New nuclear for Scotland- would be a tragic mistake?
SafeEnergy E Journal No.92. December 21, New Nuclear in Scotland Leader of the Scottish Labour Party, Anas Sarwar, says nuclear power should be part of the mix on energy. He has also called for a statutory “just transition commission” to be established to help workers move out of the oil and gas industry. He said: “I think we have to be honest about future opportunities and I think nuclear power has to be part of the mix. “I’m not saying nuclear power has to be the priority, or the lead. But it has to be part of the mix to have a diverse energy supply.” Sarwar insisted nuclear power could mean lower fuel bills for consumers at a time of rising inflation.
In September Sarwar announced plans for a Scottish Energy Transition Commission to outline how Scotland can protect and create highly skilled jobs in the transition to a net-zero economy. The commission will be chaired by pro-nuclear former Labour Energy Minister Brian Wilson. It will support the development of Scottish Labour energy policy and advise on how the transition to netzero can deliver for the working people of Scotland. It will also look at the failures of the current energy market, which has led to spiking prices this winter, the role of public energy companies and Scotland’s energy mix. (2)
The Bella Caledonia website described Wilson as “a devout nuclear enthusiast”. Sarwar told the BBC that “I think we should consider potential new (nuclear power) plants” (3) and certainly with a nuclear lobbyist chairing this is where they’ll end up. Journalist Dominic Hinde points out: “This is a little odd in that Scotland already meets almost a hundred per cent of its electricity needs from renewables and is set to surpass this. Most emissions now come from heating, agriculture and transport.” (4)
Dr Richard Dixon, Director of Friends of the Earth Scotland, called Scottish Labour’s drift towards nuclear power “a tragic mistake”. Nuclear is slow to build, eye-wateringly expensive and dangerous. There is still no agreed solution for nuclear waste, which will need monitoring for many thousands of years. It is neither a solution to short-term energy needs nor to the climate crisis.
Dixon said the Scottish Energy Transition Commission is Scottish Labour’s plan to keep the pressure up on the Scottish government’s official Just Transition Commission, and should have been welcome, but giving it to the former ‘Minister for Hunterston’ devalues it. Anas Sarwar was quoted saying he supports a “diverse energy supply”, which is standard union code for more nuclear – and thinks “nuclear is a key part of that and it’s something that I think we should fundamentally explore”. For many years the Scottish Conservative manifesto for every election said we should have two new nuclear power stations in Scotland. It became a running joke because they knew it was never going to happen and they quietly dropped any mention of nuclear a couple of elections ago. The tragedy of Labour finding a new enthusiasm for the ultimate unsustainable form of energy is that it was a Labour First Minister who put a stop to the nuclear industry’s ambitions in Scotland. Jack McConnell, despite massive pressure from Tony Blair’s government, said in 2005 that Scotland would use planning powers to block any proposals for new reactors in Scotland unless there was an answer to the question of permanent storage of radioactive waste, something that is no closer today than it was then. Scottish Labour’s drift into being pro-nuclear will please no-one but the GMB union and Brian Wilson. It is a betrayal of one of their greatest achievements in government in Scotland. (5)
Meanwhile, North Ayrshire Conservative councillor Tom Marshall has called for a new state-of-theart ‘mini’ nuclear reactor to be built at Hunterston. (6)
According to a Panelbase survey for The Times 37% of Scots asked about the idea of building nuclear power stations in Scotland as fossil-fuel use is cut back expressed support, while only 32% were opposed. When asked if they supported nuclear power to replace energy currently produced by fossil fuels, 57% of respondents felt it was probably or definitely necessary while 26% indicated it was not or probably not necessary. A further 17% were undecided. Liam Kerr, net-zero and energy spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, called on the SNP to abandon its opposition to nuclear energy. (7)
Others joining a pro-nuclear clamour include Magnus Linklater who complains that “Without Torness, in a wind-free summer like this year’s, Scotland will have to rely on oil and gas courtesy of Vladimir Putin, imports from Norway or — irony of ironies — nuclear power from France.” (8)
And Lord Bird, co-founder of The Big Issue, has somehow got the misconceived idea that nuclear power can help to solve fuel poverty. Brian Wilson, the former UK energy minister, has supported his call. (9)
Unsurprisingly, the GMB union is also demanding the Scottish Government thinks again on nuclear power. (10)
See 1 page briefing on why nuclear power isn’t a solution to climate change here: https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wpcontent/uploads/2021/11/Nuclear_no_solution_to_Climate-October-2021.pdfhttps://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/SafeEnergy_No92.pdf
UK’s Ministry of Defence makes unprecedented attempt to dismantle dead nuclear submarines
SafeEnergy E Journal No.92. December 21 , Submarine Dismantling The UK’s Submarine Dismantling Project hopes to dismantle 27 of the UK’s de-fuelled, nuclearpowered submarines after they have left service with the Royal Navy.
A demonstrator submarine is being used to define and refine the dismantling process. At Rosyth, the removal of low-level radioactive waste from the first two submarines, Swiftsure and Resolution, has been successfully and safely completed. As the unique approach is developed, work continues with the removal of low-level radioactive waste from a third submarine, Revenge. A fully developed process for steady state submarine dismantling should be ready by 2026. As the demonstrator programme progresses, the outcomes will provide more certainty in the future costs to dismantle the Devonport-based submarines. It is not MoD policy to pre-announce the funding of its projects for reasons of protecting commercial interests.”
REVENGE, entered the dry dock in Rosyth in late March 2020 to commence its LLW removal. The intent is to remove all LLW including large components such as steam generators and pressurisers. No nation has yet attempted this complex and challenging undertaking, so the MoD is currently putting in place the techniques necessary to remove all LLW for the first time to comply with safety and sustainability standards. https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/SafeEnergy_No92.pdf
Belene nuclear plant: Bulgarian far-right leader threatens to send opponents to a labour camp
Belene nuclear plant: Bulgarian far-right leader threatens to send opponents to a labour camp, By Krassen Nikolov | EURACTIV.bg 26 Nov 21,
Kostadin Kostadinov, leader of the pro-Russian far-right party ‘Vazrazhdane’ (Revival), started his first term as an MP by threatening to deport all those who oppose the Belene nuclear power plant to the town’s communist-era forced labour camp.
The Belene NPP is an unfinished project that dates back to the 1980s. Bulgaria has invested €600 million in it. 26 Nov 2021 ……..
Vazrazhdane’ won just under 5% in the parliamentary elections due to its consistent policy of disparaging the pandemic, resistance to COVID vaccines and green certificates. Now the party is beginning to expand on the energy issue. Vazrazhdane has 13 out of 240 MPs in the new parliament…….
Belene NPP is the last remaining project of the so-called Russian Grand Slam in Bulgaria, which was agreed between the Presidents of Bulgaria and Russia Georgi Parvanov and Vladimir Putin. The others were the South Stream gas pipeline and the Burgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline. https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/belene-nuclear-plant/
Bellona signs open letter to prevent nuclear energy and fossil gas from being labelled as green
(Signed by 129 reputable European and international organisations)
Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal. Olaf ScholzFederal Minister of Finance
and Vice Chancellor
11016 Berlin
Germany
Dear Federal Minister,
We are extremely concerned by the announcement of the European Commission’s President, Ursula von der Leyen, to likely label both nuclear energy and fossil gas as sustainable in the context of the EU’s taxonomy. According to media coverage, it was the absence of a strong German voice against nuclear in the European Council on 21/22 October that directly contributed to this decision. In your role as current finance minister and future Chancellor, we call on you to swiftly and decisively confirm the German veto against labelling nuclear as a sustainable form of energy and highlight that the Commission’s attempt to shape this discussion during the sensitive time of a new government being formed in Germany is not acceptable.
The EU taxonomy regulation is meant to provide guidelines for the necessary future-oriented investments for Europe’s economic transition. Nuclear energy, however, is unsustainable due to severe safety risks, environmental pollution and the unsolved waste problem. Fossil gas emits large quantities of climate-damaging greenhouse gases, especially methane, along its extraction and transport chain. Granting nuclear and fossil gas the label of sustainability would undermine the EU’s climate targets, divert much-needed investments in the green transition and jeopardize the credibility of the entire European Green Deal.
Dear Federal Minister, Germany has embarked upon a clear path to phase out nuclear power by the end of next year. NGOs from across Europe count on you to take an equally clear stance against nuclear energy but also fossil gas at the European level. more https://bellona.org/news/climate-change/2021-11-bellona-signs-open-letter-to-take-action-to-prevent-nuclear-energy-and-fossil-gas-from-being-labelled-as-green
UK government tries to save its nuclear skin by turning to dubious Regulated Asset Base funding
At a time of rising energy bills in the UK, it certainly seems risky of the government to commit to increasing them further and opening themselves up to a downside risk that could prove very costly.
The National Infrastructure Commission, a body designed to give impartial advice to the government, said in March 2020 that a “renewable-based system looks like a safer bet” and a “substantially cheaper” option than the construction of multiple new nuclear power plants.
The UK’s nuclear plan is a financial, environmental and political risk, Investment Monitor, Jon Whiteaker , 16 Nov 21,” …………..The problem with financing nuclear power
…… Hinkley Point C has been a bit of a nightmare for the UK government. It is already seven years behind schedule, has controversial Chinese investors that the government is understood to be trying to get rid of, and is widely agreed to be far too expensive.
It was financed under the contracts for difference (CfD) model used for offshore wind. This guarantees a ‘strike price’ for the power plant owner, allowing them to raise capital for construction by having certainty of revenues.
Using the same funding model as offshore wind has, however, allowed for simple comparisons of the costs of the two power types. While the latest round of offshore wind projects saw strike prices of about £40 per megawatt-hour (MWh) over a 15-year contract, the owners of Hinkley are guaranteed at least £89.5/MWh over 35 years.
The reasons the Hinkley strike price is so much higher is because the capital costs are much higher, but also because the risks involved in developing them are much greater.
At least Hinkley Point C is being built. A number of planned projects, including the Moorside power station in West Cumbria and Wylfa Newydd plant on Anglesey, have been cancelled or shelved in recent years.
With the need to develop the UK’s next generation of nuclear plants increasingly urgent, the government has turned to the RAB model to save its skin.
UK government turns to the RAB model
The RAB model is known mostly for its successful use on the Thames Tideway Tunnel (TTT), the new super sewer in London that is helping to clean up the Thames River. The government says that like that project, nuclear power plants are complex, have high capital costs and long operating lives.
The RAB model allows developers of infrastructure to earn immediate revenues by adding charges to consumers’ utility bills during the construction. Bill payers will have to buy before they try their lovely new nuclear power.
This in theory widens the pool of potential investors, making the government less beholden to a small group of companies who typically invest in and build nuclear plants, lowering the cost of financing, and ultimately saving money for bill payers.
The government predicts that using the RAB model to build a new nuclear plant will save energy bill payers £10 per year compared with the CfD model.
Legislation allowing the introduction of the RAB model for new nuclear was introduced in October 2021 and is moving through the House of Commons. The government has pledged to reach a final investment decision on at least one new nuclear plant by the end of this parliament in 2024.
It is hoped by government that the previously stalled 3.2GW Sizewell C, owned by EDF Energy, will be the first nuclear project to use the RAB model.https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/business-activities/energy/uk-nuclear-rab-energy-renewable
The problems with RAB for nuclear
While this all sounds like a perfect panacea for the government’s problems, there are several downsides to using the RAB model.
The depth of investor interest in new nuclear power stations is yet unknown. As the UK government should be painfully aware, having just hosted COP26, the conversation about what does and does not meet different investors ESG standards is a live one. Whether nuclear power is seen as a sustainable investment is debatable.
Trying to get any of the investors in TTT to make clear their stance on nuclear power is not easy, and I have tried. For the government to achieve its goals, institutional investors, like those that supported TTT, should want to invest in new nuclear too.
Asset manager Aviva Investors, a major investor in UK infrastructure, has called on the government to present a robust ESG case for new nuclear, which it says is lacking at present.
Many investors will be concerned over whether nuclear meets the criteria of an environmentally sustainable activity. Institutional investors are incredibly cautious by nature and the shadow cast by the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011 is still long.
All energy suppliers will have to contribute to the costs of RAB nuclear plants, whether they want to or not, before passing those costs on to bill payers. That seems a retrograde step for an energy market that has been diversifying to provide customers with ‘green only’ options in recent years. Whether you have ethical objections to nuclear power or not, you will have to use a supplier that helps fund that technology.
Hinkley Point C is seven years behind schedule. You would be brave to bet against any delays to the first RAB model nuclear plant too.
The government says that there would be a cap on how much extra investors could charge consumers but that this cap could be increased by the government if deemed necessary. If the costs became excessive, the government would have the option of covering the costs itself, although this is ultimately taxpayer money too.
At a time of rising energy bills in the UK, it certainly seems risky of the government to commit to increasing them further and opening themselves up to a downside risk that could prove very costly. Perhaps the government thinks these are all costs worth shouldering to ensure its net-zero plans stay on track.
The National Infrastructure Commission, a body designed to give impartial advice to the government, said in March 2020 that a “renewable-based system looks like a safer bet” and a “substantially cheaper” option than the construction of multiple new nuclear power plants.
That sounds like advice worth considering again. https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/business-activities/energy/uk-nuclear-rab-energy-renewable
New German government aims for coal exit, and 80 pct renewables, by 2030
New deal between SDP, Greens and pro-business party calls for coal exit by 2030, and an 80 per cent share for renewables. The post New German government aims for coal exit, and 80 pct renewables, by 2030 appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Soren Amelung and Benjamin Wehrmann 25 November 2021 https://reneweconomy.com.au/new-german-government-aims-for-coal-exit-and-80-pct-renewables-by-2030/ Germany’s prospective new government has agreed to speed up the country’s coal exit and accelerate the rollout of renewable power to get the country on track for climate neutrality.
“We will align our climate, energy and economic policies nationally, in Europe and internationally with the 1.5 degree path and activate the potential at all levels of government,” states the coalition agreement between Social Democrats (SPD), Greens, and pro-business Free Democrats.
“With ambition and perseverance, we are making the country a pioneer in climate protection,” likely future chancellor Olaf Scholz, a Social Democrat, said during the presentation of the coalition treaty. He added that “modernisation won’t be for free – we will invest massively so Germany can stay a world leader.”
Germany plans to become climate-neutral by 2045, but the measures implemented by the outgoing government, a coalition between chancellor Angela Merkel’s Conservatives and the SPD, are insufficient to reach that target.
The September vote had been called a “climate election” due to the high importance many voters had given the topic.
Scholz aims to be elected chancellor in the week of December 6. Prior to that, the Greens will invite all 120,000 party members to vote on the coalition agreement online. The SPD and the FDP will organise party conferences on December 4 and 5, respectively, to secure their members’ backing for the agreement.
Faster rollout of renewables
“Reaching climate targets will require an accelerated exit from coal power generation,” the coalition treaty reads. “Ideally, this will be achieved by 2030 already.”
Green Party co-leader Robert Habeck said the measures agreed by the three parties would put Germany on an emissions reduction path compatible with the Paris Climate Agreement‘s target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The coalition treaty’s “core” principle would be to reconcile prosperity with climate action, he argued.
“We have decided against setting higher climate targets in the coalition agreement, but rather formulated concrete measures,” Habeck said, adding that these measures would put the country on a 1.5 degree path.
The three parties aiming to form the next German government, said they aim to cover 80 percent of the country’s power demand with renewables by 2030, a significant increase from the current target of 65 percent. “Renewables are no longer an addition but will have to carry our supply security,” Habeck said.
FDP leader Christian Lindner, who is likely to become new finance minister, said “no other industrialised country will make efforts in climate action as great as ours, this is the most ambitious programme to date” and the government would make sure that it is sufficiently funded. At the same time, Germany would remain “an advocate of prudent financial policy,” Lindner added.
The parties also rejected calls for postponing the end of nuclear power plants. “We will stick to the nuclear exit,” their coalition agreement says.
To help the country’s famed industry to lower emissions, the future government plans to use new instruments, such as carbon contracts for difference, and support an EU-wide carbon border adjustment mechanism.
The coalition partners also said they will consider a national carbon floor price of 60 euros if the price in the EU emissions trading system falls below that limit. In the transport sector, they want to achieve a fast transition to low-emission mobility. “Our target is at least 15 million fully electric cars by 2030,” the treaty says.
The future government also agreed on considerable changes to the government architecture to implement its climate agenda. The parties plan to create a novel climate ministry that merges the energy and industry departments of the economy ministry with the environment ministry’s climate department.
First published on Clean Energy Wire
Powerful greenhouse gases emitted from Hunterston A nuclear station
| THE release of a refrigerant gas during the ongoing decommissioning of Hunterston A has been revealed at a recent nuclear summit. Hunterston ‘A’ bosses reported two environmental incidents at the station during its decommissioning phase linked to their air conditioning units. Earlier this year, the release of fluorinated gases was noticed. These are powerful man-made gases that can stay in the atmosphere for centuries and contribute to a global greenhouse effect. The incidents formed part of a report to the recent Hunterston site stakeholders meeting. Largs & Millport News 22nd Nov 2021 https://www.largsandmillportnews.com/news/19720653.gas-leak-hunterston-reported-sepa/ |
The UK’s nuclear plan is a financial, environmental and political risk
The UK’s nuclear plan is a financial, environmental and political risk, Investment Monitor, Jon Whiteaker , 16 Nov 21, If the UK government thinks the RAB model will solve all its nuclear power problems, it may have a nasty surprise coming its way.
As the dust settles on COP26, the UK government will turn its attention away from global discussions and towards what it is doing domestically to help mitigate the climate crisis.
The government’s Net Zero Strategy sets aside £120m towards developing new nuclear power plants, which it says “could support our path to decarbonising the UK’s electricity system” by 2035.
Could’ is doing a lot of work in that sentence, because although nuclear power plays a prominent role in the government’s decarbonising strategy, bringing additional nuclear capacity online is far from straightforward.
The government says nuclear is a continuous, reliable and low-carbon form of energy that has been part of the UK electricity system for 65 years. Nuclear is also controversial, hugely expensive in comparison to other fossil fuel alternatives, and often proves challenging to develop.
According to the latest World Nuclear Industry Status Report, between 1951 and 2021, of the 783 nuclear reactor projects launched, 12% have been cancelled. Delays and cost overruns are also very common when constructing nuclear plants.
The UK government is hoping to kickstart development of new nuclear in the UK through the introduction of the regulated asset base (RAB) funding model. This model is intended to widen the investor pool for nuclear power, reduce financing costs, and ultimately save bill payers money.
While the RAB model has proved successful for other large UK infrastructure projects, it comes with risks for the government. It is unclear which investors will be happy to support new nuclear projects, and there are potential political costs if UK citizens are made to pick up at least part of the tab if things go wrong.
The government expects electricity usage to increase by 40–60% by 2035. It has mapped out several scenarios for how this demand can be met solely by renewables, all of them dependant on building new nuclear power capacity.
Yet in 2020, while generation from all other renewable energy sources increased, generation from nuclear power actually declined in the UK due to a decision not to restart operations at the Dungeness B plant in Kent, which had been suffering a prolonged outage since 2018.
The UK nuclear fleet is old, suffering performance issues and largely due to be decommissioned. By 2035, the UK will lose almost 8GW of nuclear power plants to decommissioning.
The only new nuclear plant under construction is the 3.26GW Hinkley Point C plant, which is now due to be completed in 2026.
All this means the government needs to quickly develop new nuclear capacity. It seems very taken by new small modular reactors, particularly if they are developed by UK companies such as Rolls-Royce.Yet this and another new technology, advanced modular reactors, are not due to reach the demonstration phase until the early 2030s.
So, the government has been seeking a way to deliver several new Hinkley Point Cs…………………
The National Infrastructure Commission, a body designed to give impartial advice to the government, said in March 2020 that a “renewable-based system looks like a safer bet” and a “substantially cheaper” option than the construction of multiple new nuclear power plants.
That sounds like advice worth considering again. https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/business-activities/energy/uk-nuclear-rab-energy-renewable
German nuclear power shutdown will not lead to power shortage: report
German nuclear power shutdown will not lead to power shortage: report https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/german-nuclear-power-shutdown-will-not-lead-to-power-shortage-report/
By Jessica Bateman and Nikolaus J. Kurmayer | EURACTIV.com with CLEW 24 Nov 21, The shutdown of Germany’s last nuclear power plants will not cause supply shortages, according to calculations by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), CLEW reported.
As the so-called “traffic light” coalition in Berlin takes shape, there have been concerns that the country’s upcoming phase-out of nuclear power could cause power shortages as the country’s renewable expansion has been slow-going for years.
“I’m looking for a flashing orange traffic light emoji when the German government will have to face blackouts later this winter,” tweeted energy analyst Thierry Bros.
Researchers used modelling methods to see how the decommissioning of nuclear power plants Brokdorf, Grohnde and Gundremmingen C (which will be taken off the grid at the end of this year) and Neckarwestheim 2, Isar 2 and Emsland (which will be shut down in late 2022) will affect power flows and the energy mix in Germany.
They found the decline in nuclear power will temporarily lead to a higher use of fossil fuels and imports, but that this should be quickly reduced by the accelerated expansion of renewable energies.
German energy use is expected to increase by 100 TWh until 2030, while the next German government wants to phase out coal by 2030 and to be done with gas in 2040.
The next government is expected to boost the expansion of renewable energy in Germany by speeding up planning and permitting processes, as well as mandatory solar PV installations on newly built buildings, according to FAZ.
According to reports, the next German government may aim for 80% renewable electricity in 2030, up from the current target of 65%.
Projections currently put Germany’s 2030 energy demand somewhere between 645 to 665 TWh. If those prove true, it would mean that wind and solar would have to generate upwards of 516 TWh per year, or more than double the current renewable energy generation capacity.
In 2020, renewable energy consumption was 251 TWh, according to CLEW.
In order to keep grid operation stable, congestion management will also need to be adjusted. “The lights will not go out in Germany,” study author Claudia Kemfert said in statement.
“On the contrary: the [nuclear] shutdown paves the way for the overdue expansion of renewable energies. Nuclear energy was uneconomical from the start and characterised by incalculable risks.”
Plans to phase out nuclear energy in Germany were introduced in 2011 after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. The decision has been criticised for worsening the country’s reliance on imported fossil gas while Germany exits coal at the same time.
Manager at Tricastin NPP files complaint about safety issues and harrassment
In the midst of a debate on the revival of nuclear power, a whistleblower
throws a stone in the pond: a member of the management of the Tricastin
power station (Drôme), one of the oldest in the French fleet, has filed a
complaint against EDF concerning site safety, endangering others, the Labor
Code and harassment, as revealed by Le Monde.
Mediapart 24th Nov 2021
Tricastin nuclear power plant: cascading cover-ups.
Tricastin nuclear power plant: cascading cover-ups. In the case of the
whistleblower at the Tricastin power plant, which files a complaint against
EDF, new elements consulted by Mediapart reveal that the Nuclear Safety
Authority has long known about the problem. According to an internal
document, EDF lied and the safety authority also in its public
communication.
Mediapart 24th Nov 2021
Boris Johnson quizzed over future of Bradwell, (Essex) nuclear plant
Boris Johnson quizzed over future of Essex nuclear plant https://www.maldonandburnhamstandard.co.uk/news/19738655.boris-johnson-quizzed-future-essex-nuclear-plant/
By Jessica Day-ParkerTrainee Reporter PRIME Minister Boris Johnson told MPs he does not want to “pitchfork away” all investment from China in response to a question about Bradwell B.
Matthew Pennycook, Labour MP for Greenwich and Woolwich, pressed the Prime Minister on Bradwell B – the proposed nuclear power station at Bradwell-on-Sea put forward by China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) – in the House of Commons.
Mr Pennycook said: “The Government’s Integrated Review concluded the Chinese state poses a systemic challenge to our national security and the Prime Minister has made clear that when it comes to China we must remain vigilant about our critical national infrastructure.
General Nuclear to own and operate its own plant in Bradwell in Essex have been abandoned?”
Mr Johnson confirmed the Government doesn’t want to see “undue influence by potentially adversarial countries in our critical national infrastructure” and insisted “there will be more information” coming on Bradwell.
But he added: “What I don’t want to do is pitchfork away wantonly all Chinese investment in this country or minimise the importance in this country of having a trading relationship with China.”
