Bradwell nuclear power plan – foolish, in view of climate change predictions
BANNG 8th Jan 2020, As we enter a new year, Andy Blowers muses on the massive challenge of climate change that lies ahead, globally and locally, in the column for Regional Life, January 2020.
In East Anglia, we are increasingly aware of record heatwaves, milder and wetter winters, retreating coastlines and loss of precious habitats and declining and disappearing species. To an extent, these may be tackled by adaptive measures such as managed retreat of the coastline or hard defences. Even then, land loss and inundation will be unavoidable.
The idea of a massive nuclear power station at Bradwell on a
site threatened by the impacts of climate change seems foolish in the
extreme. Far better to go for cheaper, less risky and easily deployable
renewable options. Concerted action worldwide and locally, by governments,
businesses and individuals, is needed now if we are to reduce carbon
emissions to net zero and avert catastrophe. That was a clear message from
the General Election. Now we must get on with it.
UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget.
BBC 10th Jan 2020, UK nuclear weapons programme £1.3bn over budget. The Ministry Of Defence’s “poor management” of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme has led to rising costs and lengthy delays, according to the government spending watchdog.
UK Leading Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey would use nuclear weapons
|
8 January 2020 Leading Labour leadership candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey has said she would be prepared to use nuclear weapons as prime minister.It is a marked contrast to the policy of outgoing leader Jeremy Corbyn, a passionate and long-standing advocate of nuclear disarmament. Ms Long-Bailey, a staunch defender of Mr Corbyn’s failed leadership of the party, has previously been accused of being his “continuity candidate”. Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme whether she would be prepared to launch a nuclear strike, Ms Long-Bailey said: “If you have a deterrent you have to be prepared to use it.”…. https://au.news.yahoo.com/rebecca-long-bailey-labour-leadership-nuclear-weapons-134918253.html |
|
|
Britain’s £1.2bn cleanup begins, of Berkeley power station, closed 30 years ago
 Nuclear waste removal begins 30 years after power station closure, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-50866867 5 Jan 2029, Work has begun on removing nuclear waste from Berkeley power station, 30 years after it was decommissioned.The disused Magnox generator, situated on the banks of the River Severn in Gloucestershire, closed in 1989.
It was the world’s first commercial power station and its laboratories and many of its buildings have already been dismantled. Work emptying its vast concrete vaults of the nuclear waste Berkeley generated is only now able to safely begin. But it will not be safe for humans to go inside its reactor cores until 2074. The BBC has been given a rare glimpse of what is stored under the disused site.For the past 50 years parts of the coastline of the west of England have been dominated by nuclear power stations. The 1960s saw the construction of Hinkley A and Hinkley B in Somerset, with both Oldbury and Berkeley built on the banks of the River Severn in the 1950s. Only Hinkley B is still in use but the nuclear waste the stations generated has remained in place. It takes hundreds of years to decompose and has to be stored underground. It will cost an estimated £1.2bn to fully decommission Berkeley. About 200 people are currently working on the site under strict security. Work emptying waste products from the concrete vaults, eight metres (26ft) underground, is a complicated process. They contain used graphite from the fuel elements in the nuclear generating process, material from the cooling ponds and from the laboratories. The removal is expected to take five or six years to complete. Rob Ledger, waste operations director at Berkeley, said: “When the power stations first started generating I don’t think there was much thought put into how the waste was going to be dealt with or retrieved. “It’s taken a while to develop the equipment and the facilities [to do this]. “A mechanical arm moves the debris into position and then a ‘grab’ comes down through an aperture in the vaults and picks up the debris [and] puts it into a tray. “Each debris-filled tray weighs up to 100kg (220lb). “The automated machinery is controlled by computers [and] tips [the waste] into a cast iron container.” The containers will house the waste in an intermediate storage facility until a long-term solution can be found. “Nuclear waste does take a long time to decay… it’s hundreds of years. And that’s why we have to go to these lengths, to store it safely,” said Mr Ledger. Eventually the boxes will be housed deep underground in a long-term storage facility. The location has not yet been decided by the government. There are currently estimated to be almost 95,000 tonnes of nuclear waste in the form of graphite blocks across the UK. But if the Carbon 14 can be extracted from the blocks, they become much safer and easier to deal with. A new process is being explored, by scientists at Bristol University, to ensure not all of the waste will be discarded. They have developed a process that uses reactor core spent contents in a new power form. Carbon 14 from nuclear reactors is infused into wafer-thin diamonds, man-made in a lab at Bristol University. They then become radioactive and form the heart of a battery that would last for many thousands of years. The tiny batteries could be used in pacemakers, hearing aids or sent into space as part of the space programme. The process is being piloted in association with the UK Atomic Energy Authority in Abingdon. It is hoped the decommissioned Gloucestershire site may be redeveloped to manufacture the new batteries, creating jobs in the region. |
|
UK govt trying to finance new nuclear plants, – complicated relations with China and USA
boss Vincent de Rivaz ill-advisedly said that customers would be using
electricity from the planned Hinkley Point C power plant to cook their
Christmas turkeys by 2017. Two years on from that self-imposed deadline,
the £21bn nuclear power station is still being built over a sprawling site
in the Somerset countryside – while the very future of nuclear power in
the UK is up for debate as other sources of energy snap at its heels and
investment in the sector gets harder to find.
