Trident celebrations ignore Aboriginal victims of British nuclear weapons testing
https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/trident-celebrations-ignore-aboriginal-victims-british-nuclear-weapons-testing, Linda Pearson, April 26, 2019 Issue 1218, Scotland
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) General Secretary Kate Hudson said the plan is “morally repugnant” and the organisation is urging supporters to convey their opposition to Defence Secretary, Gavin Williamson. Two Bishops and more than 20 priests have called on Westminster Abbey to cancel the service, which is set to take place on May 3……
The rhetoric of “deterrence” and “defence” is routinely invoked by nuclear-armed states to obscure the horrifying truth about nuclear weapons and justify national security doctrines that rely on them. Nuclear weapons are unique in their destructive power; “designed to indiscriminately kill and destroy thousands of innocent civilians”, as the Bishop of Colchester told The Times last week. This reality was recognised by most of the world’s countries, which voted to ban nuclear weapons in 2017.
Britain’s nuclear weapons program has already destroyed the lives of countless innocent civilians. More than 1200 Indigenous Australians were exposed to radiation during British nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s and 1960s, while many others were displaced. The effects continue to be experienced by their families today. Some are now calling on the British government to apologise for the testing, instead of celebrating Trident.
Nuclear testing in Australia
Britain conducted 12 major nuclear weapons tests in Australia at the Montebello Islands, and at Emu Field and Maralinga in South Australia.
After securing the agreement of the Australian government, the British established a permanent test site at Maralinga in 1955. Seven major and several hundred “minor” tests were carried out there, releasing 100kg of radioactive materials into the surrounding area.
The British and Australian governments of the day demonstrated a callous disregard for the lives of Aboriginal people that is characteristic of the settler-colonial mindset. Permission to conduct the testing was not sought from Aboriginal landowners and the Australian government decided they should not be informed of the risks.
When an Australian scientist asked British authorities about the potential danger to local Aboriginal people, the response was that “a dying race couldn’t influence the defence of Western civilisation”.
Many Aboriginal people were forcibly removed from their land prior to the tests, destroying their way of life. Others experienced serious health issues as a result of their exposure to radiation.
Yankunytjatjara man Yami Lester went blind after a “black mist” from the explosions enveloped his country. Others experienced skin rashes, diarrhea and vomiting. Today, Aboriginal communities in the area experience high rates of diseases associated with the effects of radiation poisoning.
Yami Lester’s daughter, Karina Lester, and her family played a crucial role in the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN). They collected and shared stories from the survivors of nuclear weapons testing that were instrumental in convincing 122 states that the only safe way to deal with nuclear weapons is to eliminate them.
ICAN won the Nobel Peace Prize for its efforts to bring about the 2017 United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The historic treaty recognises “the disproportionate impact of nuclear-weapon activities on Indigenous peoples”. The British and Australian governments boycotted the UN negotiations, however, and have ruled out signing the treaty.
No cause for celebration
Karina Lester said “survivors of the British Nuclear Tests carried out on Australian soil in the 1950’s and 1960’s in South Australia’s outback are still haunted. The Indigenous communities still suffer with high numbers of deaths, cancers, respiratory illnesses and autoimmune disease.”
Several attempts to clean up the Maralinga site have been made by British and Australian governments, thanks to the campaigning of survivors like Yami Lester, but contamination at the site remains. In 1995, Aboriginal peoples received just £7.5 million for the loss and contamination of their land. Only £110,000 has been paid to five Aboriginal people to compensate for their exposure to radiation. A class action was blocked by Britain’s Supreme Court in 2013.
Karina Lester said that the affected communities “have had no apology for the wrongdoings on our traditional lands to this day. As the British Government celebrates 50 years with nuclear weapons, Australia’s Indigenous communities in South Australia wear the scars.”
Instead of celebrating, Lester said, “we Indigenous South Australians urge the British government to own up and apologise for your actions
Aboriginal communities in South Australia now fear that they will be forced to bear the risks of radioactive contamination again. The Australian government is currently considering three sites for the location of a national nuclear waste dump, two on Barngarla land, near Kimba, and one on Adnyamathanha land at Wallerberdina Station, near the Finders Ranges.
The dump will host nuclear material currently stored at different sites in Australia, plus waste from Britain pursuant to a 2012 agreement between the British and Scottish governments. The agreement relates to waste generated by the reprocessing of Australian nuclear fuel at Dounreay. However, that waste is to remain where it is and a substituted amount will be shipped from the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing and decommissioning site, located on the coast of the Irish Sea.
The views of traditional owners have been sidelined throughout the process for choosing the dump’s location and Adnyamathanha’s traditional owners say that federal government contractors have already damaged sacred sites. As a result, two separate human rights complaints are outstanding in Australian courts.
Campaigners have called on the British and Scottish governments to halt the shipment while there is a risk that it will end up dumped on Aboriginal land without the consent of the Traditional Owners. However, the British government said the shipment “will comply with all relevant international laws” and the eventual destination of the waste is “a matter for the Australian authorities”. The British Environment Agency has so far failed to respond to requests to halt the shipment of waste from Sellafield.
The Scottish government has also failed to act to stop the shipment, despite expert advice it commissioned, which states that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and, ultimately, Scottish ministers could refuse to authorise the shipment on human rights grounds.
Britain’s plans to celebrate 50 years of at-sea nukes erases the experience of Indigenous people affected by nuclear weapons testing. Those experiences should be front and centre in any discussion about nuclear weapons, as ICAN recognised.
Instead of celebrating, we should be looking at ways to redress the past and prevent future harm. Britain should apologise for its nuclear weapons testing and pay adequate compensation to those affected. The shipment of nuclear waste from Sellafield should be stopped.
But there is only one way we can prevent more lives being destroyed by nuclear weapons and that is by eliminating them altogether. https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/trident-celebrations-ignore-aboriginal-victims-british-nuclear-weapons-testing
British govt about to give nuclear power a massive state-funded financial boost
|
For instance the Financial Times describes the use of “RAB” (regulated asset base) financing as similar to the system used to build the Thames Tideway tunnel’ Under such schemes the developers are allowed to charge consumers in advance for the capital building projects. What Ministers are not emphasising of course, is that in industries such as water the Government does not lend lots of money to the privatised companies. They raise this on private markets. But in the case of nuclear power plants the bulk of the money needed to build them will be borrowed from the Government.
RAB has been used to try to finance nuclear power plants in the USA, in the states of Georgia and South Carolina recently. The result was disaster and the developing company, Westinghouse, went bust. But this was ‘normal’ RAB where the developer takes the risk of cost overruns. But in the proposed UK nuclear version it will be the electricity consumer who goes bust when the almost inevitable cost-overruns set in! The nuclear RAB is really a cover for a nuclear bailout. So let’s call it a ‘nuke bailout RAB’.