Europe to pay half for raising Russia’s dangerous sunken submarines, – while Russia builds new ones!
“The sunken submarines K-27 and K-159 are the potential source of contamination of the Arctic, the riskiest ones,”
As Moscow this spring took the Chair of the Arctic Council, the need to lift dangerous nuclear materials from the seabed was highlighted as a priority.
No other places in the world’s oceans have more radioactive and nuclear waste than the Kara Sea.
Europe to pay half … it is a dilemma that international partners are providing financial support to lift old Cold War submarines from the ocean, while Russia gives priority to building new nuclear-powered submarines threatening the security landscape in northern Europe.
EU willing to co-fund lifting of sunken nuclear subs from Arctic seabed https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/nuclear-safety/2021/11/europe-offers-pay-russia-raise-sunken-nuclear-subs The Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership (NDEP) has decided to start a technical review aimed to find a safe way to lift two Cold War submarines from the Barents- and Kara Seas. By Thomas Nilsen
“We are proceeding now,” says a smiling Jari Vilén, Finland’s Ambassador for Barents and Northern Dimension.
Projects aimed to improve nuclear safety are some of the few successful arenas for cooperation still going strong between the European Union and Russia.
“In roughly two years time we will have the understanding on what and how it can be done, what kind of technology has to be used,” Vilén elaborates with reference to the two old Soviet submarines K-159 and K-27, both rusting on the Arctic seabed with highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel elements in their reactors.
Continue readingWill Germany’s Next Government Ditch U.S. Nuclear Bombs?
Explainer: Will Germany’s Next Government Ditch U.S. Nuclear Bombs? U.S. News, By Reuters|Reporting by Sabine Siebold, Editing by William Maclean, Nov. 22, 2021, BERLIN (Reuters) – NATO allies will be scouring the policies of Germany’s next federal government for one crucial detail: Will Berlin remain part of NATO’s nuclear sharing agreement?
Or will it drop out and ask the United States to remove its nuclear bombs from German soil?
While such a move might be popular among some Germans, it would reveal a rift within NATO at a time when the alliance’s relations with Russia are at their lowest since the end of the Cold War.
WHAT IS NATO’S NUCLEAR SHARING?
As part of NATO’s deterrence, the United States has deployed nuclear weapons in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey – all NATO allies that do not have their own nuclear weapons. In the case of a conflict, the air forces of these countries are meant to carry the American nuclear bombs.
WHAT EXACTLY IS GERMANY’S ROLE?
Around 20 U.S. nuclear bombs are estimated to be stored at the German air base of Buechel, in a remote area of the state of Rhineland-Palatinate. The base is also home to a squadron of Tornado fighter jets belonging to the German air force, the only German jets fitted to carry the nuclear bombs.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE TORNADO FIGHTER JETS?
The German air force has been flying the Tornado jets since the 1980s, and it has become increasingly expensive to maintain them and difficult to find spare parts to keep the plane in the air. The German defence ministry plans to phase out the jet between 2025 and 2030. Should Berlin not purchase new jets fitted for the task of carrying U.S. nuclear weapons, Germany would simply drop out of nuclear sharing when the last Tornado retires around 2030.
WHAT CHANGES MAY THE NEW GERMAN GOVERNMENT BRING?
In spring 2020, Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives, proposed replacing the Tornado jets in Buechel with F-18s made by Boeing, but the decision was later pushed into 2022.
Now, the likely new German government will be led by the Social Democrats, a party that has some lawmakers who would like to get rid of U.S. nuclear weapons on German soil. The Greens, who are expected to be part of the coalition, also have some lawmakers who take that view………https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-11-22/explainer-will-germanys-next-government-ditch-u-s-nuclear-bombs
As presidential candidate, Emmanuel Macron opposed nuclear power, now he’s all for it
Nuclear: Emmanuel Macron’s energy “at the same time”. Inheriting President Hollande’s nuclear commitments, candidate Macron had made campaign promises that were not very favorable to the atom.
But, in the middle of his five-year term, the President of the Republic has put nuclear power back at the center of France’s energy policy. To end up announcing, at the beginning of November, that it would be necessary to build new power stations.
Les Echos 22nd Nov 2021
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 (163)
- 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 