Rolls-Royce falls 6% as update lacks oomph and news on small nuclear business
Oliver Haill, 11 May 23, Proactive Investor 11th May 2023
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC’s (LSE:RR.) shares fell 6% to a month’s low after its trading update contained nothing new, analysts said, with some concern about the lack of updates about its small nuclear reactor business…………
Weatherwatch: concerns over climate impact on UK nuclear power sites
Ex-adviser worries ministers have not taken into account sea level rise and storms in selecting sites
Paul Brown https://www.theguardian.com/news/2023/may/12/weatherwatch-concerns-over-climate-impact-on-uk-nuclear-power-sites
Successive governments since the 1980s have had plans for new generations of nuclear power stations sited around the coasts of the United Kingdom. Although the main reason for building them, according to politicians, is to provide a low-carbon form of electricity to combat the climate crisis, no thought seems to have gone into what the climate crisis might do to the nuclear power stations.
Prof Andy Blowers, a former government adviser on nuclear waste, points out in the Town and Country Planning Association Journal that the eight sites identified in 2011 as suitable for new stations are the same as those identified half a century earlier, on which the first generation of nuclear power stations were built.
The reason the sites were originally chosen was their remoteness, for safety, and their proximity to the sea, for cooling purposes. The latest reasoning is that they would have a better chance of public acceptance because two generations of local people have worked in the industry. The new installations are planned to operate for 60 years and will need another century after closure to cool sufficiently to remove the waste.
Blowers, an opponent of the government plans, worries that ministers seem to have taken no account of sea level rise, intense storms and the prospect of flooding at these sites.
Campaigners against UK nuclear waste dump plan claim victory in local elections
Nuclear storage dump campaigners claim victory in local elections
Call for government to honour wishes
By Daniel Jaines Local Democracy Reporter, The Lincolnite, 11 May 23
Anti-nuclear campaigners have claimed victory in Theddlethorpe after last week’s district and parish council elections.
Opposition councillors, including independent Trais Hesketh, gained a majority of seats with a high voter turnout.
The campaign’s success saw voters “overwhelmingly reject” Nuclear Waste Service’s proposal to build a Geological Disposal Facility beneath the former Conoco gas terminal.
Prior to the election, anti-dump candidates were elected unopposed for eight of the ten available seats on Theddlethorpe Parish Council.
The Guardians of the East Coast campaigners have also claimed support from neighbouring towns such as Mablethorpe, Sutton on Sea, and Trusthorpe.
Ken Smith, chairperson for GOTEC, praised the residents for protesting through the ballot box.
“We now call upon Lincolnshire County Council and East Linsey District Council to honour the people’s decision by withdrawing from the so-called community partnership,” he said.
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities group has also backed the campaigners. Councillor David Blackburn said, “When it comes to a GDF, Mablethorpe, Theddlethorpe, and Sutton on Sea do not represent the ‘willing community’ that the government and nuclear industry say they are looking for to host the dump – instead voters there have clearly said ‘No’.”
………….An NWS spokesperson stated that the GDF would only be built where there was the consent of a willing community.
………………………………………………….. Concerns raised around seismic blasting
There have recently been concerns over the impact of seismic blasting in other areas of the UK as part of exploratory works carried out by NWS ahead of geophysical survey works.
The Lakes Against Nuclear Dump/Radiation Free Lakeland groups fear marine deaths in the Irish Sea and Allerdale’s Solway Firth area as part of Copeland exploration were a result of the seismic tests and have called for them to halt while investigations take place……… https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2023/05/nuclear-storage-dump-campaigners-claim-victory-in-local-elections
Nuclear Free Local Authorities issue appeal to King over Lincolnshire Nuke Dump
Save our sceptred isle: NFLAs issue appeal to King over Lincolnshire Nuke Dump. https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/save-our-sceptred-isle-nflas-issue-appeal-to-king-over-lincolnshire-nuke-dump/ 11 May 23
Just days after the Coronation, the English Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLAs) have written to the nation’s new Sovereign to ask His Majesty King Charles III to intercede over the plan to locate a nuclear waste dump in East Lincolnshire right next to the first Royal nature reserve.
The East Lincolnshire coast has been selected as the first of the ‘King’s Series of National Nature Reserves’ to mark the commencement of His Majesty’s Reign. A formal announcement by Natural England is expected in the summer.
The ‘Lincolnshire Coronation Coast Nature Reserve’ will cover some 21 square miles, centred upon existing protected areas at Theddlethorpe and Saltfleetby comprising mud flats, salt- and freshwater marshes and sand dunes, which support a diverse variety of wintering and breeding birds, natter jack toads, insects, and plants. The establishment of the reserve would enhance the area’s existing offer to visitors, many of whom flock to adjoining Mablethorpe to enjoy the beautiful Blue Flag award winning beaches.
So it was with regret that Councillor David Blackburn, Chair of the English Forum of the NFLAs had to sound a note of caution in his letter to His Majesty that Nuclear Waste Services has plans to locate a Geological Disposal Facility, a nuclear waste dump, right next to the reserve.
This would be the destination for Britain’s high-level, heat emitting radioactive waste, including its huge stockpile of plutonium. This waste has either already been generated through the UK’s military and civil nuclear programmes over the last 70 years or will be generated in the future through their continuance.
The GDF would comprise a surface facility approximately 1 square KM, which would most likely be located on the site of the former Conoco gas terminal in Theddlethorpe. This would be the railhead receiving regular shipments of nuclear waste. This waste would be transported below ground and out through tunnels beneath the North Sea. As nuclear waste is transported by rail, and there is no current infrastructure in place, there would be a necessity to construct a new rail line to serve the location.
The process of selecting a site for this facility could take between 15 and 20 years after which the construction and operation of such a facility would last more than 100 years.
In his letter, Councillor Blackburn contends that the project is ‘of such an immense size and in (such) a wholly inappropriate location’ that it would be ‘massively disruptive and harmful’ to the flora and fauna of the local environment, including that of the Royal Reserve, and to local people, as well as ‘massively ruinous’ to the local tourist and agrarian economy. Councillor Blackburn ends by appealing to the King on behalf of ‘His Majesty’s many loyal and anxious subjects in the affected area to intercede with relevant Ministers of the Crown to end this folly ‘.
Commenting Cllr Blackburn said: “The creation of this Royal Reserve is a wonderful idea and wholly in keeping with His Majesty the King’s known love for the natural environment. I can only hope that by drawing the Sovereign’s attention to the government’s lunatic plan to locate a nuclear waste dump next to the reserve that the King might be able to intervene to end the threat of it.”
Profitable industry in trying to clean up dead nuclear reactors
Magnox is ready to start a major decommissioning project to clean-up and
demolish four ‘blower house’ superstructures that surround Berkeley
site’s two reactor buildings. Altrad has bagged a £31m contract for the
design, asbestos removal, deplant, demolition and construction works in and
around the blower houses.
The firm will also be supported by Veolia KDC
Decommissioning Services, NSG Environmental, OBR Construction, Mammoet, and
Cavendish Nuclear. Ross McAllister, Magnox programme delivery director
said: “This is one of the largest decommissioning projects that Berkeley
site has seen for several years.
“It was originally planned for the
2070’s so it is fantastic to bring that forward by five decades in our aim
to deliver our mission better, faster and even safer. “The blower houses
circulated gas through the reactors to transfer heat into 310 tonne boilers
to create steam to turn the turbines and generate electricity. The last of
the 15 gigantic metal boilers was transported to Sweden for cleaning,
smelting and recycling in 2013. “The buildings will be emptied of the
residual metallic low-level waste and undergo a full asbestos clean before
being demolished.
Construction Enquirer 10th May 2023
Prevent, protect, consult – the NFLA (Nuclear Free Local Authorities)’ three priorities for UK radioactive waste policy
The UK Government has its priorities ‘all wrong’ in its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning, so says the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities in its response to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s consultation on its proposals for the future management of radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning.
Instead of an emphasis on cutting costs and reducing the burdens on the nuclear industry as DESNZ would like, the NFLA believes that government and the nuclear industry should do everything necessary for the protection of human health and safeguarding our natural environment – whatever the cost.
To the NFLA, government policy and industry practice should focus upon three main tenets:
- Preventing the creation of more radioactive waste, by not building any more nuclear power plants, by closing and decommissioning existing ones as quickly as possible, and by not revisiting mad-cap schemes that have failed before, like repurposing plutonium as reactor fuel, which creates yet more waste and risks nuclear weapons proliferation;
- Protecting the public and the natural environment, by ‘concentrating and containing’ existing waste on or near the surface on the sites where it was created or is currently stored and having a policy of active ongoing management, with the facility of retrieval if waste is stored below ground. This is opposed to government policy which for high-level waste is focused upon transportation by rail to a Geological Disposal Facility into which the waste would be deposited and forgotten about and for lower-level wastes is one of ‘dilute and disperse’, which involves incineration releasing radiation into the atmosphere or dumping into municipal waste tips or discharging it into rivers or oceans.
- Consulting the public, over the storage and treatment of radioactive waste, and its transportation if this should continue, and also educating the public on the radiological risks attached to these activities; all too often consultation is tokenistic, not inclusive and not open, with the nuclear industry still conducting much of its business behind closed doors.
The author of our response was Pete Roche, the NFLA Policy Advisor (Scotland). Pete has over fifty years of environmental and anti-nuclear campaigning experience, having first been involved in protests against the construction of the Torness Nuclear Power Station in the 1970s.
The NFLA’s full response can be read at the end of this media release [on original]; it amounts to a resounding ‘No’.
The DESNZ consultation is still open for public comments until 24 May 2023.
The consultation papers can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/managing-radioactive-substances-and-nuclear-decommissioning
For more information, please contact NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email on richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk or mobile 07583097793
Bristol solar farm connects directly to the grid.
A solar farm near Bristol has become the UK’s first to connect directly to
the national grid, opening a way to unblocking bottlenecks in renewable
energy schemes.
To date, the hundreds of solar farms and 1.2 million homes
with rooftop solar panels have been connected to the electricity grid’s
equivalent of A-roads, called distribution networks. However, the 50MW
Larks Green solar farm, capable of powering 17,000 homes, has instead been
connected to the transmission network, the motorways of the electricity
system.
Solar power is the cheapest electricity technology in many
countries and the fastest-growing electricity source globally. Solar
industry figures said that years-long delays were normal to enable projects
to start producing clean electricity. Some developers are routinely being
told they will have to wait until the 2030s, and in one case a company was
told it would have to wait until 2037. Ministers recently promised to
introduce reforms to speed up connections, but are yet to provide details.
On Thursday a cross-party group of MPs wrote to the government telling it
to work with energy networks, including National Grid ESO, to “unblock
the pipeline of delays”. “There is potential for solar energy to have a
bright future in the UK, but a dark cloud of delays for the industry
hinders the ability to meet its full potential,” said Philip Dunne,
chairman of the environmental audit committee.
Times 4th May 2023
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/first-solar-farm-connects-directly-to-national-grid-6nx7qjx5s
Protest against investment in Sizewell C nuclear power station.
Campaigners unfurled banners reading ‘Aviva, back renewables not Sizewell
C’ outside Norwich City’s Carrow Road football ground on Thursday.
Protestors from Stop Sizewell C gathered outside an insurer’s Annual
General Meeting (AGM) to vent concerns the firm was planning to invest in
the new Sizewell C nuclear power station.
East Anglian Daily Times 5th May 2023
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/23501909.suffolk-sizewell-c-protestors-gather-norwich-city-fc/
Opposition to Sizewell C nuclear was a factor in Green Party success in East Suffolk
The conservatives in East Suffolk were swept out of power in a Green wave
as the Green Party gained 11 seats in the local elections. In total, the
Tories lost 24 seats as their number declined from 39 to just 15 seats,
leaving the council with no overall majority.
Meanwhile the Greens moved on to 16 seats, while there were also gains for Labour, who moved on to 12 seats, an increase of five, while the Liberal Democrats also saw a rise of
eight seats to leave them with 11. Southwold councillor David Beavan, who
represents the Liberal Democrats, said meetings would be held between the
Greens, Liberal Democrats and Labour next week to discuss forming a
coalition to run the council.
He believed voters had rejected the Tories
over issues such as Sizewell C and plans to route electricity cables from
offshore wind farms through the Suffolk and Essex countryside instead of
the Thames Estuary. A number of high profile Conservative candidates lost
their seats, including former district council leader Ray Herring, who led
for 20 years, but lost his Rendlesham and Orford seat to the Greens’ Tim
Wilson.
East Anglian Daily Times 5th May 2023
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/23504329.tories-very-disappointed-greens-sweep-east-suffolk/
A KINGLY PROPOSAL: LETTER FROM JULIAN ASSANGE TO KING CHARLES III
JULIAN ASSANGE, 5 MAY 2023 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/06/port-kembla-rally-to-demand-nsw-site-be-ruled-out-as-aukus-nuclear-submarine-base
To His Majesty King Charles III,
On the coronation of my liege, I thought it only fitting to extend a heartfelt invitation to you to commemorate this momentous occasion by visiting your very own kingdom within a kingdom: His Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh.
You will no doubt recall the wise words of a renowned playwright: “The quality of mercy is not strained. It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven upon the place beneath.”
Ah, but what would that bard know of mercy faced with the reckoning at the dawn of your historic reign? After all, one can truly know the measure of a society by how it treats its prisoners, and your kingdom has surely excelled in that regard.
Your Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh is located at the prestigious address of One Western Way, London, just a short foxhunt from the Old Royal Naval College in Greenwich. How delightful it must be to have such an esteemed establishment bear your name.
“One can truly know the measure of a society by how it treats its prisoners”
It is here that 687 of your loyal subjects are held, supporting the United Kingdom’s record as the nation with the largest prison population in Western Europe. As your noble government has recently declared, your kingdom is currently undergoing “the biggest expansion of prison places in over a century”, with its ambitious projections showing an increase of the prison population from 82,000 to 106,000 within the next four years. Quite the legacy, indeed.
As a political prisoner, held at Your Majesty’s pleasure on behalf of an embarrassed foreign sovereign, I am honoured to reside within the walls of this world class institution. Truly, your kingdom knows no bounds.
During your visit, you will have the opportunity to feast upon the culinary delights prepared for your loyal subjects on a generous budget of two pounds per day. Savour the blended tuna heads and the ubiquitous reconstituted forms that are purportedly made from chicken. And worry not, for unlike lesser institutions such as Alcatraz or San Quentin, there is no communal dining in a mess hall. At Belmarsh, prisoners dine alone in their cells, ensuring the utmost intimacy with their meal.
Beyond the gustatory pleasures, I can assure you that Belmarsh provides ample educational opportunities for your subjects. As Proverbs 22:6 has it: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Observe the shuffling queues at the medicine hatch, where inmates gather their prescriptions, not for daily use, but for the horizon-expanding experience of a “big day out”—all at once.
You will also have the opportunity to pay your respects to my late friend Manoel Santos, a gay man facing deportation to Bolsonaro’s Brazil, who took his own life just eight yards from my cell using a crude rope fashioned from his bedsheets. His exquisite tenor voice now silenced forever.
Venture further into the depths of Belmarsh and you will find the most isolated place within its walls: Healthcare, or “Hellcare” as its inhabitants lovingly call it. Here, you will marvel at sensible rules designed for everyone’s safety, such as the prohibition of chess, whilst permitting the far less dangerous game of checkers.
Deep within Hellcare lies the most gloriously uplifting place in all of Belmarsh, nay, the whole of the United Kingdom: the sublimely named Belmarsh End of Life Suite. Listen closely, and you may hear the prisoners’ cries of “Brother, I’m going to die in here”, a testament to the quality of both life and death within your prison.
But fear not, for there is beauty to be found within these walls. Feast your eyes upon the picturesque crows nesting in the razor wire and the hundreds of hungry rats that call Belmarsh home. And if you come in the spring, you may even catch a glimpse of the ducklings laid by wayward mallards within the prison grounds. But don’t delay, for the ravenous rats ensure their lives are fleeting.
I implore you, King Charles, to visit His Majesty’s Prison Belmarsh, for it is an honour befitting a king. As you embark upon your reign, may you always remember the words of the King James Bible: “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7). And may mercy be the guiding light of your kingdom, both within and without the walls of Belmarsh.
Your most devoted subject,
Julian Assange A9379AY
A mess of different Small Nuclear Reactor Designs in UK.
By the time SMRs might be deployable in significant numbers, realistically after 2035, it will be too late for them to contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The risk is that, as in all the previous failed nuclear revivals, the fruitless pursuit of SMRs will divert resources away from options that are cheaper, at least as effective, much less risky, and better able to contribute to energy security and environmental goals.
No2 Nuclear Power SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.97, April 2023
More designs of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are beginning to emerge which could rival the Rolls Royce design, so the government has decided to launch its competition to gather further evidence before any firm deals are struck. According to ONR a number of companies have, in recent months, applied to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) for entry into Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process. BEIS is assessing those applications before deciding whether or not to ask ONR to start the GDA process. The plan is for the government to eventually award £1bn in co-funding to the winning SMR design. This money would help the company get through the GDA process.
At least six new SMR designs have applied to BEIS to be entered into the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process. As well as Rolls Royce’s SMR, which has already entered the process. (1) The applicants are proposing to build a range of technologies including fast reactors and high temperature reactors which were built as prototypes in the 1950s and 1960s – but successive attempts to build demonstration plants have been short-lived failures. It is hard to see why these technologies should now succeed given their poor record.
The main claim for SMRs over their predecessors is that being smaller, they can be made in factories as modules using cheaper production line techniques, rather than one-off component fabrication methods being used at Hinkley Point C. Any savings made from factory-built modules will have to compensate for the scale economies lost. A 1,600MW reactor is likely to be much cheaper than 10 reactors of 160MW. And it will be expensive to test the claim that production line techniques will compensate for lost scale economies. By the time SMRs might be deployable in significant numbers, realistically after 2035, it will be too late for them to contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The risk is that, as in all the previous failed nuclear revivals, the fruitless pursuit of SMRs will divert resources away from options that are cheaper, at least as effective, much less risky, and better able to contribute to energy security and environmental goals. (2)
The six designs are:
- GE Hitachi (GEH) submitted an application for its BWRX-300 boiling water reactor in December.
- 2. The US firm Holtec has submitted its SMR-160 design, a 160MWe pressurised water reactor developed in collaboration with Mitsubishi Electric of Japan and Hyundai
- 3. US firm X-Energy, working with Cavendish Nuclear, wants to deploy its high-temperature gas reactor in the UK.
- 4. UK-Italian start-up Newcleo has submitted it lead-cooled fast reactor design. The company says it’s in discussions with the NDA about using Sellafield plutonium and depleted uranium. (3) The Company says it has raised £900m to further its plans which include the establishment of a first Mixed Plutonium-Uranium Oxides (MOX) production plant in France, with another plant to follow later in the UK. (4)
- 5. UK Atomics – a subsidiary of Denmark’s Copenhagen Atomics – says it has submitted a Generic Design Assessment (GDA) entry application for its small and modular thorium molten salt reactor. (5)
- 6. GMET, a Cumbrian engineering group which last year acquired established nuclear supplier TSP Engineering, said it is developing a small reactor called NuCell for production at TSP’s Workington facility. (6)
The list makes no mention of an application by NuScale, which has already expressed an interest in building at Trawsfynydd. (7) According to the Telegraph, NuScale’s reactor has received design approval from the US’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) putting it ahead of the competition. (8) However, it was NuScale’s 50 MWe design which was approved by the NRC. That is no longer being pursued by the company. It is applying for a new approval for its 77 MWe design. Although NuScale claimed that the new design was so close to the original that the second approval would be simple, that is turning out not to be the case, as the NRC made clear in its recent letter. (9)
No mention either of the Last Energy micro reactor. The Company has signed a $19 billion deal to supply 34 x 20 MW nuclear reactors to Poland and the UK. These SMRs will be about 2.4 times the cost per MWh of the very expensive Hinkley facility. (10)
Mark Foy, Chief Executive and Chief Nuclear Inspector, Office for Nuclear Regulation, told the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in January that he was assuming that ONR will be asked to undertake a number of GDAs for some of the SMR technologies that are currently being considered by BEIS. “Our assessment is that if BEIS determines that two or three technologies need to go through generic design assessment, that work will be done in the next four years, or thereabouts”. (11)
Prof Steve Thomas, Greenwich University, has critically assessed the current enthusiasm for Small Modular Reactors in the UK and elsewhere. He concludes:
“The risk is not so much that large numbers of SMRs will be built, they won’t be. The risk is that, as in all the previous failed nuclear revivals, the fruitless pursuit of SMRs will divert resources away from options that are cheaper, at least as effective, much less risky, and better able to contribute to energy security and environmental goals. Given the climate emergency we now face, surely it is time to finally turn our backs on this failing technology?” (12)
‘Green’ Freeports
Meanwhile, the Inverness Courier reports that the Cromarty Firth and Inverness green freeport hopes to fabricate parts for SMRs and then transport them to the construction site wherever that might be. (13) Highlands Against Nuclear Power (formerly Highlands Against Nuclear Transport) says nuclear should not be part of the Cromarty freeport vision. (14)
The Scottish NFLA convenor, Councillor Paul Leinster wrote to Scottish Government Net Zero Minister Michael Matheson asking him to reject nuclear power at Scotland’s two new Green Freeports and instead make them a hub for renewable technologies to produce power for the nation. (15) Unfortunately, the Minister replied saying he will not be opposed to a nuclear manufacturing facility in a supposed Green Freeport. (16)
Forth Green Freeport has said they have no plans for nuclear power generation at its sites – including Rosyth – after campaigners raised concerns. “The Forth Green Freeport vision for Rosyth is centred around a new freight terminal, offshore renewable manufacturing and green power generating capacity,” said the spokesperson. “The FGF will also enable the development of largescale advanced manufacturing, skills and innovation onsite, alongside a proposed new rail freight connection. This vision and the associated economic and community benefits will boost Fife and the wider region. There are no plans for nuclear power generation on FGF sites.” However, it’s possible FGF is answering the wrong question which is about manufacturing parts for SMRs, not nuclear generation. (17)
There were reports that the Ineos-run facility at Grangemouth was interested in building a Rolls Royce SMR, (18) but the Scottish Government said it would block such a move, (19) Energy Minister, Michael Matheson responded to a letter from Scottish NFLA chair, Councillor Paul Leinster, saying Scottish ministers “remain committed” to their “long-standing government policy to withhold support for any new nuclear power stations to be built in Scotland” and officials have been advised by Ineos that “Small Modular Reactors do not currently form part of their net zero road map for Grangemouth”. (20) The Scottish Tories attacked the Scottish Government for its stance describing it as anti-business. (21 https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SafeEnergy_No97.pdf
What’s happening with Great British Nuclear? Not Much.
No2 Nuclear Power SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.97, April 2023.
Last November, the UK Government was all set to announce proposals to set up a new body called Great British Nuclear (GBN), to develop a network of small modular reactors (SMRs), as well as promote new large reactors. GBN would be responsible for getting planning permission and doing the preparation work on designated sites. However, the announcement was delayed because of a row over funding with Treasury officials arguing there is no money to pay for it. (1)
Then on 30th March, there was a further announcement, as part of the Government’s so called Green Day, when its revised Energy Strategy was launched. The strategy reiterated the pledge to set up “Great British Nuclear”, which will begin recruiting staff “shortly” and will be based “in or around” Greater Manchester. But there was still no new money announced. The body will run a competition for small modular reactor (SMR) designs, starting with “market engagement” in April 2023 and a selection process in summer. It will have “an ambition to assess and decide on the leading technologies by autumn”. The government will publish a nuclear “roadmap” later this year. (2)
Energy Security Secretary, Grant Shapps wants “to deliver wholesale UK electricity prices that rank amongst the cheapest in Europe”, (3) with GBN providing up to a quarter of our electricity –24GW by 2050, up from the previous target of 16GW. (Hinkley Point C should be 3.2GW). (4) Somehow, Shapps thinks Small Modular Reactors will help with that. But it is far from clear that SMR production line techniques will compensate for lost scale economies of building large reactors. (5)
The American SMR design from NuScale Power is the canary in the SMR market –already far more expensive and taking much longer to build than renewable and storage resources. (6)
Funding to establish GBN doesn’t mean funding for new reactors. The Times reported that a deal on funding was unlikely to materialise for at least another 12 months. (7) The perpetual launch of Great British Nuclear won’t get us anywhere near 24GW; £210 million lobbed at Rolls-Royce SMRs, and a £700 million injection into the planning for Suffolk’s Sizewell C, a nuke that’ll cost £30 billion-plus, is small beer. (8) Rolls-Royce’s nuclear power business has frozen hiring, (9) and Tom Samson, head of its SMR division is leaving the Company. (10) Rolls says its SMR programme will run out of cash by
the end of 2024, but it hopes to receive UK regulatory approval by about August 2024. (11)
Andrew Bowie, the Tory MP for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine has become the UK’s first ever nuclear energy minister. The SNP’s Westminster energy spokesman Alan Brown said: “Andrew Bowie must be taking up one of the most pointless ministerial positions in the UK government. If the Tories think they will bring down energy bills by building nuclear power stations that won’t be ready for years to come then they are more delusional than we thought.” (12)
The Scottish Government condemned the GBN launch. The new Cabinet Secretary for Energy Neil Gray said: “The launch of GBN does not change the Scottish Government’s opposition to the building of new nuclear fission power stations in Scotland. Given that new nuclear power will take years, if not decades, to become operational, will be expensive, and will generate further radioactive waste, we do not believe it to be a sustainable solution to our net zero energy requirements.” (13) Anas Sarwar
has condemned the Scottish Government’s nuclear stance as ‘short-sighted’ and ‘unambitious’. (14)
On 15th March, Jeremy Hunt, announced that nuclear power will be classified as “environmentally sustainable” in UK’s green taxonomy, “giving it access to the same investment incentives as renewable energy.” He stated that “because the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine, we will need another critical source of cheap and reliable energy. And that is nuclear.” (15) It’s unclear whether the reclassification will help in the hunt for co-investors alongside EDF and government in Sizewell C.
Ministers were forced to publish the raft of revised policies, contained in 40 documents and nearly 3,000 pages, after a court ruled last year that the existing strategy for reaching net zero emissions was unlawful because it provided insufficient detail on how the target would be met. But it has admitted the revised plans will only deliver 92% of the goal to cut emissions by 68% by 2030,compared with 1990. The Green Alliance think tanks says even that 92% is a very generous reading. (16) https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SafeEnergy_No97.pdf
Now the UK government is saying they need costly large nuclear reactors as well as small ones
No2 Nuclear Power SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.97, April 2023
Simon Bowen, the Industry Adviser at Great British Nuclear (GBN) told the House of Commons Science & Technology Committee he thinks the UK will need two more large reactors after Hinkley and Sizewell as well as SMRs and Advanced Modular Reactors (AMRs). (1)
Graham Stuart, Minister of State at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, told the same Committee that Government policy is to seek UP TO 24GW of nuclear by 2050. He continues:
“I would love it if storage to deal with the intermittent renewables became cheaper, more effective and better for long-term storage and the like. I am not saying that we will definitely have 25% of our electricity from nuclear. That is our ambition; that is our thinking; but as technology, prices and the economics develop, we want tensions between these technologies to deliver it. However, what I can say is that we are absolutely committed to nuclear as a significant share of our electricity because we need that baseload and are committed to driving it forward.”
In January, Bechtel and Westinghouse told the Welsh Affairs Select Committee they are hoping to have an AP1000 nuclear station up and running on Anglesey by 2035. The Development Consent Order process takes 4 years and it takes around 6 years to build. The companies see it as the role of GBN to acquire the site from Hitachi. The Companies are confident they will be able to address the biodiversity and Welsh language issues which led to the Horizon application being rejected by the Planning Inspector. (3) The two companies have been in talks with government since 2020. (4) The two AP1000s being built in the US State of Georgia at Vogtle were originally expected to cost $14 billion, but this has now jumped to $34 billion. (5) The first reactor has only just reached initial criticality – construction started in 2009 and was meant to be complete in 2016. (6) The Nation Cymru website asks whether Wales should be involved with Great British Nuclear at all. (7) https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SafeEnergy_No97.pdf
UK government to take 50% stake in Sizewell C nuclear project, amid legal challenge, soaring costs, and pension funds pulling out.
No2 Nuclear Power SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.97, April 2023
In December, the Government announced, yet again, that Sizewell C will go ahead, and that it would invest nearly £700m to end China’s controversial involvement. Ministers said the move would mean the UK Government taking a 50% stake in the project’s development. (1) However, the announcement was no more than the long-anticipated buying out of China General Nuclear from the project and funds to allow the development of the project to the point of a Final Investment Decision (FID). (2) Business Secretary Grant Shapps has refused to provide a figure for the cost of buying out China’s stake.
It reaffirmed its commitment again at the launch of the ‘Powering Up Britain’ strategy. It says it will bring Sizewell C to the point of a final investment decision this year. In his spring budget announced earlier this month, chancellor Jeremy Hunt confirmed the Government would be investing £700million in Sizewell C. (3)
Campaigners launched a legal challenge against Sizewell C in the High Court on Wednesday 22nd and Thursday 23rd March. (4) Together Against Sizewell C argues that the environmental impacts of securing a permanent water supply of two million litres per day were never assessed. As a result, the government cannot guarantee the date the nuclear plant will open, which means it has no way of knowing for sure that the plant’s contribution to climate change is enough to override the environmental harm it will cause. TASC also says no alternatives to nuclear power, including renewables, were considered when the Secretary of State for Energy, then Kwasi Kwarteng, gave the go ahead. He rejected the recommendation of the Examining Authority which ruled in February 2022 that unless the outstanding water supply strategy could be resolved and sufficient information provided to enable the Secretary of State to carry out his obligations under the Habitats Regulations, there was no case for a development consent order. The result of the hearing should be known between the 23rd April and the 7th May.
Sizewell Funding Efforts to attract investment into Sizewell C have taken a setback after two of the UK’s biggest pension funds turned their backs on the project. The BT Pension Scheme and NatWest – have told campaign group Stop Sizewell C and the Daily Mail they do not intend to back the project. (5) However, the UAE’s wealth fund – Mubadala – may invest. (6)
With Hinkley Point C now forecast to cost £33 billion and Sizewell C as much as £30 billion, Grant Shapps insists “private sector capital and investment” will ride to the rescue. He points to the Middle East. “I was recently in the Gulf states and was really struck by the money available for investment,” he says. “What they want to know is that we’ve got a platform, Great British Nuclear, and that we’re up for it — we’ve got the technology.” (7)
The Flamanville EPR is another six months late and 500 million euros more expensive. (8) Regular electricity production at Finland’s new Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor has been postponed again to 29th March. (9) Nuclear Engineering International summarises where the world’s EPRs have got to. (10) https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SafeEnergy_No97.pdf
UK government’s proposals on radioactive substances : -all of its 7 “consultation questions” should be vigourously opposed.
Nuclear Waste Consultation, No2 Nuclear Power SAFE ENERGY E-JOURNAL No.97, April 2023
The UK and devolved governments have launched a consultation on proposals to update and consolidate policies on managing radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning into a single UK-wide policy framework. (1) The new document will basically replace existing policy which dates back to a 1995 document commonly known as Command 2919. The proposals focus on 3 areas: managing solid radioactive waste; updating the policy for nuclear decommissioning; managing nuclear materials and spent nuclear fuel. Proposals include leaving lower-level waste behind on decommissioned sites; disposing intermediate level waste in near surface facilities and, most shockingly, reintroducing reprocessing.
In a draft response, I argue that the consultation has its priorities the wrong way round. In Part 1 there is far more emphasis placed on cost-effectiveness and removing burdens from industry, whereas protecting public health appears to be relegated to a second-class objective. Even here the emphasis is on meeting safety and environmental regulations rather than maximising public health protection, with no recognition of the uncertainties involved in radiation protection.
There needs to be a new emphasis on openness, transparency and public consultation as plans for decommissioning and waste management are developed, so that the public is fully aware of the intended destination of each waste stream, radioactive discharges expected from each proposed method of waste management and the dose implications of each proposed action. The public should also be given access to independent advice.
The document says: Government “must strive to keep the creation of radioactive waste to a minimum,” which given that the latest UK Energy Security Strategy proposes increasing the target for new nuclear power stations from 16GW to 24GW is nothing short of misleading.
The proposals would embed the so-called Nuclear Waste Hierarchy into Government Policy. In our view the Hierarchy promotes methods of radioactive waste management which are basically ways of diluting and dispersing radioactive waste around the environment, ultimately discharging radioactive substances into our estuaries, seas and atmosphere whilst masquerading as the environmentally friendly sounding ‘waste hierarchy’. Diverting increasing quantities of radioactive waste to landfill, metal recycling and incineration plants is a policy of dilute and disperse rather than one of concentrate and contain. This is ‘waste management on the cheap’. Waste management techniques should be based on environmental principles, particularly the principle that hazardous waste should be concentrated and contained in isolation from the environment.
The document also proposes a new policy framework for near surface disposal facilities for some types of intermediate level waste in England and Wales. It should be noted that while these near surface facilities might resemble Scottish near surface facilities, in Scotland waste could be retrieved if something went wrong, but in England and Wales retrieval is not planned for.
The new policy also proposes the promotion of on-site disposal on nuclear and former nuclear sites with the rider “where it is safe to do so”. This is to “help drive earlier and more cost-effective nuclear decommissioning and management of radioactive waste without compromising safety and security.”
Finally, the consultation says “New and advanced reprocessing technologies, with integrated waste management, may be developed in the future which support advanced nuclear reactor systems. The UK Government is continuing to support the advanced nuclear sector through investments in research facilities and programmes.”
The Consultation Document asks 7 “Do you agree” questions. The answer to all seven should be “No”. https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SafeEnergy_No97.pdf
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 (126)
- 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 