nuclear-news

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

Strong opposition in Holywell County Council to hosting nuclear waste dump

Leader Live 22nd March 2019 , HOLYWELL councillors were quick to back a bid to reject nuclear waste being dumped in the town. Earlier this year, North Wales residents were consulted in the search for a site to dump 60 years’ worth of the UK’s most dangerous radioactive waste.

At their monthly meeting, town council members were quick to support the motion that Holywell would not become the host of a nuclear waste dump. Plaid Cymru’s Jill Evans MEP sent the town council an email on the subject that was read out at the meeting. “We are writing to you to urge your council to pass a motion stating that your community
will not volunteer to host an underground waste dump.

CND Cymru will keep a record of every community, town and county council that passes such a motion, and submit a list to the government’s consultation as part of our submission to the consultation.” From the end of March, this list of
councils who support this motion will be available on the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament’s website

https://www.leaderlive.co.uk/news/17517980.council-says-that-holywell-will-not-host-nuclear-waste-dump/

March 25, 2019 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Despite £1 million just to listen , UK County Councillors not keen to host nuclear waste dump

Daily Post 22nd March 2019 , Any plans to find a site to store nuclear waste in Denbighshire will be strongly resisted despite an offer of £1 million just to listen to a government pitch for the plans. The UK government is searching for sites that will allow nuclear waste to be buried.

As part of the process county councils have been offered £1 million to listen to the government sales pitch for the scheme. If a council agrees to the start of work on taking in the waste they will be then given £2.5 million if authorities take part in
the planning stage. Denbighshire councillors will be presented with details of the scheme when they meet next week but already opposition councillors have said there is no way they would support such a move.

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/1m-sweetener-store-nuclear-waste-16015159

March 25, 2019 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Sizewell C and nuclear accidents

No2Nucear Power March 2019, EDF Energy has been running its third stage of public consultation on the proposals for a new nuclear power station at Sizewell in Suffolk. The consultation closes on 29 March 2019. (1) As with earlier consultations on proposed new nuclear stations, the principle of nuclear power generation is deemed to have been settled during the process of drawing up National Policy Statements. (2) Nevertheless, with the anniversaries of Fukushima, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island all occurring during March, this seems like a good opportunity to re-visit the risk of a nuclear accident at the proposed nuclear stations.

A severe accident scenario was postulated by the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland in 2013. (3) This would involve a loss of coolant combined with a bypass of the containment. Core damage would be initially delayed by actions of the plant operators, but eventually takes place after 12.75 hours. The release of fission products to the environment starts 12.8 hours after reactor shutdown, and lasts for 35.2 hours eventually stopping 48 hour after reactor shutdown.

Nuclear engineer, the late John Large, expanded on this type of scenario pointing out that the fuel core would completely melt after about 16 hours and the corium mass slumps to the bottom of the Reactor Pressure Bessel (RPV), thereafter burning through the RPV steel shell to fall and slump onto the primary containment floor. At this point in time, the hydrogen gas in the RPV circuit is released into the primary containment whereupon it reacts with the air in the containment, deflagrating and exploding with sufficient might to breach the containment surety and, with this, the first phase release of radioactivity to the atmosphere for dispersion and deposition further afield commences. He said this scenario is very similar to the events at Fukushima. (4)

According to EDF Energy´s Environmental Statement for Hinkley Point C (Appendix 7E “Assessment of Transboundary impacts”), the likely impacts of an accident do not extend beyond the county of Somerset and the Severn Estuary. In contrast a report for the Austrian Environment Agency says severe accidents at HPC with considerable releases of caesium-137 cannot be ruled out, although their probability may be low. There is no convincing rationale why such accidents should not be addressed in the Environmental Statement (ES); quite to the contrary, it would appear rather evident that they should be included in the assessment since their effects can be widespread and long-lasting. (5)

The RPII Severe Accident Scenario suggests a radioactive release of I-131 and Cs-137 amounting to 610,000TBq which is quite a bit larger than Fukushima. Cs-137 has a half-life of 30 years, whereas I-131 only has a half- life of 8 days. So Cs-137 is much more important in the longer term. With its longer half-life Cs-137 is around for much longer. Having said that I-131 distribution after an accident is important when looking at the incidence of thyroid cancer. Austria had the second highest average I-131 deposition density, outside Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, after Chernobyl. (As ever, whether there was an increase in thyroid cancer in Austria after Chernobyl is controversial – see TORCH 2016).

Spent Fuel Storage Unlike spent fuel generated by existing UK nuclear reactors, it is not the intention of future reactor operators to reprocess spent fuel from new nuclear reactors, so spent fuel will almost certainly remain on-site for decades, rather than being transported off-site to Sellafield as it is at the moment at most sites apart from Sizewell B. Although it is possible that spent fuel might start to be transported off site during the 60 year lifetime of new reactors, prospective operators generally take the view that it is prudent to plan to store all of the lifetime arisings of the planned reactors on-site probably in spent fuel storage ponds. At Hinkley Point C, EDF is planning to be able to extend the life of the storage ponds for up to 100 years after the reactors close. (14)

A recent study in the US detailed how a major fire in a spent fuel pond “could dwarf the horrific consequences of the Fukushima accident.” The author Frank von Hippel, a nuclear security expert at Princeton University, who teamed with Princeton’s Michael Schoeppner on the modelling exercise said “We’re talking about trillion-dollar consequences.” (15) This would clearly involve major transboundary radioactive releases much larger than those suggested in the RPII scenario, because the spent fuel store could contain up to 60 years’ worth of spent fuel.

According to the Austrian Analysis PSA 2 results (in the Pres-Construction Safety Reports by EDF and Areva) show that a possible severe accident in the spent fuel pool could result in a release of 1,780,000 TBq of Cs-137. (16) In other words, the greatest risk is one that could remain in place until at least 2130. …………..

http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/NuClearNewsNo115.pdf

March 25, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) dismiss the need for Sizewell C nuclear station, and call for renewables

  Councils call for fresh look at nuclear power as current policy ‘flawed’, East Anglian Daily Times, 24 March 2019, Richard Cornwell

Campaigners fighting proposals for new-build nuclear power plants have dismissed the need for Sizewell C – and called on the Government to reassess future electricity usage and generation.

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) group, which represents 40 councils across the country, believes renewable energy alternatives, with energy efficiency and energy storage, are more effective options.

The group points to the recent scrapping of the Sellafield Moorside development, and the decision to halt the Wylfa B and Oldbury B projects as evidence of the state of the new-build programme.

NFLA steering committee and English Forum chairman David Blackburn said: “In our submission, NFLA shows in detail why the Government’s ongoing support for new nuclear is flawed and that there is no need for such reactors at a time when the renewable sector is rapidly moving forward.

“Sizewell C also has some serious issues over the waste it would produce remaining on site for many decades, and the serious accident scenarios international agencies have

developed suggesting much more alarming consequences than EDF foresee.

“If the local councils in Suffolk are not particularly impressed with EDF’s current proposals, then there is indeed much work for it to do. NFLA see no ‘need’ for new nuclear at a time of major changes to future energy use.”

New research on nuclear accidents shows that a Chernobyl level incident at Sizewell C could require large areas of southern and central England to be evacuated.

NFLA claims electricity generation has fallen 16% in the past 14 years despite a 10% rise in population. ……..

People wanting to respond to the consultation can complete a questionnaire at www.sizewellc.co.uk or email comments to info@sizewellc.co.uk or by post to Freepost SZC Consultation. https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/nuclear-free-local-authorities-views-sizewell-c-1-5955745

March 25, 2019 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Bradwell B nuclear project – a risk to UK’s national security?

