British churches going for renewable energy
Hundreds of UK churches set to go green, switch to renewable energy-charities LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – More than 400 churches in the United Kingdom plan to switch to clean energy providers for their light and heat, shifting spending of 1 million pounds ($1.4 million) to renewables from fossil fuels, two Christian charities said on Wednesday.
The move is part of the Big Church Switch, an initiative launched in February by charities Christian Aid and Tearfund, which urged UK churches and households to use clean sources of energy instead of carbon-emitting fossil fuels.
Their online platform connects those who sign up with energy experts, promising to find them the best renewable deal by negotiating with energy providers.
“As individuals and churches we have a choice in how we treat the earth, how we spend our money, how we power our homes and our buildings,” David Walker, the Anglican bishop of Manchester, said in a statement.
“By creating technology which can turn wind and sunshine into clean and renewable energy, humans continue to benefit from the gift of creation. Making the most of this bountiful harvest is a common sense way for us to roll back the ravages of climate change and ensure we are taking an active role in being part of the solution.”……..http://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-renewables-church-idUSKCN0WW1QG
Transatlantic flights with nuclear waste cargo – an unacceptable danger
“Nuclear waste should be dealt with as close to where it is produced as possible rather than risking transporting it in ships or planes. This waste will remain dangerous for tens of thousands of years. The consequences of an accident during transit would be horrific.”
the proposed shipment sent an “open invitation to terrorists keen to get their hands on this prime terrorist material”.
Campaigners condemn UK Government for playing transatlantic nuclear ping-pong,
Herald Scotland, MICHAEL SETTLE, 31 Mar 16 CAMPAIGNERS have denounced the UK Government’s decision to play “transatlantic nuclear ping-pong” by agreeing a deal to transport 700 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium fuel from Dounreay in Caithness to the US.
The SNP’s Paul Monaghan, the local MP, said he too was deeply concerned by the development and is to demand assurances from David Cameron about the safety of the transportation, which he believes will involve up to nine flights from Wick airport using huge American c-130 Galaxy aircraft.
“Wick airport is not built for that kind of aircraft. I’m very concerned about the prospect of the planes flying over the town,” declared the backbencher.
Mr Monaghan stressed that the highly-enriched uranium fuel, which he said had originated from the former soviet state of Georgia, could only be used for nuclear weapons.
Claiming the Prime Minister had “obfuscated” in his replies when asked previously about the planned shipment of nuclear fuel from Dounreay to the US, the Nationalist MP said the safety of local people was his “paramount concern” and that the UK Government, through its lack of clarity, was “abrogating its responsibility to the people of Scotland”.
Mr Cameron is due formally to announce the deal when he attends an international nuclear security summit in Washington DC tomorrow. It will involve the largest ever shipment of radioactive material from the UK to America, which in turn will send a different form of the nuclear element to Euratom, the European atomic agency, for conversion in France into medical isotopes to be used in European hospitals for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
A UK Government source said: “It’s a win-win; we get rid of waste and we get back something that will help us to fight cancer.”
But Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland, said: “Only the nuclear industry could think it was a good idea to risk playing ping pong with large quantities of one of the most dangerous materials on the planet across the Atlantic.
He added: “Nuclear waste should be dealt with as close to where it is produced as possible rather than risking transporting it in ships or planes. This waste will remain dangerous for tens of thousands of years. The consequences of an accident during transit would be horrific.”
John Finnie, justice spokesman for the Scottish Greens, dismissed the UK Government’s attempt to present the proposal to send dangerous nuclear waste across the Atlantic as helping in the fight against cancer as “at best misleading and at worst cynical”.
He added: “Moving such a large amount of toxic waste shows callous disregard for the safety of people in the Highlands. There must be better ways to fight cancer than sending dangerous uranium on an 11,000 kilometre round trip.”
Whitehall has, for security reasons, not confirmed the details of the transportation or the timescale.
Last year, the Sunday Herald broke the story about a “secret plan” to ship nuclear material from Dounreay to America.
The report said the plan was for nearly five kilograms of enriched uranium to be transported by sea from Caithness to the US Government’s nuclear complex at Savannah River in South Carolina.
The material was said to have come from a research institute in Mtskheta, some six miles from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, in a secretive US operation codenamed Auburn Endeavour in April 1998. Washington was said to have been worried at the time that it could have fallen into the hands of Chechen gangs or Iran.
However, the proposed UK Government plan is to ship not five kilograms but 700kg or more than 110 stones of the nuclear material.
At the time of “secret plan” report one anti-nuclear campaigner warned the proposed shipment sent an “open invitation to terrorists keen to get their hands on this prime terrorist material”……..http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14395623.Campaigners_condemn_UK_Government_for_playing_transatlantic_nuclear_ping_pong/
US and UK to do cyber attack tests on a nuclear power plant
 UK and US to simulate cyber-attack on nuclear plants to test resilienceCountries plan to cooperate by exploring the resilience of nuclear infrastructure to a terrorist attack, Guardian, Heather Stewart, 31 Mar 16 Britain and the US will stage a war-game later this year, simulating a cyber attack on a nuclear power plant, to test the readiness of the government and utility firms.As David Cameron prepares to fly to Washington to attend a nuclear security summit, convened by Barack Obama, government sources said the two countries plan to cooperate on exploring the resilience of nuclear infrastructure to a terrorist attack……. Separately, Cameron is also set to announce an exchange deal with the US, which will see the UK ship 700kg (110st) of nuclear waste, most of it currently stored at Dounreay, in Scotland, to be processed in America.
Cameron will also commit to spend £10bn this year to fund the world of agencies including the IAEA, on improving the security of civil nuclear infrastructure worldwide. Over lunch on Friday, the world leaders will discuss “scenario-planning” for protecting their nuclear facilities, and preventing volatile nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands…….http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/31/uk-us-simulate-cyber-attack-nuclear-plants-test-resilience
|
EDF senior engineers call for delay in UK Hinkley nuclear power development
Dissenting EDF engineers urge delay to Hinkley nuclear project Complexity makes completion date unrealistic, argues report, but French group sticks to timetable Ft.com : By Michael Stothard in Paris, 29 Mar 16,
Senior engineers at French utility EDF have called for at least a two year delay at the controversial Hinkley Point nuclear project in the UK and recommended a redesign of the reactor technology.
An internal white paper written by dissenting EDF engineers, which has been seen by the Financial Times, argues that Hinkley Point is so complex and untested that the company should announce a later completion date than the target of 2025.
The paper, circulated among top executives, said that the “realistic service date was 2027” due to the size of the project, continuing design modifications to the European Pressurised Reactor system and the “very low” competency of French supplier Areva in making some of the large components……..
The unsigned white paper was written after Mr Piquemal’s resignation by a group of senior engineers and other dissidents, according to people with knowledge of the document. The company plans to make the final investment decision on the project at a board meeting on May 11……..
The paper also addresses wider fears that the Hinkley project will in any case not be completed by 2025 and might suffer years of construction delays.
One person on the EDF board who had read the white paper said: “Few believe that we can build this [Hinkley Point] by 2025 any more.”…….
Three people close to the company said that CGN, EDF’s Chinese partner for Hinkley, also feared possible delays, attempting to insert a clause so it would take on a lower financial risk if there were a large problem.
In the case of a £5bn cost overrun, despite EDF having a 66.5 per cent stake in the project, EDF would be liable for 80 per cent of the additional costs, according to a document sent by the EDF finance department to the board’s audit committee in January…….https://next.ft.com/content/2ef61abe-f5b1-11e5-96db-fc683b5e52db
Britain now boasts world’s largest floating solar energy farm
World’s biggest floating solar farm powers up outside London
Five years in planning and due to be finished in early March, more than 23,000 solar panels will be floated on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir near Heathrow and used to generate power for local water treatment plants Guardian, Fiona Harvey, 29 Feb 16 On a vast manmade lake on the outskirts of London, work is nearing completion on what will soon be Europe’s largest floating solar power farm – and will briefly be the world’s biggest.
But few are likely to see the 23,000 solar panels on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir at Walton-on-Thames, which is invisible to all but Heathrow passengers and a few flats in neighbouring estates.
“This will be the biggest floating solar farm in the world for a time – others are under construction,” said Angus Berry, energy manager for Thames Water, which owns the site. “We are leading the way, but we hope that others will follow, in the UK and abroad.”
Five years in planning and due to be finished in early March, the £6m project will generate enough electricity to power the utility’s local water treatment plants for decades. The energy will help provide clean drinking water to a populace of close to 10 million people in greater London and the south-east of England, a huge and often unrecognised drain on electricity, rather than nearby homes.
Why put solar panels on water? The answer, according to Berry, is that the water is there, and might as well be used for this purpose. Floating panels, covering only about 6% of the reservoir, will have no impact on the ecosystem, he says………
A similar floating solar farm with around half the capacity of the Thames Water project is being built by water company United Utilities on a reservoir near Manchester. Construction of an even bigger farm – at 13.7MW more than twice the QEII farm – is underway on a reservoir in land-scarce Japanand due to finish in 2018…….
Putting solar panels on the water for the QEII scheme has not required planning permission, though big arrays of similar panels on land require official sanction. The government has decided to ban farmers who put solar arrays on agricultural land from receiving EU subsidies for the land.
More than 23,000 solar panels will be floated by developer Lightsource Renewable Energy at the reservoir near Walton-on-Thames, representing 6.3MW of capacity, or enough to generate the equivalent electricity consumption of about 1,800 homes…….http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/29/worlds-biggest-floating-solar-farm-power-up-outside-london
Terrorism threat to Britain’s nuclear facilities is increasing – warns Nuclear Regulator
Nuclear watchdog warns of terrorist threat to UK reactors As Hinkley Point hangs in balance, strategic plan acknowledges security risks Independent, Mark Leftly Associate business editor @MLeftly 26 March 2016
Britain’s nuclear industry is under threat from cyber-attacks, terrorism and state-sponsored espionage, regulators have warned.
Buried in the Office for Nuclear Regulation’s 2016-20 strategic plan are bleak references to the growing threat of attack on Britain’s 15 operational reactors, which account for nearly a fifth of the country’s electricity. The Independent has established this is the first time that the ONR has explicitly acknowledged the growing terrorist threat to the nuclear industry.
The document states: “The threat of terrorism in the nuclear sector will continue to be managed proportionately and effectively through national and international capabilities. The capabilities of potential adversaries to operate in cyberspace will continue to grow.”
At the top of a list of the industry’s corporate risks, the ONR writes: “Failure to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of sensitive information and assets from both known and emerging security threats to the UK nuclear infrastructure (eg, cyber-attacks, terrorist activity, state-sponsored espionage).”
In another reference, it says: “We recognise the world is increasingly globalised and digitised, where both the terrorist threat and the risks from cyberspace are changing. The Government and duty-holders have well-developed security capabilities to deter and defend against organisations and individuals that might conspire to attack or exploit the nuclear estate. ONR will continue to work with the Government to ensure that security-focused regulations evolve to remain fit for purpose and align with safety regulation.”
The news comes at a sensitive time, with French giant EDF weighing up whether to risk its balance sheet on building a £24.5bn reactor at Hinkley Point on the Somerset coast. This is supposed to herald a new generation of nuclear power plants, which are needed to bridge the UK’s yawning energy gap, but EDF has delayed a final investment decision until May. There are also reports that the Isis terrorists who attacked Brussels might have planned to steal radioactive materials from a Belgian nuclear plant to build a bomb.
John Large, the nuclear expert who warned in a 2014 report for the French authorities that reactors are highly vulnerable to drone attacks, said the admission was “a step forward”, but warned: “It might be too late. The problem is that the plants were designed in the 1950s and 1960s and those designs ignored terrorism. That’s one of the problems they [the nuclear industry] face. ……..
Clive Lewis, a shadow Energy minister, pointed out that the ONR’s admission comes shortly after news that the Civil Nuclear Constabulary will be cut by about 200 officers by 2020, despite government promises to protect police funding. ….. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/exclusive-nuclear-watchdog-warns-of-terrorist-threat-to-uk-reactors-a6953396.html
China wants big involvement in construction of Hinkley Point C nuclear station
China wants hands-on role in UK nuclear, Building.co UK 24 March 2016 | By Yoosof Farah China General Nuclear says it wants to bring “expertise and experience” to UK
The Chinese nuclear developer part-funding Hinkley Point C has said it wants to be heavily involved in the construction of new nuclear plants in the UK.
Speaking to MPs on the Energy Select Committee, Zhu Minhong, general director of UK nuclear projects at China General Nuclear (CGN), said that in addition to its investment in EDF’s Somerset plant, his firm wants to bring its “expertise and experience” to Hinkley and further nuclear schemes in the UK.
At the same committee session EDF’s UK chief executive Vince de Rivaz was girlled by MPs over when the French client will make a final investment decision on Hinkley.
De Rivaz began his appearance by saying “clearly and categorically” that Hinkley Point C will go ahead, but he refused to commit to a date for when a decision will be made.
Under CGN’s funding deal with EDF, the Chinese nuclear giant has already agreed to help fund Hinkley and to partner on construction of further plants at Sizewell in Suffolk and Bradwell in Essex. At Bradwell CGN is expected to lead on development and construction itself.
Minhong told MPs the final terms of CGN’s funding deal with EDF for Hinkley is “practically completed” and the firm is “confident” it will go ahead. CGN has a 33% stake in the £18bn project. In China……..http://www.building.co.uk/news/china-wants-hands-on-role-in-uk-nuclear/5080898.article
UK govt getting resigned to the likely scrapping of Hinkley Point C nuclear project
U.K. Sees No Power `Black Hole’ If EDF Scraps Nuclear Plan,Bloomberg, Alex Morales AlexJFMorales 24 Mar 16 The U.K. won’t struggle to keep the lights on if Electricite de France SA decides not to proceed with its 18 billion-pound ($25 billion) plan to build a new nuclear-power plant at Hinkley Point in southwest England, Energy Secretary Amber Rudd said.
Britain has nine years to fill any gap in generation created by the loss of a 3.2-gigawatt project that could produce 7 percent of the country’s electricity supply, Rudd said in an interview Thursday.
“If there were any delay, we would have plenty of time to arrange replacements,” Rudd said after giving a speech near Rochester in southeast England. “It’s absolutely not right to think that there will be some sort of black hole in 2025.”………
EDF executives and French Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron have reiterated this month that the company will take a final decision soon to go ahead with the project. Still, the company originally said that new nuclear power would be generated by Christmas 2017, a deadline that has since slipped to 2025…….
The U.K. network operator has signed contracts for 3.6 gigawatts of reserve power that it can use to meet shortfalls. National Grid can also ask shops and factories to reduce demand during peak times to help ease pressure on the system……..
Rudd spoke after giving a speech at the U.K. end of the new 1-gigawatt BritNed interconnector, which allows electricity to flow between the Netherlands and Britain. She made the case for Britain’s continued membership of the European Union, saying that a departure would risk inflating customer energy bills by 500 million pounds a year. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-24/u-k-sees-no-power-black-hole-if-edf-scraps-nuclear-plan
Scotland’s floating wind farm will ‘store’ power
World’s first floating wind farm to ‘store’ power http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/21/world-first-floating-wind-farm-to-store-power.html Anmar Frangoul Monday, 21 Mar 2016 Statoil is to install a lithium battery based storage system at the world’s first floating wind farm off the coast of Scotland.The new system, called Batwind, is to be developed in co-operation with universities and suppliers from Scotland after a deal was signed last week between Statoil, the Scottish Government, the Offshore Renewable Energy (ORE) Catapult and Scottish Enterprise, according to a statement released on Monday.
“By developing innovative battery storage solutions, we can improve the value of wind energy for both Statoil and customers,” Stephen Bull, Statoil’s senior vice president for offshore wind, said. The system is to be installed at the end of 2018, Statoil said, and will have the battery capacity of “more than 2 million iPhones.”
Because renewable sources of energy, such as the sun and wind, do not promise a constant stream of power, storage is seen as vital in the transition to a low-carbon, renewable future. A recent report from the Carbon Trust found that energy storage has the potential to save £2.4 billion ($3.46 billion) a year by 2030.
The storage system from Statoil will be piloted at Hywind Scotland, an offshore “wind park” with five floating turbines. The park is currently being built, with electricity production set to commence at the end of 2017. Statoil say that the wind farm will be able to power roughly 20,000 homes.
“This will help maximize the renewable generation of the Hywind offshore wind farm, whilst informing the case for energy storage and demonstrating the technology’s ability to support renewables in Scotland and internationally,” Fergus Ewing, Scotland’s energy minister, said.
Rolls Royce touts “football fields” of mini nuclear reactors for Britain
The UK’s current plans for a new wave of huge nuclear power stations is spinning out of control. The first, Hinkley Point in Somerset, was set to start generating in 2017 but questions over design and financing of the £18bn, 3,200 megawatt plant have put it years behind schedule.
The scheme was thrown into further doubt earlier this month when the finance director of EDF, the French company which will build Hinkley Point, quit over fears the company’s balance sheet could not withstand the huge costs.
Rolls Royce believes a series of mini reactors – known as “small modular reactors” (SMRs) – are a more viable medium-term solution to Britain’s looming energy crisis, although the first crop of new large reactors will still need to be deployed……..
Hinkley nuclear- the wrong energy path for UK: five much better alternatives
“Hinkley is a deal that has nothing to do with market reality. Nothing to do with affordability, let alone with the ‘hard-working families’ that [energy secretary] Amber Rudd keeps bleating on about. And nothing to do with addressing our climate change responsibilities.
“By contrast, it’s got everything to do with political leaders in three nations – the UK, France and China – all of which ‘need’ Hinkley Point to happen for grubby geopolitical interests of their own.”
Five ways to power the UK that are far better than Hinkley Point http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2016/mar/18/five-ways-to-power-the-uk-that-are-far-better-than-hinkley-point
These alternatives to the troubled planned nuclear plant will be faster to build and cheaper for energy consumers, say experts, Guardian, Damian Carrington The planned £18bn nuclear reactors at Hinkley Point in Somerset are derided by critics as “one of the worst deals ever” for Britain, but defended as crucial to the UK’s energy policy by the government.
Recent resignations and financial warnings have knocked confidence in the Hinkley C deal, raising the question of whether clean energy alternatives could plug the gap. The fast-changing economics of the energy world, with renewables and other clean technologies falling in cost, indicate they can. The alternatives also look faster to build – it would take a decade to get Hinkley into operation – and cheaper for consumers, who ultimately foot the bills.
Energy policy expert Jonathan Gaventa, from the thinktank E3G, has come up with five better ways of powering the nation:
Energy efficiency
Electricity demand is already falling. The Somerset site for Hinkley C was approved in 2010 but since then UK demand has already fallen by more than the plant will produce, about 25TWh a year or 7% of today’s demand. Due to repeated delays, Hinkley C is unlikely to produce electricity much before 2030, by which time six Hinkleys’ worth of electricity could have been cut from the national demand, according to a McKinsey report for the government.
Wind turbines
Wind power generation equivalent to one Hinkley has been connected to the national grid since 2010. Onshore wind power, having dropped 20% in cost over the last five years, is much cheaper than the heavily subsidised price Hinkley is guaranteed for over 35 years. The costs of offshore wind are also falling and likely to be below Hinkley well before 2030.
Solar power
Electricity from solar power is now also cheaper than Hinkley, having fallen by half in the last five years. From almost no solar panels in the UK, a third of a Hinkley has been added since 2010. Half of that was delivered in just 18 months, according to government statistics. [excellent graph]
Cost of silicon photovoltaic solar cells,
Interconnectors
Another third of a Hinkley has been added to the UK grid since 2010 by new cables to other European countries, where electricity is currently cheaper. New interconnectors to Norway, Denmark and France could be laid by 2025, adding another two or three Hinkleys to the grid, according to a report for the UK’s National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) in February.
Storage and flexibility
Another NIC report for the government found that four Hinkleys’ worth of electricity could be saved by 2030 by increasing the ability to store electricity, inlarge batteries for example, and making the grid smarter. This would also save bill payers £8bn a year.
“It is clear that a combination of efficiency, renewables, interconnection and flexibility would be more than enough to fill the gap if Hinkley C is withdrawn – and could do so more quickly, more reliably and more cheaply,” says Gaventa.
“It is clear that a combination of efficiency, renewables, interconnection and flexibility would be more than enough to fill the gap if Hinkley C is withdrawn – and could do so more quickly, more reliably and more cheaply,” says Gaventa.
So why isn’t Hinkley dead already? Many energy policy experts are baffled. But veteran green campaigner Jonathan Porritt, who chaired the UK’s sustainable development commission for a decade, thinks he knows: “Hinkley is a deal that has nothing to do with market reality. Nothing to do with affordability, let alone with the ‘hard-working families’ that [energy secretary] Amber Rudd keeps bleating on about. And nothing to do with addressing our climate change responsibilities.
“By contrast, it’s got everything to do with political leaders in three nations – the UK, France and China – all of which ‘need’ Hinkley Point to happen for grubby geopolitical interests of their own.”
UK taxpayers up for huge liabilities if Hinkley nuclear power project goes ahead?
“The £22bn ‘poison pill’ effectively reduces the risk to zero for EDF and its backers, which is great for them. But from an outside perspective, it smacks of desperation.”
“Energy economics are changing rapidly and so the momentum is towards decentralised, smart and flexible energy systems. It is moving away from large, inflexible power plants like Hinkley. If it ever gets funded, it will be a white elephant before it is even finished and this government, with this £22bn ‘poison pill’, will have tied the next generation into paying for it, for no reason that I can understand. If it is simply political saving face, it really is pitiful.”
Hinkley Point C nuclear deal contains £22bn ‘poison pill’ for taxpayer
Public left with huge liability for a government closure of power plant before 2060 under UK’s agreement with EDF, Guardian, Damian Carrington, 18 Mar 16, The Hinkley nuclear power deal contains a “poison pill” which could leave taxpayers with a £22bn bill if a future UK government closed the plant before 2060, according to an official document seen by the Guardian.
The huge liability shows Hinkley is a “terrible deal” for the UK public, according to critics, with the company also guaranteed three times today’s price for electricity for 35 years. The project has recently been battered by financial warnings and resignations at its prime backer EDF, although on Thursday France’s economics minister, Emmanuel Macron, said that the French state would bail the company out.
The deal the UK government has agreed with EDF, set out in an unpublicised “minute”, commits the British public to pay subsidies of up to about £40bn in real terms and provides state guarantees on nuclear waste disposal and insurance, while allowing the plant to begin producing electricity as late as 2033.
A shutdown that triggers the “poison pill” compensation is not entirely within the control of the UK government but could also be forced by the EU or an international regulator such as the International AtomicEnergy Agency, according to the document. [ EU par inserted here on original]
“This is a dreadful agreement for the nation,” said Prof Catherine Mitchell, an energy policy expert at the University of Exeter. “The government is already paying a high price, index-linked for an incredibly long 35 years. This should be more than sufficient for a professional, business contract.
“The £22bn ‘poison pill’ effectively reduces the risk to zero for EDF and its backers, which is great for them. But from an outside perspective, it smacks of desperation.”
“There could be so many reasons over 35 years that you would want to close the plant,” she said, including rising costs, changes to the UK’s energy system or loss of public confidence.
Green party MP Caroline Lucas said: “Even before we knew about this ‘poison pill’, Hinkley represented a terrible deal for taxpayers and a huge burden on bill payers too. This flies in the face of relentless ministerial rhetoric on value for consumers – especially compared to the costs of solar power and wind – which are already cheaper than nuclear and continue to fall.”………
Former Conservative energy secretary Lord Howell has criticised the Hinkley dealas “one of the worst deals ever” for British consumers and industry and has protested against “endless government guarantees for risk-free returns to the investors”.
Tom Burke at thinktank E3G, a former special adviser to three Conservative environment secretaries, said: “Why would a Conservative government want to buy 35 years of electricity ahead of time? They are supposed to believe in the market. But they have tied themselves in knots and now it is too embarrassing to untie it.”
The UK government argues that new nuclear power is essential to provide large amounts of reliable, low-carbon energy.
But Mitchell said: “Energy economics are changing rapidly and so the momentum is towards decentralised, smart and flexible energy systems. It is moving away from large, inflexible power plants like Hinkley. If it ever gets funded, it will be a white elephant before it is even finished and this government, with this £22bn ‘poison pill’, will have tied the next generation into paying for it, for no reason that I can understand. If it is simply political saving face, it really is pitiful.” http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/18/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-deal-22bn-poison-pill-taxpayer
UK Members of Parliament to question EDF executives about Hinkley nuclear project financing
EDF Energy to be grilled by MPs over Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant , City AM. 17 Mar 16 EDF Energy will be grilled by a group of MPs next week over the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant in Somerset.
EDF’s chief executive Vincent de Rivaz, and managing director of new nuclear build Humphrey Cadoux-Hudson, will appear before the energy and climate change select committee on Wednesday.
It comes as French economy minister Emmanuel Macron pledged fresh financing for the £18bn project during a visit to a nuclear power plant there today.
EDF has been forced to defend Hinkley after its chief financial officer Thomas Piquemal resigned over the huge costs. It subsequently sent a letter to employees reiterating confidence that the project will go ahead.
“The hearing will give EDF Energy an opportunity to answer the committee’s questions on the investment plans for a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C in Somerset,” it said in a statement today……..http://www.cityam.com/237033/edf-energy-to-be-grilled-by-mps-over-hinkley-point-c-nuclear-power-plant
Nuclear risks don’t go away: future for UK nuclear is bleak
Pro-nuclear governments try to shield the nuclear operator from these risks, if possible. They protect the nuclear operator from lawsuits (reducing insurance costs). They guarantee debt (reducing interest
costs). In the U.S. they tend to pass on unexpected (but prudently incurred) costs to the consumer.
That leads to our second point: these measures do not reduce risk, they just shift it. The risk never goes away. The government and consumer now bear part of it. But consumers do not take out nuclear risk policies with semi-annual payments. They do not see the cost so it doesn’t exist for them until the electricity bill goes up. In the same way, government can deny the costs of acting as an insurer of last resort because no line item appears in the budget to cover the costs until an accident happens (that’s the way a Congressional staffer explained it once at a meeting on the future of nuclear power).
5 years after Fukushima: Nuclear power prospects dim http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/03/15/5-years-after-fukushima-nuclear-power-prospects-dim/81553524/ Leonard Hyman and William Tilles, Oilprice.com March 15, 2016 Five years after a devastating earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident at Fukushima that killed thousands and displaced many more, the Japanese are still cleaning up, people still cannot return to their homes and, possibly the least important statistic, Tokyo Electric Power’s shares sell at one quarter of the pre-accident price.
Roughly five years ago, the British government and French utility EDF began a process to build another nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point, an investment still awaiting the approval of EDF’s board. As odd as it seems, the tragic disaster and botched business deal have a common thread (other than the fact that EDF shares sell at one-third of their 2011 price): the role of government in nuclear power. Continue reading
Political importance to world’s nuclear powers, of getting Hinkley project happening
“The governments of the UK, France, and China have invested huge amounts of political capital in seeing Hinkley Point C come to the point of construction,” he said.
“This political capital lies with the public, convincing them that nuclear is part of a low-carbon future; [with the] the financial institutions, convincing them that when the UK makes a decision it sticks to it and hence the UK is an investable proposition; and with international governments—when the UK makes an international agreement it is binding.”
The UK’s Next Nuclear Power Plant Could Collapse Before It’s Built Motherboard, BY NICOLE KOBIE 15 March 2016 The UK could face power outages and missing emissions targets if the nuclear plant isn’t built – but that doesn’t mean it should be
Nuclear power stations are always controversial, but the UK’s proposed Hinkley Point C is particularly so. It may well be the most expensive object ever built; it guarantees higher power bills; and it’s already taken down executives, despite construction yet to start.
Hinkley Point C is set to be the first new nuclear power station built in the UK since 1995, poised to hit the grid as older nuclear sites and coal are ditched. However, its high costs are now leaving the project—and the future of the UK’s power supply—in danger.
Set to be built in Somerset by energy company EDF, which is majority-owned by the French government, there’s a chance Hinkley Point C may collapse before it’s built, and it’s nothing to do with protesters or environmental complaints. The problem with Hinkley is money: its costs risen to £18 billion ($25 billion)—with some projecting the final cost to be £24 billion ($34 billion)—and EDF has yet to finalise funding. Though it is expected to sign off on the project soon, financial analysts stressed last week that EDF can’t afford to build it.
The delays may already cause shortages in the UK’s electricity supply as it’s currently planned, which would naturally worsen if the project fails to get off the ground. The plant is supposed to start operations in 2025, when several older nuclear sites are decommissioned and the deadline hits for shutting down coal plants. Tony Roulstone, a professor setting up the University of Cambridge’s new MPhil in nuclear energy, believes the project will take ten years to construct, and given work isn’t expected to start until 2018 or 2019, will miss its deadline. “This will put the UK in a difficult position because they were counting on electricity from Hinkley by 2025,” Roulstone said.
“As some have said, the UK does not have a plan B,” he added. “The AGRs [advanced gas-cooled reactors, which make up most of the UK power stations] will close down by 2030 and at that stage we would have just one nuclear power station, Sizewell B.”
Hinkley Point C is expected to provide 7 percent of the UK’s energy. At the moment, about a fifth of the UK’s power comes from the eight currently-operating nuclear plants, but seven of those are due to be decommissioned. That, alongside theplanned closure of coal plants, which make up 22 percent of our power today, led the Institution of Mechanical Engineers to claim in a report we could see a potential supply gap of 40 to 55 percent by 2025…………..
EDF is set to make a final decision on funding the project soon, ahead of a board meeting in April, after multiple delays. However, back in February the project’s director, Chris Bakken, stepped down to “pursue new professional opportunities,” and more recently the company’s finance director, Thomas Piquemal, departed, with rumours suggesting he believed the project would damage EDF’s finances too much.
The board-level turmoil might actually be a sign that EDF’s remaining executives plan to approve the project, according to Martin Freer, director of the Birmingham Centre of Nuclear Education and Research and a professor of physics at the University of Birmingham. “My take on the resignation of the chief of finance signals that the HPC [Hinkley Point C] decision is being pushed through against the judgement of financial caution,” Freer told me. “EDF are at a point in their history where they roll the dice and hope to be lucky.”
Roulstone noted that the new plant’s construction cost is the same as EDF’s capitalisation. “Only major sales of assets and/or funding by the French government can rescue EDF and hence Hinkley,” he said………
Freer suggested that there’s more than power supply and emissions targets at risk. “The governments of the UK, France, and China have invested huge amounts of political capital in seeing Hinkley Point C come to the point of construction,” he said. “This political capital lies with the public, convincing them that nuclear is part of a low-carbon future; [with the] the financial institutions, convincing them that when the UK makes a decision it sticks to it and hence the UK is an investable proposition; and with international governments—when the UK makes an international agreement it is binding.” http://motherboard.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-uks-next-nuclear-power-plant-could-collapse-before-its-built
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (92)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 