Hinkley Point C nuclear station could ‘wipe out’ 11 billion fish, Bristol Channel campaigners say
“The new post-Brexit Environment Act requires the Secretary of State to set a long-term legally binding target on biodiversity by late next year”
Hinkley Point C could ‘wipe out’ 11 billion fish, Bristol Channel
campaigners say Activist groups are campaigning against EDF’s decision to
remove Acoustic Fish Deterrents on the cooling water intakes at the nuclear
power station.
Bristol Channel campaigners have warned that EDF‘s
decision to remove the Acoustic Fish Deterrents (AFDs) on the cooling water
intakes at Hinkley Point C nuclear power station could put massive fish
stocks at risk. An AFD is a system that guides fish away from water
intakes.
A public inquiry was held into this issue by the Planning
Inspectorate from 8th to 24th June. Activist groups that had previously
launched a campaign named Stop Hinkley wrote a letter to the Secretary of
State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs George Eustice on 7th October
asking him to refuse EDF’s appeal.
Since then, campaigners claim they
have not received a reply. A spokesperson from Stop Hinkley said: “The
new post-Brexit Environment Act requires the Secretary of State to set a
long-term legally binding target on biodiversity by late next year.“On paper,
George Eustice is committed to halting the decline in nature in England,
and beginning the restoration of our marine environment, but on current
evidence, he is failing to do so.
“He needs to set an example in tackling
the global biodiversity crisis by refusing EDF’s application to remove
the Acoustic Fish Deterrents, against Environment Agency advice,
threatening to wipe out 11 billion fish and decimate stocks in Severn
Estuary for 60 years.” Sources told ELN that the department is giving
careful consideration to all recovered appeals and the length of time taken
to decide a case depends on the complexity of each case. Chris Fayers, Head
of Environment at Hinkley Point C, said: “We are committed to reducing
environmental impact from a project which will play a key role in fighting
climate change. Hinkley Point C is the first power station in the Severn
Estuary to include fish protection measures in its design.
Energy Live News 17th Nov 2021
Bradwell nuclear project is likely to be scrapped, despite the Planning Inspectorate having supported the project.
The Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG) is naturally disappointed
that BRB’s Appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the refusal by
Maldon District Council of Planning Permission for further land
investigations at Bradwell was successful.
But this does not give a greenlight to a future nuclear power station at Bradwell. BANNG has always made
clear that its objections to land investigations were on the grounds that
they were unnecessary since the site is wholly unsuitable, unsustainable
and unacceptable for the development of a mega nuclear power station and
spent fuel stores.
The Planning Inspector chose to uphold the Appeal on the
narrow grounds that the works would be temporary and would create little
disruption and disturbance to the environment and human welfare. The
Inspector declined to take into account the question of need for new
nuclear, relying on a Government policy from 2011 that deems Bradwell a
‘potentially suitable’ site.
In its latest policy statements the Government is silent on Bradwell and the project seems likely to be dropped altogether on geopolitical grounds.
BANNG 15th Nov 2021
Regulated Asset Base model may save Hitachi’s Wylfa Newydd nuclear project.
RAB model may have saved Wylfa Newydd nuclear project. Access to the
regulated asset base (RAB) financing model may have helped to save
Hitachi’s plans to build a new nuclear plant in north Wales, an executive
who worked on the project has told MPs. Last year, the Hitachi-backed
Horizon consortium announced it had withdrawn from the Wylfa Newydd project
after ploughing more than £2 billion into its development.
Utility Week 18th Nov 2021
Despite the frantic nuclear lobbying at COP26, Rolls Royce’s small nuclear reactors will be of zero use against greenhouse emissions – Jonathon Porritt
Rolls-Royce talks of the first plant ‘coming online by 2031’ – do please do the maths yourself. So let’s say 2035, to be generous, at the earliest. And therefore of zero benefit in terms of meeting the Government’s own target of a 78% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2035.
It’s all such a pathetic waste of time – and of taxpayers’ money. Whatever the timescale, SMRs will never compete with renewables plus storage.
COP6 ‘Nuclear Sidebar, http://www.jonathonporritt.com/cop26s-nuclear-sidebar/ Jonathon Porrit, 6 Nov 21, The fact that COP26 was crawling with huge numbers of delegates from Big Oil and Gas got a lot of attention from the media. Less attention was paid to the large number of pro-nuclear delegates parasitically inserting themselves into as many events as they could engineer access to – facilitated at every turn by BEIS Secretary of State Kwasi Kwarteng and Booster Boris himself..
The nuclear industry had its own short-lived moment in the sun, on 9th November. For what is now reckoned to be the fourth time, Kwasi Kwarteng went over the top to re-re-re-confirm the Government’s enthusiasm for Small Modular Reactors, re-re-re-promising (a rather miserly) £210m of Government money for Rolls-Royce, described by Kwasi Kwarteng as ‘a once in a lifetime opportunity’.
Rolls-Royce duly obliged, conjuring up another £250m of private sector investment to deliver a new fleet of at least five SMRs (and possibly as many as 16) at around £2.2bn a pop. The company’s share price duly went up by around 4%. Job done.
It doesn’t matter how many times Ministers bang this particular drum, or how many times deplorably gullible journalists in the BBC, FT, Times and the Telegraph suck it all up, moonshine is still moonshine.
In and of itself, that £460m buys practically nothing. It will allow Rolls-Royce to take whatever design they finally settle on through the Generic Design Assessment process. This will take no less than four years, and probably more than five. Even if (and it’s a big IF) regulatory approval is secured, private sector investors will still have to be found, sites identified and planning permission for each site secured – a process which can take years.
Rolls-Royce talks of the first plant ‘coming online by 2031’ – do please do the maths yourself. So let’s say 2035, to be generous, at the earliest. And therefore of zero benefit in terms of meeting the Government’s own target of a 78% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2035.
It’s all such a pathetic waste of time – and of taxpayers’ money. Whatever the timescale, SMRs will never compete with renewables plus storage.
To be fair, it would be wrong to underestimate the importance here of energy security – meeting our energy needs from home-based, ‘indigenous’ capacity. Boris Johnson keeps banging on about ‘British wind and sunshine’ – mindful perhaps of a recent poll of Daily Express readers, of whom 97.5% said that Boris ‘should pledge to make Britain self-sufficient in energy production by 2050’.
On that basis, British nuclear electrons are therefore much more desirable than those unreliable French electrons, regardless of the fact that we wouldn’t have any new nuclear electrons coming on-stream were it not for Electricité de France.
COP26 was of course a global gathering. UK energy security was therefore less of an issue. But it got a bit of an airing on 12th November, when the two big tidal stream companies here in the UK (Nova Innovation and Atlantis Energy) made a big splash about the huge potential for tidal stream technology in Scotland – with a potential capacity of more than 500 MW. This is a proven technology (with turbines anchored to the sea floor to capture the power of tidal currents) – already delivering suitably ‘indigenous’ electrons – with no moonshine to be seen anywhere.
The potential for tidal stream is indeed significant – not just in the UK, but internationally.
However, for me personally, it’s still relatively small beer in comparison to tidal range – harnessing the power of the tides to generate huge amounts of electricity from either tidal lagoons or barrages, predictably, cost-effectively, over many decades.
If our Government was genuinely serious about energy security (instead of finding ways of propping up Rolls-Royce to support our nuclear weapons programme), tidal power would be top of its list.
But is it heck! So please check out my blog about tidal energy which follows shortly.
UK’s small nuclear reactor consortium indicates that it will be relying on tax-payer funding if it is to go ahead
State support a fallback option for UK’s mini-nuclear plants rollout.
The head of the consortium, which is developing a £ 30 billion fleet of
mini-nuclear power stations, has indicated that it will have to rely on UK
taxpayers to help fund the construction of the first of the new designs if
there is not enough investor interest.
FT 10th Nov 2021
https://www.ft.com/content/869279aa-f771-4025-8719-c3b8bdf1f375
Scottish earthquake was nuclear waste ‘wake-up call’
 | |||
Scottish earthquake was nuclear waste ‘wake-up call’, Ronnie Cowan MP says, The National, By Greg Russell 17 Nov 21 A SCOTS MP has said the 3.1 magnitude earthquake off the West of Scotland was a “wake-up call” over the “dig a hole and bury it” approach to nuclear waste.
Ronnie Cowan was speaking after Tuesday’s early-morning quake – recorded just 10km beneath its epicentre – was felt on the west coast and in Ireland.
The SNP MP for Inverclyde wrote on social media: “Hopefully too small and too far away from the nuclear waste dump and weapons storage to be concerning.”
He later told The National that when it comes to nuclear powered submarines and their payload, safety had to be paramount.
Cowan said: “Likewise our nuclear energy industry isn’t just about the crucial day to day safety, it is about the long term security of the sites and the waste.
“Currently the ‘dig a hole and bury it’ attitude to nuclear waste is concerning. It feels very much like we passing on a problem to future generations, which given the heightened awareness of environmental damage and climate change seems like a deliberate dereliction of duty.
“It therefore came as a wake-up call when I read that an earthquake had taken place just off the west coast of Scotland.”
Cowan stressed he was not claiming that the incident was a threat, but wondered if it was a warning shot given the “very unforgiving” nature of nuclear energy and waste.
“One mistake and the outcome could be catastrophic and as we see the climate change and weather patterns change, we are seeing more and more extreme weather episodes, and to future-proof our existing nuclear waste dumps we must consider the state of the planet thousands of years into the future,” he said.
Scottish earthquake was nuclear waste ‘wake-up call’, Ronnie Cowan MP says, The National,
By Greg Russell @National_GregJournalist A SCOTS MP has said the 3.1 magnitude earthquake off the West of Scotland was a “wake-up call” over the “dig a hole and bury it” approach to nuclear waste.
Ronnie Cowan was speaking after Tuesday’s early-morning quake – recorded just 10km beneath its epicentre – was felt on the west coast and in Ireland.
The SNP MP for Inverclyde wrote on social media: “Hopefully too small and too far away from the nuclear waste dump and weapons storage to be concerning.”
He later told The National that when it comes to nuclear powered submarines and their payload, safety had to be paramount.
Cowan said: “Likewise our nuclear energy industry isn’t just about the crucial day to day safety, it is about the long term security of the sites and the waste.
“Currently the ‘dig a hole and bury it’ attitude to nuclear waste is concerning. It feels very much like we passing on a problem to future generations, which given the heightened awareness of environmental damage and climate change seems like a deliberate dereliction of duty.
“It therefore came as a wake-up call when I read that an earthquake had taken place just off the west coast of Scotland.”
Cowan stressed he was not claiming that the incident was a threat, but wondered if it was a warning shot given the “very unforgiving” nature of nuclear energy and waste.
“One mistake and the outcome could be catastrophic and as we see the climate change and weather patterns change, we are seeing more and more extreme weather episodes, and to future-proof our existing nuclear waste dumps we must consider the state of the planet thousands of years into the future,” he said.
“And secondly, the earthquake bothered me because for some time now I have been concerned about the amount of unexploded ordnance (UXO) in the Clyde and beyond.
“My concerns are around the safety of those working on the river and those who enjoy it recreationally.”
The MP said he wanted to see a massive clean-up of the munitions dump in the River Clyde, but it had to be disposed of thoughtfully……… https://www.thenational.scot/news/19722624.scottish-earthquake-nuclear-waste-wake-up-call-ronnie-cowan-mp-says/
Plan for solar power to UK via cable from Morocco, as nuclear power closes
As the UK’s ageing fleet of nuclear power stations begins to close –
until recently a steady source of low-carbon baseload generation –
Utility Week speaks to Simon Morrish, chief executive at XLinks, about its
plans to transmit cheap solar power thousands of kilometres across the
Atlantic seabed from the sun-drenched deserts of Morocco to help fill the
looming gap.
Utility Week 15th Nov 2021
As the UK’s ageing fleet of nuclear power stations begins to close –
until recently a steady source of low-carbon baseload generation –
Utility Week speaks to Simon Morrish, chief executive at XLinks, about its
plans to transmit cheap solar power thousands of kilometres across the
Atlantic seabed from the sun-drenched deserts of Morocco to help fill the
looming gap.
Utility Week 15th Nov 2021
UK’s planned Sizewell nuclear reactor at risk – same design as Taishan reactor which has been shut down since July for safety reasons
Chinese nuclear reactor shutdown hangs over future of Sizewell C. Developers behind Taishan plant, where radiation was found in cooling waters, are also building UK’s Hinkley Point C and planning Sizewell C.
Reports of cracked fuel rods from a Chinese nuclear power station will be examined for any implications for new plants in Britain. Mark Foy, chief nuclear inspector at the Office for Nuclear Regulation, told civil society groups he was in touch with Chinese and other regulators over the plant in Taishan, southeastern China, where a reactor has been shut since July after radiation was found in its cooling waters. The plant is owned by Chinese state nuclear developer CGN along with its French equivalent EDF.
The two companies are also building the Hinkley Point C plant in Somerset and areplanning a second plant, Sizewell C in Suffolk, using the same reactor design as at Taishan. he problems at Taishan emerged in June after CNN reported that Framatome, the part-EDF owned company which helps run the plant, had written to US officials on June 8 asking for permission to share American technical assistance. Experts have said cracked fuel rods are “not uncommon”, albeit undesirable. An Office for Nuclear Regulation spokesman said: “We held one of our regular meetings with the NGO community last week where we reiterated that we remain in contact with the Chinese, French and Finnish regulators on this matter and are likely to be in dialogue again with them before the end of this year. “We will take the opportunity to gain any knowledge from this issue in China to help inform our regulation of nuclear plants in the UK, like Hinkley Point C, where the EPR reactor will be installed.”
Telegraph 14th Nov 2021
Industrial action from Tuesday could ‘cripple’ Clyde nuclear base.
Industrial action from Tuesday could ‘cripple’ Clyde nuclear base, The Herald, By Martin Williams @Martin1Williams, Senior News Reporter, 15 Nov 21, SPECIALIST staff are to down tools on Tuesday in an industrial dispute a union says is expected to “cripple” the effective running of UK’s nuclear submarine base on the Clyde.
The Unite Scotland union has confirmed that around 70 of its members who provide specialist services for the UK’s nuclear deterrent submarines will start an overtime at the Royal Naval Armaments Depot (RNAD) Coulport.
The union has severely criticised the “delay tactics” employed by the ABL Alliance after the workers voted to take industrial action in September in what was then described as a “final warning shot” to ABL Alliance, a joint venture which won a 15-year contract from the Ministry of Defence in 2013 to maintain the weapons systems at Coulport.
Unite Scotland said the specialist staff who provide care and maintenance services for the weapons systems on the Royal Navy nuclear armed submarine fleet took the “historic” decision in a dispute over pay that it says will leave the base severely debilitated.
Since then, the union say the ABL Alliance refused to meet over what it called an RPI inflation annual pay claim of 3.8%.
Some 90.5% of Unite members at RNAD Coulport voted in support of strike action, and 95.3% supporting action short of a strike.
The ABL Alliance, made up of AWE plc, Babcock Marine (Clyde) Ltd, and Lockheed Martin UK Strategic Systems Ltd, previously state it was “disappointed” at the industrial action vote………………….
The union is concerned that all the companies could afford the pay rise as they were profitable. AWE Plc had an after tax profit of £17.7m in the year to December, 2020, Babcock Marine (Clyde) Ltd turned a £7.3m profit in 2019/20, while Lockheed Martin UK Strategic Systems Ltd was £41m in the black in 2019.
Babcock have been approached for comment. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/19716968.industrial-action-tuesday-cripple-clyde-nuclear-base/
UK’s Regulated Asset Base (RAB) “a very bad deal for consumers” – like the USA’s disastrous system in South Carolina
Reaction to the Bill from stakeholders has been mixed. Some environmental bodies have questioned whether the RAB model set out in the Bill offers value for money for consumers and whether it transfers the risk of cost overruns to consumers. Tom Burke, the co-founder of E3G, a climate think-tank, told the Financial Times that the model risked being “a very bad deal for consumers” on the grounds that electricity generated from nuclear power would be more expensive than that from ‘homegrown’ renewables and would simultaneously “inhibit the market in wind, [an] area where we have the opportunity to create a global competitive industry in the UK”.145 The same article included comment from Steve Thomas, Professor of Energy Policy at the University of Greenwich, who questioned whether people would want their pension funds exposed to construction risk cost and whether that meant the consumer would take on all the risk. In an article in the i on the day the legislation was published, Doug Parr, Chief Scientist at Greenpeace, noted that the RAB model had already been used to finance nuclear power in the United States, adding that the “results were disastrous”: “It transfers huge financial risk from the builders to bill payers. In South Carolina, 18 per cent of residents’ energy bills went to pay for a half-built reactor which has been abandoned and will never produce electricity.” House of Commons Library 1st Nov 2021 https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9356/CBP-9356.pdf |
Scottish MP seeks commitment from UK govt to protect Beaufot’s Dyke from nuclear waste dumping
| MSP concerned about potential for dumping in Beaufort’s Dyke. South Scotland list MSP Emma Harper (SNP) is seeking a commitment from the UK Government that Beaufort’s Dyke will not be used as a dumpsite for nuclear and radioactive waste. Ms Harper has written to the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Defence Secretary following speculation that through committing to upgrading the A75 and building a new nuclear power station, that the Government will once again use Beaufort’s Dyke as dumping site. Previously Ms Harper has also raised concerns over the noted increase in the amount of unexploded ordnance which has washed up on beaches across south west Scotland over recent years. Beaufort’s Dyke became the United Kingdom’s largest offshore dumpsite for surplus conventional and chemical munitions after the Second World War. Galloway Gazette 12th Nov 2021 https://www.gallowaygazette.co.uk/news/environment/msp-concerned-about-potential-for-dumping-in-beauforts-dyke-3456195 |
Speaker of UK Parliament refuses debate on motions against Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill.
Of course, consumers who have signed up to buy 100% renewable electricity could quite rightly feel aggrieved at having to pay the “nuclear tax” as well.
nuClear News, November. 21. Nuclear Energy Finance Bill On Wednesday 3rd November, MPs debated the second reading of the Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill. The Liberal Democrats and the SNP, bot put forward an amendment, but neither was accepted for debate by the Speaker.
LibDem Motion: That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill because there is no economic or environmental case for the construction of any further nuclear stations in the UK; because the Bill does nothing to address concerns about costs around nuclear waste disposal and decommissioning; because the Bill fails to bring forward meaningful reforms to accelerate the deployment of renewable power or the removal of restrictions on solar, wind and the building of more interconnectors to guarantee security of supply; and because it fails to remove barriers to investment in renewables or to support investment and innovation in cutting-edge energy technologies, including tidal and wave power, energy storage, demand response, smart grids and hydrogen.
SNP Motion: This House declines to give a Second Reading to the Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill because it believes there is no longer a justification for a large nuclear power station to provide base load energy, because large scale nuclear is not compatible as a counter to the intermittency of renewable wind as nuclear stations are too inflexible, because pumped storage hydro should be utilised to provide renewable energy that can be dispatched when required and pumped storage hydro should be supported with a minimum electricity price providing better value to bill payers than funding new nuclear, because wave and tidal technologies should be utilised to provide stable and predictable electricity generation and these technologies should be supported to scale up via the provision of a ring fenced pot of funding within the forthcoming contracts for difference auction, because the net zero pathway will be better advanced by supporting the Scottish Cluster as a fast track Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage project given that it includes hydrogen production, direct air capture and carbon storage facilities that will serve the wider UK, and because greater support and investment should be directed towards green hydrogen production and emerging storage technologies; and, as the cost of energy increases, this House calls on the Government to spend more money on energy efficiency measures and targeted support for those who suffer from or are at risk of fuel povertyac1
Continue readingWith the confusing consortium behind it, the UK’s Rolls Royce ”small” nuclear reactor project is running a huge risk
this is a huge risk of public money on a speculative design. By the time we know how much SMRs will cost and whether they are reliable or not, there will be up to 10 reactors being manufactured unless production lines are allowed to sit idle for years waiting until the design is proven enough for new orders to be placed. Realistically the first reactor won’t be complete before the mid-2030s at about the time the last fossil fuel will disappear from the generation mix, so it’s too little, too late and too expensive
What it turns out to amount to is an agreement to spend £400m over the next three years which may produce a design for a reactor which may get approved by the regulators and which may find investors willing to pay what will be at least £2billion to build each one
nuClear News November 21. Rolls Royce’s Small Modular Reactors On 9th November the Government announced that it would back the Rolls-Royce Small Modular Reactor with £210m in funding. Matched by private sector funding of over £250 million, this investment will take forward phase 2 of the Low-Cost Nuclear project to further develop SMR design and take it through the regulatory processes to assess suitability of potential deployment in the UK.
The Government claimed that SMRs have the potential to be less expensive to build than traditional nuclear power plants because of their smaller size, and because the modular nature of the components offers the potential for parts to be produced in dedicated factories and shipped by road to site – reducing construction time and cost. Rolls Royce SMR estimate that each Small Modular Reactor could be capable of powering 1 million homes – equivalent to a city the size of Leeds.
The £210 million grant follows £18 million invested in November 2019, which, according to the Government, has already delivered significant development of the initial design as part of Phase One of the project. (1)
The Rolls Royce SMR design is not exactly small. It was originally conceived as a 440 MW unit, but R-R has found a way of getting 470 MWe out of the core. Each of the proposed 16 reactors is expected to cost around £1.8 billion to £2.2bn and produce power at £40-60/MWh over 60 yrs. (2) Rolls Royce says it has a target cost of £1.8 billion once 5 reactors have been built. (3)
As well as the Government funding, Rolls-Royce has been backed by a consortium of private investors. The creation of the Rolls-Royce Small Modular Reactor (SMR) business was announced following a £195m cash injection from BNF Resources, and Exelon Generation to fund the plans over the next three years. (The Guardian suggests Rolls Royce will top this up with £50m of its own money, which gets us to £245m –not quite the ‘over £250m’ mentioned in the Government Press Release, but it’s not clear whether the £50m is extra money or part of the £195m). It is hoped the new company could create up to 40,000 jobs by 2050. The investment by Rolls-Royce Group, and the government will go towards developing Rolls-Royce’s SMR design and take it through regulatory processes to assess whether it is suitable to be deployed in the UK. It will also identify sites which will manufacture the reactors’ parts and most of the venture’s investment is expected to be focused in the north of the UK, where there is existing nuclear expertise. (4)
BNF Resources UK Limited appears to have been created in June and has two significant employees, Nicholas Fallows and Sean Benson. Benson says: “BNF has an established history of energy market investing and we are proud to be a part of Rolls-Royce SMR in this exciting opportunity. Following reviews of numerous proposals we found that this project, featuring a highly experienced team was the most realistic, affordable and scalable solution for provision of carbon-free baseload and alternative power requirements.” (5)
It appears that BNF Resources UK Limited is a subsidiary of BNF Capital Limited which was created in 2012 (same address) and is registered in Guernsey. These two people seem to have a history in Financial Investment. The Perrodo family, which made its fortune from the private oil company Perenco, is behind BNF Resources UK.
Confusingly there has been no mention of the Rolls Royce SMR Consortium which included Assystem, Atkins, BAM Nuttall, Laing O’Rourke, National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL), Jacobs, The Welding Institute (TWI) and Nuclear AMRC, as well as Rolls Royce. The consortium existed in July of this year when Cavendish signed up to work on the SMR. (6) Assystem has since said it will continue to lead on the design of key areas of power plant infrastructure including the turbine island, cooling water island and balance of plant systems, and is expecting to double the size of its SMR team in the next six months. (7) Similarly Nuclear AMRC has said it will work with Rolls-Royce to help prepare critical components for commercial production in the UK. The centre will also support the design of a new UK factory for large SMR components. (8)
Exelon is contributing under an agreement from a year ago to find international markets. (9)
This new funding will help Rolls-Royce start the SMRs on the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process. (10) In May, the government declared the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) open to advanced nuclear technologies – including SMRs – for the first time. The process allows the nuclear regulators to assess the safety, security and environmental implications of new reactor designs. Rolls-Royce SMR has stated its intention to enter the GDA process shortly. (11) This could take about 5 years. (The GDA process took 5.75 years for the EPR, 7.5 years for the AP1000, 4.75 years for the ABWR, and process for the UK HPR1000 is continuing after 4 years. (12)) According to the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) the GDA on SMRs was expected to have started by now but there have been delays.
Each of the initial run of reactors is expected to have a generation capacity of 470MW, or enough to power the equivalent of 1.3m UK homes, and cost about £2bn on average, well below the price per MW sought by developers of large-scale nuclear reactors. The consortium hopes to build on an initial run of five SMRs, the first of which could go on line by 2031, to create a multibillion-pound stable of 16 SMRs around the country. (13)
This means that if delivered on budget and to engineering specifications, a single SMR would deliver roughly a seventh of the power of Hinkley for less than a twelfth of the price, while using less land. Each power station is said to be the size of two football pitches, (but this is open to question) and can also be used to create hydrogen by splitting water molecules. The company, primarily a jet engine maker, hopes the hydrogen SMRs could produce would accelerate a move to greener aviation.
Rolls-Royce will be seeking more investment for the project to help fund the building of actual SMRs. The government is currently passing legislation that will allow investors to back projects like SMRs using a regulated asset base (RAB) model, which allows them to recoup up-front costs. The government said this would “attract a wider range of private investment into these projects, reducing build costs, consumers’ energy bills and Britain’s reliance on overseas developers for finance.”
Professor MV Ramana, a nuclear policy expert at the University of British Columbia in Canada, cautioned that this would be a new market for Rolls. He said: “It’s the same technology, but the set of constraints that you will be dealing with in the electricity sector are very different from submarines.” He also said Rolls has some catching up to do against rivals pursuing the same goals. NuScale Power, based in Oregon, received US regulatory approval for its own reactor design last year and could have a plant working by 2026. (14)
Steve Thomas, Emeritus Professor of Energy Policy at Greenwich University said this is a huge risk of public money on a speculative design. By the time we know how much SMRs will cost and whether they are reliable or not, there will be up to 10 reactors being manufactured unless production lines are allowed to sit idle for years waiting until the design is proven enough for new orders to be placed. Realistically the first reactor won’t be complete before the mid-2030s at about the time the last fossil fuel will disappear from the generation mix, so it’s too little, too late and too expensive
Chair of the E3Gthink tank, Tom Burke, points out that this is the third or fourth time this programme has been announced in the past year. What it turns out to amount to is an agreement to spend £400m over the next three years which may produce a design for a reactor which may get approved by the regulators and which may find investors willing to pay what will be at least £2billion to build each one and which may be generating electricity which may be competitive with renewables just before the whole of our electricity system has to be decarbonised to meet the PM’s target. So, six things have to go right before we might see an SMR somewhere.
As expected, Moorside, Wylfa and Trawsfynydd have all been mentioned as potential sites for an SMR. Tees Valley mayor Ben Houchen also wants Hartlepool to be on the list. (15) Dylan Morgan of PAWB (People Against Wylfa B) said: “We have an immediate crisis now. Nuclear power is slow, dangerous and extortionately expensive. It will do nothing to address the current energy crisis, neither will it be effective to counter climate change. The UK and Welsh governments should divert resources and support away from wasteful and outdated nuclear power projects towards developing renewable technologies that are much cheaper and can provide faster and more sustainable solutions to the energy crisis and the challenges of climate change.” (16) https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/nuClearNewsNo135.pdf
Developers will have an uphill battle to meet environmental protection requirements for Bradwell nuclear project.
Bradwell Action Network said “The planning inspectorate stated that
Maldon District Council had NOT behaved unreasonably in refusing permission
on ecological grounds. The inspector allowed these works to go ahead only
after the developer submitted further data and control measures, and due to
their temporary nature.
While we are disappointed that these destructive
works are set to proceed, we should take heart that this process (the
refusal and appeal) has shown that the developers will have an uphill
struggle meeting environmental protections as this project develops. The
Blackwater Estuary and our shoreline is a critical and sensitive area for
its flora and fauna. We will continue to do what we can to protect it from
the threat of the Bradwell B development.”
BAN 11th Nov 2021
The consortium wanting to develop UK’s min-nuclear plants will have to rely on tax-payer funding.
State support a fallback option for UK’s mini-nuclear plants rollout.
The head of the consortium, which is developing a £ 30 billion fleet of mini-nuclear power stations, has indicated that it will have to rely on UK taxpayers to help fund the construction of the first of the new designs if there is not enough investor interest. Kwasi Kwarteng, business secretary, confirmed on Tuesday that the government is committed to £ 210 million in state funding to a Rolls-Royce-led consortium developing a new generation of small modular reactors (SMRs) as part of a new push into nuclear power
to help achieve the UK’s net zero target.
The government has previously seen that it was prepared to approve up to £ 2 billion in state funding to help start the program, which envisages the construction of at least 16 SMR power stations. Consortium chief executive Tom Samson told the Financial
Times that he had held talks with the government on the possibility of “putting in part of the cost for the first three or four units and then using it as a way to exploit private capital”.
Samson declined to comment on the potential scope of any further government investment and stressed that while it is an option, the aim was to “move forward in line with the
technology that requires the least government funding”. He added: “It is our duty to bring this story to the [capital] markets.”. The first five SMR power stations would cost £ 2.2bn each, with the price of subsequent units dropping to £ 1.8bn, according to Rolls-Royce. The consortium is looking to build the plants at operational and mothballs nuclear power plants in Britain.
FT 10th Nov 2021
https://www.ft.com/content/869279aa-f771-4025-8719-c3b8bdf1f375
The consortium wanting to develop UK’s min-nuclear plants will have to rely on tax-payer funding.
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (163)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 