sites and supplies
millions of households with electricity. Its de-listing from the Paris
stock market will be the end of an era for the utility which was partially
privatised in 2005, when a chunk of its share capital was floated at 33
euros ($35.82) a share.
Reuters 20th Jan 2023
Nuclear Regulatory Commission certifies NuScam’s design for small nuclear reactor, despite predictions on uneconomic costs

1st small modular nuclear reactor certified for use in US
AP News, By JENNIFER McDERMOTT, January 21, 2023
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has certified the design for what will be the United States’ first small modular nuclear reactor.
The rule that certifies the design was published Thursday in the Federal Register. It means that companies seeking to build and operate a nuclear power plant can pick the design for a 50-megawatt, advanced light-water small modular nuclear reactor by Oregon-based NuScale Power and apply to the NRC for a license.
It’s the final determination that the design is acceptable for use, so it can’t be legally challenged during the licensing process when someone applies to build and operate a nuclear power plant, NRC spokesperson Scott Burnell said Friday. The rule becomes effective in late February………
It’s the seventh nuclear reactor design cleared for use in the United States. The rest are for traditional, large, light-water reactors………….. The first small modular reactor design application package included over 2 million pages of supporting materials………..
However, David Schlissel at the Ohio-based Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis expressed concerns about the costs. Schlissel, who has studied the history of the nuclear power industry and the finances of the NuScale project, expects they will continue to go up, which could limit how many NuScale reactors are built. He said he thinks they’re not competitive in price with renewables and battery storage.
………… The U.S. Energy Department said it provided more than $600 million since 2014 to support the design, licensing and siting of NuScale’s VOYGR small modular reactor power plant and other domestic small reactor concepts. ……………………………..
Jeremy in nuclear wonderland
Tim Ambler, Adam Smith Institute 20 Jan 23
MPs on the Commons’ science and technology select committee heard yesterday that the establishment of Great British Nuclear has been delayed due to friction between the business department and the Treasury over the budget for new projects. Given we know that all of the UK’s eight nuclear power plants are due to shut by 2028, apart from Sizewell B, which is closing in 2035, the need for new nuclear power is imperative.[really?] Especially when five of these are still providing about 13% of the UK’s electricity.
A new one (Hinkley Point C) is under construction but “reports surfaced this week suggesting that the nuclear power station in Somerset will not be operational until 2036, 11 years after its original 2025 completion date.” The other new one (Sizewell C) is a replica of Hinkley Point C and has been under consideration for 12 years and the government hopes to make a final decision by 2025. Being a replica should make Sizewell C easier and cheaper to build but, unfortunately Hinkley Point C has technical problems and duplicating Sizewell B would have been a better bet.
Britain’s chaotic approach to nuclear energy can all be laid at the door of HM Treasury. Prime Minister Johnson recognised the need to action and, in March 2022, grabbed a target of 24GW for nuclear out of the air which, he claimed, would be 25% of electricity demand – a not unreasonable baseload given the volatility of renewables. Unfortunately, then-Chancellor Sunak forgot to mention that electricity met only 20% of our energy demands and would have to supply nearly 100% by 2050. So 25% of demand needs more like 56GW than 24GW and, furthermore, someone seems now to have cunningly inserted “up to” before the 24GW.
Johnson also announced that a new organisation would take charge of delivering this nuclear programme pronto, Great British Nuclear (GBN). Apparently GBN has a shopping list of what it needs to get going but the public are not allowed to see it. HM Treasury is concerned that GBN wants to spend money.
So the current plans are to decide (maybe) to add two more Sizewell Bs or Cs in the next Parliament, i.e. by 2030, and hope they are up and running by 2050. So we’ll have four operational 2.3GW plants by 2050, i.e. 13.2 GW – well they only said “up to”. Note that the plans only encompass when decisions might be made – not when the plants might be generating electricity………..
The Treasury nuclear wonderland has two stand-out features: delaying the commissioning of nuclear generators, ostensibly to save taxes, as discussed above, and ensuring users pay twice as much as the French or Americans to restrain our enthusiasm for buying electricity at all. It does that in three ways. The first is fixing the way wholesale electricity prices are set so that everyone pays the most expensive tender price to the National Grid rather than (as other auctions work) the lowest.
Then it adds the “Green Levy” alongside other taxes so that today’s consumers pay for the electricity used by the next generation of consumers. Never mind renewables being cheaper, today’s consumers have to pay a premium for it.
The third way today’s consumers are hit with future costs is the “Regulated Asset Base” (RAB) model HM Treasury will use to finance Sizewell C and all future nuclear power plants. This is the successor to the Private Finance Initiative which financed £12 billion of English hospital building at a cost to the taxpayer, by the time the idea was dropped in 2018, of £79 billion in repayments. Only it is worse. The idea, like the Green Levy, is that today’s electricity user pays for tomorrow’s consumption inflated by City profits. Someone seems to have conceived the idea that if we all pay a lot more for our electricity today, it won’t hurt when the zero carbon costs hit us in 2050.
The bottom line of all this is that the Treasury’s ducking and diving is hugely damaging for today’s and future electricity users and preventing any sane nuclear policy being implemented. https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/jeremy-in-nuclear-wonderland
“Great British Nuclear “- it’s high time that they came clean on what this will cost.

Bowen is right to think Britain’s nuclear plans will require “substantial” taxpayer support.
It’s high time the government spelt out how much financial fuel it’s willing to burn.
Maybe Great British Nuclear will prove as successful as Great British
Railways: another government invention still stuck in the sidings while the
strike-bound network grinds to a halt.

But at least Simon Bowen is after an
improvement on that. Who he? The industry adviser picked by ministers to
make their nuclear nirvana a reality. He’s setting up GBN, the “flagship
body” to corral the construction of up to 24 gigawatts of new capacity by
2050: a shopping list, he says, that will involve at least three more
mega-nukes on top of Hinkley Point C, plus a litter of small modular
reactors.
As he told MPs on the science committee, the new body will be the
“glue within the industry to drive the nuclear programme”. Always
assuming it gets set up, of course — because you can already sense
Bowen’s frustration with the government.
In a post-Ukraine war push for
energy security, it was Boris Johnson who declared that Britain should
“go nuclear and go large”, not that he spelt out the eye-popping costs
to the taxpayer. But Bowen’s report into how the new body should work,
complete with 25 recommendations, has since been passed from Liz Truss to
Rishi Sunak and deemed top secret.
To boot, from the latest PM he sees no
“overarching strategy” on what’s needed for energy security: the
“quantum of nuclear” or other technologies. That’s crucial because
“the investment required in nuclear is substantial”, he says, with the
same stuff underpinning successful international projects: “A substantial
amount of government leadership and fiscal support, not just in terms of
financing but who bears the risk.”
No private financier can see how
Sizewell gets built without the government injecting £5 billion-plus equity
and insulating investors from most construction risk. Build three big nukes
and you treble that problem before taking on small modular reactors — an
untried technology to which Rolls-Royce’s new boss, Tufan Erginbilgic,
seems disinclined to bring blue-sky finance. Add it up and Bowen is right
to think Britain’s nuclear plans will require “substantial” taxpayer
support. It’s high time the government spelt out how much financial fuel
it’s willing to burn.
Times 19th Jan 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/great-british-nuclear-puts-treasury-on-alert-jjt987rlr
Slovenia’s nuclear power plant gets permit for a 20 year operating extension
nsion
Krško nuclear power plant has obtained an environmental permit for its
lifetime extension from 40 to 60 years. The only NPP in Slovenia will be so
able to operate until 2043.
European Nuclear Society 17th Jan 2023
France’s new law on nuclear energy will be a gift to the nuclear lobby.
The new nuclear law, under debate in the Senate, is a gift offered to the atom lobby. And the majority on the right could further strengthen it. The public debate on the creation of new EPR2 nuclear reactors is not yet over and the government already wants to speed up their construction.
OnTuesday, January 17, his bill for an “ambitious and sustainable” nuclear revival will be presented to the Senate. The text proposes various technical measures to simplify the development of EPR2s . But above all, it sends a political signal: the government is in working order to advance its cause. Even if it means radically changing the deadlines for administrative authorizations, the legal procedures and the frameworks of environmental democracy.
When presenting her bill to the Economic Affairs Committee , Agnès Pannier-Runacher first began by apologizing. “I’m sorry, it’s a horribly technical text… But the modalities for reviving nuclear power
will go through unattractive considerations , ” she continued. For her, the current difficulties of nuclear power – its slowness and its high cost – would be, above all, linked to bureaucratic and normative heavinesses that it would be a question of doing away with.
“It’s important that the cost of this new program be competitive, which is much easier said than done ,” she
said. Renewable energies have an exit cost of 60 to 80 euros (MWh) and this is the price level that should be had for nuclear power.
Reporterre 17th Jan 2023 https://reporterre.net/Tapis-rouge-pour-le-nucleaire-au-Senat
Mini nuclear reactor firm snubs Britain for the French: Newcleo blames political chaos for decision to build prototype across Channel
Britain’s nuclear power ambitions suffered another setback as a UK company
chose France to build its prototype reactor. Newcleo blamed political
upheaval in Westminster for its decision. The mini-nuclear power station
company said it waited in vain for ministers to give the green light over
where to site the project – leaving it no option but to take the work over
the Channel.
The move will cost hundreds of potential UK jobs and casts
further doubt on the country’s nuclear future. Speaking at the World
Economic Forum in Davos, Newcleo chief executive Stefano Buono told the
Mail: ‘Changing government three times has not helped. ‘We were
expecting a decision before, but I understand that when the government
changes, it’s very difficult to take decisions.’ Britain is scrambling to
replace its fleet of six large nuclear plants, five of which are due for
closure by 2028 and one, Sizewell B, in 2035.
Hopes for the mini-nuclear sector were raised by Boris Johnson’s plans for a government-backed body
called Great British Nuclear (GBN) to support the development of new sites.
Speaking in the Commons yesterday, the former prime minister urged the
Government ‘to exploit this country’s technological lead and build a
fleet of small modular nuclear reactors as part of our Great British
Nuclear programme’. Business Secretary Grant Shapps said GBN would be up
and running shortly and said small modular reactors would play ‘an
important part’ in boosting nuclear power supplies. The Government wants 25
per cent of power to come from nuclear by 2050. Last year it supplied 15.5
per cent. Privately-owned Newcleo, which is about to launch a £900million
funding round, is one of a number of companies planning to build
mini-nuclear power stations around the UK.
Daily Mail 17th Jan 2023
A bit of panic in the UK small nuclear reactor lobby?

‘No regrets?”
Quite a lot of people have regrets about the introduction of nuclear power.
And that’s even when the reactor types have been tested.
The new gee-whiz nuclear reactors haven’t even been tested.
Pipeline of ‘no-regrets’ new nuclear schemes needs ‘expediting’
New Civil Engineer16 JAN, 2023 BY ROB HORGAN
A pipeline of “no-regrets” new nuclear schemes must be fast-tracked if the UK is to meet its net zero carbon emission targets, according to an independent [how independent?] review set up to assess the UK’s decarbonisation plans.
It is one of 129 recommendations made by former energy minister Chris Skidmore in his government-ordered net zero review titled Mission Zero.
The report calls for the formation of Great British Nuclear (GBN) to be “expedited in early 2023” so that a “clear roadmap” of future schemes can be developed this year to tackle “rising power demand”.
The government first announced its intention to set up GBN to develop a project pipeline in its British Energy Security Strategy published in April last year.
Skidmore concludes that speeding up the formation of GBN will address industry concerns about a “lack of clarity on the pathway” to achieving the UK government’s ambition for nuclear energy to provide a quarter of power consumed within the country. (Nuclear energy currently supplies 15% of the UK’s power needs.)
The review concludes: “Building new nuclear is a no-regrets option, despite high upfront costs and long construction times”……………….

- YOU ARE HERE:LATEST
Pipeline of ‘no-regrets’ new nuclear schemes needs ‘expediting’
16 JAN, 2023 BY ROB HORGAN
A pipeline of “no-regrets” new nuclear schemes must be fast-tracked if the UK is to meet its net zero carbon emission targets, according to an independent review set up to assess the UK’s decarbonisation plans.
It is one of 129 recommendations made by former energy minister Chris Skidmore in his government-ordered net zero review titled Mission Zero.
The report calls for the formation of Great British Nuclear (GBN) to be “expedited in early 2023” so that a “clear roadmap” of future schemes can be developed this year to tackle “rising power demand”.
The government first announced its intention to set up GBN to develop a project pipeline in its British Energy Security Strategy published in April last year.
Skidmore concludes that speeding up the formation of GBN will address industry concerns about a “lack of clarity on the pathway” to achieving the UK government’s ambition for nuclear energy to provide a quarter of power consumed within the country. (Nuclear energy currently supplies 15% of the UK’s power needs.)
The review concludes: “Building new nuclear is a no-regrets option, despite high upfront costs and long construction times.
“In view of rising power demand, nuclear energy can provide reliable baseload power which is not weather dependent and can provide other services to power networks.”
It adds: “To achieve affordability and efficiency, the Government needs to commit to funding a fleet of projects. Recognising the start times for new build nuclear, a clear roadmap for nuclear deployment up to 2035 is required.”
The government is currently committed to building Sizewell C, while construction of Hinkley Point C continues to gather pace. Ambitions to develop a fleet of small nuclear reactors has also been widely supported by government in the past few years.
Skidmore’s review concludes that as well as delivering a pipeline of projects, the government must act to remove barriers to its nuclear ambitions.
It identifies “the main barrier for new nuclear projects is the need for stable, long-term policy and funding commitments given the long timeframes involved in the building of nuclear plants”.
It also points out that “rapid expansion of nuclear power could lead to some bottlenecks in supply chains and skills pools”.
However, the report stresses that “understanding the timings of different projects” would allow “any supply chain and skills pinch points [to] be identified early, allowing for coordinated action to prevent bottlenecks”.
The review also concludes that streamlining planning and consenting decisions would “ensure nuclear projects are not unnecessarily delayed”. Likewise, Skidmore’s review calls for the lengthy protocols required for innovations like SMRs to be accelerated.
National Infrastructure Commission chair Sir John Armitt supports Skidmore’s calls for clarity and accelerated action.
He said: “Chris Skidmore’s clarity in his call for accelerated action is as compelling as it is commendable, nailing the argument that inaction now will cost us all in the long run.
“Given the economic opportunities offered by leading the pack internationally, securing policy and funding stability over the coming years is paramount.”

Nuclear energy recommendations made in Skidmore’s net zero review:
- Expedite the set-up of Great British Nuclear in early 2023, ensuring required funding and skills are in place.
- Government and GBN to set out clear roadmap in 2023, including interim targets to reach 2050 ambition, and government to ensure funding is in place. As part of the roadmap, government should assess the possibility to increase the current ambitions, supporting the development of supply chain to service a fleet of projects.
- Roadmap to set out clear pathways for different nuclear technologies (including small modular reactors) and the selection process. This should consider how to use programmatic approach to deliver further cost reductions in a competitive environment.
- Government to deliver on siting strategy by 2024
-
Archives
- July 2026 (332)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
-
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