Is Bradwell B a risk to nationalsecurity?    Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group  (BANNG)21 March 2019

Andy Blowers considers whether the ‘golden relationship’ with China might be a Trojan Horse in the BANNG Column for Regional Life March 2019.  The state visit of the Chinese President Xi Jinping, in October 2015 proclaimed the beginning of a ‘golden era’ in Sino-British relations. The deal was sealed with the promise that China would be offered the opportunity to construct a new nuclear power station at Bradwell with a state-owned company, CGN, using its own technology. In return the Chinese would provide the lion’s share (two-thirds) of investment in the project, with its partner the French state backed-company EDF finding the rest.

The jubilation of the Cameron Government turned to scepticism when his successor’s Joint Chief of Staff, Nick Timothy, declared, ‘The Government is selling our national security to China’. Fears that a critical part of sensitive infrastructure could be open to control by a potentially hostile power have continued to cloud the project. The fact that China, like the UK, is a military as well as civil nuclear power makes the issue of security and control especially worrying.

Bradwell B – a Trojan Horse?
Concerns about security threats are not without foundation. There is the broad charge that China plays by its own rules and the United States has long claimed that China has stolen American atomic secrets…….
Fears of Chinese infiltration in national security have led the United States to ban foreign ownership or control of nuclear power plants (see Box). No such injunction has been proclaimed in the UK; rather, at this very moment, the UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation is deeply engaged in the process which may lead to approval for the Chinese Hualong One reactor design, thereby paving the way for overseas expansion of Chinese nuclear technology and the inevitable proliferation of security concerns. Bradwell B could be the Trojan Horse that leads into the heart of our national security  …..

nothing is said at all about what will be a deteriorating nuclear complex with stores of highly radioactive nuclear wastes strewn on a disappearing coast for the indefinite future. And will the Chinese still be around when the risks increase?

The Chinese are intent on accelerating the Bradwell B programme to begin construction before the end of the next decade. That is a tall order but they have the resources and apparent determination. But, the risks to national and local security and safety from a nuclear power station constructed and controlled by a foreign power cannot easily be allayed. Despite all the soothing words and promises of energy security, Bradwell B, if it materialises, may be a dangerous and unpredictable cuckoo in the nest.  https://www.banng.info/news/is-bradwell-b-a-risk-to-national-security/

March 23, 2019 Posted by | politics international, safety, UK | Leave a comment

Dangers of nuclear weapons convoys travelling through Northampton

Northampton Chronicle 21st March 2019 , Campaigners have raised concerns about nuclear warheads travelling through
Northampton after a convoy passed an accident-prone stretch of motorway.
Nuclear warheads are regularly driven from Burghfield Atomic Weapons
Establishment (AWE) near Reading to Coulport, Scotland, for loading onto
the Trident missile submarines.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/fears-raised-as-nuclear-warhead-convoy-passes-through-northampton-1-8859088

March 23, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Irish Council opposes dumping of UK’s nuclear waste in any part of Ireland

Councillors back motion to oppose dumping of nuclear waste, The Impartial Reporter, 18th March A motion to oppose the dumping of any toxic waste in any part of Ireland was passed unanimously by Fermanagh and Omagh District Council, however it was not without some political wrangling between Sinn Féin and the DUP.

The motion proposed by Sinn Fein’s John Feely states the Council’s opposition who said that the “dumping of nuclear waste has dire consequences for our environment and also poses a serious health risk to the population”.

Councillor Feely said the geological screening for geological disposal facilities for nuclear waste raised a number of questions such as about how much radiation would reach the surface and water sources.

He added that the proposals by the British Government showed once again “the complete and total disregard” it has for the citizens of “Fermanagh and Omagh, the North of Ireland and all its people”.

Councillor Barry Doherty seconded the motion saying everybody had obligation to ensure future generations have the opportunity to enjoy the area in the same way that people do today and Ireland should not turn into anyone’s dumping ground……..

Councillor Alex Baird said the UUP were happy to support the motion with an amendment to stop anybody dumping toxic waste in Northern Ireland.

Councillors, Shields, McAnespy and Deehan all welcomed the motion, with Councillor Deehan describing the prospect of a disposal facility for nuclear waste in the country as “chilling”…….. https://www.impartialreporter.com/news/17495254.councillors-back-motion-to-oppose-dumping-of-nuclear-waste/

March 21, 2019 Posted by | Ireland, politics international, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

UK pledges to fully fund EU nuclear-fusion facility

Britain will pay £60 million to keep the Joint European Torus near Oxford running if negotiations to continue EU funding stall. Nature, Elizabeth Gibney, 20 Mar19,

The UK government has said that it will step in to pay for a European Union-funded nuclear-fusion laboratory near Oxford after 29 March, if European cash cannot be agreed in the next ten days.

The Joint European Torus (JET) laboratory currently has only a short-term funding contract with the European Commission, which will run out on 28 March, the day before Britain is scheduled to leave the European Union. Until now, JET has received around 88% of its funding from EU sources, and the remainder from the United Kingdom. Negotiations with the EU to agree a new contract to fund the facility until the end of 2020 are ongoing, but have stalled in part because of uncertainty over Brexit.

In a statement to Parliament on 13 March, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond promised to front up to £60 million (US$80 million) to run the JET in 2019–20, should no new agreement be reached in time.

The £60 million would cover the whole of the lab’s 2019–20 budget, says Ian Chapman, chief executive of the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy near Oxford, which hosts JET. Chapman says that the pledge is effectively an “insurance policy”: he is still optimistic that a contract with the EU will be signed in time, and that the commission will continue to fund JET in the long term. “It’s not the intention on either side for [JET] to become a UK facility. This is to make sure we’re covered and operations continue in every eventuality,” he says. ……

Unless the deal is passed by Parliament, or Brexit is delayed, the United Kingdom will leave the EU without a deal. Although it would be possible for the bloc to keep funding JET in a ‘no deal’ Brexit, it is unclear whether this would happen. A UK government spokesperson said that the funding for JET would come from existing funds earmarked for science. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00930-3

March 21, 2019 Posted by | politics international, technology, UK | 1 Comment

EDF Energy extends outages at UK’s Hunterston B nuclear plant

Nina Chestney, Reuters LONDON (20 Mar 19,  – EDF Energy, owned by France’s EDF, has extended outages at two nuclear reactors at its Hunterston B plant in Scotland while it waits for Britain’s nuclear regulator to assess their safety cases.

  • Hunterston B-8 reactor is now expected to restart on April 30, a month later than previously forecast. Hunterston B-7 is scheduled to restart on June 29, compared with a previous date of April 30, according to EDF Energy’s website.
  • In March last year, the two reactors were taken offline to carry out inspections of the graphite core. These confirmed the presence of cracks and showed these were happening at a higher rate than modelled……… https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-nuclear-outages-idUKKCN1R01Q1

 

March 21, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Are the UK’s cracked Hunterston nuclear reactors safe?

The Ferret 19th March 2019  Plans to restart two cracked and ageing reactors at Hunterston in north Ayrshire have again been delayed as operators struggle to convince regulators they are safe.

EDF Energy, the French company that runs Hunterston B nuclear power station, has postponed the restart date for reactor three by two months to 30 June 2019. The restart of reactor four has been postponed a month until 30 April 2019.

Some 370 major cracks have been found in the graphite core of reactor three, which has been closed down for more than a year since 9 March 2018. There are estimated to be around 200 similar cracks in reactor four, which was closed down on 2 October 2018.

The operational safety limit for cracks imposed by the UK government’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) is 350. EDF is now trying to convince ONR that reactors should be allowed to operate with up to 700 cracks.

The proposed restart dates for both reactors have been repeatedly delayed over the last six months. They started generating electricity in 1976 and were originally due to close in 2006 – but EDF wants to keep them going until at least 2023.

Critics, however, reiterated calls for the reactors to shut down permanently. “It really is time for EDF to admit that these stations are well past their sell-by date and need to close,” said nuclear consultant, Peter Roche. “They should start talking to the Scottish Government about providing alternative employment opportunities in Ayrshire, preferably by bringing forward decommissioning and dismantling and developing robot technology.”

Rita Holmes, chair of the Hunterston site stakeholder group chair, said that personally she had no doubt that ONR would take time to scrutinise EDF’s safety cases. “Some people find the delays reassuring because EDF is sparing no expense, leaving no stone unturned, consulting the experts in order to build a robust safety case,” she said.

“Some feel the opposite – if it takes EDF that long to provide a robust safety case then maybe there is something far wrong. The safety case might or might not satisfy the regulator……….
https://theferret.scot/cracked-reactors-force-further-delays-at-hunterston/ 

March 21, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

UK communities not convinced by bribes to host nuclear waste

GDF Watch 17th March 2019 The sociopolitical challenges RWM faces were starkly revealed by the
community sector’s response to a recent major Government funding
announcement. Their reaction suggests that the package of GDF-related
investment and other funding, while being ‘necessary’, is not
necessarily ‘sufficient’ to secure a community’s consent to start
initial discussions or formally enter the siting process. At the forefront
of the sectors’ concerns is ‘collaboration’, and more active
involvement in shaping policy and how it is implemented. This aspiration,
particularly in the context of a ‘consent-based’ siting process, is
likely to become a key area of discussion as RWM seeks to build awareness,
trust and confidence with communities. The evidence for this analysis can
be found in the community/civil society sector reaction to the
Government’s recent £1.6 billion ‘Stronger Towns Fund’ announcement.

Instead of welcoming the extra cash, across the board there was frustration
and concern that once again there had been no consultation with those
affected, that this was another top-down solution, and was throwing good
money at bad means of delivering real benefits to communities.

http://www.gdfwatch.org.uk/2019/03/17/to-consult-or-to-collaborate-that-is-the-community-question/

March 20, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK Labour undermines renewable energy pledges with state ownership plan for new nuclear power plant.

Dave Toke’s Blog 17th March 2019, Labour’s energy spokesperson, Rebecca Long-Bailey, having previously pledged to put renewable energy on top of the energy agenda has now relegated it far below nuclear power. They have done this with a pledge to take partial state ownership of new nuclear power projects and saying they will do this for nuclear projects that have been abandoned. But giving state priority to these projects, far from keeping the lights on will actually ruin the chances of aspiring renewable energy generators.

The figures speak for themselves. Bailey pledges to reverse what she calls the Government’s ‘cancellations’ of new nuclear projects (Moorside, Oldbury, Wylfa) (factcheck; it was the developers who cancelled them despite being promised tens of billions of state aid). If these projects are brought on line (in addition to the existing Sizewell B and still-not-cancelled projects of Hinkley C and Sizewell C) then nuclear generation will climb to at least 35 per cent of current generation – and even that does not count the Chinese led project at Bradwell.

Meanwhile renewable energy generated 33% of UK electricity in 2018, a figure that, with the recently announced ‘sector deal’ for offshore wind, will increase to around 65% by 2030 even without any more onshore wind and solar pv which the Labour Party claims to support. It doesn’t need a mathematical genius to work out that with 35% coming from nuclear power, there simply will not be any market space for any more renewable energy.

Yet renewable energy, as we have discussed is cheap, becoming cheaper, and needs little or no public subsidy – a big contrast with nuclear, which despite all the promised support, high consumer subsidies, public guarantees of loan funding (none of which is available for new renewable schemes) has failed so far to generate a single kWh. And it will not until at least 2026 even if EDF’s schedules for Hinkley C construction prove (miraculously in the light of recent nuclear construction history) to be achievable………..

Labour have come out with a daft policy that threatens to take us back to the dinosaur age by comparison.

I really hate to say this, but because the Tories have actually (so far) stopped short of the financial insanities involved in getting all of the projected new more nuclear power stations online and are thus leaving some space for new renewable energy schemes, there is actually a plausible argument to say that now, compared to Labour’s new policy position the Conservative Party policy actually favours renewable energy more than Labour!   http://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.com/2019/03/labour-undermines-renewable-energy.html

March 20, 2019 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Scotland’s First Minister refused to meet Australian Aboriginal nuclear waste protestor – for political reasons

Gaffe reveals why Sturgeon refused to meet nuclear waste protestor    https://theferret.scot/sturgeon-nuclear-waste-protestor/  James McEnaney on March 14, 2019 The Scottish Government has mistakenly revealed that Nicola Sturgeon refused to meet an Aboriginal nuclear waste protestor in an attempt to avoid political damage – not because she was too busy, as her officials said. 

Internal emails uncovered by The Ferret reveal that the First Minister was advised to turn down a request for a meeting in 2018 so as not to become a “focus for criticism”. But officials said the public reason given for her refusal would be “on the standard basis of diary pressures”.

Campaigners reacted with sadness, saying that the Scottish Government’s “ears are closed”. The government stressed that it had “very limited scope” to address the issues raised.

Nuclear fuel was sent from an Australian research reactor to Dounreay on the north coast of Scotland for reprocessing in the 1990s. The resulting radioactive waste, amounting to 51 cemented drums, was originally due to be returned to Australia for disposal.

But under the terms of a waste substitution deal in 2014, Scottish and UK governments agreed that the drums should stay at Dounreay. Instead, the plan is to send four containers of “radiologically equivalent” waste to Australia from the Sellafield nuclear complex in Cumbria.

Two sites have been identified for a planned store for the waste in south Australia – Wallerberdina Station, near Hawker, and Kimber – both of which face opposition from indigenous communities. The Ferret reported in February that Scottish ministers had been advised that they had powers to prevent the waste being exported to protect human rights.

March 16, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

UK govt’s health study of nuclear veterans – but they’ve lost half the records

Nuclear test guinea pigs study announced – then Government admits it’s lost half of them https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/government-announces-study-nuclear-test-14134958

Veterans say the research is meaningless, and demand a long-promised medal review By Susie Boniface,  14 MAR 2019 

The government has “lost” all trace of almost half its nuclear veterans – making a mockery of a planned health study.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson is now facing calls to cancel the expensive and “meaningless research” which survivors of the bomb tests say has no chance of proving their claims to have been irradiatedduring Cold War radiation experiments.

It comes after officials at Public Health England, which is conducting the six-figure study, admitted they have no way of checking the health of all 22,000 servicemen who took part in the 1950s tests.

Alan Owen, chairman of the British Nuclear Test Veterans’ Association, said: “We have been palmed off with meaningless research that has no chance of being definitive or accurate. The only reason for continuing it is shameless PR.

“Mr Williamson should cancel this useless study immediately, and use the money to provide our veterans with a medal for their exemplary service.”

Several studies have been carried out since the 1980s into the veterans’ rate of cancer, which if accurate could indicate radiation exposure.

But veterans says they are flawed because they compare the health of scientists with soldiers, and the health effects of smaller weapons that had fewer eyewitnesses with massive hydrogen bombs. Many of the servicemen lived in the fallout of such weapons for more than a year.

In 1983 the MoD said it could find records of only 85 per cent of those present, and now PHE staff have admitted they have lost almost half.

An official has now said privately to campaigners that they can trace 12,000 deaths of veterans for the research, but details for the remaining 9,400 people – or 44 per cent of the total – are missing from the records.

Those who have moved abroad, not registered with a GP after moving home, or who use private doctors will not be included. If a veterans’ NHS number becomes inactive they cannot be tracked for the study.

The Ministry of Defence did not confirm the figures that were leaked to the veterans.

A spokesman MoD said: “Around 2,000 [of the veterans] have emigrated and around 100 have not yet been traced. We continue to follow up with the remainder and are confident this study will bring the current information up to date.”

March 16, 2019 Posted by | health, UK | Leave a comment

Was this horrific murder done in order to protect the nuclear industry?

Robert isn’t alone. He has documented the harassment and even murder of other whistleblowers who spoke out about contentious nuclear issues, or attempted to supply him with sensitive information.  

March 14, 2019 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »