Energy-rich Scotland does not require any nuclear power stations.
Andrew Bowie, undersecretary for nuclear, is pushing expensive and
dangerous nuclear power onto energy-rich Scotland. That’s insane. Nuclear
power has consistently failed to deliver energy on time or on budget.
The much-touted Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) don’t yet exist, are heavily
dependent on government subsidies to come on stream and will generate more
toxic nuclear waste for which there is no safe disposal.
Unlike renewables, where costs are falling, nuclear costs keep climbing. The UK Government has flung billions at Hinkley Point C, guaranteeing £92.50 per MW hour over the
next 35 years, twice as much as is guaranteed for wind. When finished,
Hinkley Point C will be one of the most expensive power stations in the
world. And Scottish households will pay £80 a year for nuclear on top of
already exorbitant energy bills.
The National 30th Nov 2023
UK’s first small nuclear reactor deal ‘poised’ for signing but not with Rolls-Royce
Proactive Investors, 01 Dec 2023 Oliver Haill
Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) could be built in the north-east of England but not by Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (LSE:RR.), Britain’s leading candidate to develop the technology.
In the same week that shockwaves were felt around the industry as an expected first SMR project in the US was cancelled due to a lack of interest from local utilities, US-based Westinghouse Electric was today reported to be close to agreeing a deal to build four SMRs near Hartlepool……………………………….
Rolls-Royce is seen as one of the frontrunners to develop the first UK SMR projects, with its £1.8 billion-per-site design using tech similar to that in nuclear submarines to power up to a million homes.
It was shortlisted in the government-run SMR competition in October, along with Westinghouse’s UK arm, EDF, GE-Hitachi, Holtec Britain, and NuScale Power, the operator with the cancelled US project earlier this week.
But of those names, only Rolls was thought to be currently undergoing assessment from the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and Environment Agency for the first order, which it insisted put it almost two years ahead of its competitors in bringing an SMR on-stream and receiving funding from the UK government to build the reactors, though others have also applied for regulatory approval.
Rolls chief executive Tufan Erginbilgic has previously said the winner of the UK’s ongoing government-run SMR competition will need “tangible commitments in terms of projects – multiple projects”.
Earlier this week at its much-trumpeted investor event, Rolls said is planning to work with a “broad set of partners” to develop SMRs.
The government is close to publishing its long-awaited nuclear roadmap, which will set out plans to build a new generation of small and large nuclear reactors around Britain.
Westinghouse was bought last year by secretive Canadian infrastructure investor Brookfield. https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1034906/uk-s-first-small-nuclear-reactor-deal-poised-for-signing-but-not-with-rolls-royce-1034906.html
Failure of USA’s NuScale small nuclear reactors (SMRs) not a good omen for Rolls Royce and other UK SMR developers
Concern for Rolls-Royce, other developers after US mini nuclear setback
Proactive ,30 Nov 2023
A major setback in the roll out of mini nuclear power plants in the US has raised concern over the UK’s own bid to introduce the technology, whose developers include Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (LSE:RR.).
Cancelling plans for its first small modular reactor (SMR) in the US earlier this week, NuScale blamed a lack of interest in the plant’s power output by local utilities.
“Despite significant efforts […] it appears unlikely that the project will have enough subscription to continue toward deployment,” the company said in a statement.
Given the plant was set to be the first of its kind in the US, having been granted regulatory approval in 2022, concern has been raised over the ramifications on other countries looking to utilise modular nuclear technology………………………..
Rolls-Royce is among frontrunners developing such technology in the UK, with its SMR representing the only system currently being assessed by independent regulators.
Cambridge University nuclear energy professor Tony Roulstone commented that failure of NuScale to push through its SMRs was “bad for the broader market”, however.
“They’re the one with a ticket from a safety authority,” he added. NuScale has received some US$600 million from the US government since 2014.
Pointing to the UK, he suggested just one version of the technology was needed, given companies will need several orders to help bring down costs as a whole.
“You can do it if you’ve got an order for ten,” he said. “You can’t do this if you’ve got an order for one.”
A host of companies are indeed looking to build SMRs though, such as EDF, GE-Hitachi and of course Rolls-Royce and NuScale.
Alongside the fact each is looking for public support and contracts, concern has been raised in the UK over a lack of urgency on the government’s part.
Rolls-Royce has previously laid out the need for fast decision making on SMRs, with chief executive Tufan Erginbilgic himself having said the winner of the UK’s ongoing government-run SMR competition will need “tangible commitments in terms of projects – multiple projects”. https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1034737/concern-for-rolls-royce-other-developers-after-us-mini-nuclear-setback-1034737.html
US nuclear bombs ‘set to return to UK’ for first time in 15 years – making Lakenheath a “nuclear target”
“they will make us a nuclear target. “
US nuclear weapons are expected to return to the UK after 15 years following a visit to RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk by American Deputy Defence Secretary Kathleen Hicks
By Ben Glaze, Deputy Political Editor1, 29 Nov 2023
American nuclear bombs are set to return to Britain after 15 years.
A senior US defence official has visited an RAF base in the Suffolk countryside, paving the way for the controversial arms to come back to the UK. Deputy Defence Secretary Kathleen Hicks went to RAF Lakenheath for a tour of “infrastructure improvements” at the air station, according to The Daily Telegraph.
The Pentagon is planning a £39.5million dormitory for troops with the military site due to be used for “surety” – a US defence term to describe operations related to nuclear weapons, the paper reported. The last American nuclear arms were removed from Britain in 2008, when approximately 110 tactical B61s stored at Lakenheath were stripped out.
The weapon – a low to intermediate-yield strategic and tactical nuclear bomb – remains part of the US’ “enduring stockpile” following the end of the Cold War. It could be dropped by US Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle fighter-bombers. The aircraft are still based at Lakenheath as part of the USAF 48th Fighter Wing – known as The Liberty Wing – its main air defence mission in Europe………………………………………..
Deployment of American nuclear arms to Britain would generate fresh controversy. Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament general secretary Kate Hudson told the Mirror: “Kathleen Hicks’ visit to RAF Lakenheath is further proof that Washington intends to use Britain as a launch pad for its nuclear arsenal in Europe. The lack of transparency surrounding this deployment is shocking, given how dangerous it is.
“Russia has already retaliated – it has stationed its own nuclear weapons in Belarus in response. A YouGov poll found that almost two thirds of the British public don’t want US nuclear weapons stationed here. That’s not surprising – they will make us a nuclear target. CND calls on the UK Government to say that US nuclear weapons are not welcome in Britain.”
Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer said: “The world feels like an increasingly dangerous place with conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza and many other places. However, the positioning of US nuclear weapons at Lakenheath will not help ease tensions – it is far more likely to increase them. Over 100 nuclear bombs were stored at the airbase but they were removed in 2008. The UK Government should be working much harder to reduce the threat of nuclear war by actively supporting the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, and seeking to reverse the collapse of other international arms control treaties which were designed to protect us.”
Previous deployments of American nuclear weapons have triggered outrage. Greenham Common in Berkshire saw years of anti-nuclear demonstrations, and was the UK’s biggest women-led movement since the Suffragettes. The protest began in 1981 and lasted 19 years until the airbase was decommissioned. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nuclear-bombs-set-return-uk-31552964?link_id=3&can_id=0a448bf4278898648e02a8f6dea4650f&source=email-a-senior-us-defence-official-just-visited-raf-lakenheath&email_referrer=email_2128400&email_subject=a-senior-us-defence-official-just-visited-raf-lakenheath
Why Britain’s mini-nukes dream is hanging by a thread
Scuppered American power deal throws the UK’s promise of a green transition into doubt
Telegraph UK, By Howard Mustoe, 29 November 2023
It was meant to provide cheap, clean power to towns in the Midwest of the US.
But a scuppered nuclear power deal has thrown the promise of green power in the region into doubt, and could have repercussions in Britain.
NuScale Power said earlier this month that its maiden deal to build six of its mini-nukes in Utah was dead, after several towns that were backing the project pulled out over soaring costs…………………………………
In Britain, the Government wants a quarter of all electricity to come from nuclear power by 2050, and has launched a competition to find developers who can build SMRs by the mid-2030s. Last month, it unveiled a shortlist of six contenders, including NuScale.
However, the Portland, Oregon-based company’s struggles raise the spectre that SMRs may be beset to the same cost overruns that have long haunted the industry, casting doubt over whether mini-nukes can actually deliver on their promise.
NuScale is the only SMR developer with a design approved by a regulator.
The Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), which provides power to local areas across the Midwest, first signed a deal with NuScale in 2015.
The ambition of the project changed over time, with UAMPS eventually settling on plans to buy six NuScale reactors that could deliver 77 megawatts (MW) of electricity each, collectively enough to power almost 1.4 million homes.
However, members of UAMPS, small towns and local areas, were uneasy with the long timeline and high costs of the project.
When the Utah city of Logan pulled out in 2020, its finance chief Richard Anderson told the Salt Lake City paper Deseret News: “We don’t have the experience to be swimming in these waters. I didn’t feel good about it.”
The death knell for NuScale came in January when new estimates showed a 53pc increase in costs. The price of steel and other raw materials had leapt, sending the price of power from the plant from $58 per MW hour to $89.
The sharp increase came despite a promise of $4bn (£3.2bn) in US taxpayer support under President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act.
Several member towns pulled out over soaring costs, leaving the project dead in the water.
Tony Roulstone, a lecturer in nuclear energy at the University of Cambridge and a former Rolls-Royce engineer, said the deal coming unstuck was “bad for the broader market”.
“They’re the one with a ticket from a safety authority,” he said of NuScale. “They’re the one with a project, which has been supported by the US government.”
SMRs offered the promise of bringing the cost discipline of mass production to nuclear engineering. They were touted as a way to pull the industry away from unwieldy megaprojects that were subject to cost overruns and delays……………………………..
the rising costs in Utah evoke worrying parallels to the industry of old. Hinkley Point C in Somerset was estimated to cost about £26bn in 2015, for example, but could now end up costing £33bn, according to the latest estimate.
While the scale of costs is different, the unpredictability is a worry……………………………….
The market is also quite crowded. France’s EDF, US-Japanese alliance GE-Hitachi, Rolls-Royce and US companies Holtec, NuScale and Westinghouse are all competing for part of the SMR market in the UK through the Government’s competition.
With costs rising and interest waning, the industry has complained the Government is moving too slowly…………………………………..
To succeed in delivering the economies of scale promised by factory production, SMRs must be developed en masse………………………………………………………. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/11/29/soaring-costs-mini-nuclear-dream-left-on-thread/
UK government hopes that United Arab Emirates will invest in Sizewell C nuclear power plan.
UAE approached to invest in Sizewell C nuclear power plan
UK lines up Middle East investor for stake in £20bn-£44bn project despite growing row over other Emirati investment plans.
Alex Lawson, https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/27/uae-approached-to-invest-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-plant
A United Arab Emirates investor has been approached to take a stake in the Sizewell C nuclear power plant project in Suffolk, it has emerged.
Ministers are searching for new investors in the project, which could cost between £20bn and £44bn, after removing the Chinese state-owned CGN last year due to security concerns over UK infrastructure amid poor Anglo-Sino relations.
The Times reported on Monday that the UK government had lined up Mubadala, the Abu Dhabi fund run by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the owner of Manchester City football club, to back the energy project, with a decision due early next year.
However, a source close to Mubadala denied the fund was interested in Sizewell but said other UAE entities were interested. A separate source said that Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation, which is owned by Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund ADQ, could be a good fit for the project.
The UAE interest comes against the backdrop of Westminster tensions over a separate Emirati deal. Last week, RedBird IMI – a joint-venture between America’s Redbird Capital and International Media Investments, an Abu Dhabi investor also backed by Mansour – announced a deal to take control of the Telegraph group. The government has indicated it will launch a public interest investigation into the newspaper deal.
The Sizewell C plant aims to generate enough energy to power 6m homes. It is backed by France’s EDF and the UK government, which has spent nearly £100m buying CGN out of the project. CGN had held a 20% stake.
Rishi Sunak hosted Mubadala’s Khaldoon Al Mubarak at a meeting of global business leaders at Hampton Court, south-west London, on Monday as he attempts to attract foreign investment to the UK.
Although a formal search for outside investment launched in September, Sizewell C has been touted to potential investors – including sovereign wealth funds, infrastructure and pension funds – for years. The government earmarked a further £341m to develop the project in August.
Bankers at Barclays have been tasked with procuring investment for the project, which has faced significant opposition in Suffolk.
The interest from the UAE – host of Cop28, which begins this week – in Sizewell C has been mooted for more than a year. Last week, campaigners parked a sign reading “Sizewell C is a toxic investment” outside the UAE embassy in London.
Alison Downes, of the Stop Sizewell C campaign, said: “There may be a dearth of UK interest in Sizewell C, but there is no energy security in handing chunks of the UK’s critical national assets to countries that don’t share our values. If the UAE is not good enough for the Telegraph, it’s definitely not good enough for Sizewell C.”
Investors in Saudi Arabia and Australia have also previously reportedly been approached to back Sizewell C. However, a source close to the project denied there was active interest from Saudi investors.
The project is set up as a 50-50 joint-venture between the government and EDF, which is behind the sister Hinkley Point C development in Somerset. That project is significantly over budget and years late.
Ministers overruled the independent Planning Inspectorate to grant Sizewell C planning consent. Backers are seeking a development consent order that will precede a final investment decision by its backers.
The plant is not expected to generate power until at least the mid-2030s, after most of Britain’s nuclear power stations have been retired.
Sunak’s government hopes to kickstart a renaissance in the nuclear power industry, and launched a new delivery body, Great British Energy, in the summer.
Separately, the boss of Rolls-Royce, Tufan Erginbilgic, is expected to urge the government to back its plans to build small nuclear power plants at an investor day on Tuesday.
Sizewell C and Mubadala have been approached for comment.
UK’s Sizewell C Nuclear stake seized from China may go to United Arab Emirates
The UK government is seeking backers for the nuclear power station in Suffolk. Ministers have
lined up Abu Dhabi investors to take a significant stake in the Sizewell C
nuclear power plant, as concerns grow among Conservative MPs over a
separate Emirati bid for The Daily Telegraph.
The government is looking for backers for the £20 billion power station in Suffolk, after China General Nuclear was removed from the project last year.
Britain spent nearly £100million buying the Chinese state-owned company out of its 20 per cent stake, amid concerns over Beijing having access to critical national
infrastructure.
Ministers are searching for investors to fill the shortfall
in funding. A United Arab Emirates sovereign wealth fund run by Sheikh
Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the owner of Manchester City, has been
approached before a decision expected early next year, The Times
understands. A government source confirmed that Mubadala, which controls
assets worth £219 billion, was being considered.
“They are part of the
mix of options but not the only viable one,” a source said. The
government has put more than £1.2 billion into developing the plant in
Suffolk, but the state and the energy company EDF want to retain stakes of
about 20 per cent in the construction phase and are seeking to bring in
private investors. They have been working with bankers from Barclays and
Rothschild to sound out potential backers. Centrica, the energy group that
owns British Gas, is among bidders that took part in an initial
pre-qualification process, which was run by the government last month.
Nuclear projects have long struggled to attract private investment because
of the huge up-front construction costs and the industry’s record of
delays and going over budget.
Times 27th Nov 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uae-state-energy-company-china-stake-sizewell-c-q7vk8jbtd
No Ceasefire in the Propaganda War
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/11/no-ceasefire-in-the-propaganda-war/
I have had BBC News on in the background for the last two hours. In that time there have been three lengthy interviews with different relatives of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. There has not been a single interview with a Palestinian relative of a Palestinian prisoner held by Israel.
Today 13 Israeli prisoners and 39 Palestinian prisoners are due to be released. 90% of the BBC mentions of prisoner releases do not include the Palestinians at all. Just finished is a ten minute interview of a Professor in Kent on the psychological effects on Israeli hostages. Earlier there was an expert from Tel Aviv on the psychological impact on Israeli hostages’ families. There has been no report whatsoever of the impact on Palestinian prisoners and their families.
The BBC simply does not treat the Palestinians as human, whereas the emphasis on Israeli personal victimhood is incessant and unrelenting.
Of the 300 Palestinian women and children prisoners on the list possibly to be released during the ceasefire, 252 have never been charged with any crime. 23 were charged with stone throwing.
Since October 8 over 200 Palestinian children have been taken prisoner, none of whom had anything to do with the October 7 attacks. That rather puts the possible release of 33 children and six women today into perspective. But it is not a perspective the BBC would ever give you.
Over 2,000 Palestinians are held by Israel in “administrative detention”, without charge or trial. Some for over twenty years.
Since 1967 Israel has made over 1 million arrests of Palestinians. This “justice” system is an essential part of the imposition of apartheid and the slow genocide, which did not just start this autumn. The BBC won’t tell you that either, and appears to have no problem with permanently showcasing its Israel based correspondents churning out the Israeli propaganda narrative, with no attempt at either perspective or balance.
Poor nuclear prospects in UK
The Global Warming Policy Foundation, no stranger to controversy, has published a report on nuclear prospects, which is quite damning, with the GWPF claiming that it shows that the nuclear industry is now so dysfunctional it may have no future in the UK without a concerted policy and regulatory effort. The report’s author, energy consultant and Daily Telegraph columnist Kathryn Porter, says ‘most of our existing nuclear fleet will close in the next few years, with almost nothing to replace it, and I see little cause for optimism that the economic or regulatory environment will produce significant new capacity any time soon.’………………
In the report, Porter goes through the technical options in a quite neutral way, but warns that, at present, ‘the economic opportunities for nuclear power in Great Britain are mixed. The Government hopes that the new Regulated Asset Base model will attract investor interest by increasing income certainty and transferring some risks to consumers. However, Ofgem has been designated as the economic regulator in this area, and its track record in setting consistent and effective price controls for gas and electricity network operators has been mixed. It is now under significant pressure to contain energy company profits, which may make nuclear developers nervous about the model and how it may operate in practice’.
So she is concerned about funding. ………………………………..
Prof. Malcolm Grimson from Imperial College London focused more on the economics: ‘The paper is rightly very clear that the economic risks of nuclear power – in short, that compared to other power options, much more of the cost of nuclear generation is front-loaded in the construction phase, so managing risks of cost or schedule overruns is a practically insuperable task for private capital – are such that heavy state involvement, probably up to and including direct state investment in new nuclear construction, is unavoidable.’
He added ‘The paper is also probably right in saying that the CfD/strike price structure which was created to fund Hinkley Point C probably will not be repeated……………………..
It will be interesting to see how the government (and the nuclear industry) responds to Porters analysis of funding and energy pricing policy, and especially to the point that, given the zero fuel costs of renewable, but also their operational costs, ‘determining the optimal generation mix of nuclear and renewable energy when taking the full costs to consumers into account is challenging’………………………..
she backs off talking about nationalisation,……………………… https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2023/11/poor-nuclear-prospects.html
Rolls Royce panicking, as UK government and investors are lukewarm about its small nuclear reactor project?
Rolls-Royce boss Tufan Erginbilgic: Britain must win nuclear race. The
boss of Rolls-Royce is this week expected to urge the Government to throw
its full weight behind ground-breaking British nuclear technology developed
by the country’s flagship engineering giant. Chief executive Tufan
Erginbilgic is pushing through a whirlwind transformation of the company.
He will on Tuesday unveil his blueprint for restoring Rolls to its former
glory. ‘Turbo-Tufan’ will be highlighting his company’s mini nuclear
power plants – known as SMRs, standing for small modular reactors.
Erginbilgic is a big believer in the SMR project, which is based on
technology honed for use in submarines over the last three decades.
Rolls-Royce, which has so far benefited from about £200 million
of Government backing for its work, is ahead of other companies in the UK
and abroad. But Erginbilgic is understood to be concerned that competitors
will catch up if the Government does not give its full-throated support.
There are also fears that potential overseas buyers of the technology are
hesitant because of the British Government’s apparently lukewarm attitude
towards Rolls-Royce’s technology.
Instead of backing Rolls outright, the
Government launched a competition to select an SMR provider, pitting the
company against foreign rivals. Six firms were selected for the next phase
of the competition last month, including EDF of France and a joint venture
between the US’s GE and Hitachi of Japan. Erginbilgic is likely to argue
that the process should be speeded up.
This is Money 25th Nov 2023
UK GOVERNMENT BLOCKS MP QUESTIONS ABOUT GAZA-RELATED ACTIVITY AT ITS CYPRUS BASE
Ministry of Defence takes extraordinary step of censoring all requests for information by MPs about RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus, which Declassified has reported is facilitating arms supplies to Israel’s war on Gaza.
MATT KENNARD AND MARK CURTIS, 20 NOVEMBER 2023 https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-government-blocks-mp-questions-about-gaza-related-activity-at-its-cyprus-base/
- MP whose questions were blocked tells Declassified: “This is totally unacceptable in a democracy”
- RAF sent A400M military transport aircraft from Cyprus base to Tel Aviv this morning
- Britain’s Cyprus base has secretly become international military hub supporting Israel’s bombing of Gaza
The British government has blocked MPs asking any questions about activity at RAF Akrotiri, its vast air base on Cyprus, Declassified can reveal.
Blocking all parliamentary questions from MPs is a highly unusual move.
Government departments routinely refuse to answer specific questions about military operations for reasons of “national security”, but blocking all questions by elected parliamentarians goes far beyond the usual level of Whitehall secrecy.
It comes after Declassified revealed the RAF has made over 30 military transport flights to Tel Aviv since Israel began bombing Gaza. The Ministry of Defence refused to provide us any detail of the cargo or personnel on the flights.
Just this morning an A400M Atlas military transport aircraft operated by the RAF landed in Tel Aviv from Akrotiri. The aircraft can carry 116 soldiers, a Chinook helicopter or a payload of 37 tonnes.
RAF Akrotiri sits 180 miles from Tel Aviv with a flight time of 40 minutes.
Declassified has also reported that the US is moving arms to Israel using RAF Akrotiri, which has become an international military hub supporting Israel’s bombing campaign in Gaza. Half of US planes flying from British Cyprus are said to be carrying weapons for Israel.
Kenny MacAskill, Alba MP for East Lothian, told Declassified he put down a number of parliamentary questions concerning what military support the UK is providing to Israel and the role of RAF Akrotiri in the supply of military equipment.
“Your question has been queried because it is subject to a block by Government,” he was told in an email. “The Department [Ministry of Defence] has stated that it will not comment on operational matters at this base.”
MacAskill, a former Scottish justice secretary, told Declassified: “This is totally unacceptable in a democracy. Genocide is being perpetrated in Gaza and we have a right to know what our Government is doing about it.”
MacAskill said he had never experienced such a ‘block’ on asking parliamentary questions before.
He added: “The failure to call for an immediate ceasefire is bad enough but any complicity raises issues of participating in war crimes. We need openness and transparency by our government. This is not in our name.”
Secrecy
The UK military-run Defence and Security Media Advisory (DSMA) Committee – better known as the ‘D-Notice’ committee – has also sent out an ‘advisory’ to all British media to suppress reporting on UK special forces’ activity related to Gaza. The SAS was previously reported to have deployed a force to Cyprus.
No British mainstream media outlets have reported on Declassified’s recent findings about RAF Akrotiri and Gaza despite the President of Cyprus Nikos Christodoulides having to defend his government from accusations of complicity in Israel’s bombing of Gaza.
In answer to questions about the use of RAF Akrotiri by Cypriot journalists over the weekend, Christodoulides said: “There is no such information, our country cannot be used as a base for war operations”.
However, RAF Akrotiri has long been the staging post for British bombing campaigns across the Middle East. Declassified also recently revealed that 129 US airmen are also permanently deployed at the base.
The censorship of information requests from MPs makes it all but certain that RAF Akrotiri is being used for covert military purposes that the government does not want the public to know about.
It is likely the UK is sending material military aid to Israel during its bombing of Gaza, which has now killed over 12,000 Palestinians, although it previously told Declassified it was not providing “lethal aid”.
Nuclear Power: UK’s Financial Challenge Unveiled
the actual cost might reach as high as £10 billion per reactor, resulting in an astonishing cumulative expense for the decommissioning process. …
this substantial cost could ultimately fall on taxpayers, raising concerns about the financial burden on the public.
Dev X Noah Nguyen, November 21, 2023
The UK’s Commitment to Nuclear Power and Financial Challenges
The United Kingdom’s dedication to nuclear power is becoming a financially challenging commitment as the dismantling expenses for its nuclear generating facilities continue to escalate. These costs have been advantageous for businesses involved in the dismantling process but a noteworthy expenditure for UK taxpayers
Regardless of the substantial costs associated with the new nuclear reactors at Hinkley Site C and the rising price of clean-up initiatives, the nation’s government remains committed to nuclear technology. This unwavering commitment is driven by the belief that nuclear power is crucial for achieving the UK’s long-term energy security and climate change goals. However, critics argue that increased investment in renewable energy sources could provide similar benefits, without the high financial burden and safety concerns associated with nuclear power……………………………………………………
Concerns Regarding Decommissioning Costs and Life Expectancy of Reactors
Nearly all of the remaining functional reactors are scheduled for closure by 2028, except Sizewell B, anticipated to stay in operation until 2035. With a life expectancy of roughly 40 years—considerably shorter than the 60 to 80 years frequently claimed by the sector—questions emerge about the demolition costs for the existing 23 reactors and the two under construction at Hinkley Point C.
As these reactors reach the end of their life cycle, it is crucial to plan and allocate resources effectively for their dismantling and waste disposal. The cost of decommissioning and managing nuclear facilities can significantly impact the overall economic feasibility of the energy generated, emphasizing the need for accurate cost estimations and environmentally responsible strategies.
Projected Costs of Dismantling and Importance of Effective Management
By the end of 2022, the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) projected a total dismantling cost of £149 billion. If this figure encompasses Hinkley Site C, it would equate to about £6 billion per reactor. This substantial financial investment highlights the importance of thoroughly managing the decommissioning process to ensure effective resource allocation. With the growing push towards renewable energy sources, proper management and safe dismantling of nuclear reactors have become increasingly significant for the country’s transition towards sustainable energy.
Higher Potential Costs and the Financial Burden on Taxpayers
However, Professor Stephen Thomas from the University of Greenwich’s energy policy department posits that the actual cost might reach as high as £10 billion per reactor, resulting in an astonishing cumulative expense for the decommissioning process. He further elaborates that this substantial cost could ultimately fall on taxpayers, raising concerns about the financial burden on the public. To mitigate such consequences, proper planning and establishing an adequate funding source must be undertaken for a feasible and efficient decommissioning process…………………………………………………………………………………….
What are the concerns regarding the decommissioning costs and life expectancy of nuclear reactors in the UK?
With functional reactors scheduled for closure and shorter life expectancies than often claimed, there are concerns about the demolition costs for the existing reactors and effective management of resources for dismantling and waste disposal. The cost of decommissioning can significantly impact the overall economic feasibility of nuclear-generated energy and necessitates accurate cost estimations and environmentally responsible strategies………….. https://www.devx.com/news/nuclear-power-uks-financial-challenge-unveiled/
Tories, Labour clash over Milton Keynes nuclear waste claims
Claims that Milton Keynes is being considered as a site to store nuclear
waste have sparked a war of words between the Labour and Conservative
parties. The Labour Leader of Milton Keynes City Council Peter Marland
claimed that a site in the north of the city had been identified as a
potential dumping ground for nuclear waste.
He said that Nuclear Waste
Services, the body responsible for managing the nuclear waste generated
from UK power stations, has contacted the council about an “interested
party” looking for a site. Nuclear Waste Services has been approached for
comment. In an email seen by the BBC Local Democracy Reporting Service
(LDRS) a council official said they had been contacted by a member of the
government body who “confirmed that they will ‘close out’ with the
interested party, meaning the initial assessment of a site in MK will go no
further”.
Milton Keynes Labour said it had launched a petition to oppose
the “plans” that will be sent to the Secretary of State for Energy
Security and Net Zero, Claire Coutinho.
Bucks Free Press 21st Nov 2023
UK Has £10 Billion Per Nuclear Reactor Decommissioning Bottomless Pit
estimate in late 2022 was that the program was likely to cost £260 billion given the cost trends. That’s £10.4 billion per reactor, an order of magnitude higher than the industry average of three years ago.
Whether £6 billion or £10 billion, these numbers should be giving national energy policy makers pause. After all, those costs are going to be paid in the future in future value dollars that will be inflated. They won’t be getting magically smaller due to discounting, but should be included in cost cases with the discounting rates built in.
Clean Technica, , Michael Barnard
The decommissioning costs for the UK’s nuclear generation are coming home to roost, and they are laying golden eggs for the firms that won the business. For UK citizens, not so much. Despite the very high costs of both the new nuclear reactors at Hinkley Site C, the rapidly rising costs of clean up and the much cheaper alternatives available, the country’s current administration remains committed to the technology. Something is likely to give.
The UK is like the USA and France, a western nuclear military power. They built and operated four nuclear powered submarines with nuclear missiles and two nuclear powered aircraft carriers. That gave them one of the preconditions for success for commercial nuclear electricity generation.
They built all of the 14 shut down and 9 currently operating nuclear generation plants between 1957 and 1995, satisfying the conditions of success of a three to four decade build out to maintain master builders, creation of a nuclear construction industry with skilled, certified and security validated resources, and building a couple of dozen reactors to amortize the national program across.
They built all reactors with a very narrow set of designs, first the Magnox which also created weapons grade plutonium and then the AGR which was a modified Magnox optimized for electricity generation, not plutonium manufacturing. The high similarity and only two designs across all 23 reactors satisfied another criterion for success of a nuclear program…………….
Naturally, the nuclear program was a national strategic priority for the UK with bi-partisan support between the Conservatives and Labour, satisfying another condition of success.
This was a blueprint for a successful nuclear electrical generation program, and why nuclear generation is a poor fit for free market economics.
Despite no longer having the obvious conditions for success for a new nuclear program, the British government got behind the Hinkley Point C construction of two new EPR reactors with their unproven design. That program is years late and 50% over budget as a result. The reactors are GW scale, with 3.2 GW between the two reactors so have one condition for success out of six. The UK government also have planned two EPRs at the Sizewell site, with one of the innumerable Conservative Prime Ministers of the past decade committing £100 million of governmental money in a vain attempt to get any private investors interested. No schedule has been set for construction of those reactors.
But now the reactors are shut down or about to be shut down. Most of the remaining operating reactors will be off the grid by 2028, with only Sizewell B hanging on until 2035. All reactors had roughly a 40 year lifespan, not the 60 to 80 years often claimed by the industry, including the 60 year claim for Hinkley Point C.
How much will it cost to decommission those 23 reactors and the two Hinkley Point C reactors still under construction? The last time I looked at nuclear decommissioning costs and duration was three years ago. At the time, the average was roughly a billion US dollars and a century of duration per site.
Well, the UK’s nuclear program is definitely exceeding that. As of late 2022, the official estimate of the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) was £149 billion. Assuming Hinkley Site C was rolled into that number, that would be a cost of £6 billion per reactor, or more than many nuclear advocates claim new nuclear can be built for.
However, Stephen Thomas, a professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich and a regular analyst of the nuclear industry with a publication history on energy and nuclear programs with a global reach stretching back to 2004, has a slightly different expectation. He first published on the UK’s NDA in 2005 and has been tracking costs closely since, including with freedom of information requests to get accurate numbers.
His estimate in late 2022 was that the program was likely to cost £260 billion given the cost trends. That’s £10.4 billion per reactor, an order of magnitude higher than the industry average of three years ago.
Whether £6 billion or £10 billion, these numbers should be giving national energy policy makers pause. After all, those costs are going to be paid in the future in future value dollars that will be inflated. They won’t be getting magically smaller due to discounting, but should be included in cost cases with the discounting rates built in.
Given the magnitude of the costs, effectively every MWh generated by the UK fleet of reactors cost substantially more than its official stated cost. The price will be paid, after all.
If there were no alternatives to nuclear generation, then this wouldn’t be a problem compared to global warming. But, of course, this is 2023 and there are proven, effective, efficient and reliable forms of low-carbon electrical generation that do compete with nuclear energy, wind and solar. ……………………………………
The full lifecycle costs of nuclear energy are fairly well established now, and they are much higher than for renewables, transmission and storage. The conditions for success for nuclear programs are well established as well, and there isn’t a single country in the world that has fulfilled them in the 21st Century. Even China has failed, in my assessment as their industrial policy of exporting nuclear reactors of any type foreign buyers might want overrode energy policy requirements to build only a single design.
It’s unclear to me what blend of ideology, tribalism and magical thinking are combining to make countries think that their nuclear programs are unique, and that they will succeed at them when there are clear alternatives. https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/19/uk-has-e10-billion-per-nuclear-reactor-decommissioning-bottomless-pit/
Major malfunction on Royal navy nuclear submarine plunges warship into ‘danger zone’
The sub was preparing to go on patrol when dials indicating its depth stopped working, leaving commanders to think it was level when it was still diving.
Jerome Starkey – The Sun, November 20, 202
A Royal navy nuclear sub sinking towards its crush depth was saved moments from disaster.
A depth gauge failed on the decades-old Vanguard class vessel, carrying 140 crew and Trident 2 doomsday missiles in the Atlantic.
Such a catastrophe would also have triggered a nightmare salvage mission to recover the top-secret vessel and its nuclear reactor before the Russians got to the scene, The Sun reports.
The sub was preparing to go on patrol when dials indicating its depth stopped working, leaving commanders to think it was level when it was still diving.
It was entering the “danger zone” when engineers at the back of the 490ft Vanguard-class vessel spotted a second gauge and raised the alarm………………………………………. more https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/major-malfunction-on-royal-navy-nuclear-submarine-plunges-warship-into-danger-zone/news-story/6267e0293fd0b47979b907f1912d5058
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 (116)
- 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 