Europe’s Just Transition Mechanism excludes nuclear from the European Green Deal
|
Nuclear ‘excluded’ from EU’s new Just Transition Fund, By Beatriz Rios reporting from Strasbourg | EURACTIV.com, Jan 15, 2020 The EU’s regional policy Commissioner Elisa Ferreira revealed on Tuesday (14 January) details of the €100 billion Just Transition Mechanism, a key financial component of the European Green Deal that should make the bloc climate neutral by 2050.
“Nuclear energy is excluded from the Just Transition Mechanism,” Ferreira told a small group of journalists ahead of the college meeting of the European Commission that approved the proposal for the fund aimed at supporting poorer EU regions achieve climate neutrality. EU leaders agreed in December on a bloc-wide objective of reaching climate neutrality by 2050. In order to convince Hungary and the Czech Republic to sign up, they also reaffirmed the right of countries to decide on their own energy mix, including nuclear. Poland refused to sign up, saying it needed more EU funding to help phase out coal. The Just Transition Fund is intended to support regions that will be particularly affected by the changes brought by ‘greening’ the economy. Ferreira confirmed “no country or region” will be excluded but the objective is to concentrate on those areas facing the most dramatic challenges. The Commission will, therefore, take into account the intensity of greenhouse gas emissions of the industrial sector compared to the EU average and the impact in terms of employment of the transition for these industries. The relative prosperity of the country will also be considered. ……… The fund in detail The Fund will provide financial aid to countries in their work towards climate neutrality. Within a wider mechanism, the Commission aims to provide technical assistance and ease state aid rules for green investments. The fund will be based on €7.5 billion of “fresh money”, to be topped up with financing from the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund Plus, both part of the EU’s cohesion policy, but its use will be limited to a 20% of the total allocation. Ferreira admitted the money is not huge but hoped it could help leverage up to €100 billion for the period 2021-2027 in investments through the support of private investors. …….. https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/nuclear-excluded-from-eus-new-just-transition-fund/ |
|
|
The highly controversial question of how to fund UK’s nuclear build
|
Momentum Builds for UK Government to Self-Fund New Nuclear Plants https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/momentum-builds-for-uk-government-to-fund-new-nuclear-itself
The U.K. government wants new nuclear capacity. How it will be funded remains a highly contentious question. JOHN PARNELL JANUARY 15, 2020 When the U.K. government unveiled its contract for difference with EDF’s 3.2-gigawatt Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in 2012, it proudly proclaimed that the arrangement proved new nuclear did not need direct subsidy.
Since then, three other U.K. projects have been put on an indefinite pause after Hitachi and Toshiba said their respective ventures had failed to attract investors. While the 35-year contract for difference (CFD) awarded to EDF is considered generous at £92.50 ($120) per megawatt-hour, the French energy giant is on the hook for overrun costs — no small concession. A 2014 study found that of a global sample of 180 nuclear power plants, 97 percent ended up over budget. There is an acceptance in the nuclear industry and at the government level that the CFD approach won’t be used for nuclear again in the U.K. Yet all but one of the country’s 15 working reactors are going offline by 2030, and the process of replacing them is behind schedule. A new approach is needed — and quickly. Sizewell C is the next active nuclear project in the U.K. pipeline. It will be a carbon copy of EDF’s Hinkley C, offering project savings and a readymade supply chain. The plan is to switch the workforce from one site to the other. How Sizewell C will be funded, however, remains an open question. The government launched a consultation in July 2019 on a new method that could be used for Sizewell C. That process closed in October, but between Brexit and an election, there has been no response from the government since. EDF has reportedly become twitchy about the timeline, telling the government it needs to know how Sizewell C will be funded by the end of the year if it’s to have any chance of starting construction in 2022. The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy told GTM it would follow up on the consultation’s responses “in due course.” RAB: Nuclear’s next top model?The government is seeking feedback on one possible new approach for Sizewell C known as regulated asset base (RAB), which is already in use for other big infrastructure projects. The RAB model basically gives the project developer a means to recover its investment through consumer bills under the watchful gaze of a regulator — including payments during the