Permit problems for Sizewell C nuclear project? Cooling system could kill millions of fish.
Permit problems for Sizewell C predicted after report confirms cooling
mechanisms can kill millions of fish. The Sizewell C nuclear reactor may
face obstacles in receiving an environmental permit after a report revealed
that the cooling mechanism at a similar development could kill millions of
fish.
ENDS 12th Sept 2022
A farcical detachment from reality’: Green groups respond to UK Government’s energy bills plan.
The Government has unveiled plans to
introduce a price freeze on energy bills to combat the energy crisis, but
decisions to reverse fracking bans and not introduce a windfall tax on
energy firms have been criticised by green groups.
Jess Ralston, Senior
Analyst with the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU): “All the
experts and even the industry agree more UK gas won’t bring down British
bills. To bring down bills we need to use less gas by investing in
insulating homes, a measure which could be cost neutral to the Treasury
given it will spend billions on the price cap freeze.
There is a real danger of the Government serving up a red herring with local communities
likely to oppose fracking rigs while focus is diverted from efficiency and
renewables which can be quick to introduce and are popular, rather than
unpopular, with the public.”
Mike Childs, head of science, policy and
research at Friends of the Earth, “The government’s energy plan is
farcical in its detachment from reality. It does nothing to tackle the root
cause of the energy crisis – our reliance on costly, polluting fossil
fuels – and only lines the pockets of the oil and gas companies driving
the cost of living and climate emergencies. “
Most of us will be relieved
about the cap on energy bills ahead of this winter but with energy, food
and fuel costs remaining high many people will still struggle to heat their
homes and put food on the table. “To bring down bills for good, we need a
street-by-street insulation programme targeted at the neighbourhoods where
most homes are poorly insulated. There are five million homes without even
basic insulation, such as loft or cavity wall insulation, and the Committee
on Climate Change has said 15 million homes would benefit from other
insulation measures.
“The biggest winners today are the oil and gas
companies. Not only will they benefit from the green light for more fossil
fuel extraction but the tens of billions of pounds of public expenditure on
the energy cap will go into their pockets and further fuel their
eye-watering profits.”
Edie 8th Sept 2022 https://www.edie.net/a-farcical-detachment-from-reality-green-groups-respond-to-governments-energy-bills-plan/
Sizewell C nuclear plant “will never get built” due to impossibility of raising finance for it.
Sizewell C: UK tapping up Saudi and UAE investors as it struggles to bring in nuclear investment funds.
The UK is approaching foreign investors to fill a gaping funding hole in Sizewell C as the Government struggles to attract attention for nuclear investment, i can reveal.
In his final major policy speech as Prime Minister, this week Boris Johnson announced £700m in funding for the nuclear project in Suffolk, urging his successor to “go nuclear and go large and go with Sizewell C”. But the scheme, which is estimated to cost more than £20bn, is struggling to drum up interest amid a diminishing appetite for nuclear investments.
Barclays and Rothschild banks have been hired to help the UK fill the remaining stake, but i understands that negotiations have not yet begun between Barclays and potential investors, and investment is still in the preparatory stages. The UK has approached investors in the UAE, Australia and Saudi Arabia in a bid
to shore up financial support, sources told i. An industry source said the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) were “definitely interested” and had already visited the UK to discuss nuclear collaboration, with further meetings planned this month. A Government source confirmed that talks had taken place with ENEC and were set to continue. ENEC is thought to be keen to expand on the launch of the Barakah power plant in Abu Dhabi, the UAE’s first nuclear site.
Another source said that Macquarie, an Australian bank, had also been approached by Rothschild and been given a presentation on Sizewell C.
A finance source said securing investment has proved “not as easy” as No 10 had envisaged and there were not many Western-based funds that would get involved with nuclear. Many investors are understood to be reluctant to invest in Sizewell C over economic considerations, and over ESG – environmental, social and governance – concerns, such as how nuclear waste is dealt with.
Dr Paul Dorfman, a nuclear energy expert at the University of Sussex, said that the “market has fled nuclear.” He added: “There is no nuclear being built without vast public subsidy. The market has said no to nuclear, because it’s completely uneconomic and doesn’t make financial sense. It’s hugely expensive, the learning curve is completely static, the renewable market is off the wall. Last year, 84 per cent of all new power capacity worldwide was renewable, but nuclear is nowhere.
Jérôme Guillet – who has worked in energy for 25 years and was managing director of renewable energy
financial advisory firm Green Giraffe – said that private investment in nuclear power was extremely hard to come by, with renewable energy now cheaper and the infrastructure faster to build. “Nuclear has just become too expensive,” because of the high safety and financing costs, he said. He added that investment was likely only to come from those already involved in nuclear, such as EDF, or those with political interest, such as Chinese companies – and that the funds may never be raised.
“My personal opinion is that this plant will never get built. The delays to Flamanville [a nuclear project in northern France] and Hinkley Point will push any decision into the future, and by the time it could be taken, enough offshore wind will have been built to make the question moot.”
iNews 4th Sept 2022
Environment Agency rejects EDF’s appeal against requirement to protect millions of fish from Hinkley C’s huge cooling system
A report threatens to undermine the government’s Sizewell C plan after it sided with opponents who claim a plughole to cool a similar nuclear reactor could kill millions of fish. Boris Johnson promised £700 million for the Sizewell C power station in Suffolk in a speech last week, saying he was “absolutely confident” the project would “get over the line”.
A day later an inspector threw out an appeal by EDF, the French energy company, against the installation of a fish deterrent device relating to Hinkley Point C in Somerset, which EDF is building. Environmentalists claim that without the device, millions of fish could be killed after being sucked into the large cooling system for the new reactor. EDF now has to install the technology or be at risk of paying compensation, which experts say could run into hundreds of millions of pounds.
Campaigners claim the saga is directly relevant to the proposed Sizewell C plant, which is also being developed by EDF and uses the same technology. The Blue Marine Foundation was one of six groups that opposed the plans from EDF. Priyal Bunwaree, the foundation’s lawyer, said: “EDF decided to build the largest engineering project in Europe in the middle of a marine protected area in the Severn estuary and then claimed it would have no adverse effect on the species within it. This was a colossal blunder and they were poorly advised. “The company must now find a technical solution to stop killing so many fish or pay compensation which we estimate could run into hundreds of millions.”
Bunwaree added that similar legal issues could be an obstacle to opening Sizewell C. “The sad
thing about Sizewell is that there has been no proper assessment of damage to the marine environment, so it is likely the same legal issue will arise there,” she said. The Hinkley C cooling system, described as a giant plughole under the sea, will suck in 130,000 litres of water per second. The twin inlet tunnels, stretching two miles out into the Severn estuary, are so big that a double-decker bus could drive through them.
Conservation groups say it will kill up to 250,000 fish a day and must be altered or scrapped. EDF appealed against the Environment Agency’s requirement that it fit an “acoustic fish deterrent” to the cooling system. It argued that it was dangerous for divers to install the fish deterrent device in
the fast waters of the Bristol Channel. An inquiry into the appeal was held last year. The inspector and George Eustice, the environment secretary who endorsed his conclusions, said that before the Hinkley plant can open EDF must fit the technology to it. Experts say it will stop the deaths of an estimated 182 million fish, which will be killed in the Bristol Channel every year for the 60 years the plant is in operation. The inspector’s report said the measures are required by law to protect cod, herring, bass and whiting and migratory species such as Atlantic salmon, allis shad and twaite shad. The report concluded that the magnitude of predicted fish deaths was more likely than EDF’s contention that there would be “no adverse effect” on species or the Bristol Channel. Some experts say the
Sizewell plant would kill 804 million fish a year.
Times 5th Sept 2022
Safety a ‘top priority’ for anti-nuclear groups seeking answers on nuclear rail transport
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have joined with the Close Capenhurst Campaign, Highlands against Nuclear Transport (HANT) and Radiation Free Lakeland to highlight the issue of safety in nuclear rail transport in the UK.
For many years, Close Capenhurst, HANT, and Radiation Free Lakeland have raised issues of concern relating to the rail transportation of nuclear fuel and nuclear waste, particularly in relation to train movements in the North-West of England and from the former Dounreay plant on the North Scottish coast. The NFLA published its own analysis of the rail, sea and road transport of nuclear materials in June 2021[i], with member authorities expressing concerns about such movements through their own areas.
Although nuclear rail transport has a good record, the hazardous nature of the cargoes carried, and the consequences of any accident, means that all four organisations have resolved to work together to raise questions about safety standards and accident preparedness in the industry. They have today sent a joint question set to the head of Direct Rail Services (DRS), Chris Connolly, asking for answers on a range of safety issues, and it is hoped this will also open a dialogue with industry leaders.
Direct Rail Services (DRS) was established in 1995 as ‘lead supplier of rail transport and associated services to the nuclear industry’[ii]. In 2021, DRS was brought under the umbrella of Nuclear Transport Services (NTS), a new division of the restructured Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) responsible for the transportation of nuclear materials by rail, road, sea and air. The NDA is the publicly funded body responsible for decommissioning Britain’s old nuclear power stations and moving and managing spent fuel, radioactive waste and other materials from operational or redundant nuclear plants to storage at Sellafield or Drigg, both on the West Cumbrian coast. New nuclear fuel rods and materials are also transported from operating plants from manufacturing facilities at Capenhurst, near Chester, and Springfields, near Preston.
Commenting on the latest initiative, the Chair of the NFLA Steering Committee, Councillor David Blackburn, said: “All of our organisations are opposed to civil nuclear power generation, and so nuclear waste, but we are pragmatic; we cannot simply magic ‘nuclear away’. Although the case for renewables rather than nuclear – on the grounds of cost, time, practicality and safety – becomes stronger every day, the present government remains intent on building new nuclear power plants and keeping existing plants online for several years yet, and the decommissioning of closed stations will take many decades to complete. Consequently, there shall continue to be nuclear fuel rods and nuclear waste in transit for many years to come.
“We intend our questions to provoke debate and to open a dialogue between ourselves as campaigners opposed to nuclear power and those in the industry who are responsible for nuclear rail transportation. For when it comes to safety, it is best to talk. The absolute priority for all concerned about nuclear transport – whether for or against nuclear power – must be to ensure the best possible safety standards are maintained in the industry, for the well-being of the public, for NTS staff, and for our natural environment, for so long as the transport of these materials continues, whilst, for our part, we continue to work for the eventual elimination of nuclear power.”
The NFLA intends to publish a full Briefing of the responses and the dialogue in due course.
UK government grants £3.3M funding for Advanced Modular Development and Demonstration Nuclear Reactors
Six ground-breaking nuclear technology projects across the UK have
received government backing to help develop the next generation of nuclear
reactors. The £3.3M funding will support the early-stage innovation for
the winning projects, ………….. Through the Advanced Modular
Reactor Research, Development and Demonstration (AMR RD&D) programme, the
funding support the development of technology such as high temperature gas
reactors (HTGRs), helping revolutionise the way the UK gets its energy. The
innovative projects being backed by the government include National Nuclear
Laboratory in Cheshire, which is coordinating a UK-Japan team to design an
innovative HTGR and U-Battery Developments in Slough, for a study to
determine the optimum size, type, cost, and delivery method for a U-Battery
AMR suitable for demonstration in the UK.
New Civil Engineer 5th Sept 2022
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/6-nuclear-innovations-win-government-funding-05-09-2022/
Nuclear power for Britain – a “financial basket case “
Recent days have seen Government ministers blaming opposition parties for
the failure to deploy nuclear power in the UK. But the problem is not
politicians, not the Conservatives, Labour or anyone else; it is the
extreme difficulty of delivering nuclear power itself.
Financially, it is a basket case, and any other technology with similar problems simply wouldn’t
get past the lobbyists’ meetings with politicians. On August 7th Kwasi
Kwarteng produced a tweet blaming Nick Clegg and Labour for delays in
building nuclear power, saying: ‘Thanks to Labour’s 13-year moratorium
and Lib Dem blockers in the Coalition, we made no progress on nuclear.
Supply chains disappeared. Since 2015, we got Hinkley approved and Sizewell
C received planning consent last month. ‘
However, this explanation does
not stand up to serious analysis. In their 2005 manifesto the Conservatives
did not even mention nuclear power, referring instead to renewables and
energy efficiency as a means of protecting energy security. By the 2010
election both Labour and Conservatives were backing the idea of building
more nuclear power plant, but Conservatives ruled out giving nuclear
subsidies. Their manifesto said they would be ‘clearing the way for new
nuclear power stations – provided they receive no public subsidy’ .Of
course the Liberal Democrats were very much opposed to new nuclear power
before they joined the Coalition in 2010.
But then it was the Liberal
Democrat Energy Secretary of State Chris Huhne who proposed a new
electricity market reform consultation paper at the end of 2010. This
allowed, in effect, nuclear power to receive public subsidies under the
cover that this same subsidy would be available to other low carbon
sources. This laid the basis for the current contracts for difference (CfD)
regime which is funding Hinkley C.
But in practice the offer of a generous
CfD for Hinkley C proved not to satisfy the prospective nuclear generators.
This included EDF which was/is backed by the French state who wanted to
promote France’s new European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) design. The most
fundamental problem was that no major British political party was then
willing to underwrite cost overruns – this was seen as giving nuclear
constructors a blank cheque, which it is. Nevertheless this underwriting
has now, latterly, been given EDF for Sizewell C under the so-called
‘RAB’ arrangements.
100% Renewables 3rd Sept 2022
UK’s Nuclear Gambit Faces Long Odds Even With Sizewell Approval
The 24 gigawatt-target is “not viable if each project happens by negotiation that takes five to 10 years,” said Luba Kotzeva de Diaz, managing director European energy & renewables at Lazard Ltd.
- EDF’s Hinkley Point C is over budget and behind schedule
- Government’s 24-gigawatt nuclear target seen as unrealistic
Bloomberg. By Rachel Morison, September 4, 2022 , The UK’s audacious push to triple nuclear power capacity inched forward with the promise of government funding for the Sizewell C station, but doubts remain about the government’s ability to greenlight enough projects by 2030 to meet that goal.
Considering it took about 10 years for Electricite de France SA’s plant to get this far, the government’s “go big” gambit on nuclear energy — to help wean the nation off Russian fossil fuels and reduce emissions — is seen as a long shot. And those odds may get worse for the successor to Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
……….. The government wants to deliver eight new nuclear reactors this decade — needing approval at a pace equivalent to one a year. A construction program of this scale hasn’t been achieved on the continent since the French in the 1970s, prompting calls on leaders to find alternative paths for achieving energy independence and legally binding emissions cuts.
“It will be extremely difficult for the government,” said Asgeir Heimisson, senior associate at Aurora Energy Research Ltd. “Investment would need to occur approximately every three years from 2022, requiring a total of about £180 billion of capital expenditure.”
That’s a challenge for the new prime minister, who will take over in coming days amid a recession spurred by record energy prices and an inflation rate set to hit 14% this winter.
By 2050, a 24 gigawatt-strong fleet of new reactors is supposed to provide stable backup for offshore wind, the most-advanced renewable technology in Britain. The near-term ambition here is massive, too: reaching 50 gigawatts this decade………………………………..
The Sizewell project still needs significant backing from private investors before a final investment decision is made. It would follow on from Hinkley Point C, the UK’s first nuclear plant in three decades. Progress at Hinkley is costing more and taking longer to build than planned, stoking concerns about whether the government is right to rely so heavily on the technology.
Financing is the biggest hurdle for new stations, with the price tag for Sizewell being £20 billion ($23 billion) at the start of this year, but materials costs have surged since. An overhaul of the financing mechanism is meant to attract more funds. The regulated asset base, or RAB, model is supposed to encourage private investors and dilute the construction risk shouldered by the developer and taxpayers.
The government’s £700 million investment is expected to form a 20% stake in the project, with EDF taking another 20%. Greencoat Capital LLC, one of the UK’s biggest managers of renewable-energy funds, is considering investing, founder Richard Nourse said in July.
Sizewell represents a “glimmer of hope” for the nuclear industry, said Vince Zabielski, partner at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLC. “The investment shows promise, but the decision is about 10 years late.”
…………The 24 gigawatt-target is “not viable if each project happens by negotiation that takes five to 10 years,” said Luba Kotzeva de Diaz, managing director European energy & renewables at Lazard Ltd. — With assistance by Ellen Milligan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-04/uk-s-nuclear-gambit-faces-long-odds-even-with-sizewell-approval
Youth- led 7 day anti-nuclear march against UK government’s plan for small nuclear reactors
Members of the youth cohort of CND Cymru will be embarking on a 7-day march
from Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station in Gwynedd to Wylfa Nuclear Power
Station on Ynys Môn in September, in protest against the Westminster
government’s decision to locate Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) on
the decommissioned sites.
This decision came hand in hand with the growing
frustration felt by young people following the government’s
‘greenwashing’ of nuclear energy; selling it as a form of clean, safe and
homegrown energy in the backdrop of the climate crisis.
We are equally concerned about the disastrous effects of uranium mining on the lands of
indigenous people in Australia as well as in areas of the Global South –
not to mention the links between nuclear power, the military and nuclear
weapons.
The young people who have decided to march against the
construction of SMRs in Trawsfynydd and Wylfa want their voices heard in
the debates that will depict the future landscape in which they will have
to live in. They demand to see preparations for a genuinely green future
and the creation of jobs that will not come at the expense of the health of
workers and their communities, or the environment.
Climate justice cannot
be achieved by nuclear energy. We will be walking with the support of the
Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), Nuclear Free Local Authorities
(NFLA), CADNO, PAWB, Cymdeithas yr Iaith, XR Cymru, Youth Fusion and Mabon
ap Gwynfor (MS). Although the march will be youth-led, anyone wishing to
join will be most welcome.
CND Cymru 4th Sept 2022
Caroline Lucas, Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion condemns decision for massively costly Sizewell C nuclear station.
https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2022/09/01/caroline-lucas-responds-to-the-decision-to-approve-sizewell-c-nuclear-power-station/ “Sizewell C is massively costly, achingly slow, and carries huge unnecessary risks. Its approval marks Boris Johnson taking one final opportunity to kick the public in the teeth before his departure as Prime Minister.
“This project is expected to cost up to £30 billion; and in following the Regulated Asset Base business model, it will pass that enormous upfront cost directly onto the consumer. As energy bills soar ever higher and this lame duck Government leaves people in the lurch, the last thing the public needs right now is a massively costly nuclear white elephant. Even cabinet ministers are already expressing reservations about its value for money.
“When we need oven-ready solutions to delivering energy security and slashing bills, Sizewell C simply is not one of them. Hinkley Point C will have taken the best part of two decades to go from planning to production, and it’s still years behind schedule. This Sizewell plant could take anywhere between 10-17 years to build.
“Meanwhile, there are hundreds of energy-saving options and clean, cheap and home-grown renewable projects ready to go – yet solar farms are being refused at their highest rate for five years, the Government has utterly failed to adopt a retrofit revolution to slash energy bills, and now Tory leadership candidates are vowing to block onshore wind power which could be operational within days.
“Rubber stamping Sizewell C is simply Boris Johnson’s woeful final attempt at making his Prime Ministerial mark – it’s befitting of him that this vanity project is the wrong answer at the wrong time.”
Julian Cusack, chair of Suffolk Coastal Green Party, said: “For Boris Johnson to claim Sizewell C as his legacy is just outrageous. It is the wrong and unproven technology in the wrong place and will deliver the most expensive electricity sometime in the next decade. It is totally irrelevant to today’s energy cost crisis and will do wanton damage to prized landscapes and fragile local communities.”
High Court legal challenge to UK government against decision to build Sizewell C nuclear station
A campaign group has issued legal proceedings against the government challenging its decision to allow for the Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station to go ahead against the advice of the planning Examining Authority.
Together Against Sizewell C Limited (TASC) has issued the judicial review proceedings in the High Court following an unsatisfactory response to their pre-action protocol letter sent to Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng at the beginning of August.
The Examining Authority (ExA) recommended refusal of development consent, accepting in part TASC’s evidence that the 3.2 gigawatt power station to be built alongside the 27-year-old Sizewell B nuclear plant should not be built in that Suffolk location where the water supply cannot be guaranteed, and the coastline will not be resilient for the entire lifetime of the project. However, Mr Kwarteng rejected the ExA advice and granted consent on 20 July, 2022.
TASC argue in their legal case that the decision to give the go ahead for Sizewell C is unlawful on a number of grounds, including:
- Failure to give lawfully adequate reasons for departing from the advice of Natural England, who were of the view that the water supply element did form part of the Sizewell C project;
- Failure to consider all alternative solutions to the project, including alternatives to nuclear power, given the purpose of the project was to generate electricity and that could potentially be done in a less harmful way;
- Taking into account a legally irrelevant consideration, namely the contribution the project would make to reducing Green House Gas (GHG) emissions, because the electricity grid is supposed to be carbon neutral by 2035 and without a permanent water supply solution there is no guarantee Sizewell C will contribute significantly to that target;
- Acting irrationally by assuming the site would be clear of nuclear material by 2140 when evidence presented to the examination showed that it would be much later;
- Wrongly concluding that the project’s operational emissions would not have a significant effect on the UK’s ability to meet its climate change obligations, because no such assessment was conducted.
TASC is supported in this action by two other opposition groups in the area, Suffolk Coastal Friends of the Earth and Stop Sizewell C……………………….
Leigh Day solicitor Rowan Smith said:
“Our client is incredibly concerned that the government has ignored the recommendation of the Examining Authority to give the go ahead to Sizewell C. For such a locally and nationally important issue, it was vital that the Secretary of State properly assesses the environmental impacts of the project. However, TASC believes that fundamental legal errors were made, particularly in respect of water, alternatives to nuclear power, local wildlife and climate change. We hope these arguments will now be fully scrutinised by the Court.”
TASC is fundraising towards the costs of the judicial review: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/save-suffolks-heritage-coast-w/
https://tasizewellc.org.uk/tasc-press-release-on-judicial-revue-1st-september/
Nuclear power: the accumulating problems
With the present British government intent on a fleet of new nuclear power stations, Dr Paul Dorfman, Sussex University, looks at the major obstacles
and argues for alternatives.
Although the current UK government plans some
sort of nuclear renaissance, in this article I’ll show that new nuclear
power can do nothing for our current energy crisis and may well endanger
our response to the climate crisis.
But the coming months will tell – and
it will be a very long time in politics. This winter – with millions
struggling under the cost-of-living crisis, plunged into unmanageable debt
through energy price ramps, and choosing between eating and heating –
putting huge sums of public money into the deep pockets of French
state-owned EDF via its long-term nuclear power construction programme may
look much less palatable to the public, press and policy-makers.
Especially when cheaper, faster, more efficient renewable power and storage
technologies are available here and now. Coupled with large-scale home
insulation programmes, these are what would really make a difference to
consumers.
Responsible Science 31st Aug 2022
https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/nuclear-power-accumulating-problems
GDF Community Partnership promotes “feel good” books to children, making nuclear waste dump ‘cute and safe’.
In 2003 The Advertising Standards Authority ruled that BNFL – now the
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority could not “make an absolute claim”
about the future of nuclear waste at Sellafield and the advert showing a
butterfly flying away from a hand, with the headline “The future of the
environment is in safe hands” was ordered to be removed.
Now in 2022,
Nuclear Waste Services, a subsidiary of the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority has formed partnerships of Nuclear Waste Services and “the
local community” called GDF Community Partnerships (three in Cumbria and
one in Lincolnshire).
GDF Partnership literature has been produced to
promote support in communities for a Geological Disposal Facility for heat
generating nuclear wastes. All advertising literature published under the
tagline “Working in Partnership” states: “Doing the right thing for
future generations. Geological disposal is one of the UK’s largest ever
environmental protection projects, which will provide a safe and secure
long-term solution for the disposal of higher activity radioactive waste.
This programme will create investment and jobs over many generations.”
This flies in the face of the 2003 ASA ruling that no absolute claims can
be made for the future safety of nuclear waste. “GDF’s Heroes”
Advertorial Literature Targeted at Children. While all the GDF Partnership
advertising aimed at adults makes absolute claims which as the ASA
previously ruled cannot be backed up (unless the GDF Partnership have a
fail safe crystal ball), our primary complaint is the literature aimed at
children.
In particular a promotional colouring book aimed at children
called “GDF’s Heroes”. Colourful Nuclear Dump “feel good” books are
targeted at children to advertise Geological Disposal.
Radiation Free Lakeland 1st Sept 2022
A concerted push now for renewable energy would save Britons billions of pounds
The UK would be paying “billions” of pounds less for its energy, if it had
stuck with plans to reduce fossil fuel use, an energy boss has said. Greg
Jackson, chief executive of Octopus energy, told the BBC there should be a
concerted push now. The same “sense of urgency” should be applied to the
switch to green energy, as there was for finding a Covid vaccine, he said.
The government said it had delivered a 500% increase in renewables since
2010. “Without the clean energy we have deployed over the past decade,
bills would be even higher today,” a spokesperson for the Department for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) said. There were already
plans to invest further in renewables, BEIS said.
In 2013, the coalition
government led by David Cameron made a series of changes, including cutting
back support for energy efficiency and later ended subsidies for onshore
wind. “If we hadn’t done that, energy bills this year would be billions of
pounds lower than they are,” Mr Jackson told the Big Green Money Show on
BBC Radio 5. “It’s short term behaviour that has left us even more exposed
than we need to be.”
Octopus Energy generates electricity from renewable
sources, including wind and solar and supplies energy to three million UK
customers. A report earlier this year by energy analysis site Carbon Brief
said bills in the UK were nearly £2.5bn higher than they would have been if
climate policies had not been scrapped over the past decade.
BBC 2nd Sept 2022
Stop Sizewell C urges Boris Johnson’s successor to totally review this costly nuclear project
Stop Sizewell C condemns Boris Johnson’s visit and support for Sizewell C,
speculating that the blessings of an outgoing Prime Minister may be the
kiss of death. Stop Sizewell said: “Like multiple vanity projects such as
the Bridge to Northern Ireland and “Boris Island” airport, Sizewell C
is another Boris Johnson infrastructure blowout that his successor should
consign to the bin.
When every penny matters, it’s totally wrong to shackle
the next Prime Minister and billions in taxpayers’ money to this damaging
project, whose ballooning cost, lengthy construction, failure-prone
technology and long term water supply are so uncertain.”
“Sizewell C would not be British, nor secure. It would be developed by an arm of a
foreign government, probably with considerable foreign ownership and be
reliant on overseas uranium.” Stop Sizewell C urges Boris Johnson’s
successor to totally review the Sizewell C project. Candidate Liz Truss has
said she plans to cancel green levies on bills, but if she were to continue
to support Sizewell C, it can only be financed if a nuclear levy is added
to household bills.
Stop Sizewell C 1st Sept 2022
1 This Month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (152)
- 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)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 