BAE shipyard – home to nuclear submarine construction ‘set to flood’ due to impact of climate change
BAE shipyard in Barrow ‘set to flood’ due to impact of climate change 31st March DAN TAYLOR, CHIEF REPORTER BARROW’S shipyard is at ‘very great’ risk of flooding in the near future, according to a report.
Findings by the Nuclear Consulting Group suggest BAE’s shipyard would be left ‘profoundly vulnerable’ to flooding from sea-level rises due to the impact of climate change.
It claimed the shipyard was among nine nuclear sites that are threatened by the possibility of increased rainfall and a rise in sea levels.
The report is based on models predicting sea levels in 2050 following the effects of climate change.
…….. Writing in the report Dr Paul Dorfman, the chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group think tank, said: “Present UK coastal military nuclear infrastructure is profoundly vulnerable to flooding from sea-level rise, storm intensity and storm surge – with inland nuclear facilities also facing inundation and flooding.
“Ministry of Defence and nuclear regulatory mitigation efforts will become obsolete, and sooner than planned.
“In other words, UK nuclear military bases are set to flood.”
The next generation of Trident nuclear submarines are being built in Barrow, alongside the Astute hunter-killer boats.
And raising concern about the shipyard, Dr Dorfman warned: “Despite the key role the shipyard plays in the UK nuclear military enterprise, climate change (even in lower-mid range projections) will challenge the utility and viability of the facility due to the combined impact of future sea-level rise, storm surge and flooding.”………… https://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/20028594.shipyard-flood/
Growing resistance to EU proposal to label gas and nuclear as ”sustainable” energy
| Resistance has been growing to an EU proposal to label gas and nuclear energy as sustainable investments, officials said this week. The European Commission last month proposed including both in the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy, a system for labelling climate-friendly investments. The proposal split opinion among the European Parliament and EU countries, which disagree on the fuels’ green credentials and could also still reject it. Two groups of lawmakers – the Greens and the Socialists and Democrats – confirmed that they would file a motion to reject the rules. German Green lawmaker Michael Bloss had confirmed the Greens’ objection earlier in the week. “Nuclear power and fossil gas are not ‘sustainable’, far too dangerous and not a bridge technology,” he said in a tweet. The move is the opening salvo in a months-long process of negotiations, which would culminate in Parliament voting by July on the potential motions to reject the gas and nuclear proposal. Emerging Risks 1st April 2022 https://emergingrisks.co.uk/resistance-grows-to-eu-nuclear-and-gas-taxonomy/ |
Wide reporting on Russian soldiers affected by radiation, leaving Chernobyl
| The UN atomic watchdog is investigating Ukrainian claims that Russian soldiers occupying Chernobyl nuclear power station left after receiving high doses of radiation. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it could not confirm the claims by Ukrainian state power company Energoatom and was seeking an independent assessment. Energoatom said the Russians dug trenches in the forest inside the exclusion zone at the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster, and that the troops “panicked at the first sign of illness” which “showed up very quickly” and began preparing to leave. The Ukrainian deputy prime minister, Iryna Vereshchuk, also made the claim that Russian troops who dug trenches in the forest were exposed to radiation, but it has not been independently verified. Some reports have suggested the soldiers are being sent to a special medical facility in Belarus after driving tanks through the “dead zone” around the nuclear plant, kicking up radioactive dust. Guardian 1st April 2022https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/russians-fled-chernobyl-with-radiation-sickness-says-ukraine-as-iaea-investigates |
Russian forces that occupied the Chernobyl nuclear power station after
invading Ukraine have left the defunct plant, and suggested radiation
concerns had driven them away. Chernobyl is back under Ukraine control
after Russians forces formally give up the nuclear site.
The Ukrainian
state nuclear company said on Thursday most of the Russian forces that
occupied the Chernobyl nuclear power station after invading Ukraine have
left the defunct plant, and suggested radiation concerns had driven them
away.
Energoatom said it had also confirmed information that Russian troops
had built fortifications including trenches in the so-called Red Forest –
the most radioactively contaminated part of the zone around Chernobyl. As a
result of concerns about radiation, “almost a riot began to brew among the
soldiers,” it said in the statement, suggesting this was the reason for
their unexpected departure.
Mirror 31st March 2022
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/breaking-chernobyl-back-under-ukraine-26606690
Energoatom also said reports were confirmed that the Russians dug trenches
in the Red Forest, the 10-square-kilometer (nearly four-square-mile) area
surrounding the Chernobyl plant within the Exclusion Zone, and received
“significant doses of radiation.” The Russian troops “panicked at the first
sign of illness,” which “showed up very quickly,” and began to prepare to
leave, the operator said. The claim couldn’t be independently verified.
Daily Mail 31st March 2022
Energoatom said the pullout at Chernobyl came after soldiers received
“significant doses” of radiation from digging trenches in the forest in the
exclusion zone around the closed plant, although there was no independent
confirmation of that.
Independent 1st April 2022
Low-lying Dungeness threatened by climate change – sea level rise.
Dungeness could find itself underwater within 30 years, threatening both a
tourist hotspot and a vital conservation area. Dungeness and its nature
reserve are low-lying, which means that they are particularly vulnerable to
climate change and rising sea levels.
Climate Central is an organisation
dedicated to researching the impact of global warming. The organisation
uses UN-approved data to predict which areas of the world could be most
threatened by rising sea levels, with variables concerning pollution levels
and extreme weather events. Here’s an example of one of Climate
Central’s maps, [on original] showing what Dungeness could look like in 2050 should
global warming continue at its current rate. The red parts show areas
beneath the tide level.
Time Out 30th March 2022
https://www.timeout.com/news/dungeness-could-be-underwater-by-2050-033022
Sizewell new nuclear will not solve the government’s energy problems, but will punish the poorest.
| Nick Butler: Spending £4bn on a new nuclear station at Sizewell will not solve the government’s energy problems. Instead of sensible short-term measures to help those facing energy poverty, the government is focusing on a technology with a track record of failure. In the face of surging energy prices and the prospect of more problems as Europe turns off Russian gas supplies, the UK government is struggling to find a coherent energy policy. The latest move, a £4bn investment in the proposed new nuclear station at Sizewell, is both a mistake and an irrelevance. Private investors who are being asked to stump up the majority of the £20bn total cost should politely decline the offer. The current energy challenge—driven first by the surging post-Covid economy around the world, and now by fears of a fight for supplies as Europe reduces its use of Russian gas by two-thirds by 2023—is not the fault of the British government. The UK is not dependent on Russian supplies, which account for less than 5 per cent of British consumption. We do, however, import half our gas, and are therefore vulnerable to whatever happens on the world market. The government is responsible for the response to a crisis which will raise retail bills in April, and again in the autumn. The burden of these sudden increases will hit the poorest hardest, adding to cost of living pressures already evident. The Bank of England talks of inflation of 8 per cent by the end of the year. Many commentators think 10 per cent is more likely. The answer to the challenge has to begin with welfare support for those who cannot cope. A temporary removal of some of the taxes on energy supply, including VAT, would also offer some relief. The £2bn being given to the developers of Sizewell would have made a material difference to those facing energy poverty. The choice of EDF’s European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) technology is the worst from any perspective. In the face of an energy crisis and soaring bills, the government needs solutions which are practical and affordable. There is no way of insulating the UK from developments in the world market. The poorest can and should be protected but the rest of us will undoubtedly have to pay more. What matters now is that the short-, medium- and longer-term solutions to limit that exposure are deliverable and affordable. Sizewell is neither. Prospect 30th March 2022 https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/science-and-technology/spending-4bn-on-a-new-nuclear-station-at-sizewell-will-not-solve-the-governments-energy-problems |
Russian troops pull out out of Chernobyl after suffering ”acute radiation sickness”
Russian troops have pulled out of Chernobyl and handed control back to
Ukrainian authorities after soldiers suffered acute radiation sickness from
digging trenches in contaminated soil. Energoatom, Ukraine’s state
nuclear energy company, said that soldiers had received “significant
doses of radiation” after they constructed trench fortifications in the
Red Forest, a highly toxic area surrounding the defunct plant.
Times 1st April 2022
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sick-russian-soldiers-seen-fleeing-chernobyl-ztcwvgzwg
Greenpeace activists storm French nuclear plant
Greenpeace activists break into the construction site of the Flamanville
EPR nuclear reactor to protest against pro-nuclear candidates in the French
presidential elections.
Launched at the end of 2007, the Normandy project
is 11 years overdue and its cost has risen to 12.7 billion euros according
to EDF, compared with the 3.3 billion announced in 2006. Greenpeace France
has called for an independent assessment of the viability of EPR nuclear
reactors.
Euronews 31st March 2022
https://www.euronews.com/2022/03/31/greenpeace-activists-storm-french-nuclear-power-plant
Boris Johnson’s fixation on nuclear power is not justified by the facts, as Britain’s electricity demand continues to fall.
| Letter Andrew Warren, Chairman, British Energy Efficiency Federation: In declaring that Boris Johnson’s fixation on nuclear is a threat to British energy supply, Simon Nixon (Mar 31) draws attention to the fallacious belief by the Department for Business (if not at the National Grid) that demand for electricity is expected to expand enormously, apparently even double, over future years. Strangely enough, precisely the same justification was used in 2006, when the Labour government first committed itself (as Nixon observes) to a “family” of further nuclear power stations. Based on the official forecasts issued in 2006, we should by now be consuming at least 15 per cent more electricity than we were then. But we are not. In fact UK electricity consumption has gone down by more than 15 per cent since 2006. In other words, all that “expectation of demand growth” used then to justify new nukes was grossly exaggerated, by well over 30 per cent. In the interim, no new nuclear power stations have been added to the system. It hasn’t collapsed, and is far less carbon intensive. Surely, we should not be fooled again by the same spurious rhetoric about endless consumption growth? In that immortal phrase of the 1970s: “Save it. You know it makes sense.” Times 1st April 2022https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/times-letters-lessons-of-the-shropshire-maternity-scandal-7vs5xwfw3 |
UK government’s nuclear dream likely to fade away, as private investors resist that risky call
Private investors are yet to be convinced that the returns from nuclear
power are sufficiently attractive to plow billions of pounds into a new
fleet of reactors that is being pushed by the U.K. government.
Unclear policy, competition from renewables and concerns about how attractive the
financial returns will be all make the investment case for nuclear less
compelling, according to people involved in the discussions.
That could be a major stumbling block for the government as it seeks to enlist private
capital to help fund projects like Electricite de France SA’s Sizewell C
plant.
Financial Post 29th March 2022
Scrutiny on Switzerland’s nuclear power industry- it gets uranium from Russia
Use of Russian uranium for Swiss nuclear power under scrutiny, Russia’s state-owned nuclear firm Rosatom helps fuel two nuclear power plants in Switzerland. That commercial link is now under scrutiny as the Western world puts financial pressure on Russia to stop its aggression against Ukraine. Swiss Info March 31, 2022
Swiss electricity company Axpo purchases fuel from Rosatom to operate the Beznau and Leibstadt nuclear power plants in canton Aargau.
In a statement published on Thursday, the environmental NGO Greenpeace urged the authorities of seven Swiss cantons – which own Axpo – to stop buying uranium from Rosatom.
This commercial relationship, the NGO argued, helps to finance Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. Competitor company Alpiq, which runs the Gösgen nuclear site, stopped sourcing from Russia in 2016.
………………………………….. Of Switzerland’s four nuclear reactors, only Gösgen, operated by the company Alpiq, does not buy Russian uranium. Alpiq said this decision was taken in 2016 due to considerations about environmental compatibility and supply chain transparency………..
By paying for Russian uranium – Switzerland could also indirectly help finance Russia’s military apparatus. SRF points that Rosatom is the manufacturer of Russia’s warheads and now controls the operation of various Ukrainian nuclear power plants, such as at Zaporizhia, seized after fighting on March 4. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/use-of-russian-uranium-for-swiss-nuclear-power-under-scrutiny/47479722
Getting bigger but not safer or cheaper – the myth of Rolls Royce and its very big non-modular reactor
Rolls Royce are now starting a ‘Generic Design Assessment’ (GDA) process with the ONR which will take around 5 years. After then they will be asking the UK Government for a blank cheque for the project.
https://100percentrenewableuk.org/getting-bigger-but-not-safer-or-cheaper-the-myth-of-rolls-royce-and-its-very-big-non-modular-reactor By David Toke, 30 Mar 22, Rolls Royce’s so-called small modular reactor (SMR) is getting bigger, but is likely to have fewer special safety features compared to EDF’s increasingly pricey design for Hinkley C.
In 2017 Rolls Royce said that its small modular reactor would be between 220 and 440 MW, but the latest design is bigger, at 470 MW. It is strange to call this small. Reactors in service at the moment (the so-called AGR reactors) were around the 600 MW size for each unit and, strange as it might seem, most of the first generation of so-called ‘Magnox’ nuclear reactors built in the UK were actually smaller than 470 MW. They were not called ‘small’. So why is Rolls Royce calling this a SMR? There’s no reason for this other than public relations.
Rolls Royce claim that the parts will be mainly built in factories. Well, of course they will, that’s always the case with nuclear power plant. The difference with building a relatively smaller plant of course is that you get less of the economies of scale in doing this. That is why nuclear power plant have got bigger.
So the fact that the Rolls Royce unit will be about a third the size of the EPR is likely to make them cost more. But there is one way that Rolls Royce will be able to economise compared to the European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) being built at Hinkley C, and that is because I have seen no sign that Rolls Royce will include some special safety features that have been included in the EPR.
The best known of these safety features are a) a ‘double containment’ feature that is designed to stop material from the inside getting out (as well as another external shell to shield from aircraft) and b) a ‘core catcher’ to stop a melting core eating its way into the ground and potentially contaminating water courses. I am assuming Rolls Royce will not be including either of these features, although it will have to satisfy the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) that it has other ways of stopping radioactive releases from accidents.
Rolls Royce are now starting a ‘Generic Design Assessment’ (GDA) process with the ONR which will take around 5 years. After then they will be asking the UK Government for a blank cheque for a project.
Of course there is another factor and that is that EDF have some experience (admittedly not very successful of late) of building nuclear power plant. Rolls Royce do not have experience of building large nuclear power plant (which is what they are really hoping to do). Producing small (and, it must be said extremely expensive) genuinely small reactors for nuclear submarines is not the same thing at all! So Rolls Royce are likely not to have the skills to build large nuclear power plant. That is a bad sign!
The so-called SMRs proferred by Rolls Royce will just be the latest in a long line of very expensive, very lately delivered nuclear power stations in the UK. It is unlikely to be any cheaper than the reactor that EDF is building at Hinkley C (becoming more expensive as time goes on). But it will have fewer safety features.
Robert (Bob) Hoggar comments: Small Mod Reactors scattered about Britain will also have lots of nuclear waste scattered about Britain which will need careful looking after and that is guaranteed to be an additional rusk to the nation.
European Union lawmakers move to reject inclusion of nuclear energy as ‘green’
EU lawmakers move to reject green gas and nuclear investment rules, Reuters, By Kate Abnett and Simon Jessop
- Summary
- Greens, Socialists and Democrats oppose proposed rules
- Parliament vote on taxonomy proposal due by July
- EU advisers launch report on other environmental criteria
BRUSSELS, March 30 (Reuters) – At least two groups of European Union lawmakers have confirmed they will reject an EU proposal to label gas and nuclear energy as sustainable investments, officials said on Wednesday.
Reporting by Kate Abnett, Simon Jessop, editing by Ed Osmond………… (registered readers only) https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/eu-lawmakers-move-reject-green-gas-nuclear-investment-rules-2022-03-30/
UN nuclear watchdog chief in Ukraine for safety talks
 | |||
UN nuclear watchdog chief in Ukraine for safety talks https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2022-03-un-nuclear-watchdog-chief-in-ukraine-for-safety-talks
The United Nations nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi visited Ukraine on Tuesday unannounced to start providing assistance including experts and equipment aimed at keeping nuclear facilities there safe in the midst of war, apparently without Russia’s blessing. March 30, 2022 by Charles Digges
The United Nations nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi visited Ukraine on Tuesday unannounced to start providing assistance including experts and equipment aimed at keeping nuclear facilities there safe in the midst of war, apparently without Russia’s blessing.
Grossi’s visit comes as seasonal wildfires are ripping unchecked through the irradiated area surrounding Chernobyl, the defunct nuclear power plant that was seized by Russian troops on February 24. Ukrainian officials have said the blazes within the 2,600 square kilometer exclusion zone around the disaster site could bear radiation aloft to surrounding territories and across borders.
Since Russia invaded Ukraine last month, Grossi has called on both countries to agree a framework to ensure nuclear facilities, including spent nuclear fuel storage facilities at Chernobyl and Europe’s biggest nuclear power plant at Zaporizhzhya, are kept safe and secure.
International Atomic Energy Agency chief Grossi has so far failed to obtain such an agreement or even a three-way meeting with Ukraine and Russia. He had hoped to convene one at Chernobyl, which like Zaporizhzhya continues to be held under Russian control. He met the Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers separately in Turkey almost three weeks ago.
On Wednesday Grossi appeared to make some progress, posting on Twitter that he had met with Ukraine’s energy minister and the head of Energoatom, the state company that oversees the country’s nuclear industry.
IAEA’s on-site presence will help prevent the danger of a nuclear accident that could have severe public health and environmental consequences in Ukraine and beyond,” Grossi wrote.
On Monday, Lyudmila Denisova, commissioner of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for human rights said the wildfires around Chernobyl have led to an increased level of radioactive air pollution that could threaten neighboring European countries.
She attributed the fires to Russian combat in the region, saying 31 blazes have been recorded, and she called on the IAEA to send firefighters and equipment to help tackle them.
“Control and suppression of fires is impossible due to the capture of the exclusion zone by Russian troops,” Denisova wrote in a Facebook post Sunday. “As a result of combustion, radionuclides are released into the atmosphere, which are transported by wind over long distances.”
The IAEA’s Grossi has not yet commented on the blazes, but their presence contributed to fears of yet more mishaps as Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure falls under Russian fire.
Since the Chernobyl plant fell into Russian hands, nearby combat has cut power to the site twice, jeopardizing cooling processes for 22,000 spent nuclear fuel rods stores on plant territory. Ventilation is also required to tamp down radiation levels below the New Safe Confinement, a giant steel dome that was installed over the sarcophagus of Chernobyl’s Unit Four reactor, which exploded in 1986.
Power has since been restored, but the IAEA has reported it no longer has access to data transmitted by radiation sensors at the site.
At the Zaporizhzhya plant, a March 4 rocket strike destroyed a training laboratory. Like Chernobyl, the Zaproizhzhya’s plant’s staff is now essentially hostage to invading Russian forces – a situation that worries the IAEA. Since then, the Russian military has detonated ordinance at the plant that remained unexploded during its attack. The IAEA said that both the reactors and radiation levels remained safe after that incident.
Russians have also twice shelled the site of a US funded research reactor and nuclear research facility in the northeastern city of Kharkiv. The reactor’s fuel had reportedly been withdrawn prior to the onset of war and the IAEA said chances for an uncontrolled chain reaction at the site are low.
He also visited the South Ukraine nuclear power plant, whose three reactors are thought to be in the crosshairs of advancing Russian troops.
7 wildfires in Chernobyl Exclusion zone exceed Ukraine’s emergency classification tenfold.
Seven wildfires have broken out in the exclusion zone surrounding the
Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, the site of the world’s worst nuclear
disaster, according to a statement by Ukraine’s Parliament. The fires,
which were observed via satellite, exceed Ukraine’s emergency
classification criteria tenfold.
Ukrainian officials stated that the fires
were caused by “the armed aggression of the Russian Federation, namely
the shelling or arson,” though this has not been independently verified.
Wildfires risk mobilizing and dispersing radioactive contaminants left over
from the 1986 nuclear accident at Chernobyl.
Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 23rd March 2022
Wildfires break out in Chernobyl amid a non-functioning radiation-monitoring system
Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense warns on radioactivity danger from the Chernobyl Excusion Zone
Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense warned yesterday that the Russian
occupation of the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone dramatically increases the risk
of the release of significant amounts of radioactive dust into the
atmosphere that could contaminate not only Ukraine but nearby European
countries.
According to the Ministry, Russian military transport, rockets,
artillery shells, and substandard mortar ammunition stored a few hundred
meters from the nuclear power plant run a high risk of detonation. The
Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant and facilities in the Exclusion Zone have
been under the control of the Russian military since 24 February, the first
day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Regulatory control over the state
of nuclear and radiation safety at the site is impossible.
Byline Times 28th March 2022
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (180)
- 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)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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 