construction phase. It’s the model used by the country’s water monopolies to pay for their infrastructure. But pipes and pumps are generally simpler and cheaper than new nuclear. The biggest RAB deal in the U.K. so far is the £13.5 billion extension of Heathrow Airport. The most conservative estimate for Sizewell C is £20 billion ($26 billion). (Its forerunner Hinkley Point C is sitting at £22 billion and counting.) Taking this approach would be a first for the energy sector and a first for RABs. An entirely new entity, within or outside current regulator Ofgem, would have to step up to monitor how funds were being recouped from bills. EDF and other nuclear developers wouldn’t be paid if projects never make it to financial close, potentially leaving them exposed to the predevelopment costs. But clarity is still needed on which entities would be exposed to various other risks, and there is danger that in the event of project costs rising, billpayers would be stuck with the tab. Another option: State-backed nuclear funding?Meanwhile, a number of respondents to the government’s consultation say the government should take another, more controversial route: stepping in to build new nuclear itself, then quickly selling completed plants to the private sector. The U.K. government celebrated the fact that it wasn’t sinking state money into Hinkley Point C when the CFD was awarded. But after all, that project is being developed by two other state-run companies, albeit ones from France and China. In its response to the government’s consultation on funding options, the independent Nuclear Energy Consulting Group called for a new nuclear Crown Corporation, a state-backed investment vehicle, to step in to build nuclear projects. “This new entity would act as an owner or funder of new [nuclear power] projects from inception to commercial operation, with project risks and benefits during development and construction remaining with [HM government],” write authors Edward Kee, Ruediger Koenig, Paul Murphy and Xavier Rollat. In an email to GTM, Edward Kee, the CEO of Nuclear Energy Consulting Group, shared the group’s reservations about the RAB model. “We have doubts that developing and implementing a nuclear power RAB framework would happen fast enough. It is also unclear that the RAB approach would deliver the needed nuclear power investment, even when put into place,” said Kee. The International Project Finance Association, whose members include the World Bank, the U.S. Treasury and many major investors, agreed that the U.K. government should consider funding nuclear projects. “An alternative structure would be for government to procure construction on the balance sheet (so that the government would own the project and pay for construction as the costs are incurred), and then look to sell the project to the private sector once operational,” the IPFA suggested in its response. Energy Systems Catapult, a not-for-profit innovation center established by the government itself, also backs using the national balance sheet to build new nuclear at the lowest cost. The potential funding pool for new nuclear in Europe shrank in December when the EU published a definitive list of what can be considered for “sustainable finance.” Nuclear power did not make the grade, and nuclear won’t be financed as part of the EU’s recently announced Green Deal. Whether financial institutions follow the EU’s lead remains to be seen. The government declined to comment on its position toward directly funding and owning new nuclear power assets. “New nuclear has an important role to play in providing reliable, low-carbon power as part of our future energy mix as we aim to eliminate our contribution to climate change by 2050,” a spokesperson said. “However, we are clear that any energy project must offer value for money for consumers.” Does the U.K. need new nuclear at all?Other influential groups remain open or even supportive of the RAB model for funding new nuclear. The union Unite is receptive to a RAB framework but began its own response by saying it “favors a policy of state ownership of the energy sector.” The union also warned against letting what it views as inevitable cost overruns be passed on to energy-intensive consumers, which might then take their operations and jobs elsewhere. Trade body EnergyUK said it supports the development of an RAB model but added that it views a levy on consumer bills as a more regressive approach to funding than using general taxation. At the same time, other groups are questioning the government’s commitment to new nuclear. Citizens Advice, the powerful consumer watchdog, said it does not believe RAB would deliver good value. The union Unite is receptive to a RAB framework but began its own response by saying it “favors a policy of state ownership of the energy sector.” The union also warned against letting what it views as inevitable cost overruns be passed on to energy-intensive consumers, which might then take their operations and jobs elsewhere. Trade body EnergyUK said it supports the development of an RAB model but added that it views a levy on consumer bills as a more regressive approach to funding than using general taxation. At the same time, other groups are questioning the government’s commitment to new nuclear. Citizens Advice, the powerful consumer watchdog, said it does not believe RAB would deliver good value. “Several of the government’s own advisors, including both the Committee on Climate Change and the National Infrastructure Commission, are less definitive on the case for new nuclear than it is,” the group states in its response to the consultation. “If new nuclear is an option rather than a necessity, its economics come more sharply into play, and they are challenging when compared to a range of other low-carbon options.” Citizens Advice said it wants to see a detailed business case for new nuclear prior to any contracts being signed. It claims the value-for-money assessment on Hinkley C was published after the deal was legally binding and was only three pages long. The group also pointed out the elephant in the room: Brexit. To date, the investor pool for new U.K. nuclear has been largely populated by firms backed by foreign governments, including those that we may need to strike trade deals with in the coming years, meaning that there are political as well as economic considerations at play,” it wrote. “These factors would make it extremely hard for any regulator to take any steps that might result in the abandonment of a new nuclear project, even if costs were to escalate significantly. This would dilute their ability to act in consumers’ best interests.” |
|
Significant drop in France’s nuclear energy production
Reuters 10th Jan 2020, EDF’s French nuclear power generation fell by a more than expected 3.5 percent last year, the state-owned utility said on Friday. The French company’s domestic nuclear output power dropped to 379.5 terawatt hours (TWh), missing a revised production target of between 384 TWh and 388 TWh.power output tumbling in the final month of 2019 by 15.2% to 33 TWh. The
operator of France’s 58 nuclear reactors, covering about 75% of the
country’s electricity needs, had revised its 2019 nuclear production
target from 390 TWh to between 384 TWh and 388 TWh in November because of reactor maintenance and safety checks after an earthquake.
Britons want real action on climate change, but Boris Johnson’s govt missing in action on this
  UK Energy Policy, Independent 12th Jan 2020Boris Johnson was today facing calls to step up action on global warming, after a poll for The Independent found overwhelming support for radical change to end the UK’s net carbon emissions by the end of the decade. Some 70 per cent of those questioned by pollsters BMG said they supported the target of net-zero emissions by 2030, with only 7 per cent opposing it. And support for swift action over the next 10 years was high across all age ranges, social groups and parts of the country, countering perceptions of a generational or urban/rural split on the climate emergency. Independent 8th Jan 2020, Ministers are under fire after revealing their strategy to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 will not be released until the end of the year. It means the plans – which will require huge and potentially unpopular changes to transport, energy and agriculture – will only emerge more than a year after the legal commitment was made. “If this is true, it doesn’t really smack of a government treating this issue as a climate emergency,” said Clive Lewis, Labour’s Treasury spokesman and a
leadership candidate. And Wera Hobhouse, the Liberal Democrat climate emergency spokesperson, pointing to the wildfire crisis in Australia, said: “While the world is waking up to the dangers of climate change, this Tory government is still on holiday. |
|
Britain’s Sizewell nuclear project in jeopardy, as EDF struggles to get funding
 Sizewell, Times 13th Jan 2020, EDF is in a race against time to secure a funding deal for its proposed nuclear power station in Suffolk as delays risk making the project prohibitively expensive. The French energy giant has hired Rothschild as financial adviser for the Sizewell C project and says it wants a “definitive way forward” from the government this year so it can start construction in 2022. The company building the £22 billion Hinkley Point C plant in Somerset has promised it can significantly reduce the cost of the sister plant in Suffolk, including by transferring workers and equipmentbetween the two. Delays to funding that result in a hiatus between the
projects would erode such savings and jeopardise Sizewell, which the government has said must be cheaper than Hinkley. A senior executive at Sizewell recently admitted that if funding proposals ended up “outside an acceptable price range for the government, then the project probably won’t go ahead — it’s as simple as that”.
EDF has proposed an alternative, funding model for Sizewell C, under which consumers would pay for the project while it is still under construction. This would cut borrowing costs but also put consumers on the hook for cost overruns.
The government ran a consultation last year on adopting the model but is yet to give its verdict. An EDF spokeswoman said: “We hope to see a way forward on nuclear financing in 2020 ahead of COP26 [the Glasgow climate change summit]. This would ensure we can maximise the benefits of replicating the design of Hinkley Point C at Sizewell C.”
|
Despite USA, the European Union is determined to preserve the Iran nuclear deal
EU willing to maintain Iran nuclear deal, risking rift with the US, By Alexandra Brzozowski | EURACTIV.com 11 Jan 2020, With the prospects of a potential US-Iran war fading, EU foreign minister during an emergency session on Friday (10 January), said they are willing to maintain the Iran nuclear deal as long as Tehran fulfils its commitments in order to achieve it.
In an attempt to avoid an escalation between Iran and the US, EU leaders in the recent week have intensified diplomatic activities, trying to salvage the EU-brokered nuclear deal while making sure the US-led anti-IS coalition continues to operate in Iraq after Iraq’s parliament called for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from the country.
“The region cannot afford another war, we call for an urgent de-escalation and maximum restraint,” EU’s chief diplomat Josep Borrell told reporters following the meeting in Brussels on Friday, that had reaffirmed European commitments preserving the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA).
“We have been saying in the past and we continue to say that we regret the US decision to withdraw from the deal,” Borrell said, “And we continue believing that this deal is a key element of the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture and critical for the regional stability.”
He also warned that negotiating a new pact would be a “very complex, highly technical process” that would take a long time………
Since the Trump administration decided to exit the deal in 2018, all three European parties to the pact – Britain, France and Germany – have repeatedly stressed their commitment to saving it, even after a call by Trump this week urging them to join him in walking away.
One of the contentious points between Europe and Washington has been the Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX), which was born as the brainchild of France, Germany and the UK in January 2019, and recently joined by further European countries.
It was created as a special purpose vehicle to help EU companies do business with Iran and facilitate non-USD transactions to avoid breaking US sanctions against the country.
European efforts, however, to ensure that Iran can keep trading in spite of the sanctions have had little impact.
The Trump administration on Friday (10 January) imposed new sanctions on Iran, with the latest round set to target multiple sectors of the Islamic Republic’s economy, including construction, manufacturing, textiles and mining…….
Angela Merkel urges all parties to back Iran nuclear deal
German Chancellor urges all parties to back Iran nuclear deal, MOSCOW (Reuters) – German chancellor Angela Merkel on Saturday repeated a call for all parties to respect the Iranian nuclear accord, despite Iran’s decision to intensify its enrichment of uranium and moves by the United States to impose economic sanctions.
“For this reason we will continue to employ all diplomatic means to keep this agreement alive, which is certainly not perfect but it is an agreement and it comprises commitments by all sides,” Merkel said.
‘Error of judgement’: UK police recall guide which listed Extinction Rebellion among extremist groups
‘Error of judgement’: UK police recall guide which listed Extinction Rebellion among extremist groups https://www.sbs.com.au/news/error-of-judgement-uk-police-recall-guide-which-listed-extinction-rebellion-among-extremist-groups
Counter-terrorism police in South-East England say they made an ‘error of judgement’ in adding climate Justice group Extinction Rebellion to a list of extremist ideologies.
The Guardian revealed the group was included in a 12-page guide named ‘Safeguarding young people and adults from ideological extremism’.
The document was designed to help educate people working with youth to “recognise when young people or adults may be vulnerable to extreme or violent ideologies”,
The guide advises people to look out for young people who “neglect to attend school” or “participate in planned school walkouts” – an apparent reference to the global School Strike for climate movement started by Greta Thunberg this year.
It also suggests that young people who engage in non-violent direct action such as writing environmentally-themed graffiti, sit-down protests or banner drops are potentially at risk of radicalisation.
The environmental group featured alongside Neo-Nazi terror operations and a pro-terrorist Islam outfit.
In a statement to The Guardian, Counter Terrorism Policing South East boss Kath Barnes said the guide is being recalled.
“The document was designed for a very specific audience who understand the complexities of the safeguarding environment we work within and who have statutory duties under Prevent. We are in the process of confirming who it has been shared with and recalling it.”
Extinction Rebellion was founded in October 2018 and the group maintains a welcoming, non-violent culture is at the core of its beliefs.
A spokesperson for Extinction Rebellion’s Sydney arm, AJ Tennant, says it was a shock to hear the international movement had made it onto the list in the first place.
“It’s very distressing that a peaceful, environmental organisation that’s trying to advocate for the protection of humanity would be treated with such disdain.”
He says he understands that people may find the extinction rebellion movement confronting, and even frustrating at times, but argues the movement has always been focused on non-violent methods of drawing attention to the climate debate.
“The first word that applies to everything that XR does is non-violent. We talk about being peaceful, we talk about having love in the movement, we talk about apologising to people for any inconvenience we caused, so while we are disruptive, we are always, always peaceful.
London-based human rights lawyer and media commentator Shoaib Khan has taken to Twitter to condemn the actions of British authorities.
Tens of thousands of Australians took to the streets on Friday to demand stronger action on climate, with some in the large crowds carrying the Extinction Rebellion network’s recognisable logo and flag.
Climate protests in London, Berlin, Madrid, Copenhagen and Stockholm target Australian government
Climate action protesters angry over Australia’s bushfires rally across Europe https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-11/scott-morrison-labelled-laughing-stock-europe-climate-protests/11859988 BY EUROPE CORRESPONDENT BRIDGET BRENNAN AND ROSCOE WHALAN IN LONDON
Thousands of people have taken part in demonstrations across Europe, taking aim at what they say is the Australian Government’s lack of action on climate change during the bushfire crisis.
- Demonstrations organised by Extinction Rebellion were held in London, Berlin, Madrid, Copenhagen and Stockholm
- The protesters called for stronger action on climate change in response to the Australian bushfires
- Protesters in London rallied outside Australia House, while protesters chanted outside the Australian embassy in Berlin
Protesters stopped traffic in London and turned out at rallies in Berlin, Madrid, Copenhagen and Stockholm to show their support for victims of the disasters.
At the Strand in London, hundreds gathered outside Australia House, where the High Commission of Australia is located, calling for stronger action on climate change as part of a protest organised by Extinction Rebellion.
Anne Coates travelled from Sheffield, north of London, to attend the rally.
She began to cry when she spoke about watching the effect of the disaster on people who had lost relatives and homes.
“It’s just too much for your heart. You just can’t live with it. It just gets worse and worse every day,” she said.”Absolutely devastating to watch it. It’s like hell. And it seems like governments around the world are in a race to drag us down to hell.”
She said Prime Minister Scott Morrison was “a laughing stock around the world”.
“We’re absolutely furious with him. And I don’t know what’s it going to take. Governments should be listening,” she said.
Many people wore koala hats to represent the massive loss of wildlife in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia.
Fi Radford from Bristol carried a sign which said “koalas not coal”.
“We’re here to say to the Australian people, challenge your Government on the evidence they’re giving you,” she said.
“Australia, you are custodians of precious species that exist nowhere else in the world. Overturn your Government, they’re leading you to destruction.”
Among the protesters were some of the tens of thousands of Australians living in London.
Harley McDonald-Eckersall from Melbourne said she had been watching on in horror at what has been unfolding in Australia.“It’s been so horrible being away … Australians are extraordinarily resilient — like our First Nations people who have survived genocide and are still caring for the environment,” she said.
Australian Dylan Berthier said he believed the catastrophic conditions in Australia were a wake-up call for the world.
“I think a crisis of this magnitude is a global crisis. I think world leaders have a responsibility to call on the Australian Government to enact new policy that will actually prevent this from happening in the future,” he said.
In Germany, protesters chanted outside the Australian embassy in Berlin.
One man carried a sign which read “Aloha from Berlin” in reference to Mr Morrison’s maligned trip to Hawaii when the bushfires were burning in December.
The climate action group Extinction Rebellion organised the protests across Europe.
Bushfires ‘a warning to the whole world’: UK politicians
The bushfire emergency has been front-page news in the UK for weeks — and has forced Tourism Australia to temporarily pull its new $15 million advertising campaign, fronted by Kylie Minogue.
When the UK Parliament returned earlier this week, Speaker Lindsay Hoyle said what had been happening in Australia should act as a “wake-up call for the world”.
Last year, the Conservative Government in the United Kingdom passed legislation to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 — one of the most ambitious targets set by a major economy.
But many environmental groups have said 2050 is not soon enough.
Labour leadership contender Clive Lewis told the House of Commons: “So as Australia burns, as millions in African states face climate-driven famine, and floods have swept the north of England, will this Government give a damn about this existential threat and act, not posture?”
Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry, who is vying to become the new opposition leader, has criticised the Morrison Government.
“I hope that the horrendous wildfires in Australia, brought on by record temperatures, with such devastating impacts for the human and animal populations in New South Wales, will not just wake up Scott Morrison’s Government to its wilful inaction over climate change, but serve as a warning to the whole world,” she said.
Earlier this week, outspoken British television presenter Piers Morgan cut short an interview with Liberal MP Craig Kelly on Good Morning Britain.
Climate change and global warming are real and Australia is right now showing the entire world just how devastating it is,” he said.
“And for senior politicians in Australia to still pretend there’s no protection is absolutely disgraceful.”
In an address to Vatican diplomats this week, Pope Francis also criticised climate inaction.
“Many young people have become active in calling the attention of political leaders to the issue of climate change. Care for our common home ought to be a concern of everyone,” he said.
“Sadly, the urgency of this ecological conversion seems not to have been grasped by international politics, where the response to the problems raised by global issues such as climate change remains very weak and a source of grave concern.”
In Germany, gridlock over nuclear-capable fighter jet
“That’s pretty tight,” according to one pilot.
He spoke to DW on condition of anonymity. For the air base, tucked away amid the picturesque plateaus of the Eifel region in western Germany, has a special, secret mission: It is here that American nuclear bombs are stored in what is officially termed a “nuclear sharing agreement.”
In the case of a nuclear strike, German Tornado fighter jets and their crews would deliver the American bombs.
American bombs on German soil
Their location is a state secret. The German government has never officially confirmed the existence of the nuclear bombs in Büchel. The precise number of bombs stored in the underground vaults in the air base is thus unclear; estimates range between 10 to 20.
On the record, the Germany government only admits to being part of the sharing agreement, which dates back to the Cold War and NATO’s nuclear deterrence strategy aimed at keeping Soviet influence at bay.
In essence, it provides for member states of the military alliance without nuclear weapons to partake in planning and training for the use of nuclear weapons by NATO and, officials argue, for their views to be taken into account by nuclear-capable countries, including the US. Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy are all part of the sharing agreement.
Upkeep of Tornado fleet skyrocketing
But as Germany’s Tornado fleet is swiftly nearing the end of its shelf life, the cost of maintaining a fleet for the nuclear mission is skyrocketing.
“The increase each year is brutally high,” as one parliamentarian put it.
DW has obtained a copy of an official document from the Ministry of Defense, which puts the expenditure for the Tornado fleet, including maintenance, procurement and development, at €502 million ($562 million) in 2018. This year, the figure is estimated to reach €629 million…………https://www.dw.com/en/in-germany-gridlock-over-nuclear-capable-fighter-jet/a-51897327
A nuclear accident in Essex would be catastrophic
|
How much of Essex would disappear if there was a nuclear disaster?The damage would be catastrophic, Essex Live, By Brad Gray Multimedia Reporter 12 Jan 2020 “…………. disasters can happen, and Essex has it’s own nuclear power plant up in Bradwell-on-Sea.
