nuclear-news

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

Military interests are pushing new nuclear power

in this supposedly “civil” strategy—are multiple statements about addressing “civil and military nuclear ambitions” together to “identify opportunities to align the two across government.”

A 2007 report by an executive from submarine-makers BAE Systems called for these military costs to be “masked” behind civil programs.

 Rolls Royce even issued a dedicated report, marshaling the case for expensive “small modular reactors” to “relieve the Ministry of Defense of the burden of developing and retaining skills and capability.”

The UK government has finally admitted it

By Andy Stirling and Philip Johnstone, 6 May 24,  https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/05/06/military-interests-are-pushing-new-nuclear-power/

The UK government has announced the “biggest expansion of the [nuclear] sector in 70 years.” This follows years of extraordinarily expensive support.

Why is this? Official assessments acknowledge nuclear performs poorly compared to alternatives. With renewables and storage significantly cheaper, climate goals are achieved faster, more affordably and reliably by diverse other means. The only new power station under construction is still not finished, running ten years late and many times over budget.

So again: why does this ailing technology enjoy such intense and persistent generosity?

The UK government has for a long time failed even to try to justify support for nuclear power in the kinds of detailed substantive energy terms that were once routine. The last properly rigorous energy white paper was in 2003.

Even before wind and solar costs plummeted, this recognized nuclear as “unattractive.” The delayed 2020 white paper didn’t detail any comparative nuclear and renewable costs, let alone justify why this more expensive option receives such disproportionate funding.

A document published with the latest announcement, Civil Nuclear: Roadmap to 2050, is also more about affirming official support than substantively justifying it. More significant—in this supposedly “civil” strategy—are multiple statements about addressing “civil and military nuclear ambitions” together to “identify opportunities to align the two across government.”

These pressures are acknowledged by other states with nuclear weapons, but were until now treated like a secret in the UK: civil nuclear energy maintains the skills and supply chains needed for military nuclear programs.

The military has consistently called for civil nuclear

Official UK energy policy documents fail substantively to justify nuclear power, but on the military side the picture is clear.

For instance, in 2006 then prime minister Tony Blair performed a U-turn to ignore his own white paper and pledge nuclear power would be “back with a vengeance.” Widely criticized for resting on a “secret” process, this followed a major three volume study by the military-linked RAND Corporation for the Ministry of Defense (MoD) effectively warning that the UK “industrial base” for design, manufacture and maintenance of nuclear submarines would become unaffordable if the country phased out civil nuclear power.

A 2007 report by an executive from submarine-makers BAE Systems called for these military costs to be “masked” behind civil programs. A secret MoD report in 2014 (later released by freedom of information) showed starkly how declining nuclear power erodes military nuclear skills.

In repeated parliamentary hearings, academics, engineering organizations, research centers, industry bodies and trade unions urged continuing civil nuclear as a means to support military capabilities.

In 2017, submarine reactor manufacturer Rolls Royce even issued a dedicated report, marshaling the case for expensive “small modular reactors” to “relieve the Ministry of Defense of the burden of developing and retaining skills and capability.”

The government itself has remained coy about acknowledging this pressure to “mask” military costs behind civilian programs. Yet the logic is clear in repeated emphasis on the supposedly self-evident imperative to “keep the nuclear option open”—as if this were an end in itself, no matter what the cost. Energy ministers are occasionally more candid, with one calling civil-military distinctions “artifical” and quietly saying: “I want to include the MoD more in everything we do”.

In 2017, we submitted evidence to a parliamentary public accounts committee investigation of the deal to build Hinkley Point C power plant. On the basis of our evidence, the committee asked the then MoD head (who—notably—previously oversaw civil nuclear contract negotiations) about the military nuclear links. His response:

We are completing the build of the nuclear submarines which carry conventional weaponry. We have at some point to renew the warheads, so there is very definitely an opportunity here for the nation to grasp in terms of building up its nuclear skills. I do not think that that is going to happen by accident; it is going to require concerted government action to make it happen.

This is even more evident in actions than words. For instance hundreds of millions of pounds have been prioritized for a nuclear innovation program and a nuclear sector deal which is “committed to increasing the opportunities for transferability between civil and defense industries.”

An open secret

Despite all this, military pressures for nuclear power are not widely recognized in the UK. On the few occasions when it receives media attention, the link has been officially denied.

Other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures (especially around submarine reactors) just when the civilian industry is obsolescing. This is true in the US, France, Russia and China.

Other countries tend to be more open about it, with the interdependence acknowledged at presidential level in the US for instance. French president Emmanuel Macron summarizes: “without civil nuclear power, no military nuclear power, without military nuclear, no civil nuclear.”

This is largely why nuclear-armed France is pressing the European Union to support nuclear power. This is why non-nuclear-armed Germany has phased out the nuclear technologies it once lead the world in. This is why other nuclear-armed states are so disproportionately fixated by nuclear power.

These military pressures help explain why the UK is in denial about poor nuclear performance, yet so supportive of general nuclear skills. Powerful military interests—with characteristic secrecy and active PR—are driving this persistence.

