Environmental Research Web 28th Oct 2017, In his wide ranging review of energy costs for the UK government, Prof.Dieter Helm says ‘the cost of energy is too high, and higher than
necessary to meet the Climate Change Act (CCA) target and the carbon
budgets. Households and businesses have not fully benefited from the
falling costs of gas and coal, the rapidly falling costs of renewables, or
from the efficiency gains to network and supply costs which come from smart
technologies. Prices should be falling, and they should go on falling into
the medium and longer terms’. And he sets out his ideas for enabling that
to happen.
To simplify things, he wants to combine support systems and
taxes into a universal carbon price and a unified equivalent firm power
auction process. http://blog.environmentalresearchweb.org/2017/10/28/the-helm-energy-cost-review/
October 29, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
renewable, UK |
Leave a comment
Wales Online 26th Oct 2017, Nearly 60,000 people sign petitions to stop radioactive mud being dumped
off Cardiff. Campaigners say not enough research has been done on the
dangers of the mud from the decommissioned Hinkley A nuclear reactor.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/nearly-60000-people-sign-petitions-13817765
Somerset Live 25th Oct 2017, Concerns have been raised after more than 200,000 tonnes of ‘radioactive’
mud from Hinkley Point power station will be dumped in the Bristol Channel.
EDF Energy, the company behind Hinkley Point C development in Bridgwater,
has obtained a marine licence to dump up to 200,000 cubic metres of dredged
material in the Bristol Channel – just a mile off Cardiff Bay. The
dredging licence was granted to the French energy giant in 2013 and it
gives them the right to discharge materials at Cardiff Grounds, a sandbank
in the Bristol Channel.
http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/radioactive-mud-hinkley-point-dumped-672554
October 28, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
environment, opposition to nuclear, UK |
Leave a comment
Small nuclear reactors are a 1950s mirage come back to haunt us http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2989401/small_nuclear_reactors_are_a_1950s_mirage_come_back_to_haunt_us.html, Oliver Tickell, 24th October, 2017
The government is due to announce a £250 million support package for ‘small modular reactors’ his week, just as the price of wind and solar power contracts fall 10% below UK wholesale prices. OLIVER TICKELL argues that the Britain’s ‘civilian’ nuclear power expenditure is actually a camouflaged subsidy to the UK’s Trident nuclear missile system.
It’s easy to see why Rolls Royce and other companies in the nuclear engineering business are pushing the UK government finance the development a new generation of ‘small modular reactors’ or SMRs. Whether the project succeeds or fails, there are juicy profits to be had for them at taxpayers expense.
Rather harder to understand is why the government should see the slightest merit in the idea.
According to a recent report by Rolls-Royce and its partners in the ‘SMR Consortium’ (SMRC), a UK SMR program could create 40,000 skilled jobs, contribute £100 billion ($132 billion) to the economy and open up a potential £400 billion global export market.
Nuclear Industries Association chairman Lord (John) Hutton claims in the foreword that a UK SMR programme could “help the UK become a vibrant, world-leading nuclear nation.” He asserts his belief that “it is fundamental for the UK to meet its 2050 decarbonisation targets and will deliver secure, reliable and affordable electricity for generations to come.”
The SMRC report envisages an approximate doubling of the UK’s 9.5 GW existing nuclear capacity by 2030, then another doubling by 2050 to around 40GW. That implies that come 2050, SMRs would be delivering some 30GW – the output of 100 300MW units scattered around the UK.
There are just two problems with the rosy scenario. First, the techno-optimism that oozes from every page is a fantasy. Nuclear power stations have got bigger to achieve economies of scale: it’s much cheaper to build a single 1.2GW unit than four 300MW units, or a dozen 100MW units.
As an illustration of the principle, take a look at the wind power industry. One of the main reasons why offshore wind has come down so much in cost is the move to ever-larger wind turbines. A single new 8MW turbine may now be bigger than an entire wind farm of 20 years ago.
This story goes all the way back to the 1950s …
But first we must realise – there is nothing new about SMRs! They have been powering submarines and aircraft carriers ever since the since USS Nautilus was launched in 1955, over 60 years ago. And the world’s first purely civilian nuclear plant, at Shippingport in the USA, a 60MW SMR, went live in 1957. While civilian reactors got bigger, many hundreds of SMRs have been built and deployed for naval use.
Now if there really are huge cost savings to be achieved from the mass production of SMRs, how come they have not already been achieved? What is that that generations of super-smart nuclear engineers have missed? Industry claims of less complex financing and ‘process engineering’ may ring a little hollow, but – for the sake of argument – let’s accept that all the claimed cost reductions can be achieved. On the SMRC’s projections,
“The levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) generated by a FOAK [first of a kind] UK SMR power station is forecast under £75 per MWh and this reduces to a forecast £65 per MWh by station number five. In the medium term the target is even lower at £60 per MWh.”
This is a good bit cheaper than the inflation-proof £92.50 / MWh (in 2013 money) the government has promised to pay for Hinkley C’s power for 35 years following the plant’s opening. But it’s a lot higher than current wholesale power prices of around £42 / MWh.
The ever shrinking cost of renewable energy
Last month the price of offshore wind power reached a new low of £57.50 per MWh in an auction for contracts, guaranteed for just 15 years. Onshore wind is even cheaper: contracts awarded in Germany in May reached another new low of €42.80 / MWh (£38.24) – less than current UK wholesale power prices. And Germany’s latest solar auction, a few days ago, delivered bids as low as €42.90 per MWh. Both these technologies appear viable with no subsidy at all.
The cost of solar PV panels continues its precipitous decline. Recent figures show the cost of panels in the Netherlands declining at 11% per year, or 50% every five years. The trend may continue for a long time to come.
Extrapolate these declining renewable cost trends to 2030, and we can expect solar power to cost around £10 per MWh, with wind at £20-30 per MWh. By 2050, wind power costs will surely have halved again, with solar around £1 per MWh. So what will be the use of nuclear power at £60-75 per MWh?
Of course there will be costs in integrating large volumes of variable, non-despatchable power supply into the grid. It will mean using ‘dynamic demand’ or ‘smart grid’ technologies, energy storage in giant batteries and hydropower stations, large scale power-to-gas and power-to-liquid-fuel conversion (in turn displacing fossil fuels from transport) … and the base cost of power will be astonishingly low by current standards, not just in the UK but all over the world.
So Lord Hutton’s hyperbolic claims are wholly erroneous. Nuclear power will be utterly irrelevant in meeting decarbonisation targets. There is no £400 billion export market. Who would want SMRs in 2050, when their power will be 50-100 times more expensive than solar?
The ‘nuclear deterrent’
We now know (thanks to Andy Stirling and Philip Johnstone of Sussex University) that the government wants to use civilian nuclear programme to generate expertise, technology, for military use, especially reactors for Trident nuclear submarines. What better way than to pour billions of pounds into SMRs under the pretence that the technology is for civilian use?
Actually Lord Hutton himself gave the game away when he wrote: “A UK SMR programme would support all 10 ‘pillars’ of the Government’s Industrial Strategy and assist in sustaining the skills required for the Royal Navy’s submarine programme.”
More recently, on 10th October, defence procurement minister Harriet Baldwin MP replied to a question by Caroline Lucas MP that, “[i]n all discussions it is fully understood that civil and defence sectors must work together to make sure resource is prioritised appropriately for the protection and prosperity of the United Kingdom.”
But there are signs that BEIS Secretary Greg Clarke may be getting tired of subsidising the UK’s nuclear missiles. In 2015 former Chancellor George Osborne announced a £250 million SMR competition for the most promising ideas. The outcomewas to be published last autumn. it wasn’t. By May 2017, the nuclear industry and its backers in the House of Lords were panicking. Then the SMRCs report ‘UK SMR: A National Endeavour‘ was issued this 20th September in a desperate attempt to ginger up the process. It has failed – so far.
Could a sudden fit of common sense, logical thinking and sound economics have come across senior UK ministers? Probably not. The Telegraph reports today that BEIS is to publish the competitions ‘results’ in a study this week, announcing Rolls Royce and its SMRC partners as the winners. “We are currently considering next steps for the SMR programme and we will communicate these in due course”, a BEIS spokesman said.
This Author
Oliver Tickell is contributing editor at Resurgence & Ecologist magazine and a former editor of The Ecologist.
October 27, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
technology, UK |
Leave a comment
Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment (CORE) 25th Oct 2017 Over the coming months, in remembering this epic and historic case in theLondon High Court when West Cumbrian families sued Sellafield over cancersin children of radiation workers, CORE will be publishing the 1992/93 daily court transcripts.
The initial two test cases were brought by Leigh Day & Co. The first by Elizabeth Reay whose 10-month-old baby, Dorothy, died ofleukaemia in 1962. George Reay, the baby’s father, died of cancer in the mid- 1980s and had received one of the highest radiation doses of any of the Sellafield workers.
The second by Vivien Hope, 28, who had been diagnosed in 1988 with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, another blood cancer. Her father, David, was a fitter at the plant for more than 20 years.
Up to 40 further cases were depending on the outcome. Legally, the case would test
for the first time the concept of genetic damage: whether radiation from
Sellafield damaged the sperm of workers, resulting in leukaemia and related
illnesses in their children (Gardner theory).
http://corecumbria.co.uk/news/down-memory-lane-25th-anniversary-of-leukaemia-high-court-case-261092/
October 27, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Legal, UK |
Leave a comment
Independent 25th Oct 2017. A subsidy ban for new onshore wind farms could add £1bn onto energy bills
over five years by eschewing one of the cheapest forms of clean energy.
Generating power from new onshore wind farms would be £100m a year cheaper
than doing so from new nuclear reactors or biomass plants, and at least
£30m cheaper than under the latest offshore wind-power contracts,
according to research by the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, a
London-based non-profit group.
Savings would reach £1bn over five years if
1 gigawatt of capacity was installed in the first year and another 500
megawatts in following years, said ECIU, which urged Theresa May’s
Conservative government to allow wind farms to compete for contracts in the
next power auction, due to be held in 2019.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/onshore-wind-farms-uk-subsidy-ban-energy-bills-rise-1-billion-a8018561.html
October 27, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, renewable, UK |
Leave a comment
NFLA 25th Oct 2017, The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) warmly welcomes an exciting
initiative by Greater Manchester local authorities in its ‘Big Clean
Switch’ campaign. This scheme is encouraging both larger organisations
and members of the public to switch on to cheaper 100% renewable energy
providers for their electricity needs.
The ‘GM Big Clean Switch’ is acollaboration between the 10 Greater Manchester Councils and the
organisation ‘The Big Clean Switch’, which is encouraging greater
take-up with energy companies developing renewable gas and electricity
solutions. ‘The Big Clean Switch’ is a partnership between the climate
change campaigners at Purpose and the social enterprise Clean Energy UK.
This partnership with the GM Combined Authority is the first attempt to
encourage such a large switching to renewable energy companies and plans
are being made to look at delivering it elsewhere over the future. As the
‘Big Clean Switch’ note, this campaign is unique. It is the first time
a town or city has tried to save residents money by helping them switch to
green energy (let alone 10 local authorities working together), and it is
the first time an energy switching campaign of any kind has attracted such
city-wide support from other organisations, from universities to football
clubs. http://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/nfla-welcomes-gm-big-clean-switch-support-decentralised-renewable-energy-solutions/
October 27, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
renewable, UK |
Leave a comment
Business Green 25th Oct 2017, The government’s “outdated” ban on developing new onshore wind farms on
mainland Britain is blocking access to the cheapest available form of new
electricity generation, and having a negative impacts on bills, climate
change targets, and businesses.
That is the conclusion of new research by
the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) think tank, which estimates
electricity from 1GW of new onshore wind farms would cost £30m a year less
than obtaining the same amount of power from new offshore wind farms, even
when recent cost reductions from the offshore wind sector are taken into
account.
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3019755/report-uks-outdated-onshore-wind-ban-blocks-cheapest-form-of-new-energy
October 27, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, politics, renewable, UK |
Leave a comment
BBC apologises over interview with climate sceptic Lord Lawson https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/24/bbc-apologises-over-interview-climate-sceptic-lord-nigel-lawson Lawson’s claim that global temperatures are not rising went unchallenged, breaching guidelines on accuracy and impartiality, Guardian, Damian Carrington, 25 Oct 17, The BBC has apologised for an interview with the climate sceptic Lord Lawson after admitting it had breached its own editorial guidelines for allowing him to claim that global temperatures have not risen in the past decade.
BBC Radio 4’s flagship news programme Today ran the item in August in which Lawson, interviewed by presenter Justin Webb, made the claim. The last three years have in fact seen successive global heat records broken.
The Today programme rejected initial complaints from listeners, arguing that Lawson’s stance was “reflected by the current US administration” and that offering space to “dissenting voices” was an important aspect of impartiality.
However, some listeners escalated their complaint and, in a letter seen by the Guardian, the BBC’s executive complaints unit now accepts the interview breached its guidelines on accuracy and impartiality.
The complaint centred on two statements by Lawson: that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “has confirmed that there has been no increase in extreme weather events” and “according to the official figures, during this past 10 years, if anything, mean global temperature, average world temperature, has slightly declined”.
It is not the first time the Today programme has been censured by the BBC complaints unit for an interview with Lawson. A broadcast in February 2014 was judged to have “given undue weight to Lord Lawson’s views, and had conveyed a misleading impression of the scientific evidence on the matter”.
“I really thought the climate change debate had finished and that these voices of the very rich and well connected had lost relevance in the whole argument,” said Dr Tim Thornton, a recently retired GP from Yorkshire who made one of the complaints. “It’s fine that they don’t like the idea of climate change but they are on a par with flat-earthers.”
Thornton highlighted the claim that global temperatures had not risen: “Even a sixth-former would be able to tell you that wasn’t so. So the BBCinterviewer, if they are talking about climate change, should have done a little bit of homework.”
In his letter to Thornton, Colin Tregear, BBC complaints director, said: “I hope you’ll accept my apologies, on behalf of the BBC, for the breach of editorial standards you identified.”
Bob Ward, policy director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change at the London School of Economics, welcomed the upholding of the complaint but said: “There needs to be a shift in BBC policy so that these news programmes value due accuracy as much as due impartiality.
“As well as taking account of the rights of marginal voices like Lord Lawson to be heard, the BBC should also take account of the harm that its audiences can experience from the broadcast of inaccurate information,” said Ward. “His inaccurate assertion that there has been no change in extreme weather was harmful to the programme’s listeners because they may have been misled into believing that they do not need to take precautions against the increasing risk of heatwaves and flooding from heavy rainfall in the UK.”
Lawson did not respond to the Guardian’s request for comment.
Neither the Global Warming Policy Forum or its charitable arm, the Global Warming Policy Foundation, disclose the source of their funding. On their websites, the groups state: “In order to make clear its complete independence, it does not accept gifts from either energy companies or anyone with a significant interest in an energy company.”
The programme in August featuring the interview with Lawson also included an interview with Al Gore, the former US vice president and climate campaigner, who discussed his new film An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, and another interview with the director Fisher Stevens, who made Before the Flood, also about climate change, starring Leonardo DiCaprio.
The BBC complaints team told Thornton that “the BBC accepts there is broad scientific agreement on climate change” and that “the global climate is changing and the change is predominantly manmade”. The complaints unit said a 2011 review by the BBC Trust had made clear “the requirement to avoid the impression a minority view stands on the same footing as the views of climate scientists”.
Simon Bullock, at Friends of the Earth, said: “It was a real choke-on-cornflakes interview, with Lord Lawson’s misleading climate-denial views given undue weight, and passing unchallenged. After this ruling hopefully the BBC will now move the climate debate on to how to stop our planet warming, not denying that it is happening.”
October 25, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
climate change, media, UK |
1 Comment
Dundee Courier 24th Oct 2017,Radiation levels around Rosyth dockyard increased last year according to
the latest monitoring report. Levels across the UK were well within dose
limits, said the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) following
the publication of its Radioactivity in Food and the Environment (RIFE 22)
Report.
However, local SNP MSP Douglas Chapman has made a renewed call for
the “excruciatingly slow” timescale for dismantling Rosyth’s seven
redundant nuclear submarines to be hastened. Mr Chapman, said: “It’s
encouraging that SEPA’s latest report shows radioactivity doses are well
within limits.
“However, Rosyth should not be a sanctuary for toxic
submarines and this is something I have raised in Parliament as
constituents are fed-up with the subs rotting in their own backyard. Yes,
they are to be dismantled and removed, but the timescale is excruciatingly
slow. “‘I’m encouraging SEPA to progress its work with the MoD to
manage the area effectively and help rid Rosyth of the subs so that the
space in the dockyard basin can be used for more economically productive
uses.”
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/local/fife/530843/calls-made-to-speed-up-excrutiatingly-slow-nuclear-submarine-dismantling-process-at-rosyth
October 25, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, UK, wastes |
Leave a comment
Times 22nd Oct 2017, The emergency removal of unstable chemicals from Sellafield yesterday hasraised fresh concerns over safety at the nuclear site.
Army bomb disposal specialists were called to the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Cumbria
after a routine audit found canisters of potentially explosive solventsdating back to the early 1990s.
Officials sought to reassure the public that it was “not a radiological event” and that the solvents had been
safely destroyed in two controlled explosions. However, one expert who
spoke on condition of anonymity claimed that although the solvents were not
radioactive they had been kept in the main laboratory near far more
dangerous materials. “This substance was in a dangerous oxidised state and
if it had exploded in that location it had the potential to distribute
radioactive material over the site and beyond,” the engineer said.
“Sellafield appears to be downplaying the severity of it to the public.”
The chemicals are understood to include tetrahydrofuran, an organic solvent
that can become unstable when exposed to air. Sellafield Ltd, part of the
government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, said that after the
disposal the site was “working as it would be on any other Saturday“.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/sellafield-chemicals-scare-defused-by-army-98pkzxcln
October 23, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
incidents, UK |
Leave a comment
Evacuations after emergency at UK nuclear plant, explosives experts rush to scene, BOMB disposal specialist have been called to the Sellafield nuclear plant to deal with a chemical incident. Sunday Express, By SIMON OSBORNE, Oct 21, 2017 “…….Initial reports suggest the incident involved five bottles containing a number of non-nuclear chemicals. …..”An operational decision will be taken in due course on how best to dispose of the material.”
Sellafield reprocesses and stores nearly all of Britain’s nuclear waste.
There have been safety concerns at the plant after a tip-off from a whistleblower, including allegations of inadequate staffing levels and poor maintenance.
The programme discovered that liquid containing plutonium and uranium has been kept in thousands of plastic bottles for years. The bottles were only intended for temporary storage and some of them are degrading.
Researchers were was also told that parts of the facility are dangerously rundown.
Sellafield insisted the site in Cumbria is safe and has been improved with significant investment in recent years. http://www.express.co. uk/news/uk/869238/sellafield- nuclear-reprocessing-plant- chemical-alert-bomb-disposal- experts
October 23, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
incidents, UK |
Leave a comment
Designs for ‘mini’ nuclear power plants proposed by Rolls-Royce led group set to be given go-ahead, Telegraph Alan Tovey 22 OCTOBER 2017
An important report assessing the viability of new “mini” nuclear power plants for the UK to be published this week is expected to give the green light to develop designs proposed by a British consortium led by Rolls-Royce.
The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is set to issue a study which formally ends a competition between different types of low-carbon power generation to assess which should be supported.
Industry sources say a concurrent Techno-Economic Assessment for the government by EY concludes that designs for small nuclear reactors (SMRs) from the Rolls consortium are the more likely to succeed.
October 23, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, technology, UK |
Leave a comment
Largs and Millport News 20th Oct 2017, A seaweed solution is being sought by EDF Energy to prevent cooling water being clogged up with seaweed. Hunterston B has made an application to
Marine Scotland to remove seaweed from the seabed next to the cooling water
intake jetty to help to reduce the amount of seaweed entering the cooling
water system. The consultation period on the application has ended,
responses have been received and the station is awaiting a license decision
from Marine Scotland.
Two years ago, a reactor at the nuclear power station
had to be taken offline due to high levels of seaweed in the waters around
the plant. The plant relies on water taken from the sea for cooling. Back
in 2015, in a letter to stakeholders, station director Colin Weir said:
“Hunterston B power station’s reactor 3 was manually shut down at 18.40
on Monday 1 June due to severe seaweed ingress, accompanied by strong winds
and storm surges. “This was done as a precautionary measure when it was
clear that the seaweed levels weren’t reducing. “Reactor 4 was also
reduced in power and remains operating at a reduced power.”
Mr Weir said staff at the station were monitoring the weather and seaweed levels would
begin the return to normal service when it was determined conditions were
“in a stable state”. At the time, cooling to the reactor was maintained
at all times and there were no health, safety or environmental impacts.
http://www.largsandmillportnews.com/news/15607469.Seaweed_solution_sought_for_Hunterston_B/
October 23, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, UK |
Leave a comment
Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole, Crowd Justice, https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/keep-cumbrian-coal-in-the-hole/ 20 Oct 17 , by Keep Cumbrian Coal in the Hole Group of Cumbrians opposed to the first deep coal mine in the UK for 30 years.
OLD KING COAL RESURRECTED?
There is a statue in Whitehaven, a poignant memorial to coal miners who lost their lives.
“End of an Era” …..Only apparently it isnt!
Now there is a plan to expand the dangerous Whitehaven mines with undersea coal mining. There has been lots of greenwashing heaped on the plan by West Cumbria Mining to reopen Whitehaven coal mine, the most gaseous, dangerous pit in the Kingdom. In 1815, Sir Humphrey Davy’s invention of the miner’s safety lamp was first tested in Whitehaven Coking Coal Mine because of its reputation for “firedamp” (methane) and fatal explosions.
That was in the pre atomic age. Now in the same area, just 8km away we have the most dangerous nuclear site in the world, Sellafield. “Windscale – later renamed Sellafield, 8km away is too close”
What People are Saying:
“We are particularly concerned in regard to the potential impact upon the wider marine and coastal environment of the discharge of water into the sea, which has been pumped from the flooded anhydrite mine.” National Trust
“ The application site is in proximity (Solway Firth 1.5km) to a European designated site (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites), and therefore has the potential to affect its interest features.”Natural England
“The impact of any level of subsidence upon the terrestrial or marine heritage assets and designated sites and landscapes could be significant and permanent, therefore having a detrimental impact ..The history of contamination of watercourses in the areas raises concerns for some local residents in relation to the impact of the development on the complex hydrology of the area.” Colourful Coast Partnership
“Our position is to object to the proposed development on the grounds of the adverse impact on groundwater, surface water and biodiversity.”Environment Agency
“It is clear that this is a very large mine, with a very long life span…of 20-50 years and a peak of 2.8 million tonnes a year. Assuming a 40 year life (following construction), and an average of 2 million tonnes a year, that is a total production of 80 million tonnes, which will emit around 175 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. The level of emissions and proposed life-time of the mine is of major concern….We would also query whether or not there has been robust enough analysis of the potential for seismicity (and subsidence) relating to well-known nuclear facilities in the wider area, including Sellafield and proposed new facility at Moorside? What potential is there for seismicity to effect these and other facilities (including the low level waste repository at Drigg) and the possible high level waste radioactive waste facility which has been proposed in West Cumbria for some time.” Friends of the Earth
“The application should be rejected because it is not in the national interest. From reviewing the documents submitted by West Cumbria Mining it is clear that the intention is to export the coal to Europe and Asia…The application to mine is too close to the Sellafield nuclear site and the proposal for another nuclear power station at Moorside. Underground mining can have a significant impact on the surrounding areas, recently a coking coal mine in Russia triggered an earthquake.” Coal Action Network
Just some of the “Star Species” found in this Heritage Coast and Marine Conservation Zone are listed by the RSPB as: Fulmar, Guillemot, Herring Gull, Kittiwake, Razorbill and so many more that would be impacted on by the plan for a new coal mine with possible subsidence of the Irish Sea bed impacting on food sources such as sandeels (and not to mention disturbing decades of Sellafield discharges which have settled there).
There are so many reasons to oppose this coal mine plan. That is why we are
campaigning hard to stop the plan.
TAKE ACTION
Specialist law firm,
Leigh Day have agreed to help which is amazing. So we are raising funds for the cost for counsel to provide a written Opinion on Potential Grounds for Judicial Review. This is to ensure that we will still have a chance of stopping the coal mine plan should Cumbria County Council ignore the advice of Natural England, the National Trust, Coal Action Network, the Environment Agency, Colourful Coast Partnership, Friends of the Earth and others and rubberstamp the plan.
by West Cumbria Mining for the new Woodhouse Colliery (planning application number 4/17/9007 )
Cumbria County Council is scheduled to be making a decision on the 24th of January, 2018. The decision will be taken by the Development Control Committee. Their contact details are
here . The more letters they get the better. If you feel you can speak in opposition to the plan on the 24th of January then please do, whether as an individual or as a member of a group. The meeting is open to public participation and you can register to speak by contacting
Cumbria County Council.
We need to stop this diabolic plan for a new coal mine dangerously near Sellafield, if you can help in ANY way either by donation or by action then the better chance we have.
October 21, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, UK |
Leave a comment
Platts 17th Oct 2017, UK annual inflation hit 3% in September for the first time since March
2012, up from 2.9% in August, the Office for National Statistics said
Tuesday. Monthly CPI as published by the ONS is used as an input in strike
prices awarded to low-carbon projects under the Contracts for Difference
regime. One of the early commercial agreements was for the Hinkley Point C
nuclear power station. LCCC data show the initial GBP89.50/MWh ($118/MWh)
strike price for the plant (2012 money) has risen GBP7.64/MWh to
GBP97.14/MWh. This initial strike price assumes a second EDF project at
Sizewell C proceeds. If not, the initial strike price rises to
GBP92.50/MWh. https://www.platts.com/latest-news/electric-power/london/uk-inflation-hits-3-in-september-strike-price-26822470
October 20, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, UK |
Leave a comment
nuclear-news 