backdrop of wariness about the source of potential investments:
state-backed China General Nuclear (CGN) is one of few investors willing to
pour money into the risky nuclear sector – but the communist
superpower’s involvement has brought political and security concerns as
well as opposition from the US.
beset by controversy, with Theresa May, the former prime minister,
reversing George Osborne’s courting of China in 2016 when she ordered a
review of China’s involvement in the UK’s nuclear industry, amid
concerns about national security.
consultation opened in the summer on the potential new financing mechanism for nuclear power plants which will see consumers pay for nuclear power plants before they start producing, in an attempt to bring down the costs of financing.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/01/05/britain-heading-fallout-nuclear-conundrum/
UK’s Sizewell C nuclear project not viable, due to escalating costs?
Could escalating costs mean ‘game over’ for nuclear power and Sizewell C? East Anglian Daily Times, January 2020, Andrew Hirst
The growing cost of nuclear power could mean ‘game over’ for Sizewell C, experts claim. While much of the debate in Suffolk around EDF Energy’s proposals have focussed on the local impacts, recent reports from energy forums have started to question how viable the industry is for the UK – and globally.
At a recent debate, Paul Dorfman of the University College London’s Energy Institute went head to head with Paul Spence, director of strategy and corporate affairs at EDF to discuss the future of the sector.
Dr Dorfman, who also founded the Nuclear Consulting Forum, said the “massive cost escalations” of nuclear power together with the increasing competiveness of renewables meant there was “little rationale for new nuclear builds”.
Costs for offshore wind have plummeted to around £40 per MWh – making it now one of the cheapest forms of power available.
Meanwhile, the costs government agreed to pay EDF for Hinkley Point C, is more than twice as expensive at £92.50 per MWh.
The latest World Nuclear Industry Status Report warned of “substantial challenges” and a decline in usage, with fewer reactors in operation today than 30 years ago.
Globally, while investment in renewables has increased to around $350bn per year, nuclear fell to just $17bn. Dr Dorfman said: “In this context, nuclear power at the expense of more flexible, safe, productive, cost-effective and affordable technologies really does seem to be rather foolish.”
He said it could mean “game over” for nuclear projects, including Sizewell…….
The government consulted earlier this year on the “Regulated Asset Base model”, which is intended to incentivise private investment in public projects by guaranteeing a return for developers. It would mean developers can raise revenue, potentially though customer bills, and reduces their risk. ……
although EDF claims RAB could save money for consumers – critics say it merely leaves the public with all the risk.
“Under RAB, the plan is for the burden of risk to pass to hard-pressed UK consumers and/or taxpayers labouring under post-Brexit conditions,” said Dr Dorfman.
“Not only that, but the revenue stream will include a variable strike price – with taxpayers and/or electricity consumers forced to write, what is essentially, a ‘blank cheque’.
Earlier this year it was reported a “Sizewell surcharge” could add £6 to annual energy bills under the RAB model. A petition opposing the surcharge was signed by more than 36,000 people.
Concerns were further compounded by EDF’s precarious financial position. The company is €37.4billion net debt and its stock lost 34% of its value this year.
Professor Steve Thomas, a researcher in energy policy at the University of Greenwich, questioned the company’s credentials ahead of a seminar organised by the Nuclear Free Local Authorities in Colchester last month.
“EDF is in deep financial crisis and will only be able to survive with heavy French government support and radical restructuring,” he said. “It is unclear how EDF will be able to finance Hinkley Point C, much less Sizewell C, and the UK government must resist pressures to throw more public money at these ill-conceived projects and abandon them now.”
UK: legal action against environmental destruction by Sizewell nuclear project
Crowd Justice (accessed) 30th Dec 2019, Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) is an unincorporated citizens’ group
formed to oppose the building of Sizewell C’s twin nuclear reactors and
associated works in Suffolk Coast & Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural
Beauty (AONB) in a legal open, peaceful and fully accountable manner.
TASC has mounted a legal challenge against East Suffolk Council’s decision to
approve the planning application submitted by EDF, the nuclear developer,
to: – chop down 100-year-old Coronation Wood, turn a large area of priority
habitat acidic grassland, known as Pillbox Field, into a 576 space car
park, relocate over 320,000 sq. feet of 7 largely non-essential and
non-operational Sizewell B buildings and an additional 128 car parking
spaces, that will encroach further into the AONB. Most of these
buildings/facilities could be located outside the AONB. The works are
needed to free up land for the construction of Sizewell C as the existing
site is too small and are clearly integral to the wider Sizewell C
development.
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/save-coronation-wood/
BBC 30th Dec 2019, Campaigners opposing a new nuclear power station are seeking a judicial review over a “premature” decision to allow woodland to be felled. EDF Energy wants to build two reactors next to Sizewell B in Suffolk and in September was told it could chop down Coronation Wood on the site. TogetherAgainst Sizewell C (Tasc) said the area was vital for wildlife. East
Suffolk Council said it would respond to the campaigners’ challenge in due
course.
Britain’s nuclear weapons convoys a disaster waiting to happen
DOZENS of safety failures during nuclear weapons convoys are a “disaster waiting to happen,” campaigners charged as they demanded the Ministry of Defence (MoD) answer for the risks it is exposing the public to.
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and political campaigners have hit out at the MoD after concerning reports show 40 lapses in safety while nuclear and radioactive materials were being transported across the country over the past five years.
A Freedom of Information request has revealed the 40 operational and engineering issues on convoys carrying bombs and hazardous materials.
These incidents included issues identified with brakes on convoy vehicles, included burning smells during transportation.
On other occasions convoy vehicles were forced to stop, and road lanes closed, after suffering flat tyres.
Among other engineering faults listed were warnings of overheating in convoy vehicles.
Multiple “operational” issues also disrupted transportation of dangerous materials.
Reported in these were rolling road blocks needed to manoeuvre the convoy through busy, congested routes across the UK, causing delays in the journey.
CND general secretary Kate Hudson said: “Nuclear bombs carried on our roads are a disaster waiting to happen.
“This report shows that ‘poor maintenance’ is a factor in these safety lapses.
“The MoD must be brought to book for this disgraceful failure — and our new government must end this cargo of death through our communities.”
Britain’s nuclear weapons are still based in Scotland and those north of the border have said it is time to rid ourselves of the apocalyptic threats.
Scottish Green MSP Mark Ruskell led a debate on the topic last year.
He said: “Like many I’d like to see an end to the housing of nuclear weapons in Scotland, but while they are still here it’s not unreasonable to expect the highest standards of safety to apply to their movement.
“People will be shocked at the thought of nuclear convoys travelling on public roads.
“In Stirling the convoys even park up overnight behind a chain-link fence across the road from a Nando’s and a Vue Cinema. This is an absurd situation that must come to an end.”…… https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/britain-nuclear-weapons-convoys-are-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-peace-campaigners-warn
Documents reveal UK’s plans for rolling out nuclear weapons
World War 3: UK’s plan for ‘rapid deployment of nuclear weapons’ in 24 hours exposed https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1219002/world-war-3-uk-nuclear-weapon-deployment-24-hours-soviet-union-cold-war-spt, by CALLUM HOARE, Mon, Dec 30, 2019 |
THE UK planned to roll out its nuclear arsenal in as little as 24 hours in what would have been a “frenetic” response to the Soviet Union’s escalation of war in the Eighties, documents seen by Express.co.uk reveal.
The 1983 papers came at a time of intense tensions, as the Cold War reached boiling point, threatening to topple into World War 3. The US and the Soviet Union were jostling for world supremacy and, as the threat of nuclear war increased, allies on both sides prepared for how they would respond, including the UK. Ministry of Defence documents expose a top secret mission for “rapid deployment of nuclear weapons” in the event things spiralled out of control.
One document seen by Express.co.uk reads: “The Secretary of State asked for further advice on the arrangements which would be needed for the rapid deployment of Tactical Nuclear Warheads (TNW) in a crisis on the assumption that all naval nuclear weapons were stored in the UK in peacetime.
“A plan – Operation Perfidious – is already in existence to allow for the rapid deployment of TNW from the stock-pile at RAF Honington in Suffolk, either directly by helicopter to the ship, or to service airfields in the UK by helicopter or C130 Hercules aircraft for onward transmission to ships.
“Theoretically, transfer from Honington to sea could take as little as 24 hours, but this assumes that the ships are close to the Norfolk coast and that all the assets from the movement are available.
The documents go on to discuss the need to act quickly, and the risks the Soviet Union posed.
They add: “Nuclear stockpiles are known to be prime targets for Soviet Special Forces.
“Additionally, each time a nuclear weapon is moved there is a safety risk, a security risk, and, if the timing of the move can be predicted, a risk of civil, industrial or even military intervention.
“The risks are small if the move is preplanned and conducted in isolation of all other activities.
The risks would be higher if hurried embarkation of a large number of TNW were attempted amidst all the other preparations for war under the eagle eyes of the media and anti-war faction.
“Nuclear stockpiles could be created around the country, but the cost in preparing storage facilities and the manpower necessary to service and guard such areas would be disproportionately high.”
Thankfully, they were never needed.
While tension did reach unthinkable levels, both the US and the Soviet Union were aware of each other’s nuclear capabilities.
As a result, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction was accepted between the two.
This was the belief that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender.
It is based on the theory of deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons against the enemy prevents the enemy’s use of those same weapons.
Goats irradiated in 1950s now pose possible environmental danger in Berkshire, UK
Contamination in Berkshire, Berkshire Live 21st Dec 2019, Goats injected with radioactive chemicals could be buried in Berkshire. The
animals, said to have been experimented on in the 1950s and 60s, could now
be buried on land in Shinfield.
Those living nearby have raised concerns
after learning scientists at the University of Reading injected the goats
with radioactive isotopes. The experiments were said to have been looking
into how radiation affected milk and metabolism.
It formed part of research
into milk production and the dairy industry, by The National Institute for
Research in Dairying (NIRD), based in Shinfield and closed in 1985. The
goats were apparently ‘famous in folklore’, according to one American
professor, Margaret Neville. Burying dead livestock is now banned to stop
the spread of disease. But before the 2003 ban, farmers would reportedly
often bury dead animals in pits on their own land.
Anger as EDF tries to shrink emergency zone around Scottish nuclear plant
Follow The emergency zone around Hunterston B, an ageing nuclear power plant in Scotland, sprawls for more than 2km in every direction. Residents of this zone are regularly given iodine pills to take in the event of a nuclear disaster.However, French state-owned EDF Energy has come under fire for attempting to reduce the emergency zone to 1km, potentially exposing residents further away to harmful levels of radiation if an accident were to take place.
Activists claim the zone should be expanded rather than contracted. A recent change in the law has placed the responsibility for zoning around nuclear facilities with local authorities, rather than the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR).
North Ayrshire...(subscribers only) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/12/16/anger-edf-tries-shrink-emergency-zone-around-scottish-nuclear/
Boris Johnson’s overhaul of govt departments. Will it really be good for the environment?
Times 16th Dec 2019, Boris Johnson wants an overhaul of Whitehall that would merge departments and make it easier to fire civil servants and bring in experts from outside. Climate change would again become a separate department, allowing Mr Johnson to claim that he has a commitment to the environment.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prime-ministers-cummings-plan-for-civil-service-zv85vxd8z
Call to postpone a decision on Suffolk’s new nuclear power station bid
East Anglian Daily Times 16th Dec 2019, An MP has called on the Secretary of State for Energy to postpone a decision on Suffolk’s new nuclear power station bid – accusing developers of failing to address community concerns.
Central Suffolk and North Ipswich MP Dan Poulter told Andrea Leadsom that EDF Energy’s latest consultation on Sizewell C still failed to provide enough information for consultees to make an informed response. EDF is expected to make its ‘Development Consent Order’ to the Planning Inspectorate early next year – after finishing its stage four consultation in September.
But Dr Poulter, said the company’s stage four consultation still left too many unanswered questions. EDF said its consultation had engaged with thousands of people across East Suffolk, providing updates on its plans as they evolved. It said it held regular meetings with parish councils and had provided funding to offer themindependent and free guidance during consultation.
But it faced regular criticism over the level of detail supplied in each stage of consultation. Dr Poulter said EDF’s lack of detail was a “common theme”. “There was some hope among interested parties in East Suffolk that EDF would use the stage four consultation to address the numerous calls for better information, but a review of the responses indicates EDF has missed this opportunity,” Dr Poulter wrote.
He said the collective response from the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB was “particularly damning”. The response said the consultation failed to pay proper regard to the purposes of the AONB – “despite comments made in previous consultations”. Dr Poulter said the information called for should be provided in EDF’s DCO but he had “serious reservations” of its ability to do so, given its failings so far.
Even if EDF was able to provide the information, Dr Poulter said the amount of data consultees would need to go through would be “substantial” – meaning their ability to make proper responses would be “severely limited”. Explaining his letter, Dr Poulter said: “EDF are behaving in a disdainful and unacceptable way towards many of the communities in East Suffolk. They should engage
properly and consult with local communities so the very real concerns of
residents about what the construction of Sizewell C means for them can be
properly considered and addressed.”
Sceptisim over Boris Johnson’s promises environment and climate
The Conversation 13th Dec 2019, Rebecca Willis: Climate change had a higher profile in the UK election campaign than ever before, with parties competing hard over their offer to concerned voters.
But this was a debate that the Conservatives – who won a landslide majority – largely stood back from. Their manifesto was light on detail compared to the other parties, and Boris Johnson chose not to take part in the first ever UK televised leaders’ debate on climate.
Conservative candidates were conspicuous by their absence in local climate
hustings, too. Neither was climate mentioned in their legislative plan for
the first hundred days. The Conservative government did legislate for a net
zero carbon emissions target back in June, following the advice of the
Committee on Climate Change. And there was an explicit manifesto pledge to
deliver on this target, with no signs of backtracking.
In his speech to the party faithful on the morning of his election, Johnson declared his ambition to “make this country the cleanest, greenest on Earth, with the most far-reaching environmental programme”, adding: And you the people of this country voted to be carbon-neutral in this election – you voted to be carbon-neutral by 2050. And we’ll do it.
But targets don’t reduce carbon. Policies do. And despite its much-admired Climate Change Act, the UK’s policy record lately has not been good. The Committee on Climate Change have repeatedly warned that the UK is off track to meet future commitments, a verdict shared by the independent Climate Action Tracker project, which assesses each country’s performance against the Paris Agreement. It rated the UK as “insufficient”, with policies compatible
with a 3°C world – not the 1.5°C level that we desperately need.
If the new government is serious about its commitment, it will have to signal this soon, and with confidence. Steps that it could and should take straight
away include: instigating a swift review of governance for net-zero, giving
responsibility and resources to other government departments, and,
crucially, to local areas, to deliver on carbon strategy; prioritising
climate and environmental protection in negotiations for a trading
relationship with the European Union; moving quickly to consult on a
phase-out date for petrol and diesel vehicles, as promised in its
manifesto; removing the de facto ban on onshore wind energy, which the
Committee on Climate Change advised needs to increase in capacity by 1GW a
year; confirming its opposition to fracking, and making its moratorium
permanent; pledging to formally consider the results of the national
citizens’ assembly on climate change, Climate Assembly UK, due to report
in 2020.
UK election. Green Party grew by 60%
Business Green 13th Dec 2019, The Green Party saw its total number of votes grow by over 60 per cent in yesterday’s election, delivering the biggest percentage gains of any party following a campaign that saw environmental issues take centre stage.
Caroline Lucas retained her seat in Brighton Pavilion, increasing her share
of the vote by almost five per cent to 57 per cent.
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3084650/green-party-celebrates-60-per-cent-vote-surge
1 This Month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (94)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
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