Neglect of this picture makes it all the more disturbing. Outside defense budgets, off the public books and away from due scrutiny, expensive support is being lavished on a joint civil-military nuclear industrial base largely to help fund military needs. These concealed subsidies make nuclear submarines look affordable, but electricity and climate action more costly.

The conclusions are not self-evident. Some might argue military rationales justify excessive nuclear costs. But history teaches that policies are more likely to go awry if reasons are concealed. In the UK—where nuclear realities have been strongly officially denied—the issues are not just about energy, or climate, but democracy.

Andy Stirling is Professor of Science & Technology Policy in the Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex. Philip Johnstone is Research Fellow, SPRU, University of Sussex.

May 7, 2024 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

France’s Macron wants to build 14 new Nuclear reactors by 2050. 6 is more realistic

energy post eu, April 29, 2024 by Jonathan Bruegel

France’s President Macron is talking about a nuclear renaissance, after years of uncertainty over its future. The goal is to build 14 new reactors by 2050. But Jonathan Bruegel at IEEFA says this is unrealistc. France’s nuclear sector has much to recommend it. It produces up to 80% of the country’s total power generation, the highest share of nuclear in the generation mix anywhere in the world, and CO2-free. However, France hasn’t built a nuclear reactor since 1999, and construction delays and budget overruns plague the completion of its latest reactor, Flamanville 3, started in 2007. And with many of the 56 currently operational reactors reaching the end of their 40-year lifetime, decisions must be made whether to shut them down or extend their lifetimes by 10 or 20 years through major refits. Bruegel looks at the fundamentals and estimates that a more realistic goal is to build 6 new reactors by 2050, and to extend the lifetimes of 13 (or a maximum of 20) reactors. That would leave nuclear’s share in France’s 2050 mix at a maximum of 40% and more realistically 30%.

Key findings

  • Given that new nuclear projects have faced significant construction delays and cost overruns, France’s plan to build 14 new reactors by 2050 is unrealistic.
  • Nuclear should continue playing a key role in France’s power sector but not at the expense of renewables growth.
  • French policy has recently shifted from a commitment to reduce nuclear generation to calls for a “renaissance” of the technology.
  • France’s heavy reliance on nuclear has kept its power sector emissions relatively low but left it exposed to the many challenges associated with the technology.

Energy security

………………………… In the last two years, Europe’s imports of Russian piped gas have been largely replaced by liquified natural gas (LNG) from alternative sources. Curtailments and demand response mechanisms have contributed to absorbing the price shock…………………………..

In the case of France, this energy crisis was especially challenging since it coincided with many nuclear reactors being taken offline for maintenance work. In 2022, the country was a net power importer for the first time in more than 40 years. In 2023, as most nuclear reactors went back online, it resumed being a net power exporter. The episode illustrated the risks of France’s exposure to nuclear power.

Nuclear has dominated France’s power mix since the 1980s

……………………………..However, as Chart 1 [on original] shows, France hasn’t built a nuclear reactor since 1999, meaning its EPR expertise hasn’t benefitted its domestic nuclear fleet as much as it could have. Construction of the latest reactor, Flamanville 3, started in 2007. It has yet to be commissioned. So far, it is delayed by 12 years and is almost four times over budget.

With many reactors reaching the end of their 40-year lifetime, decision-makers must choose whether to shut them down or extend their operations by 10 or 20 years through major refitting programmes.

Policy shift sees France plan a “nuclear renaissance”

Nuclear’s role in France’s future power mix has become an increasingly crucial and controversial political debate.

After his election to the presidency in 2012, François Hollande committed to reducing the share of nuclear in France’s power production to 50% by 2035, with an ambitious decommissioning plan. However, not one nuclear unit was decommissioned under his presidency and no legally binding decommissioning dates for plants were set. The only binding commitment was to cap French nuclear capacity to 63GW.


During his first term between 2017 and 2022, President Emmanuel Macron did not engage in any nuclear policy shift, postponing the debate. The Flamanville 1 and 2 nuclear reactors were decommissioned in 2020 because they had exceeded their 40-year lifetime and no agreement had been made with operator EDF for a major refit programme.

Criticisms

During his second term, Macron has called for a “nuclear renaissance” and announced a goal to build 14 new reactors by 2050, implicitly targeting a maintenance of the 63GW of capacity and nuclear’s share in the power generation mix. The announcement was heavily criticised from across the political spectrum, with the main argument being that nuclear would slow the growth of renewables. Concerns have also been raised about the challenges associated with nuclear technology such as safety issues, long construction times, massive capital expenditures (see Chart 2 on original), a levelised cost of electricity higher than renewables and waste management.

Despite its role in reducing carbon emissions, Nuclear must not limit Renewables growth

Nuclear is not considered a renewable technology since uranium is needed, but the debate remains open on whether nuclear is green. 

Although its challenges are well known (e.g., safety, costs, waste management), the French plan to build 14 new nuclear units by 2050 seems at best unrealistic.

Significant construction delays and cost overruns faced by the two latest EPRs, Flamanville 3 in France and Olkiluoto 3 in Finland, are evidence that building an average of one reactor every two years until 2050 is not a feasible goal…………………………………………………. more https://energypost.eu/frances-macron-wants-to-build-14-new-nuclear-reactors-by-2050-6-is-more-realistic/

May 6, 2024 Posted by | France, politics | Leave a comment

NATO using war games to ‘prepare for conflict’ – Moscow

 https://www.rt.com/russia/596996-nato-conflict-prepares-russia/ 5 May 24

The US-led bloc is holding its largest exercises in decades near the Russian border, the Foreign Ministry has pointed out

NATO’s largest exercise since the Cold War are being held near Russia’s border, indicating that the US-led bloc is “seriously preparing” for a potential conflict with Moscow, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.

The Steadfast Defender drills, featuring some 90,000 troops from all 32 NATO member states and 1,100 combat vehicles, started in late January and will end in May.

According to the wargame scenario, “the coalition’s actions against Russia are being practiced using all the instruments, including hybrid and conventional weapons,” Zakharova said in a statement on Saturday.

”We have to admit that NATO is seriously preparing for a ‘potential conflict’ with us,” Zakharova said.

The diplomat was commenting on accusations made by NATO earlier this week that Russia was allegedly carrying out “hybrid activities” on the member countries’ soil, which they insist constitute a threat to their security. These actions include “sabotage, acts of violence, cyber and electronic interference, disinformation campaigns, and other hybrid operations,” the bloc claimed in a statement on Thursday.

Zakharova dismissed the allegations as “disinformation” and an attempt to shift public attention from NATO’s own activities.

The bloc and the leadership of individual member states are “increasing the degree of anti-Russian hysteria in order to justify the unprecedented scale of militarization in Europe,” the official stated.

According to the diplomat, it was NATO that launched “a hybrid war against Russia in all operational environments and in all geographic directions.” In addition, the bloc members are actively involved in the Ukraine conflict. They are providing Kiev not only with financial support, but also with weapons and intelligence data – which are then used “to strike civilians and civilian infrastructure in Russia,” Zakharova added

Back in March, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev said that NATO’s Steadfast Defender 2024 exercises were “increasing tensions and destabilizing the situation in the world” by simulating a military confrontation with Moscow. The official described the bloc as an “important tool” employed by the US to exert pressure and influence on other nations. NATO has come directly to Russia’s western border and is preparing for future conflicts, he stressed.

In recent months, multiple senior officials from NATO member states claimed that Moscow was planning to launch an attack against the military bloc in the coming years.

Russia has repeatedly denied those claims, with President Vladimir Putin saying the country “has no interest … geopolitically, economically or militarily … in waging war against NATO.”

May 6, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The undersea nuclear graveyard now more costly than HS2

Behind the much delayed plan to store the radioactive waste generated over decades

A vast subsea nuclear graveyard planned to hold Britain’s burgeoning piles of radioactive waste is set to become the biggest, longest-lasting and most expensive infrastructure project ever undertaken in the UK… ……………………………..(Subscribers only)  https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/05/66bn-nuclear-graveyard-became-expensive-challenge/

May 6, 2024 Posted by | oceans, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Germany records 50 hours of negative electricity prices for April, largely due to renewables.

Average retail prices fell to €6.24 ($6.70)/kWh on the German electricity spot
market in April, largely due to renewables covering about 70% of the
network load. These low price levels in the electricity market can be
attributed to the high shares of renewables in Germany. According to Rabot
Charge, renewable energy systems covered 70% of the network load in April.

PV Magazine 3rd May 2024

May 6, 2024 Posted by | Germany, renewable | Leave a comment

Why UK Government nuclear quango has ruled out Trawsfynydd from initial mini-nuke rollout

The site in Gwynedd could still be considered later on in the process

Owen Hughes, Business correspondent, 3 MAY 2024

A UK Government nuclear quango has dropped Trawsfynydd from the initial rollout of small modular reactors. Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson had said in 2022 that the UK Government are “looking to build another small modular reactor(SMR) on the site at Trawsfynydd”.

The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and Welsh Government owned Cwmni Egino had been working up plans for a new nuclear station close to the former power station, which stopped generating in 1991 and is in the long process of being decommissioned. The location had also previously been tipped by Rolls Royce SMR as a location for an SMR.

But those hopes have been dealt a blow after Great British Nuclear(GBN) said the site would not be considered in its initial rollout phase. It is understood the size of the site and the volume of cooling water counted against it. They also said it may not be able to deploy as quickly as some other sites.

It has though not been ruled out completely and could play a part in the future. A source explained that the initial rollout was looking at locations that could host four or five SMRs, which Traws does not have capacity for.

But once these larger sites are developed a further rollout would consider smaller sites that could host one or two SMRs, with would put the Gwynedd site back in contention.

On Anglesey, UK Government is buying the Wylfa site in a bid to progress nuclear development on the island after two failed attempts for a Wylfa B. This could be used for four or five SMRs or a single large scale nuclear power station…………………………………

GBN’s plans for its first phase of work for SMRs proposes to make decisions on investments by 2029, with power on the grid by the mid-2030s.  https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/uk-government-nuclear-quango-ruled-29108206

May 6, 2024 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Banned By Germany

Apr 30, 2024 YANIS VAROUFAKIS

Germany recently prohibited a Palestinian Congress from taking place in Berlin, arrested its Jewish supporters, and barred one of its organizers, Greece’s former finance minister, from entering the country. But the turn to repression is powerful evidence that the country’s pro-Israel political consensus is breaking down.

ATHENS – Three weeks ago, I was banned from entering Germany. When I asked the German authorities who decided this, when, and under what rationale, I received a formal reply that, for reasons of national security, my questions would receive no formal reply. Suddenly, my mind raced back to another era when my ten-year-old self thought of Germany as a refuge from authoritarianism.

During Greece’s fascist dictatorship, listening to foreign radio broadcasts was banned. So, every evening, at around nine, my parents would huddle under a red blanket with a short-wave wireless, straining to hear Deutsche Welle’s dedicated Greek broadcast. My boyish imagination was propelled to a mythical place called Germany – a place, my parents told me, that was “the democrats’ friend.”

Years later, in 2015, the German media presented me as Germany’s foe. I was aghast; nothing could be further from the truth. As Greece’s finance minister, I opposed the German government’s monomaniacal insistence on harsh universal austerity, not merely because I thought it would be catastrophic for most Greeks, but also because I thought it would be detrimental to most Germans’ long-term interests.

The specter of deindustrialization that today casts a depressing shadow across Germany is consistent with my prognosis.

In 2016, when choosing a European capital to launch DiEM25, the pan-European political movement that I helped to found, I chose Berlin. At Berlin’s Volksbühne Theatre, I explained the reason: “Nothing good can happen in Europe if it does not begin in Berlin.” To reinforce the point, in the 2019 European Parliament elections I chose symbolically to be DiEM25’s candidate not in Greece (where I could win easily) but in Germany.

Given my lengthy relationship with the land of Goethe, Hegel, and Brecht, the German center-left government’s decision to ban me is more bewildering than even my nearest and dearest can imagine. I shall leave to my lawyers the legality of being denied the right to know the rationale behind the ban, and I will set aside the threat to my safety from the reckless insinuation that I am, somehow, a threat to Germany’s national security. Nor will I delve into what my ban means for a European Union where free movement and association are singular virtues. Instead, I want to focus on the ban’s deeper significance.

The trigger for banning me was a Palestinian Congress co-organized by DiEM25’s German party (MERA25), various Palestinian support groups and, crucially, the German organization Jewish Voice for a Just Peace. But the writing had been on the wall well before that.

Last November, Iris Hefets, a friend and member of the aforementioned Jewish organization, staged a one-woman protest in Berlin. Walking alone, in silence, she held a placard on which she had written: “As an Israeli and as a Jew, stop the genocide in Gaza.” Astonishingly, she was arrested for anti-Semitism. Soon after, the bank account of her organization was frozen – by officials unable to grasp the irony, indeed the horror, of the German state seizing Jewish assets and arresting peaceful Jews in Berlin.

In the run-up to our Palestinian Congress, a coalition of political parties representing almost the entire German political spectrum (including two leaders of my former comrades in the Left party) took the extraordinary step of creating a dedicated website for denouncing us. Their charges?

First, they branded us as “terrorism trivializers” vis-à-vis Hamas’s October 7 attacks in Israel. It was not enough for them that we had condemned as war crimes all acts of violence against civilians (regardless of the identity of perpetrator or victim). They wanted us to condemn resistance to what even Tamir Pardo, the former Mossad director, described as an apartheid system designed to push Palestinians either into exile or into permanent servitude.

Second, they claimed that we were “not interested in talking about possibilities for peaceful coexistence in the Middle East against the background of the war in Gaza.” Seriously? All participants in our Congress are committed to equal political rights for Jews and Palestinians – and many of us, taking our cue from the late Edward Said, support a single federal state as the solution to the conflict.

Dismissing their groundless accusations, let me home in on the central question: How could almost the entire German political class embrace this denunciation, which prepared the ground for the subsequent police action? How could they remain silent as the police arrested Udi Raz (another Jewish comrade), prohibited our conference and, yes, banned me from entering Germany – even from connecting via video link to any event in the country?

Their most likely answer is the German state’s official semi-rationale, or Staatsräson: the protection of Jewish lives and Israel’s security. But the German state’s recent behavior is not at all about protecting Jews (especially my friends Iris and Udi) or Israel. The purpose is to defend Israel’s right to commit any war crime its leaders choose in the process of enforcing an agenda whose goal is to render impossible the two-state solution that the German government claims to favor.

If I am right, something else is behind the current political consensus in Germany. My hypothesis is that Germany’s political class has a penchant for national catechisms that unite its members behind a common will: net exports as Germany’s strength; China as German industry’s playground; Russia as its source of cheap energy; and Zionism as proof that it has turned a page, morally.

Once such a catechism is established, debating it rationally becomes next to impossible. Moreover, the fear of being denounced for abandoning it motivates the concerted denunciation of any apostate who questions it.

A silver lining here is that young Germans, seeing the bodies piling up in Gaza, are not afraid that they will be denounced if they challenge a catechism that has jeopardized German democracy, the rule of law, and basic common sense. This is why, despite the ban, I am not giving up on Germany.

May 6, 2024 Posted by | Germany, politics | Leave a comment

A Closer Look at Two Operational Small Modular Reactor Designs

There are literally dozens of small modular reactor (SMR) and microreactor designs being developed by different companies around the world, and some of the work has been going on for decades. Yet, only two designs have actually been built and put into commercial operation. POWER takes a closer look at both of them.

Power, by Aaron Larson 1 May 24

Many nuclear power supporters have long thought small modular reactors (SMRs) would revolutionize the industry. Advocates expect SMRs to shorten construction schedules and bring costs down through modularization and factory construction. They often cite numerous other benefits that make SMRs seem like no-brainers, and yet, only two SMR designs have ever been built and placed in commercial operation.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) publishes booklets biennially on the status of SMR technology. In the IAEA’s most recent booklet, it notes 25 land-based water-cooled SMRs and another eight marine-based water-cooled designs are under development globally. It also lists 17 high-temperature gas-cooled SMRs, eight liquid-metal-cooled fast-neutron-spectrum SMRs, 13 molten-salt SMRs, and 12 microreactors. If you do the math, that’s 83 SMR designs under development, but only the KLT-40S and HTR-PM are actually operational.

KLT-40S

The KLT-40S is a pressurized water reactor (PWR) that was developed in Russia. It is an advanced version of the KLT-40 reactor, which has been used in nuclear-powered icebreakers. The first KLT-40S units, and, to date, the only two of these units to enter commercial operation, were deployed in the Akademik Lomonosov—the world’s first purpose-built floating nuclear power plant (FNPP, Figure 1 on original).

Main Design Features.………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Deployment Details.…………………………….

Construction and testing of the FPU was completed in 2017 at the Baltic shipyard. In May 2018, the vessel was towed 4,000 kilometers (km), around Finland and Sweden, to Murmansk, completing the first leg of its journey to Pevek. Fuel loading was completed in Murmansk in October 2018. First criticality was achieved in November 2018, then in August 2019, the vessel embarked on the second leg of its journey—a distance of 4,700 km—towed by two tugboats to the Arctic port town of Pevek, where it was connected to the grid on Dec. 19, 2019. Akademik Lomonosov was fully commissioned on May 22, 2020, and it currently provides heat to the town of Pevek and supplies electricity to the regional Chaun-Bilibino power system.

HTR-PM

On Dec. 6, 2023, China National Nuclear Corp. announced it had commenced commercial operation of the high-temperature gas-cooled modular pebble bed (HTR-PM) reactor demonstrator. The HTR-PM project was constructed at a site in Rongcheng, Shandong Province, roughly midway between Beijing and Shanghai in eastern China…………………………………

Main Design Features.…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Deployment Details.……………………………………………………………………. The civil work for the nuclear island buildings was completed in 2016 with the first of two reactor pressure vessels installed in March that year. The fuel plant reached its expected production capacity in 2017. Startup commissioning and testing of the primary circuit were finished by the end of 2020. The HTR-PM achieved first criticality in September 2021, and was ultimately grid connected on Dec. 20, 2021.

Spotty Results at Best

While it is laudable that these SMRs—the KLT-40S and HTR-PM—have been placed in commercial operation, their performance since entering service has come under fire. In The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2023 (WNISR), a Mycle Schneider Consulting Project, co-funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety, and Consumer Protection, it says both designs have operated at low capacity factors recently.

Concerning the Chinese HTR-PM, the WNISR says, “Between January and December 2022, the reactors operated for only 27 hours out of a possible maximum of 8,760 hours. In the subsequent three months, they seem to have operated at a load factor of around 10 percent.” The Russian units’ performance has been nearly as dismal. “The operating records of the two KLT-40S reactors have been quite poor. According to the IAEA’s PRIS [Power Reactor Information System] database, the two reactors had load factors of just 26.4 and 30.5 percent respectively in 2022, and lifetime load factors of just 34 and 22.4 percent. The reasons for the mediocre power-generation performance remain unclear,” the report says.

Meanwhile, the promises of shortened timelines and lower costs were not borne out by these projects. “The experience so far in constructing these two SMRs as well as estimates for reactor designs like NuScale’s SMR show that these designs are also subject to the historical pattern of cost escalations and time overruns. Those cost escalations do make it even less likely that SMRs will become commercialized, as the collapse of the Carbon Free Power Project involving NuScale reactors in the United States illustrated,” the WNISR says………….. https://www.powermag.com/a-closer-look-at-two-operational-small-modular-reactor-designs/

May 4, 2024 Posted by | China, Russia, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

NATO state rejects €100 billion Ukraine war chest ‘madness’

 https://www.rt.com/news/596896-hungary-nato-ukraine-madness/ 02 May 2024

Budapest is opposing a potential €100-billion ($107 billion), five-year NATO plan to fund Ukraine in its conflict with Russia,Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. The draft plan on the military aid fund was presented to member states of the US-led bloc by Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg earlier this week, Szijjarto revealed.

The minister made the remarks on Thursday to Hungarian broadcaster M1 before heading for a ministerial meeting of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in Paris. Szijjarto said:

“On Tuesday, the NATO member states received the secretary-general’s proposal to raise 100 billion that NATO plans to spend on the war. Since the money is to be collected over five years, this means NATO expects the hostilities to continue for this period.”

Budapest will oppose the initiative and is not planning to participate in arming Kiev or training its soldiers, Szijjarto stressed. The draft plan was presented to the bloc’s member states in its “first reading” and is still a subject to negotiations, the senior diplomat noted.

“In the coming weeks during negotiations we will fight for Hungary’s right to stay away from this madness, from collecting these 100 billion and siphoning them out of Europe.”

Budapest prioritizes the security of its own people before anything else and will do its best to “stay out of war,” Szijjarto explained, adding Hungary’s opinion remains that the conflict can only be resolved through negotiations. Nonetheless, Budapest acknowledges mounting global security issues and wants to be ready to face them, he said.

Szijjarto urged:

“We cannot ignore the threat of a new world war and the preparations for a nuclear war. This madness here in Europe must be stopped.”

Hungary has consistently expressed its opposition to the ever-growing involvement of the US-led NATO bloc – and of the EU – in the Ukrainian conflict, refusing to send arms to prop up Kiev or to train its troops, and forbidding use of its territory to funnel such shipments from third countries.

Budapest has also publicly spoken out against the potential accession of Ukraine into NATO, which has long been one of the key goals of Ukrainian leadership.

May 4, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Fears raised over Wales accident risk involving aircraft carrying nuclear materials

 https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/fears-raised-over-wales-accident-risk-involving-aircraft-carrying-nuclear-materials/ 30 Apr 24,

An air crash involving an RAF aircraft carrying US nuclear materials over South Wales may be the stuff of nightmares, but the Chair of the Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities has just written to the First Minister of Wales asking him to contemplate just that possibility.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Nukewatch have just published a disturbing briefing titled ‘Special nuclear flights between the UK and US: the dangers involved’. The briefing references the transport of nuclear materials made by RAF C-17 Globemaster flying between RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and airbases in the United States. Around ten such round-trips are made every year to transport nuclear materials utilised for the maintenance of Britain’s nuclear arsenal.

The report says of the route taken by these flights: ‘Aircraft fly from Brize Norton out into the Atlantic, overflying the Cotswolds and then the northern edges of Bristol and Cardiff to reach the Bristol Channel, flying south of Ireland to cross the Atlantic. A variation of this route takes the plane further to the north where it overflies Gloucestershire and the South Wales valleys, heading out to sea over Swansea and the Gower, and, again, South of Ireland.’

Although the C-17 Globemasters involved in these flights are four-engine aircraft, and are subject to an enhanced maintenance regime, so catastrophic mechanical failure is less likely, Welsh Forum Chair Councillor Sue Lent wants Welsh emergency planning authorities to properly consider the likely impact of any accident involving nuclear materials. Cllr Lent serves on Cardiff City Council, one of the municipalities flown over, and one of several South Wales local authorities who are members of the NFLAs.

The First Minister acts as Chair of the Wales Resilience Forum. The Forum ‘supports good communication and improves emergency planning across agencies and services’ acting as a coordinating body for local resilience forums across Wales. These ‘bring together all responder organisations that have a duty to co-operate under the Civil Contingencies Act. The groups also include other organisations who would respond to an emergency. Together, they ensure they prepare for emergencies by working in a coordinated and effective way.’[i]

The Minister of Defence hosts annual Astral Bend exercises ‘to practice and test the emergency response to an accident involving an RAF aircraft transporting special nuclear materials’, but investigative reporter Rob Edwards uncovered evidence that such an exercise held in February 2011 at the Caerwent military base in South Wales identified several failures in the actions of first responders which would have led to ‘“avoidable deaths” in a real-life situation’. The MoD has refused to release details of recent exercises held after 2012 in response to Freedom of Information requests; nonetheless the NFLA Secretary has just submitted one.

Councillor Lent asks First Minister Gething to ‘seek a reassurance from the MoD / RAF that such flights will be diverted out to sea, well away from our South Wales municipalities, and revisit emergency planning arrangements should an accident involving these special nuclear materials occur’ and suggests that as the last exercise conducted at Caerwent appears to be that held in 2011 a follow-up exercise to test the preparedness of Welsh emergency service agencies is ‘long overdue.’

May 3, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Industrial action by nuclear submarine workforce hits Rolls Royce

GMB members working on the company’s nuclear submarine programme have
begun industrial action. The action comes after 90 per cent of GMB members
at the company supported action if company bosses failed to present a pay
rise acceptable to union members. Known as ‘work to rule’, the
industrial action will see GMB members applying strict limits to working
outside of pre-agreed processes. Rolls-Royce is a world leader in the field
of submarine technology, as well as being the supplier to Britain’s
domestic nuclear submarine fleet.

 UK Defence Journal 30th April 2024

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/industrial-action-by-nuclear-sub-workforce-hits-rolls-royce

May 3, 2024 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities to join new “Rock Solid2” art exhibition 

The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities Secretary will be joining Cumbrian artists and activists at the launch of a new art exhibition at Kendal Museum next month.

Rock Solid 2 has been organised by co-ordinator and artist Marianne Birkby. Marianne supports local campaign groups Radiation Free Lakeland / Lakes against the Nuclear Dump in opposing plans to impose a Geological Disposal Facility upon Cumbria. This could be located by the coast in Mid- or South-Copeland to receive Britain’s legacy and future most toxic radioactive waste, which would be transferred from the Sellafield nuclear complex and buried in tunnels beneath the Irish Sea.

Marianne described the exhibition as “a must see for all those who love Cumbria.” She explained that it was “a unique celebration of Lakeland’s jewel-like geology, landscape, flora, and fauna seen through the lens of a ‘quixotic’ plan to bury atomic wastes deep under the Cumbrian coast and the sea. Altogether 20 artists have produced artworks including comic books, installations, sculpture, and multi-media in a vibrant and thought-provoking exhibition.”.

Winner of the John Moore’s Painting Prize, guest artist Martin Greenland will be joined by internationally renowned mountain painter Julian Cooper, record producer Russell Mills, Lake Artist Society award winners Kate Bentley and Andrea Pentecost, Steve Wallis, and Irene Rogan amongst others. Artists have spent time looking at the Museum’s natural history collection for inspiration.

The exhibition will open in the People’s Gallery on 9th May, but a special official launch will be held on Friday 10th May from 6pm to 8pm.

A follow-up talk, titled ‘Atomic Wastes Under Cumbria’, will be held on the following day on Saturday 11th May in The Venue, which is accessed through the Museum.

Kendal Museum can be found on Station Road, Kendal, LA9 6BT. It is a short distance from the railway station.

Everyone is welcome to both events, which are FREE, but attendees are asked to contact the Museum to book a place at the official launch and/or the meeting by email to info@kendalmuseum.org.uk or by telephone on 01539 815597.

NFLA Secretary Richard Outram has been asked to join radiation expert Dr Ian Fairlie in speaking at the official launch and at the meeting.

Following the events, the exhibition will be open to the public on Thursdays, Fridays, or Saturdays from 9.30am to 4.30pm until 29 June. There is also a related art trail to explore around the galleries and shops of Kendal.

Ends//… For more information please contact the NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email at richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk

May 3, 2024 Posted by | culture and arts, UK | Leave a comment

France Increases State Funding for Advanced Nuclear R&D Project

by Jov Onsat, Rigzone Staff, Thursday, May 02, 2024

The French government has received clearance from the European Commission to provide Electricité de France (EDF) a further EUR 300 million ($321.6 million) for the front-end design phase of a project to develop small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs).

The project by Nuward, the nuclear energy-focused subsidiary of state-owned EDF, aims to come up with a design that has a power output of up to 300 megawatts electric.

The front-end design is the third phase of the five-phase project. The Commission previously approved EUR 50 million ($53.6 million) in French state aid for the second phase, which focused on gathering new knowledge for SMR design and construction.

Under the measure, the aid will take the form of a direct grant of up to EUR 300 million that will cover the R&D [research and development] project until early 2027”, the Commission said in a statement announcing clearance for the new funding from European Union competition regulations. “The measure will support Nuward in sizing the modules and components of the SMRs and validating their integration in the SMRs by means of numerical simulators and laboratory tests.

“Nuward will also carry out industrialization studies relating to the modular design and mass production of SMRs. Finally, the measure will also support Nuward in the preparation of the required safety demonstrations for the approval of the project by the national nuclear safety authorities”.

The Commission recently launched an alliance to accelerate the development of SMRs, following moves by the United Kingdom and United States to commercially scale up the advanced nuclear generation technology.

The public-private coalition aims to come up with a working model by the 2030s. “The Alliance targets a wide range of SMR stakeholders including vendors, utilities, specialized nuclear companies, financial institutions, research organizations, training centers and civil society organizations”, the Commission said in a press release February 9 announcing the initiative…………………..

Earlier the UK government announced an investment of GBP 300 million ($376 million) for the domestic production of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), challenging Russia’s status as the only commercial manufacturer of the fuel for SMRs. The UK previously funded a program by Rolls-Royce PLCs to design an SMR model, which is currently awaiting approval for deployment in Poland, as announced by the company last week—though the product is still undergoing the regulatory design assessment in the UK.

The UK will become the first country in Europe to launch a high-tech HALEU nuclear fuel program, strengthening supply for new nuclear projects and driving Putin further out of global energy markets”, the UK Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) said in a news release January 7 announcing the HALEU funding.

The DESNZ said GBP 10 million ($12.5 million) has also been allotted to develop sites and promote skills development for the production of other “advanced nuclear fuels”.