What makes this move even more infuriating for green energy supporters is that Hammond offered what amount to a few superficial titbits for green energy in his Spring statement. Meanwhile renewable energy projects will not be able to take part in RAB projects. Not only will nuclear power be funded under much more preferential terms compared to offshore or onshore renewable energy projects but they will be directly funded by government and large parts, if not all, of their liabilities guaranteed by the treasury – again something that does not apply to renewable energy. (1)
According to Harminder Singh, Power Analyst at GlobalData, the RAB model would shift the risk from the developers to consumers, thus raising the electricity bills of consumers. Consumers will be effectively paying for an asset that will come up some time in the future, with all the risks associated with it. Furthermore, with the cost escalations associated with nuclear power projects, there is an additional uncertainty regarding how much it will add to the consumer power bill. The model has so far not been used for projects as expensive as nuclear power plants, which is seen as a key cause for concern. On the other hand, the RAB is a useful tool to attract private investments in the sector, as investors are able to see a fixed rate of return as the project is being built. The key problem that RAB addresses is that of high cost of capital for nuclear power projects. It is revised at regular intervals to take into account increases in capex – subject to regulatory approval. The regulatory protection and government backing means that the RAB is treated as a strong, secure asset. (2) http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NuClearNewsNo116.pdf |
|
|
Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg addresses UK Parliament
BBC 23rd April 2019 Teenage activist Greta Thunberg has described the UK’s response to climate change as “beyond absurd”. In a speech to MPs, the Swedish 16-year-old
criticised the UK for supporting new exploitation of fossil fuels and
exaggerating cuts to carbon emissions. She was invited to Westminster after
inspiring the school climate strikes movement. Environment Secretary
Michael Gove said “we have not done nearly enough”. In her speech in
Parliament on Tuesday, Miss Thunberg said the UK was supporting shale gas
fracking, greater exploitation of North Sea oil and gas fields and
expanding airports. “This ongoing irresponsible behaviour will no doubt be
remembered in history as one of the greatest failures of humankind,” she
said. She also described the UK’s carbon emissions reduction as the result
of “very creative” accounting. The country’s reported 37% reduction in
emissions since 1990 was only 10% when aviation, shipping, imports and
exports were counted, she said. Miss Thunberg said her generation’s future
had been “stolen” so that “a small number of people could make unimaginable
amounts of money”.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48017083
admiration but also a sense of responsibility and guilt because I recognise
I am of your parents’ generation. I recognise we have not done nearly
enough to deal with the problem of climate change,” he said. “Suddenly,
thanks to the leadership of Greta and others, it has become inescapable
that we have to act . . . Greta, your voice has been heard and we are all
responsible for making sure that we listen and we respond and that we
change.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e43d91d8-660e-11e9-adc2-05e1b87efaea
Decommissioning contracts announced for Dounreay nuclear site in Scotland.
£400m decommissioning contract winners for Scotland nuclear site revealed, Infrastructure Intelligence Ryan Tute, 24 Apr 19, Dozens of companies and their supply chains have been announced as winners for six decommissioning framework contracts, worth up to £400m, at the Dounreay nuclear site in Scotland.
Dounreay Site Restoration Limited (DSRL), was the site of Britain’s former centre of nuclear fast reactor research and development for 60 years and is set to be demolished and cleaned up.
Initially for up to four years with the possibility of extensions of up to an additional three years, winners will take work at the site, delivered on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). ……
Full list of winners:
- AECOM E&C UK; MW Hargreaves; Kier Infrastructure and Overseas; Morson Projects; NIS; NSG Environmental; Squibb Group; Westinghouse Electrical Company UK
- Dounreay Decommissioning Framework (DDF) Alliance; Cavendish Nuclear; BAM Nuttall; KDC Contractors; JGC Engineering and Technical Services
- Dounreay Wood Alliance (DWA); Wood; Aquila Nuclear Engineering; GD Energy Services; Orano Projects
- Jacobs UK; Atkins
- Nuclear Decommissioning Ltd (NDL); James Fisher Nuclear; REACT Engineering; Shepley Engineers; WYG Engineering; JBV Demolition; RPS Consulting Services
- Nuvia; Graham Construction; Oxford Technologies; Thompson of Prudhoe http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/apr-2019/%C2%A3400m-decommissioning-contract-winners-scotland-nuclear-site-revealed
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) holds public meeting in Burnley
 Organisation that has called for nuclear  weapons to be banned for six decades holds public meeting in Burnley, 23 Apr 19, https://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/organisation-that-has-called-for-nuclear-weapons-to-be-banned-for-six-decades-holds-public-meeting-in-burnley-1-9730392An organisation that has existed for 62 years and campaigns to ban nuclear weapons held a public meeting in Burnley.And the strong message that came forward from the meeting of the East Lancashire branch of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament was that the public should be made more aware of the humanitarian consequences of a deliberate or accidental detonation of nuclear weapons as well as the dangers that the population of UK are exposed to by the government persisting in maintaining and developing them.
Between her international anti-nuclear commitments , Rebecca is currently acting as a legal observer in the XR demonstrations in London where over two hundred people have been arrested for committing acts of non-violent direct action. Rebecca showed a short film about the horrific humanitarian consequences of the use of nuclear weapons before going on to describe how, over a number of years, the nations of the world that do not have nuclear weapons have come together to negotiate the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. It was adopted by the United Nations in July 2017 by 122 nations of the UN General Assembly. Currently 70 nations have signed the Treaty and 22 have ratified it. Once 50 countries have ratified it, then it will become part of International law, like the laws against other WMD’s -chemical weapons, cluster bombs and landmines. It is expected that this could happen sometime next year. |
|
Planning application for Wylfa nuclear plant examined, despite project halt due to lack of investment
Officials will rule on a development consent order (DCO) application for
the project in three months. If the Planning Inspectorate approves the DCO,
the project must also be approved by business secretary Greg Clark before
it can go ahead. Introduced in 2008, DCOs are designed to streamline
construction planning for projects designated as nationally significant by
rolling other individual consents such as planning permission, listed
building consent and compulsory purchase orders into one. The decision to
continue with the DCO application for Wylfa comes despite work on the site
remaining suspended – work was stopped in January when Hitachi struggled
to secure additional private investment in the project.
Wastes from other nuclear stations could be dumped at Hinkley Point A
Somerset Live 23rd April 2019 Fears ‘skips of nuclear waste’ could be transported through Bridgwater to be stored at Hinkley Point A. Dozens of skips full of nuclear waste couldsoon be transported through Bridgwater from other parts of the UK. Magnox
Ltd currently operates the Hinkley Point A site near Stogursey, which
includes a small area where nuclear waste is stored before being moved
elsewhere for processing. Currently, only waste which is generated on the
Hinkley site can legally be stored there. But the company is putting
forward plans to allow waste from other nuclear power stations to be
transported to Hinkley by road – via Bridgwater.
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/fears-skips-nuclear-waste-could-2788091
UK is stuck with 20 dead nuclear submarines – what to do with them?
|
How do you scrap a nuclear submarine? https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/how-do-you-scrap-a-nuclear-submarine/3010405.article, The UK is facing a £7.5 billion bill to dismantle its 20 defunct vessels
What is a nuclear submarine?A ‘nuclear’ submarine can refer to a submarine that carries nuclear warheads, one that is powered using nuclear energy, or both. In the UK, the Vanguard, Astute and Trafalgar class submarines are all powered using a nuclear reactor, but only the four Vanguard class submarines carry nuclear warheads – Astute and Trafalgar submarines are ‘hunter-killers’ designed to sink other ships. The UK’s current fleet relies on a reactor typically seen in power stations across the world – the pressurised water reactor (PWR). These compact power plants produce vast amounts of heat through the splitting of uranium-235 (235U). This fissile isotope exists in very small quantities (less than 1%) in natural uranium, which mainly consists of uranium-238 (238U). To use it as fuel, the 235U is increased relative to the 238U in a process known as enrichment. In the PWR, waste fission products are made, such as caesium, xenon and krypton, as neutrons split the 235U fuel, with 238U also absorbing neutrons to form plutonium. These fission products can damage the ceramic fuel and reduce the reactor’s efficiency. The vessel that contains this whole process is also bombarded with high levels of radiation over its operational life. What happens to a nuclear submarine once it is removed from service?Once a nuclear-powered submarine is decommissioned, it is placed into long-term storage. Only after monitoring the vessel will engineers begin to defuel and dismantle it. However, over the past four decades, this second part hasn’t happened in the UK.
Since 1980, the UK Ministry of Defence has taken 20 nuclear-powered submarines out of service. Of these 20 subs, the UK has not fully disposed any of them and nine still contain highly radioactive nuclear fuel. The vessels have languished at dockyards in Plymouth and Rosyth.
This is not a sustainable solution, but it is in stark contrast with other countries’ past policies. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union dumped 19 ships containing nuclear waste in the Kara Sea, as well as 14 reactors and the K-27 nuclear submarine. With such vessels continuing to rust on the seabed, there are concerns these sites could harbour a potential environmental crisis. However, the subs stored in the UK are constantly monitored in a controlled environment. Although a far cry from the Arctic submarine graveyards, the UK fleet still lies exposed to salty water, with the vessels rusting in the dockyards.
Why are the submarines still in storage?It is an incredibly complex situation, but the government stopped defueling its disbanded fleet back in 2004. The UK’s nuclear regulator deemed that the facilities were not up to standards, and the UK has been working to improve them ever since. Mired in delays and inflating budgets, the defueling may not restart until 2023 – the original start date was 2012. Even when the subs are ready for their next voyage through the disposal process, it is a journey fraught with complexity.
What is the plan for the nuclear waste?Once defueling starts, the sub will be moved to a ‘reactor access house’ on rails. In this facility, engineers will remove the spent nuclear fuel from the sub, which contains various actinides and radionuclides. The fuel is highly radioactive and generates heat, so needs to be cooled in water before any further work can begin. To cool the fuel rods, the waste is sent to a specialised plant at Sellafield, where it is stored in vast water ponds. The water acts as both an efficient coolant and radiation barrier. Historically, this spent fuel would have then been recycled to form new nuclear fuel.
During reprocessing, the fissile uranium and plutonium is separated through solvent extraction, before converting the remaining liquid waste into a glass for long-term storage. However, it is now unclear whether this will still happen. It is more likely that the spent nuclear fuel will be stored indefinitely after cooling. The current UK strategy is to bury this waste in a highly-engineered geological disposal facility, which would see more than 650,000m3 of waste stored in an underground cavern, according to recent government estimates. But plans are still ongoing and a facility is yet to be built.
What happens to the submarine after defueling?After defueling, the sub will return to the ‘wet’ dock for another period of storage and monitoring. Following this, the submarine is dismantled. Components such as pipes and pumps exposed to radiation are taken away and the reactor vessel removed. However, engineers do not simply remove the reactor. In many countries, the reactor is lifted out with the two empty compartments either side of it and then sealed off to minimise the risk of exposure. After removing this ‘three-compartment unit’, the submarine is cast off for its final voyage to a commercial shipyard for recycling. But it will be a costly endeavour. The UK may face costs of up to £7.5bn if it wants to take the entire fleet through this voyage of defueling and disposal. It remains unclear whether the plans will stay on course, but the defence department has committed to dismantling the fleet ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’.
|
|
|
Pumped storage hydro could fill nuclear nuclear energy gap
 Pumped storage hydro could fill nuclear nuclear energy gap https://www.thenational.scot/news/17588663.pumped-storage-hydro-could-fill-nuclear-nuclear-energy-gap/, A SCOTTISH company has called for the UK Government to put pumped storage hydro (PSH) at the heart of its strategy to meet the challenge of providing a secure, low-carbon electricity supply in the coming decades.
|
|
Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) feeling encouraged: public opinion turning against Sizewell nuclear project
Suffolk coast have been “exposed as entirely inadequate” – and believe it cannot be built.
way on its Hinkley Point C new build and plans for the Suffolk project are
progressing well.
recent plans shown in the company’s stage three consultation for Sizewell C
have been “exposed as entirely inadequate”. He said: “Since the
delivery of a 1,500-signature petition to the Leader of Suffolk County
Council, we have seen a surge in support for our position of outright
opposition to Sizewell, local artists and actors voicing their concerns and
the RSPB warning that the most important bird reserve in the country,
Minsmere, is potentially threatened by the Sizewell development.
the hurdles to building such a complicated and dangerous plant in such a
confined and remote area will be recognised as overwhelming and terminal.
to the sheer scale of the environmental and infrastructure changes the
plant will require and they are becoming more and more vocal in opposition.
It is very encouraging.” TASC has voiced concerns over the suitability of
the Sizewell site, claiming it is too small for the proposed development,
potential loss of SSSI, visual intrusion, noise and light pollution and the
negative impact it will have on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB and
Heritage Coast.
clearly demonstrates three things: we require much more information from
EDF before we can fully appreciate the impact of their plans; even on the
information available, it is clear that the dis-benefits associated with
Sizewell C far outweigh the putative benefits, and EDF must plan for a
fourth round of consultation.”
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/tasc-pete-wilkinson-szc-cannot-be-built-1-6009732
Nearly 1000 climate protestors arrested in London – and Extinction Rebellion is changing tack
|
Extinction Rebellion: The People Risking Their Freedom For Climate Change | HuffPost Reports: UK Extinction Rebellion arrests close to 1,000 as protesters ‘pause rebellion’ ITV 21 Apr 19 Climate change protesters who have stopped traffic in a series of peaceful demonstrations across London will “pause” their rebellion in a bid to achieve their political aims, as the arrest total nears 1,000.Extinction Rebellion (XR) have announced they are switching disruptive tactics for political negotiations as they enter a second week of campaigning to have the Government declare a climate emergency. The number of people arrested in connection with the protests has hit 963 and 40 people have been charged. Continue reading |
We will never stop fighting’: Greta Thunberg joins London climate protest
Humanity is at a crossroads, Greta Thunberg tells Extinction Rebellion, Guardian, Vikram Dodd , Damien Gayleand Mattha Busby 22 Apr 2019
Swedish climate activist’s speech comes amid police action to clear protesters from Waterloo Bridge, Governments will no longer be able ignore the impending climate and ecological crisis, Greta Thunberg, the teenage climate activist, has told Extinction Rebellion protesters gathered at Marble Arch in London.
In a speech on Sunday night where she took aim at politicians who have for too long been able to satisfy demands for action with “beautiful words and promises”, the Swedish 16-year-old said humanity was sitting at a crossroads, but that those gathered had chosen which path they wish to take…….
Her speech came amid police efforts to forcibly clear Extinction Rebellion protesters from Waterloo Bridge as the group debated whether to continue its campaign of mass civil disobedience. Police said on Sunday night they had cleared all the protesters from Parliament Square ……. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/21/extinction-rebellion-london-protesters-offer-pause-climate-action
Britain’s Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) notes that over 70 Welsh councils formally reject hosting nuclear waste dump
NFLA 18th April 2019 The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) notes that over 70 Welsh unitary, county, city, town and community councils have passed resolutions formally opposing taking any interest in hosting a deep underground radioactive waste repository.
The figure was noted at a joint meeting in Menai Bridge organised by the NFLA Welsh Forum in conjunction with the groups PAWB, CADNO and CND Cymru. At a presentation provided by the NFLA Secretary, he noted that there had been real anger and frustration raised across Welsh and Northern Irish Councils in particular to the request made by the UK
Government for considering hosting a large deep underground repository to store over 60 years of higher activity radioactive waste, as well as possibly additional waste should new nuclear power stations ever be built.
Even in England, a number of nuclear site Councils have indicated their public opposition to hosting a repository. NFLA have noted some of these issues in its response to RWM regarding its consultation on how any proposed sites will be evaluated.
Britain’s slow path to zero carbon emissions
Extinction Rebellion: what pushes people to drastic action on climate change?
Slow burn? The long road to a zero-emissions UK, Guardian, Robin McKie, Observer science editor, Sun 21 Apr 2019
Extinction Rebellion protesters want a carbon-free UK by 2025. But can the financial and political hurdles be overcome?
Many experts disagree, however. They argue that such an imminent target is completely impractical. “Yes, you could decarbonise Britain by 2025 but the cost of implementing such vast changes at that speed would be massive and hugely unpopular,” says Lord Turner, former chairman of the climate change committee.
Most expect the climate change committee will plump for 2050 as Britain’s ideal decarbonisation date. “2050 is do-able and desirable and would have an insignificant overall cost to the economy,” states Turner, who is now chairman of the Energy Transitions Commission. According to this scenario, developed nations, including Britain, would aim to achieve zero-emissions status by 2050 and then use the decarbonising technologies they have developed to achieve this goal – hydrogen plants, carbon dioxide storage vaults and advanced renewable generators – to help developing nations halt their greenhouse gas emissions by 2060.
Many experts disagree, however. They argue that such an imminent target is completely impractical. “Yes, you could decarbonise Britain by 2025 but the cost of implementing such vast changes at that speed would be massive and hugely unpopular,” says Lord Turner, former chairman of the climate change committee.
Most expect the climate change committee will plump for 2050 as Britain’s ideal decarbonisation date. “2050 is do-able and desirable and would have an insignificant overall cost to the economy,” states Turner, who is now chairman of the Energy Transitions Commission. According to this scenario, developed nations, including Britain, would aim to achieve zero-emissions status by 2050 and then use the decarbonising technologies they have developed to achieve this goal – hydrogen plants, carbon dioxide storage vaults and advanced renewable generators – to help developing nations halt their greenhouse gas emissions by 2060.
And the change has already been reflected in Britain’s power statistics. In 2013, 62.5% of UK electricity was generated by oil, coal and gas stations, while renewable provided only 14.5%. In 2018, the figure for oil, coal and gas had been reduced to 44% while renewables were generating 31.7%. It is a distinct improvement – though we have yet to be given a date when engineers expect the last UK fossil-fuelled power plant to produce its final watts of electricity and to emit its last puffs of carbon dioxide
“Decarbonising UK power production is going well,” says George Day, head of policy for the technology and innovation centre Energy Systems Catapult. “There is a clear path forward.” But as he points out, there are many other sources of carbon dioxide in the UK. “The next big challenge will be heating. Gas boilers are major carbon emitters and dealing with them is going to be very difficult.”
According to Day, about 90% of British people have gas boilers in their homes, most having been fitted relatively recently …
………In the end, it will simply not be possible to reduce Britain’s fossil-fuel emissions to zero, say scientists. To compensate, we will have to take carbon dioxide back out of the atmosphere. “That is the logical, inevitable consequence of trying to achieve zero net emissions in this country,” argues Corinne Le Quéré, of the University of East Anglia. “If you are looking for any net zero target then you have to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.”
This can be done in three ways: naturally, by planting trees and shrubs that absorb carbon dioxide. Or artificially – on a larger scale – the gas can be removed as it is produced at a factory or power station that burns trees for energy.
Or it can be removed by huge numbers of man-made air filters, known as direct air capture. The carbon dioxide can be liquefied and stored underground in underground caverns, or old, depleted gas fields under the North Sea. This is known as carbon capture utilisation and underground storage (CCUS).
“In the end, your choice of replanting or of building underground storage facilities depends on how much carbon you will need to remove,” says Le Quéré. “Most calculations suggest Britain will need to take quite a lot of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to keep its net emissions at zero.”……….
UK carbon emissions have fallen for the sixth year running
This need for speed is shared by many other parts of the zero-emissions programme, as we have seen. It may seem odd given it is unlikely it will reach its conclusion for another three decades. Nevertheless, scientists are adamant that even if choose 2050 for our decarbonisation date, we need to act now.
This urgency of the task is emphasized by Joeri Rogelj at Imperial College London. “If the world limits emissions of carbon dioxide to no more than 420 billion tonnes this century, we will have a two in three chance of keeping global warming down to around 1.5C.
“However, if we go above to 580 billion tonnes then our chances will be reduced to 50-50. The problem is that in 2017 alone, a total of 42 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide was emitted in a single year. By that calculation, we clearly do not have a lot of time to waste.”https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/21/long-road-to-zero-emissions-uk
UK’s EPA concerned over proposals for Sizewell new nuclear power station in Suffolk
ENDS 16th April 2019 The Environment Agency has flagged a series of concerns over proposals for a new nuclear power station in Suffolk, warning that a lack of detail means
that the impacts and proposed suitability of mitigations “cannot be
assessed at this time”. Energy firm EDF plans to build and operate the new
Sizewell C nuclear power station in Suffolk on land immediately to the
north of the Sizewell B power station. The application – which has yet to
be submitted – will be determined via the fast-track Planning Act 2008
regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects, with the
business secretary responsible for making a final decision.
https://www.endsreport.com/article/1582216/environment-agency-concerned-lack-detail-sizewell-c-plans
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
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
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (338)
- 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 