Energy firms demand billions from UK taxpayer for mini reactors Ministers under pressure to fund new generation of small-scale nuclear power stations,Guardian, Adam Vaughan Energy correspondent @adamvaughan_uk, 1 Oct 2018 Backers of mini nuclear power stations have asked for billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to build their first UK projects, according to an official document.
Advocates for small modular reactors (SMRs) argue they are more affordable and less risky than conventional large-scale nuclear plants, and therefore able to compete with the falling costs of windfarms and solar power.
But the nuclear industry’s claims that the mini plants would be a cheap option for producing low-carbon power appear to be undermined by the significant sums it has been asking of ministers.
Some firms have been calling for as much as £3.6bn to fund construction costs, according to a government-commissioned report, released under freedom of information rules. Companies also wanted up to £480m of public money to help steer their reactor designs through the regulatory approval process, which is a cost usually paid by nuclear companies.
Ten companies hoping to build the plants requested direct government funding, according to the briefing paper by the Expert Finance Working Group on Small Reactors. While the report named the companies involved in the mini nuclear projects, it did not specify who was asking for
David Lowry, a nuclear policy consultant who obtained the document, said: “SMRs are either old, discredited designs repackaged when companies see governments prepared to throw taxpayers’ subsidies to support them, or are exotic new technologies, with decades of research needed before they reach commercial maturity.”
The working group that drafted the report, and was appointed by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), urged the government in August to put in place a framework to help bring the smaller plants to market.
The government has already offered £44m of funding for research and development of one group of SMRs, which typically have a capacity of less than a tenth of the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant being built in Somerset, or enough power for 600,000 homes.
Mini nuclear power stations are unlikely to supply clean energy to Britain’s homes and businesses any time soon. Of more than 30 British, US and Chinese companies that have expressed an interest in building one in the UK, the majority told the working group that their power stations would be ready to deployed in the 2030s.
The companies include UK firms such as Rolls-Royce, Sheffield Forgemasters and Atkins, along with China’s CNNC, US companies NuScale and Westinghouse, and France’s EDF Energy.
The working group found the firms’ cost estimates “varied significantly”, to the degree that some of the companies clearly had a “lack of understanding” of how British nuclear regulation works.
It also noted that some of the companies proposed using “non-standard fuels” rather than the conventional uranium used by today’s nuclear plants, which “may add cost to business models” because of new facilities to produce and later manage the spent fuel.
The firms told the group that the four main barriers they faced were finding and confirming sites, the cost of regulatory approval for their designs, a lack of state funding and unclear policy.
On 24 September, shadow chancellor John McDonnell confirmed that a Labour government would keep the UK’s nuclear arsenal. He said, however, that as prime minister Jeremy Corbyn would only use it in consultation with the cabinet, parliament, and the “wider community”.
Right-wing attacks
In spite of the comments, the right-wing media attacked McDonnell’s statement as too soft. The Sun, for example, said that McDonnell “sparked ridicule” for suggesting that a Corbyn-led government would only launch a nuclear strike after “ask[ing] for the British public’s permission”.
A favourite weapon
Indeed, Corbyn’s former opposition to renewing the UK’s nuclear arsenal, known as Trident, has been one of the right’s favourite weapons with which to attack him. Some right-wing media outlets have called him “loony left” for his life-long commitment to nuclear disarmament.
And some from the Blairite wing of his own party have also piled on the abuse. In 2015, then Labour MP John Woodcock, for instance, called Corbyn’s position on Trident “childish” and “dangerously naïve”.
Expert view
But a scarcely viewed video on YouTube shows that the anti-Trident position is actually supported by one of the world’s leading experts on nuclear weapons. In a 2016 interview on Al-Jazeera with Mehdi Hasan, former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix backed Corbyn’s call to scrap Trident.
Asked by Hasan whether he supports the scrapping of Trident, he replied:
Yes, I think it’s a tremendous cost, and I do not see that it really, perceptively adds to British security
Blix is a Swedish diplomat and served as minister of foreign affairs in the Ola Ullsten administration in the 1970s. He became famous for his role as a senior UN weapons inspector in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. He has also served as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
“Sentimental status-seeking”
And for Blix, it’s apparently the pro-Trident people who are being childish and naïve. He said that holding on to Trident is “more a question of sentimental status-seeking”. He added that the UK will keep its permanent seat at the UN Security Council regardless of whether it holds on to nuclear weapons. Interestingly, Blix also says that he does not “see any enthusiasm in Washington for Trident, either.”
The hard-hitting video makes nonsense of the right’s endless fear-mongering, and provides a welcome antidote to the attacks on the Labour leadership.
Fortunately, shadow peace minister Fabian Hamilton is reportedly drawing up a nuclear disarmament proposal for the shadow cabinet’s consideration. And it would be well served to heed Blix’s advice.
Plans for a new nuclear power station in Cumbria are on the verge of collapsing after the Toshiba-owned company – NuGen – laid off 60% of its workforce and embarked on a final effort to sell the project. Toshiba was due to sell the NuGen consortium to South Korean state-owned firm Kecpo in early 2018, as the Japanese firm exits international nuclear projects and looks to recoup some of the £400m it has spent on the Moorside plant.
But Kepco has been delaying a final decision, due in part to the UK government signalling a new approach to financing nuclear power stations. That has forced NuGen to cut 60 of its 100-strong workforce after a six-week consultation with staff. (1)
Unions said the project’s problems showed the need for the government to take a stake in Moorside. Justin Bowden, the GMB national secretary, said: “The looming collapse of this vital energy project has been depressingly predictable for months.” The GMB wants the NDA to be scrapped as it currently exists and a Nuclear Development Agency created to make sure Moorside and the accompanying creation of thousands of new jobs and apprenticeships, goes ahead. (2) The skeleton NuGen team is now focused on clinching a deal with Kepco by the end of the year before Toshiba writes the unit off entirely at the end of March 2019. Success will hinge on whether Kepco buys into a new financing approach for nuclear power plants that the government is exploring, known as the regulated asset base (RAB) model. Officials think it could deliver the government’s nuclear ambitions more cheaply for consumers than alternatives.
The RAB approach involves a regulator – in the case of nuclear power stations most likely to be Ofgem – setting a fixed sum for the costs of the scheme, and a fixed return for the project’s backers. Those returns would be funded by energy bill payers. But the model is likely to be ditched if Jeremy Corbyn comes to power. Alan Whitehead, the shadow energy minister, said: “Using customers’ bills to make a bet that construction of such large and complex projects will not overrun in terms of cost or time is a reckless act.” (3)
The Chief Executive of NuGen said he will “fight tooth and nail” to salvage the £15 billion Moorside nuclear power station in an impassioned speech to industry leaders gathered in Cumbria. He says he is fully behind using the RAB model. (4)
The FT reported that Toshiba had entered talks with Canadian asset manager Brookfield over the potential sale of NuGen. Brookfield bought Westinghouse from Toshiba for $4.6bn in January after the US nuclear business filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2017. (5) But the claims were later rubbished by Toshiba. It added that it was still considering the sale of NuGen to Kepco. (6)
Later NuGen admitted that there are no firm plans to save Moorside. (7)
Workington Labour MP, Sue Hayman, co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Nuclear Energy, wrote to the Secretary of State for Business, Greg Clark MP, at the end of July, when NuGen announced it was consulting on job losses, calling on him to guarantee Government support for the project and 20,000 future Cumbrian jobs. Mr Clark said in June that he “will consider direct Government investment” in the proposed Wylfa nuclear power station in Wales, but he has refused to make any similar commitment to Cumbria. In a response to Sue’s letter, energy minister Richard Harrington MP said: “The Secretary of State and I understand the potential importance of the Moorside project to the local area. However (…) the proposed sale of NuGen is principally a commercial matter for Toshiba and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on those ongoing negotiations.” Sue Hayman said: “This Tory government could not care less about the Cumbrian economy, the Moorside project, or the 20,000 future jobs it will bring.” (8)
but he has refused to make any similar commitment to Cumbria. In a response to Sue’s letter, energy minister Richard Harrington MP said: “The Secretary of State and I understand the potential importance of the Moorside project to the local area. However (…) the proposed sale of NuGen is principally a commercial matter for Toshiba and it would not be appropriate for me to comment on those ongoing negotiations.” Sue Hayman said: “This Tory government could not care less about the Cumbrian economy, the Moorside project, or the 20,000 future jobs it will bring.” (8) http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NuClearNewsNo111.pdf
Dave Toke’s Blog 27th Sept 2018 Labour’s low cost and practical proposals for expansion of onshore and offshore wind, solar power, energy conservation and increases in renewable heat are the surest sign yet that they are the competent choice for Government.
Their proposals need some elaboration in places and some work on detail, but seem to be in a different dimension compared to the Tory Government who seem increasingly certain to be heading for self-destruction on the anvil of Brexit.
Rebecca Long-Bailey is aiming for 85 per cent of electricity to come from low carbon power by 2030. This is an easily
achievable target, and will be done at low cost if simultaneously Labour cancels the disaster-in-waiting project at Wylfa, and some way can be found to avoid Hinkley C being built.
China’s leading nuclear energy company CGN says it would consider pulling back from control of the Bradwell nuclear plant to appease political sensitivities.
Under a 2016 agreement, CGN would have a 66.5% stake in Bradwell and EDF would have the remainder when it starts generating electricity in the late 2020s or ealry 2030s. However, CGN’s chief executive Zheng Dongshan told the Financial Times (FT) CGN would be willing to consider “not being the majority operator. We understand the political and local sensitivities”. (1)
Should the Bradwell project proceed, it would be the first Hualong HPR1000-type reactor. The Office for Nuclear Regulation is currently assessing the reactor design but a final decision on the Generioc Design Assessment is expected to take at least three years. (2)
BANNG’s Andy Blowers says the project may be doomed anyway as the site is totally unsuitable and is widely opposed by communities all around the Blackwater Estuary. The Chinese withdrawal, should it come, would reflect widespread concerns about the security issues surrounding their investment into a highly sensitive part of the UK’s national infrastructure. Recent manoeuvres off the disputed, Chinese-built, artificial islands in the South China Sea have increased tensions in the area and provoked warnings of Chinese investment withdrawal from the UK. It is possible that the Bradwell project could be an early victim of deteriorating relations between the two countries. In any event the project was already looking doubtful. It is facing considerable challenges in delivering vast quantities of cooling water by pipeline and the need to avoid polluting the Marine Conservation Zone which gives protection to the Colchester Native Oyster and other marine life. Most of the site is vulnerable to flooding and it will be a heroic feat to demonstrate that highly radioactive spent fuel can be safely and securely stored on the site until the end of the next century. (3)
The Blackwater, Crouch, Roach and Colne Estuaries were designated as a Marine Conservation Zone in 2013. As part of the designation native oysters have been legally protected indeed there is the Essex Native Oyster Restoration Initiative to further the aims of the MCZ designation. The MCZ designation is a major change in the site status since Bradwell was selected in 2011 as a potential site for power generation by the Government. Despite the new MCZ status CGN and EDF Energy still confirm their belief that Bradwell is a good site for nuclear development. If you take into account this and all the other environmental protections that run along the proposed site you would have thought it would be the last place to build a nuclear power station! http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NuClearNewsNo111.pdf
After wrangling over Georgia nuclear plant, cost concerns remain, By Matt Kempner and Anastaciah Ondieki – The Atlanta Journal-Constitution , September 28, 2018
Not many people can name the plant that their electricity comes from. But in Jefferson, at a gathering sponsored by Jackson EMC, plenty of customers were familiar with the trials and tribulations of expanding Plant Vogtle.
Among the people who gather annually for chicken dinners, gospel music and raffle drawings put on by the electric cooperative, there are worries about the mounting headaches 130 miles away.
Plant Vogtle — the only nuclear power plant under construction in the United States — keeps ending up in the news because of its ever escalating pricetag. And those soaring costs are likely to end up in the monthly bills of customers of Jackson EMC and most other Georgia utilities, which are on the hook to pay for the project.
“I don’t understand why they can’t figure out what it’s going to cost,” said Mike Mize, a retired phone company worker who lives in Commerce and gets power from Jackson EMC. “I want them to hurry up and finish the thing and quit spending money on it.”
But high-stakes events this week suggest that costs will only go higher.
Co-owners of the plant voted Wednesday to continue its expansion, but did little to address the fundamentals of the Vogtle’s troubles.
The owners ditched a proposal for a firm cost cap on the now $27-billion-plus project and avoided addressing calls by state lawmakers to refrain from passing new cost increases along to customers. Meanwhile, electric membership cooperatives and city utilities around the state lost some of their say over whether the project continues in the future.
Georgia Power blasted the idea of a firm cost cap, but agreed to take on a greater share of costs in the event of certain big overruns. The size of the risk shift was limited — if there are $2.1 billion in cost increases, the company would face an extra $180 million penalty, “peanuts in this context,” said one critic.
Georgia Power, the state’s largest utility, was given carte blanche to drop out of the project at its sole discretion.
Morgan Stanley analysts predict a “very good chance” that Vogtle costs could jump more than another $2.1 billion.
“We think there is a significant level of uncertainty around the budget and see a very high likelihood of continued cost overruns,” the analysts wrote.
Add that to the existing pile. Nine years into construction, the Vogtle expansion is billions of dollars over budget, years behind schedule and at least four years away from completion.
Cost projections and assurances from Georgia Power have been consistently wrong.
Georgia Power, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and Dalton Utilities all gave approval. But Oglethorpe Power, which represents electric membership corporations throughout the state, insisted on a cost cap. It also asked that shareholders of Georgia Power’s parent, Southern Company, eventually cover additional cost increases. (Another Southern subsidiary is overseeing the construction.)
The core issue is one that has haunted Vogtle for years: Who should shoulder its ever-ballooning costs?
“We never signed up for a project where we would just be a blank checkbook for Southern Company or anybody else in this project,” said Gary Miller, the chief executive of GreyStone Power Corporation, which serves portions of Fulton, Cobb, Douglas and other counties. “We never said, ‘Build it no matter what the cost.’ ”………
Plans to clear a site to build a new £12bn nuclear power station have been approved despite strong opposition. Horizon Nuclear Power will now start the 15-month process to clear an area measuring just over a square mile (740 acres) to build the new Wylfa Newydd B reactor.
But Greenpeace has taken legal action arguing work should not start until Wylfa B is given the official go-ahead.
Anglesey council unanimously approved the plans in a meeting on Wednesday. Horizon does not have the Development Consent Order (DCO) for the nuclear plant, a process that could take at least 18 months for the planning inspectorate to decide upon. But planning officials said giving it prior permission would speed up the construction process. Ahead of the council’s planning meeting, Greenpeace solicitors launched a legal challenge against the officials’ recommendation. The campaigners said the council’s report had “mistakenly relied upon the government’s Nuclear Energy National Policy Statement as a key justification for their support for Horizon’s plan to clear the site”…..http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/news/wylfa-7-9-18/
NuClear News, October 18 Sizewell C – a figment of the imagination In an interview with The Times in April EDF Energy’s UK chief executive, Simone Rossi, said that rapid progress was needed on the development of Hinkley Point C because promised cost savings would not materialise if there was a significant delay between work on the two. (1)
EDF does not need to strike a deal on Sizewell with the government this year, but Mr Rossi wants to be confident that it will be possible to reach an agreement. “This is the year where we need to understand whether this whole thing is really feasible or not,” he told The Times. “If we were to conclude that maybe it’s not feasible, then at that point maybe we say we are not in a position to continue the project.” EDF is pushing for a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model.
The GMB has been urging a go ahead for Sizewell C because it faces an uncertain future, after the tion in National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) pushed for a reduction in the government’s plans for new nuclear power stations. (2)
Radiation Free Lakeland 25th Sept 2018 The rain returned several weeks ago and our gardens and fields have
returned to their usual shades of green. However, United Utilities still
finds it necessary to take full-page advertisements urging us all “to use
a little less water,” to spend less time in the shower, to turn off the
tap when brushing teeth etc. These are, of course in themselves, laudable
actions, but it also seems reasonable to ask ‘Where has all the water
gone? ‘ and, subsequently, to speculate that a big part of the answer
lies in the enormous quantities of water being extracted from Cumbria’s
rivers and lakes to cool and service the many serious hazards that remain
at the Sellafield nuclear site, including Building 30. https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2018/09/25/nuclear-costing-the-earth-rivers-and-sea/
Solar Power Portal 26th Sept 2018 A Labour government would look to treble the UK’s current solar capacity
and create more than 400,000 green jobs by 2030. Those were the key facts
from this week’s Labour Party conference which comprised speeches from
some of the opposition party’s central figures. Yesterday the party’s
shadow business, energy and industrial energy secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey
said that Labour had been working with an “expert team” of energy
professionals, engineers and academics to assess how the country could meet
such a target. A near trebling of the UK’s solar capacity would equate to
around 39GW of operational solar in the UK, enough, according to
Long-Bailey, to power seven million homes. Leonie Greene, director of
advocacy at the Solar Trade Association, stressed that expanding wind and
solar capacity should be an economically-driven decision that crosses party
political lines. “The government estimates that around £180 billion
needs to be invested in the electricity sector alone to 2030, so enabling
the lowest cost technologies which do not need public subsidy and which do
not contribute to climate change – namely solar and onshore wind – would be
very good news for consumers.” https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/corbyns_labour_government_would_treble_uk_solar_capacity_create_400000_gree
Sunday Times 23rd Sept 2018 , Aldermaston, The consortium that runs Britain’s nuclear weapons factory paid itself
£70m of dividends last year despite huge delays and cost overruns on a key
project. AWE Management paid the dividends to its shareholders — the
giants Serco, Jacobs and Lockheed Martin — which have a long-term
contract to run the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE).
AWE, which develops and builds the nuclear warheads that arm the navy’s Trident submarine
fleet, came under fire from the government’s spending watchdog in May.
The National Audit Office said an upgrade to AWE’s warhead assembly
facility in Berkshire was six years late and costs had spiralled from
£734m in 2011 to £1.8bn.
AWE has also been at loggerheads with the
nuclear safety watchdog, which, in July, prosecuted the company over an
incident last year in which an electrician was injured. At a court hearing
last week, AWE admitted failing to ensure the safety of its staff. It is
due to be sentenced in November. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/navy-nuke-maker-awe-pays-70m-dividend-lvthpcwkj
The National 23rd Sept 2018 ,SUNSHINE and a rainbow reflected the positive vibes at the Nae Nukes
Anywhere’ peaceful protest march from the peace camp in Faslane
yesterday, led by Scottish makar Jackie Kay. More 600 people from around
the world and of all ages gathered at Trident’s military base at the
gates of HMNB Clyde to urge governments around the world to ban nuclear
weapons. http://www.thenational.scot/news/16897005.more-than-600-anti-nuclear-campaigners-stage-peace-walk-at-faslane/
The Hill, BY BRETT SAMUELS – 09/23/18British Prime Minister Theresa May said Iran is holding up its end of the nuclear pact that the U.S. withdrew from earlier this year.
“We believe that that should stay in place, and others involved in putting that deal together believe that it should stay in place,” May said in an interview aired Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”……..
Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have been heightened in the months since the Trump administration withdrew from the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal, which offered Tehran sanctions relief in exchange for abandoning its nuclear program. Trump had decried the pact as the “worst deal ever.”
The U.S. has since reimposed some of the sanctions lifted in the deal, potentially crippling the Iranian economy.
Other signatories of the 2015 agreement — including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia and Iran — have pledged to remain committed to the deal.
N2NP 19th Sept 2018 A court in Paris has ordered French utility EDF to release a risk analysis
report to the group’s works council (CEE) concerning its Hinkley Point C
nuclear project. The appeals court in Paris said the firm must communicate
the report within a month and must consult the CEE regarding the project
within two months.
In 2016, EDF refused to release all documents required
by the council for it to be able to issue its advice on the project,
triggering CEE’s legal action. The CEE say EDF failure to give elected
representatives of the staff objective, precise and complete information on
the technical and financial issues raised by the Hinkley project meant they
had not been able “to give a reasoned opinion on this project“.
Commenting on the news, Steve Thomas Emeritus Professor of Energy Policy at
Greenwich University and author of ‘Time to Cancel Hinkley?’ said:
“Some senior EDF management and some EDF trade unions have long been
concerned about EDF’s participation in the Hinkley Point C project.
The 3-year old report the EDF Central Works Council (CCE) has won access to
will show that EDF is well aware of these risks. The continuing delays and
cost overruns (more than 3 times over budget and 8 years late) at
Hinkley’s reference plant, Flamanville, significantly worse than when the
report was written, illustrate graphically the scale of the risk.
The Works Council see Hinkley as a financially risky project that will divert EDF’s
scarce finances away from the strategically more important task of
upgrading and life-extending EDF’s fleet of 58 reactors, many of which
are at or near the end of the 40-year design life.”
Stop Hinkley spokesperson, Roy Pumfrey says: “Even the long standing nuclear advocate,
former International Energy Agency boss, Nobuaki Tanaka, says nuclear power
can’t compete with renewables. He says it’s ‘ridiculously
expensive’ and ‘utterly uncompetitive’ Electricity consumers would
almost certainly still be able to make savings if the project were halted
now and the south-west were given the chance to develop sustainable energy
industries. Full construction start is still a year or more away so not too
late to stop it.”
THE INFRASTRUCTURE for supporting the Royal Navy’s fleet of nuclear submarines is no longer “fit for purpose”, MPs have warned. Sep 21, 2018 The Commons Public Accounts Committee said past decisions to delay maintenance at the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) 13 nuclear sites around the UK had created a “ticking time bomb”.
The warning came after the National Audit Office disclosed earlier this year that the MoD’s “Nuclear Enterprise” programme was facing a £2.9 billion “affordability gap”.
The committee chair Meg Hillier said that with the MoD already facing “challenges” over the delivery of its new aircraft carriers and a potential £20 billion shortfall in its equipment programme, there were “serious questions” over its ability to meet its national security commitments.
Over the next 10 years, the MoD is expected to spend £51 billion on the Nuclear Enterprise – maintaining and replacing the submarine fleet, including the Vanguard submarines which carry the UK’s Trident nuclear deterrent…..
he MoD had deferred work on dismantling old submarines which had been taken out of service on “affordability grounds” and there was now a backlog of 20 vessels waiting to be disposed of, including nine which still contained nuclear fuel.
To date, the UK has never completely disposed of an old nuclear submarine and while work has begun on the first, it is not due to be finished until the mid-2020s.
The committee said work on de-fuelling the next submarine was due to begin around the same time, and that the disposals programme was expected to last “at least a couple of decades”.
Ms Hillier said: “I am particularly concerned that the infrastructure available to support the Nuclear Enterprise is not fit for purpose.
“The MoD admits that while it has previously put off dismantling submarines on grounds of cost, this is no longer acceptable on grounds of safety and reputation. The MoD needs to get on top of this quickly.”
nuclear-news 