Although the plant was closed down back in 2002 – and works have taken place over the past 20 years to remove nuclear waste and storage vaults – there are plans to reopen the site. A new plant could be built on the same location, up to modern standards, by 2030, but plans are not fully in place. However, with the date only a decade away – and interest in nuclear disasters higher than usual because of the hit TV show Chernobyl – it’s worth seeing how bad a nuclear disaster would be if something happened near Essex. How bad would the damage be in Essex?No 2 Nuclear Power have created a map tool to see how bad the damage would be if Sizewell were to have a nuclear accident the scale of Chernobyl’s. The map shows that much of Essex would become uninhabitable and areas in dark red or purple would have compulsory evacuation take place. At around 30 miles from the Essex border, the impact would still encompass most of the county. What about elsewhere?The damage wouldn’t just stop at our county. Suffolk and Norfolk would both be equally as affected as Essex, and London would also be heavily affected with some relocation needed. The affects would be felt as far away as Birmingham and Wales, and even further north to Nottingham and Sheffield. It’s fair to say that an explosion would be a national disaster unlike anything ever seen in the country. These estimations are also based upon there not being strong winds on the hypothetical day in question, as radiation can spread further if gusts are strong. If wind was blowing strongly west a huge portion of the country would be brought to a halt. Cities like Nottingham, Derby, Lincoln and Sheffield would all require immediate evacuation. Huge parts of the country would become uninhabitable and it would be a nationwide disaster not seen in the UK since World War Two. How likely would something like this be?It’s worth remembering that at the moment, Bradwell’s site is a non-operable plant. A disaster like this cannot happen until reactors there are up and running. And even then, with modern technology and monitoring standards, explosions like this are incredibly unlikely. In regards to Sizewell, which is made up of two nuclear power stations, there are plans that it could be transferred to a ‘nuclear island’ off the Suffolk coast………. HTTPS://WWW.ESSEXLIVE.NEWS/NEWS/ESSEX-NEWS/HOW-MUCH-ESSEX-WOULD-DISAPPEAR-3729222 |
|
|
UK’s planned Sizewell power station likely to become a ‘nuclear island’
Rising sea levels could turn new Sizewell power station into ‘nuclear island’ East Anglian Daily Times, 10 January, 2020, Andrew Hirst
Surging sea levels due to climate change could mean new power station Sizewell C is cut off by the water within decades, a top scientist has warned.
UK’s competition watchdog to investigate Jacobs’ acquisition of Wood Nuclear Limited
Times and Star 9th Jan 2020, The proposed £250 million acquisition of a major player in the clean-up of the Sellafield site in West Cumbria could be blocked. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched an investigation into global engineering firm Jacobs’ acquisition of Wood Nuclear Limited – the nuclear arm of the Wood Group.
The proposal deal – announced in August last year – would see Wood Nuclear Limited along with “subsidiary and certain affiliated companies” come under control of Jacobs’ UK division. Jacobs would also take on existing contracts held by the business – which include managing the Design and Engineering lot for the Programme and Project Partners (PPP) framework.
20-year contract awarded last year by Sellafield Limited as part of its push to “revolutionise” the decommissioning of the site, could be worth up to £769 million. Wood’s nuclear division is already a long-standing big tier company at Sellafield and, in December was awarded a £50m contract to provide programmable digital control technologies to the plant.
Bradwell nuclear power plan – foolish, in view of climate change predictions
BANNG 8th Jan 2020, As we enter a new year, Andy Blowers muses on the massive challenge of climate change that lies ahead, globally and locally, in the column for Regional Life, January 2020.
In East Anglia, we are increasingly aware of record heatwaves, milder and wetter winters, retreating coastlines and loss of precious habitats and declining and disappearing species. To an extent, these may be tackled by adaptive measures such as managed retreat of the coastline or hard defences. Even then, land loss and inundation will be unavoidable.
The idea of a massive nuclear power station at Bradwell on a
site threatened by the impacts of climate change seems foolish in the
extreme. Far better to go for cheaper, less risky and easily deployable
renewable options. Concerted action worldwide and locally, by governments,
businesses and individuals, is needed now if we are to reduce carbon
emissions to net zero and avert catastrophe. That was a clear message from
the General Election. Now we must get on with it.
UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget.
BBC 10th Jan 2020, UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget. The Ministry Of Defence’s “poor management” of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme has led to rising costs and lengthy delays, according to the government spending watchdog.
1 This Month
23-25 October – on Zoom – World BEYOND War’s annual global conferenc
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (168)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