The International Atomic Energy Agency says HALEU is only produced in the U.S. and Russia but only the latter makes the fuel at a commercial scale. SMRs need HALEU, which contains five to 20 percent of uranium-235, beyond the five percent level that fuels most of today’s nuclear power plants, according to the United Nations nuclear watchdog.

The UK move was followed by an announcement by the US Department of Energy (DOE) offering contracts worth up to $500 million in total for HALEU production, besides funding offers for SMR design development. “Currently, HALEU is not commercially available from U.S.-based suppliers, and boosting domestic supply could spur the development and deployment of advanced reactors in the United States”, the DOE noted in a media statement January 9 announcing the funding offer.

Last year the U.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission issued the country’s first certification for an SMR design, that of NuScale Power Corp.  https://www.rigzone.com/news/france_increases_state_funding_for_advanced_nuclear_rd_project-02-may-2024-176607-article/

May 2, 2024 Posted by | France, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Rolls-Royce scales back plans to build nuclear factories in UK

Rolls-Royce has scaled back plans to build two new factories for its small modular reactor (SMR) programme in the UK, following delays to a government design competition.

The FTSE 100 company had originally proposed one factory to make heavy pressure vessels for its SMRs and another to make the building blocks of the reactors. 

It had drawn up a final shortlist of locations for the pressure vessels factory, including the International Advanced Manufacturing Park on the outskirts of Sunderland, Teesworks in Redcar and the Gateway industrial park in Deeside, Wales.

But on Friday Rolls confirmed it no longer intends to proceed with that plan because there is no longer time to build the factory and make the first pressure vessels for the early 2030s, when it hopes to complete its first SMRs.

It is still proceeding with work to build the second factory, however.

The company had been waiting for the outcome of an ongoing SMR design competition in the UK – first announced by the Government in 2015 – before it made a decision on the pressure vessel plant. 

But that competition has been repeatedly delayed, with the arms length body Great British Nuclear only formally created last summer and winners not due to be announced until this June at the earliest. 

Instead the engineering giant will now buy its heavy pressure vessels from a third party supplier.

The large, metal components sit at the heart of nuclear reactors and must be able to withstand extremely high temperatures and pressures. They are only made by a select group of companies, partly due to the need for specialist welding techniques.

Among their number is now Sheffield Forgemasters, which was nationalised by the Ministry of Defence in 2021.

Earlier this month, Sheffield became the sole UK company to gain the qualifications needed to make SMR reactor vessel components. 

Despite having shelved its plans for a heavy pressure vessel factory, Rolls is still pressing ahead with plans to build its second factory, which will build the modular units that make up its SMRs. 

It is understood that sites shortlisted for the pressure vessel factory will also be contenders for the second plant but no decisions have been made.

On Friday, a spokesman for Rolls-Royce SMR confirmed the company had now “prioritised work on our modules assembly and test facility”, adding: “Our efforts are focused on identifying the best site to support our deployment at pace.”

The company has also not ruled out reviving its plan for a heavy pressure vessel factory at some point in the future, so long as it manages to build up a healthy pipeline of orders. 

A Government spokesman said: “Our world leading SMR competition aims to be the fastest of its kind, helping secure billions in investment for the UK, meaning cleaner, cheaper and more secure energy in the long-term.”

May 2, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Rolls-Royce scales back plans to build nuclear factories in UK

Curtailing comes after repeated delays to an ongoing government design competition

Rolls-Royce has scaled back plans to build two new factories for its small
modular reactor (SMR) programme in the UK, following delays to a government
design competition. The FTSE 100 company had originally proposed one
factory to make heavy pressure vessels for its SMRs and another to make the
building blocks of the reactors.

It had drawn up a final shortlist of
locations for the pressure vessels factory, including the International
Advanced Manufacturing Park on the outskirts of Sunderland, Teesworks in
Redcar and the Gateway industrial park in Deeside, Wales.

But on Friday Rolls confirmed it no longer intends to proceed with that plan because
there is no longer time to build the factory and make the first pressure
vessels for the early 2030s, when it hopes to complete its first SMRs.

It is still proceeding with work to build the second factory, however. The
company had been waiting for the outcome of an ongoing SMR design
competition in the UK – first announced by the Government in 2015 –
before it made a decision on the pressure vessel plant.

But that competition has been repeatedly delayed, with the arms-length body Great
British Nuclear only formally created last summer and winners not due to be
announced until this June at the earliest. Instead the engineering giant
will now buy its heavy pressure vessels from a third party supplier. The
large, metal components sit at the heart of nuclear reactors and must be
able to withstand extremely high temperatures and pressures. They are only
made by a select group of companies, partly due to the need for specialist
welding techniques.

Rolls is still pressing ahead with plans to build its
second factory, which will build the modular units that make up its SMRs.
It is understood that sites shortlisted for the pressure vessel factory
will also be contenders for the second plant but no decisions have been
made.

 Telegraph 27th April 2024

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/04/27/rolls-royce-plans-build-smr-water-vessel-factory-uk

May 1, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »