nuclear-news

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

UK: consultation with 2300 people about radioactive waste dump – only 13 people supported it.

Northern Echo 13th Oct 2020, THOUSANDS of people have written to the Environment Agency over concerns that plans to dump radioactive waste in Teesside will pose a risk to
communities. An application has been made by Augean North Ltd for a low
level radioactive waste permit at their existing Port Clarence site,
between Stockton and Billingham.

The Environment Agency, which held a
consultation which ended in January, published its report yesterday. About
2,300 people took part in the four-month exercise, with only 13 supporting
the application.

The Environment Agency is now considering these in
determining whether to grant the permit, taking into account information
submitted by Augean North. The operator has been asked to provide further
information, with a decision expected to be made by the end of January
2021.

Members of the public, as well members of Stockton on Tees Borough
Council and Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council commented on the
socioeconomic impact and the general impact on the area, as well as the
potential impact on regeneration plans. Last year, Tees Valley Mayor Ben
Houchen criticised the plans, which he said were against the interests of
those living in surrounding areas. The report can be viewed by visiting
consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/north-east/port-clarence-landfill-permit-application

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/18791632.2-000-objections-made-augean-north-port-clarence-nuclear-plans/

October 15, 2020 Posted by | public opinion, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Assange extradition case could esrablish a dangerous legal precedent

Crumbling Case Against Assange Shows Weakness of “Hacking” Charges Related to Whistleblowing

The charge against Assange is about establishing legal precedent to charge publishers with conspiring with their sources, something that so far the U.S. government has failed to do because of the First Amendment.

October 10, 2020 Micah Lee  THE INTERCEPT, By 2013, the Obama administration had concluded that it could not charge WikiLeaks or Julian Assange with crimes related to publishing classified documents — documents that showed, among other things, evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan — without criminalizing investigative journalism itself. President Barack Obama’s Justice Department called this the “New York Times problem,” because if WikiLeaks and Assange were criminals for publishing classified information, the New York Times would be just as guilty.

Five years later, in 2018, the Trump Administration indicted Assange anyway. But, rather than charging him with espionage for publishing classified information, they charged him with a computer crime, later adding 17 counts of espionage in a superseding May 2019 indictment.

The computer charges claimed that, in 2010, Assange conspired with his source, Chelsea Manning, to crack an account on a Windows computer in her military base, and that the “primary purpose of the conspiracy was to facilitate Manning’s acquisition and transmission of classified information.” The account enabled internet file transfers using a protocol known as FTP.

New testimony from the third week of Assange’s extradition trial makes it increasingly clear that this hacking charge is incredibly flimsy. The alleged hacking not only didn’t happen, according to expert testimony at Manning’s court martial hearing in 2013 and again at Assange’s extradition trial last week, but it also couldn’t have happened.

The new testimony, reported earlier this week by investigative news site Shadowproof, also shows that Manning already had authorized access to, and the ability to exfiltrate, all of the documents that she was accused of leaking — without receiving any technical help from WikiLeaks. …….

the charge is not actually about hacking — it’s about establishing legal precedent to charge publishers with conspiring with their sources, something that so far the U.S. government has failed to do because of the First Amendment………

Whether or not you believe Assange is a journalist is beside the point. The New York Times just published groundbreaking revelations from two decades of Donald Trump’s taxes showing obscene tax avoidance, massive fraud, and hundreds of millions of dollars of debt.

Trump would like nothing more than to charge the New York Times itself, and individual journalists that reported that story, with felonies for conspiring with their source. This is why the precedent in Assange’s case is so important: If Assange loses, the Justice Department will have established new legal tactics with which to go after publishers for conspiring with their sources. https://portside.org/2020-10-10/crumbling-case-against-assange-shows-weakness-hacking-charges-related-whistleblowing

October 12, 2020 Posted by | civil liberties, Legal, media, UK | Leave a comment

World press freedom endangered, if UK extradites Julian Assange to America

The

 

October 12, 2020 Posted by | civil liberties, Legal, media, UK | Leave a comment

Big doubts about the economics of small nuclear reactors for the UK

FT 11th Oct 2020, The big challenge facing small nuclear reactors. When Britain unveiled its
first commercial nuclear reactor back in 1956, Calder Hall in Cumbria had
the ability to generate 50 megawatts of electricity. Fast-forward four
decades to the last reactor the UK completed, at Sizewell in Suffolk. Still
functioning, it has a capacity of 1,200MW. Spot the theme? Yup, ever bigger
reactors.

Size has steadily increased because of simple nuclear economics.
Sizewell B may be able to generate 24 times as much power as a 50MW
reactor. But it doesn’t need 24 times the material inputs and staffing to
generate that extra power. Which all makes it seem faintly
counter-intuitive that Britain is considering downsizing and spending money
on a fleet of so-called small modular reactors.

The government is considering plans to put up to £2bn into developing the technology. A
number of companies, including Britain’s Rolls-Royce and GE Hitachi, are
pitching to sell their products. The aim is to fund prototypes with a view
to kick-starting a new SMR industry.

This would build perhaps dozens of
mini-reactors to [supposedly] help the UK meet its net zero emissions target while also
keeping the lights on, as well as exporting this technically advanced kit.

Large nuclear hasn’t exactly a spotless record when it comes to cost
containment. So why make it harder by forgoing those scale advantages?

Research by a team led by Tony Roulstone at Cambridge university looked at
the relative costs of building a “first of a series” SMR against a
comparable large reactor. It concluded that if you used the same project
techniques as for conventional plants, the SMR would cost (once the
interest costs incurred in construction were taken into account) roughly 70
per cent more per kilowatt (kW) to build than the larger one.

Squeezing that cost back down requires a wholly different approach to construction.
Instead of building everything in the open on a massive building site, as
with large reactors, it means making as much as possible in factories
before shipment to site. The same Cambridge team estimated that with ever
more prefabrication and standardisation of parts, you could ultimately
squeeze the cost down roughly to parity with the larger reactor.

A glance at the history of overruns and delays that plagued the Advanced Gas-cooled
Reactor project in the 1960s should suffice as a reminder. For SMRs to
avoid a similar miserable fate, the government must pick a single
commercial technology which can bring in sufficient private sector
investment and attract export orders. This cannot be some “made in
Britain” industrial exercise. If that’s what’s in prospect, then,
honestly, big is probably best.

https://www.ft.com/content/99307126-bb21-48e3-87aa-301749dec870

October 12, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Conflict of interest – UK’s Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)

Stop Hinkley Press Release 8th Oct 2020, EDF’s Hinkley C Nuclear Power Station will be wiping out fish stocks in
Severn Estuary for 60 years. The Stop Hinkley Campaign is accusing
EDFGenco, the French and Chinese owned Company building Hinkley Point C, of
trying to bully the UK Environment Agency into allowing them to destroy
environmentally precious fish stocks for the 60 year lifetime of the
nuclear power station.

A condition placed on EDFGenco by the Environment
Agency was that permission to build Hinkley C was dependent on Acoustic
Fish Deterrents (AFDs) being placed on the two massive cooling water intake
heads 3 kilometres offshore from the Nuclear site.

Now EDFGenco is trying
to renege on its commitment to install AFDs and is seeking a variation on
the planning conditions imposed. EDFGenco claims that the Centre for
Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS) the government’s
marine and freshwater science expert body – is happy for them to go ahead
without AFDs. The Wildfowl and Wetland Trust points out that “CEFAS’s
relationship as a paid contractor to EDFGenco and an agent of Government
raises unavoidable questions of conflict of interest”.

http://www.stophinkley.org/PressReleases/pr201008.pdf

October 12, 2020 Posted by | environment, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Conservative UK government is considering a carbon tax, in its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

Times 9th Oct 2020, Rishi Sunak is examining proposals for a UK-wide carbon tax that could
raise billions of pounds while encouraging the drive towards net-zero emissions. The chancellor is seeking to replace existing EU carbon-reduction schemes with the new tax when the transition period  finishes at the end of the year.
Treasury officials are also looking at longer-term proposals to extend the tax to other areas including domestic gas and agriculture, which could raise more than £25 billion by 2030, supporters say.
A Whitehall source said Mr Sunak saw the idea as a way of “raising revenue while cutting emissions”. Another added that the idea was getting “increasing traction” across government. However, the movehas alarmed some environmental groups who fear a carbon tax could become subject to political pressure, like fuel duty, which could make it less likely that Britain meets its 2050 net-zero target.
Guy Newey, strategy director at Energy Systems Catapult, said a coherent strategy was needed.
“The danger with relying solely on a carbon tax is that no one believes politicians will not scrap it when things get tough, so no one invests. A cap and trade scheme that guarantees an outcome, alongside regulation and innovation support, is much more likely to lead to cuts in emissions.”https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/sunak-plans-carbon-emissions-tax-to-help-rebuild-economy-jbl3gs993

October 10, 2020 Posted by | climate change, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Will the UK government sacrifice the beautiful Suffolk coast in its misguided, uneconomic, Sizewell nuclear power push?

East Anglian Daily Times 8th Oct 2020, As councils lose patience with EDF, will Suffolk businesses follow suit?
Today East Suffolk lies at a crossroads – the future of the east of the county now seems certain to rest in the hands of London-based civil servants and ministers – and to be honest I don’t know which way they will jump when push comes to shove. The deadline has now passed for councils, businesses, and residents to have their say on whether a two new nuclear reactors should be built on the Suffolk coast at Eastbridge, north of the existing stations at Sizewell.
Logic says they should be turned down. They would be uneconomic (EDF has had the devil’s own job in putting together a business case and there is still the question over whether Chinese money would be needed – even though we don’t want them in our mobile phone network), the plans proposed would destroy a lot ofcountryside, and there is now no need for such a damaging blot on the
landscape. But I do worry that there are some in government who do not understand the value of this area to the country as a whole who will be prepared to look on Sizewell C as a shiny investment to try to kick-start the UK economy after the pandemic and in a world no longer governed by EU rules, will pour in government subsidies to make up for the loss of Chinese money.

https://www.eadt.co.uk/ea-life/last-chance-to-stop-sizewell-c-1-6871419?s=09

BBC 8th Oct 2020, Campaigners against a new nuclear power station say they are “resolute”
after their bid to protect woodland was thrown out by the High Court. EDF
Energy, which wants to build two new reactors next to Sizewell B in
Suffolk, was given approval in 2019 to fell Coronation Wood on the site.
Together Against Sizewell C (Tasc) sought a judicial review, claiming that
decision was unlawful.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-54465228

October 10, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, environment, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Design not even finished! But UK govt to subsidise Small Nuclear Reactors (SMRs)

The plan is for 16 of them –  at ? £2bn each?   


FT 7th Oct 2020, Downing St considers £2bn support for mini nuclear reactors

Consortium wants to build up to 16 generators .  Downing Street is supporting plans to spend up to £2bn of taxpayers’ money on a
new generation of mini nuclear reactors. Consortium wants to build up to 16 generators to help UK meet carbon emissions targets. The first SMR is expected to cost £2.2bn and be online by 2029.

Government and industry figures confirmed that a pledge of £1.5bn-£2bn is being discussed which could even see taxpayers acquire an equity stake in the programme.

However, discussions are still ongoing and any final decision will be subject to the Treasury’s current multiyear spending review, which is due later this year. The government could also commission the first mini power station, giving confidence to suppliers and investors. The consortium, which also includes the National Nuclear Laboratory, will seek additional funding of at least £2bn, including from private investors and the capital markets.

Support for SMR technology is expected to form part of Boris Johnson’s “10-point plan for a green industrial revolution” which he will set out later in the autumn. …….. Under the plans being considered by Number 10, the small
modular reactors would be manufactured on production lines in central plants and then transported to sites for assembly. Each mini power station would operate for up to 60 years, providing 440MW of electricity per year — enough to power a city the size of Leeds.

The government’s support “should deliver sufficient cash to get the consortium through building
factories and well on the way to construction of power stations prior to finding more money from other sources,” said one person with knowledge of the situation.

The consortium is expected to finalise the SMR design by April next year, when it hopes to launch the four-year licensing process.
During that time it hopes to begin recruiting employees for the business, and identifying the sites for powers stations and the factories to build the components and modules for the SMRs. The business department hasalready pledged £18m towards the consortium’s early-stage plans.

https://www.ft.com/content/d7016b80-e0c4-4444-a059-2daf32b9a4ab

October 8, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Call to British govt to not allow restart of Hinkley Point B nuclear reactors, with cracks in their cores

Stop Hinkley 29th Sept 2020, EDF Energy has just announced that it intends to submit new safety cases to the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) to re-open Reactors 3 and 4 at Hinkley Point B. It currently expects reactor 4 to return to service on 26 February 2021 and reactor 3 on 12 March 2021.

The Stop Hinkley Campaign is calling for both reactors to remain closed. Stop Hinkley spokesperson Roy Pumfrey said: “Nuclear engineer, the late John Large said more than a decade ago that it was gambling with public safety to allow reactors with cracks in their core to keep operating. (3) Every minute these reactors operate that gamble become riskier.

We call upon the UK Government to intervene and request the ONR to re-consider their unwise decisions at Hunterston B and to refuse to accept EDF’s safety cases for Hinkley Point B. It is EDF in Paris, France which will benefit from the restart of these reactors, but it is those of us who live in Somerset and middle England who are being exposed to these involuntary risks”

http://www.stophinkley.org/PressReleases/pr200920.pdf

October 1, 2020 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

UK govt to give EDF a blank cheque for building Sizewell C nuclear power plant.

Dave Toke’s Blog 29th Sept 2020, It is looking increasingly likely that the British Government is about to cave-in to EDF’s demand that the British energy consumers should pay what could be massive cost overruns for building Sizewell C nuclear power plant.
But what has not been discussed so much is how the contract the Government is likely to offer EDF will reduce deployment of renewable energy schemes.
A report in The Times signals that EDF chiefs is meeting the Chancellor to complete the details for how to dress up what is in effect a blank cheque for Sizewell C. It reported that the withdrawal of Hitachi from the Wylfa site was a ‘shock’. Hitachi’s move which has been expected for a year, is not a shock to people in the energy industry. It became apparent (to me at least!) long ago that new nuclear plant can only be built if they are given an effective blank cheque (that is the promise of an unlimited supply of cash) from some state-backed energy monopoly.
EDF will be expecting the same sort of contract as given to them for Hinkley C which allows nuclear electricity generation to crowd out production from future renewable energy plant. EDF will be given so-called ‘baseload’ contracts that mean that when electricity wholesale prices are low or even negative they will still get paid the same level of high premium prices. Meanwhile future wind and solar pv projects will be effectively forced offline by the nuclear power plant because they will not receive premium prices.

http://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.com/2020/09/is-treasury-about-to-cave-in-over-edfs.html

October 1, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Plans for Bradwell B nuclear power station could collapse

Campaigners claim plans for Bradwell B nuclear power station could collapse, Clacton Gazette , By Alex Gidden Reporter  28 Sept 20,  CAMPAIGNERS claim plans to build a nuclear power station off the coast of Essex could collapse before the end of the year.

The Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group says there is growing “hostility” towards proposals to build a power station in Bradwell and believes the scheme could even be shelved in the coming weeks.

Group chairman Prof Andy Blowers made the bold claim after seeing Japanese firm Hitachi pull out of plans to build its own nuclear power station in north Wales.

He says Hitachi’s decision underlines the “huge expense” associated with building nuclear power stations and believes the Bradwell B project will be binned because of the costs and scale of opposition.

Both Colchester and Maldon councils have rejected planning applications for the power station in the past month.

The applications were jointly submitted by the China General Nuclear Power Group, also known as CGN, and energy firm EDF.

A spokesman for the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group said: “CGN is now fully aware of the mountain it has to climb to get anywhere near planning permission for its massive nuclear juggernaut, which will utterly destroy the environment and wellbeing of the Blackwater region.

“Widespread public protest and influential councils have produced a powerful coalition of outright opposition to the proposals.

Its progress will not be straightforward and will take years to complete.

“By the time it could start operating, it will be a white elephant, unnecessary, uneconomic and redundant……… https://www.clactonandfrintongazette.co.uk/news/north_essex_news/18749213.campaigners-claim-plans-bradwell-b-nuclear-power-station-collapse/

September 29, 2020 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK to return high-level nuclear waste to Germany

September 29, 2020 Posted by | Germany, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

A Sellafield nuclear disaster would spread across Cumbria – new map shows

September 28, 2020 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

French taxpayers don’t want to pay for Sizewell nuclear station, neither do British.

France’s EDF demands clarity on British nuclear power plans Times  John Collingridge   27 Sept 20, French energy giant EDF is set for a showdown with the Treasury over state funding for nuclear power stations as Britain’s atomic future faces a make-or-break moment.Jean-Bernard Lévy, chairman and chief executive of Électricité de France, will speak to chancellor Rishi Sunak via video link on Wednesday to demand clarity over Britain’s plans for funding nuclear power.

The industry was left reeling this month when Japan’s Hitachi quit its Horizon project to build a £20bn plant on Anglesey.

That shock retreat, after years of prevarication by Westminster over state support for nuclear power and turmoil in the Japanese nuclear industry, left only EDF and China General Nuclear with plans for atomic power stations in the UK.

EDF and China are building the delayed and over-budget £22.5bn Hinkley Point C power station in Somerset, but Paris has balked at
the prospect of French taxpayers funding the next nuclear project in Britain.

Instead, EDF, which is 84% owned by the French state, wants British taxpayers to underwrite a new plant at Sizewell in Suffolk. A
proposed new financial structure, the regulated asset base, would levy a tax on UK household energy bills to help pay for the project.

Other options include the British government taking a stake — although that has worried the Treasury, which is anxious about adding to its debt mountain.

EDF declined to comment. With most of Britain’s ageing reactors due to close by the end of the decade, Sunak and Boris Johnson face the dilemma of whether to fund more big nuclear plants, or rely on wind, solar, gas, small reactors and imported power to keep the lights on.

The American government has warned Hitachi against selling the Anglesey site to China, and is understood to be considering bankrolling US companies to take it over. Westinghouse, which makes the AP1000 nuclear plant, and NuScale Power,
which is developing small, modular reactors, are both believed to be
exploring options for the site. South Korea’s Kepco is also understood to
be interested, as is EDF.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/frances-edf-demands-clarity-on-british-nuclear-power-plans-00t6gbmlg

September 28, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, France, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Former UK Energy Minister Sir Ed Davey says new Sizewell nuclear station is too expensive

Suffolk’s Sizewell C too expensive, says Sir Ed Davey,   BBC,  By Vikki Irwin & Chris Bond
28 Sept 20,   Former energy secretary Sir Ed Davey has said building a new nuclear power station at Sizewell is “too expensive”.

Instead the new Liberal Democrat leader argues the government should invest more in renewable energy to help boost the economy.
“The economic case for nuclear power is not there any more,” said Sir Ed.
Energy firm EDF, which is behind the £20bn proposals, said the plant on the Suffolk coast would deliver low-carbon electricity.
Sir Ed, energy minister during the 2010-15 coalition government, approved plans for a new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point in 2013 and secured Chinese investment for the site on the Somerset coast.
But now he said: “The cost of offshore wind energy has fallen dramatically and renewables are cheaper than nuclear.
“We can build them locally, we don’t need Chinese investment. Let’s tap into this energy source that we control, that is clean, green and that creates green jobs in the region.”
Next week sees the deadline for interested parties to register their interest in the planning inquiry into Sizewell C.
It is expected to be about 18 months before a final planning decision is made and the plant would then take 10 years to build………..
Politics East is broadcast on BBC One on Sunday at 10:00 BST and available on the iPlayer after transmission . https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-54294057

September 28, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment