nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Should £25 billion Hinkley C plant go ahead, with so many safety issues not solved?

David Lowry’s Blog 4th Jan 2021On Christmas Eve last year I received a detailed response to a Freedom of Information request I had made to the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation
[ONR] (I am a member of the chief nuclear inspector’s independent advisory
panel) on the 415 unresolved nuclear safety issues outstanding for the
nuclear licence for the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant the north
Somerset coast, 18 miles from the Welsh capital city, Cardiff, across the
Bristol channel. It contains an alarming number of extremely important
unresolved matters.

Should this £25 billion plant really have been given
the regulatory green light with so many safety issues unfinished? It is
nonetheless reassuring that the ONR has been so thorough in flagging up key
matters that need safety resolution.

http://drdavidlowry.blogspot.com/2021/01/hinkley-point-c-new-nuclear-plant-still.html

January 7, 2021 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Massive nuclear waste storage construction at Dounreay

Press & Journal 4th Jan 2021, Work on Dounreay’s newest radioactive waste store has reached new heights
following a marathon efforts by staff. The construction project was one of
the first to re-start work in June, following the easing of lockdown
restrictions. The 60-strong team has had to learn Covid-19 compliant ways
of working, sometimes in close proximity with each other, to keep
themselves and their colleagues safe on site.

Since then they have poured
1,500 tonnes of concrete and the building walls have now risen to above the
first floor level. Last week the team embarked on the biggest concrete pour
of the project so far, working for nine hours to lay the floor slab in the
crane maintenance bay (CMB) on the first floor of the building, with 27
lorries delivering 425 tonnes of concrete. An overnight shift completed the
job in the early hours of the morning.

The new intermediate level waste
store will hold drums of waste in safe long term storage at Dounreay in
accordance with Scottish Government policy. The £22 million contract,
awarded to Graham Construction Ltd, started in 2018 and is expected to take
around three years to complete. Dounreay project manager Dave Busby said
that casting the CMB floor slab was a significant construction milestone as
it will allow the team to install the 170 tonne CMB shield door early next
year.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/highlands/2775652/dounreay-waste-store-reaches-new-heights/

January 7, 2021 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Legal case on extradition of Julian Assange an alarming precedent for freedom of speech

January 4, 2021 Posted by | civil liberties, legal, UK | 1 Comment

Bechtel, Westinghouse and Southern Company’s hopeless case to save shambolic Wylfa nuclear project

People Against Wylfa B 31st Dec 2020,  On the last day of troubled 2020, the Westminster Government has deferred a decision on a Development Consent Order for a nuclear power station at Wylfa until the end of April 2021. This is the fourth time this has happened, and the second time in a row for Duncan Hawthorne, chief executive Horizon, to ask for a deferral.
****
The attempt to build Wylfa B has been shambolic from the start. It’s high time to abandon the foolish dream that has paralyzed Anglesey’s development since 2006. As we approach the 10th anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, the latest to be mentioned as
‘saviours’ of the radioactive poisoning project that would threaten the health of everyone on the island and beyond are three US companies.
                                                                                              ****
Here they are: Bechtel Corporation, Westinghouse and Southern Company. Here are some of the trio’s transgressions: Bechtel – recently fined nearly $58million for financial fraud with another company over a 10-year period at Hanford Nuclear Reservation, the most radioactively contaminated site in the United States. This followed a fine of $125million for low quality work on the same site in 2016.
****
Much more could be said about Bechtel. Westinghhouse and Southern Company – Westinghouse went bankrupt while trying to build Vogtle Power Station in the state of Georgia. The two AP1000 reactors of the type destined for Wylfa are five years behind Schedule, have doubled in cost to $25billion, and there is no guarantee that the power station will ever be completed. Another of their projects
was the V C Summer nuclear plant in South Carolina. It was abandoned
unfinished in 2017, and is still being paid for by taxpayers.   https://www.stop-wylfa.org/news/

January 4, 2021 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

With all the costs and delays – why not scrap the Wylfa nuclear project right now?

January 4, 2021 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Glenn Greenwald: Julian Assange’s Imprisonment Exposes U.S. Myths About Freedom

January 4, 2021 Posted by | legal, politics international, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

New delay in planning decision for £16bn Wylfa nuclear development on Anglesey

Business Live 31st Dec 2020, A planning decision on Wylfa Newydd has been delayed for another four
months for talks with potential new investors to continue. Japanese
multi-national Hitachi announced in September they were pulling out of
funding the £16bn nuclear development on Anglesey. At that point BEIS
Secretary of State Alok Sharma delayed the Development Consent Order (DCO)
decision for the application to December 31. Now following a letter from
Duncan Hawthorne, chief executive of Wylfa developer Horizon Nuclear Power,
that date has been extended to April 30.

https://www.business-live.co.uk/economic-development/wylfa-newydd-planning-decision-delayed-19543446.amp

January 2, 2021 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Cover-up! how consumers will be forced to pay for cost-overruns for Sizewell C nuclear construction

December 31, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Brexit: UK and Euratom have signed a Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA)

World Nuclear News 29th Dec 2020, The UK and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) have signed a
Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA). This is separate from the wider UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was also announced on 24 December and which has since been approved by ambassadors from the 27 EU Member States, paving the way for it to take effect on 1 January. UK lawmakers will tomorrow return to the House of Commons, the lower chamber of parliament,
to vote on the so-called post-Brexit trade deal.

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/UK-and-Euratom-sign-Nuclear-Cooperation-Agreement

December 31, 2020 Posted by | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Scotland wants no part in the Tories’ latest nuclear energy folly

December 31, 2020 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

In so many ways, Sizewell C nuclear plan is a bad deal for Britain, and especially for climate action

Why Sizewell C is a bad deal for the UK public and our net zero goals
https://bhesco.co.uk/blog/stop-sizewell-c-nuclear-power by Dan Curtis on 21/12/2020   It has been a tumultuous few weeks for the UK’s energy policy, with the Prime Minister’s Ten Point Plan for achieving Net Zero by 2050 followed swiftly by the Government’s long overdue Energy White Paper.

Then, the news broke that the UK Government has begun discussions with French utility EDF for the development of a new nuclear reactor at Sizewell, “C” in Suffolk, basically scrapping their 10 year policy that “there will be no levy, direct payment or market support for electricity supplied or capacity provided by a private sector new nuclear operator, unless similar support is also made available more widely to other types of generation”.

The site at Sizewell contains two existing nuclear power facilities, Sizewell A (decommissioning and site restoration until 2098 at taxpayers’ cost) and Sizewell B (still active). The new proposals are to build an extension to the site, implementing the same reactor design as that Hinkley Point “C” in Somerset.

Defenders of the project invariably claim that expanding the UK’s nuclear fleet will contribute to the decarbonisation of the energy supply, ensure energy security, while providing consumers with long-term affordable electricity – all arguments which fail to stand up to scrutiny, as we shall demonstrate.

Nuclear power does not provide good value for money

It takes a phenomenal amount of money to develop new nuclear power stations, before we even begin to consider the additional cost of storing and managing the radioactive waste material.

Hinkley C was originally estimated to cost £18 billion but the project has been mired in delays and is now vastly over-budget, predicted to cost up to £3 billion more than initially forecast – a quite remarkable overspend.

 

To address this vulnerability to financial losses for the project developers EDF and Chinese firm CGN, who are considering withdrawing their investment, the UK Government are considering investing directly in Sizewell C, shifting risk and cost to the British taxpayer.

This is in addition to a suggestion of implementing a “regulated asset base” financing model which would enable EDF to charge energy customers for the cost of construction as well as the cost of electricity generation (thereby exposing both customers and taxpayers to the risk of project cost overruns).

Adding to the financial nonsense of new nuclear power is the sky-high cost of the electricity that is produced to the end user. The government has granted a guaranteed, inflation linked price of £92.50 per megawatt hour for the electricity to be produced by Hinkley Point C.

Compare this to the cost of offshore wind, which under a 2019 contract for difference auction, saw prices come in at £39.65 per megawatt hour – less than half the cost of energy from Hinkley.

In contrast to the ever-increasing costs of nuclear (Sizewell C has an estimated starting price tag of £20 billion, which will no doubt balloon), the cost of solar and wind power continue to fall year on year, with solar costs having declined by an astonishing 87% since 2010.

A primary motivation for nuclear power is its value for military applications

The astronomical construction and decommissioning costs of nuclear power does not make financial sense when looking at it from a UK taxpayer/ consumer viewpoint.  It is only when considering the wider potential applications of a nuclear programme that we can begin to understand why successive UK governments have been so supportive of the industry.

 

Researchers at the University of Sussex found compelling evidence that the UK’s domestic nuclear power programme is only supported by the Government because of its value in contributing towards the military nuclear weapons programme, which would otherwise be financially unviable without such subsidised support from domestic energy customers.

Prof Andrew Stirling of the university’s Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) said:

”The exclusion of these issues from the consultation remit reflects a serious military-driven bias in UK Government attachments to nuclear power. This is not only making carbon emissions reductions slower and more expensive, but also impeding possibilities for the UK post-COVID economic recovery”.

We believe that the arguments in favour of nuclear power are disingenuous. Backers of nuclear power should be honest that they want to build more nuclear plants not because they will provide energy security or a good deal for customers, but because they are necessary for maintaining the UK’s fleet of nuclear submarines, and all of the sabre rattling ‘seat at the table’ geo-political bravado that goes along with retaining our position as a nuclear power.

New nuclear power takes too long to build to have any meaningful role in tackling the urgent climate crisis

Wherever new nuclear power stations are being built we see long delays and broken promises.

Hinkley Point C has suffered setbacks and complications ever since development began in 2017 and it is not expected to come online until 2025. It’s the same story at other locations where this type of reactor is being built, such as in Flamanville in France which is seven years overdue and the Olkiluoto plant in Finland which is ten years late!  There is only one EPR nuclear reactor operational in the world. This is the Taishun plant in China, built on the same sea where Fukishima exploded in 2011.

Clearly, new nuclear power plants will not address the issue of urgent and radical carbon emissions reductions needed to be achieved by 2030 if we are to avoid irreversible climate breakdown.

It is also worth noting the gigantic carbon footprint that would result from the construction of Sizewell C. When considering the pros and cons of nuclear power, it is vital to honestly account for the enormous quantities of cement (which has a huge carbon footprint) and other hazardous materials required to build the facility in the first place.

Adding insult to the assertion that Sizewell C will be a long-term benefit to the environment is the fact that the site is to be located adjacent to an RSPB nature reserve Minsmere, a AONB site that EDF has already started demolishing.

Nuclear power produces nuclear waste which lasts for thousands of years

The by-product of nuclear fission is hazardous nuclear waste which remains radioactive for thousands of years. This presents an extraordinary liability and storage risk to future UK taxpayers and residents.

The current liability cost of decommissioning and safely storing our existing nuclear waste is estimated to be in the region of £232 billion – a truly eye-watering sum, and one that will only continue to increase as more nuclear reactors such as Hinkley and Sizewell contribute additional toxic waste materials for every year that they are operational.

 

The UK already has the largest stockpile of radioactive plutonium in the world, estimated to be between 112 and 140 tons, stored in an area of outstanding natural beauty in Cumbria. Future generations will not think kindly of us if we continue to add to this dangerous legacy with more hazardous nuclear waste that costs billions each year to manage to avert disaster.

The UK does not need Sizewell C or any other nuclear power stations – we can meet our energy needs with 100% clean renewable energy

We already have the means at our disposal to meet our heat and power needs through a combination of renewable energy and energy storage technologies.

Combine this with a comprehensive programme to reduce demand through energy efficiency improvements and we can conclude with confidence that there is no reason to develop new nuclear power stations in the UK.  In fact, the alternatives will deliver lower energy prices for the consumer and better taxpayer value over the long term.

A common defence for nuclear power is the need for a steady supply of ‘base load’ power in the event that intermittant renewables cannot meet demand.

But this way of thinking is obsolete. Our future energy supply in the UK will be based on dynamism and flexibility, where consumers adapt their behaviour in sync with variable generation output. As Steve Holliday, former CEO of National Grid said in 2015:

“The idea of baseload power is already outdated. I think you should look at this the other way around. From a consumer’s point of view, baseload is what I am producing myself. The solar on my rooftop, my heat pump – that’s the baseload.”

The Government’s recent announcement that it is entering into talks with EDF regarding Sizewell C is, we are told, the beginning of a long consultation process which will consider the long-term costs and benefits of such a project before reaching a conclusion on whether to give it the go ahead.

These talks are by no means a ‘green-light’ to the project. We hope that it is not naïve to believe that due diligence will be done, that the information will be honest and transparent, and that logical, rational thinking for the benefit of all residents of our small island will prevail.

But this way of thinking is obsolete. Our future energy supply in the UK will be based on dynamism and flexibility, where consumers adapt their behaviour in sync with variable generation output. As Steve Holliday, former CEO of National Grid said in 2015:

“The idea of baseload power is already outdated. I think you should look at this the other way around. From a consumer’s point of view, baseload is what I am producing myself. The solar on my rooftop, my heat pump – that’s the baseload.”

The Government’s recent announcement that it is entering into talks with EDF regarding Sizewell C is, we are told, the beginning of a long consultation process which will consider the long-term costs and benefits of such a project before reaching a conclusion on whether to give it the go ahead.

These talks are by no means a ‘green-light’ to the project. We hope that it is not naïve to believe that due diligence will be done, that the information will be honest and transparent, and that logical, rational thinking for the benefit of all residents of our small island will prevail.’

Sources ……

December 31, 2020 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Small Nuclear Reactors – the Big New Way – to get the public to fund the nuclear weapons industry

so-called “small nuclear reactors”

Downing Street told the Financial Times, which it faithfully reported, that it was “considering” £2 billion of taxpayers’ money to support “small nuclear reactors”

They are not small

The first thing to know about these beasts is that they are not small. 440MW? The plant at Wylfa (Anglesey, north Wales) was 460MW (it’s closed now). 440MW is bigger than all the Magnox type reactors except Wylfa and comparable to an Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor.

Only if military needs are driving this decision is it explicable.

”Clearly, the military need to maintain both reactor construction and operation skills and access to fissile materials will remain. I can well see the temptation for Defence Ministers to try to transfer this cost to civilian budgets,” 

Any nation’s defence budget in this day and age cannot afford a new generation of nuclear weapons. So it needs to pass the costs onto the energy sector.

How the UK’s secret defence policy is driving energy policy – with the public kept in the darkhttps://www.thefifthestate.com.au/energy-lead/how-the-uks-secret-defence-policy-is-driving-energy-policy-with-the-public-kept-in-the-dark/  BY DAVID THORPE / 13 OCTOBER 2020

 The UK government has for 15 years persistently backed the need for new nuclear power. Given its many problems, most informed observers can’t understand why. The answer lies in its commitment to being a nuclear military force. Continue reading

December 29, 2020 Posted by | politics, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK’s quest for nuclear fusion.

December 26, 2020 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Unacceptable secrecy by the nuclear industry in Sizewell documentation

December 24, 2020 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

The real reason for “civil” Small Nuclear Reactors- to supply expertise and technology for the nuclear weapons industry

December 21, 2020 Posted by | politics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment