Nuclear propagandist Prof Geraldine Thomas: comfortable , but incorrect, spin on Fukushima
Is this a problem for human health? You bet it is. The question no-one asked is what is causing the excess dose? The answer is easy: radioactive contamination, principally of Caesium-137. On the basis of well-known physics relationships we can say that 3Sv/h at 1m above ground represents a surface contamination of about 900,000Bq per square metre of Cs-137. That is, 900,000 disintegrations per second in one square metre of surface: and note that they were standing on a tarmac road which appeared to be clean. And this is 5 years after the explosions. The material is everywhere, and it is in the form of dust particles which can be inhaled; invisible sparkling fairy-dust that kills hang in the air above such measurements.
The particles are not just of Caesium-137. They contain other long lived radioactivity, Strontium-90, Plutonium 239, Uranium-235, Uranium 238, Radium-226, Polonium-210, Lead-210, Tritium, isotopes of Rhodium, Ruthenium, Iodine, Cerium, Cobalt 60. The list is long.
the Japanese government wants to send the people back there. It is bribing them with money and housing assistance. It is saying, like Gerry Thomas, there is no danger. And the BBC is giving this misdirection a credible platform.
They keep the lid on the truth using ill-informed individuals like Geraldine Thomas.
Fukushima is far from being over, and the deaths have only just begun.
Is Fukushima’s nuclear nightmare over? Don’t count on it https://www.rt.com/op-edge/335362-fukushima-nuclear-japan-bbc/ Chris Busby 12 Mar 16
On the 5th Anniversary of the catastrophe, Prof Geraldine Thomas, the nuclear industry’s new public relations star, walked through the abandoned town of Ohkuma inside the Fukushima exclusion zone with BBC reporter Rupert Wingfield-Hayes.Thomas was described as “one of Britain’s leading experts on the health effects of radiation”. She is of the opinion that there is no danger and the Japanese refugees can come back and live there in the “zone”. Her main concern seemed to be how untidy it all was: “Left to rack and ruin,” she complained, sadly.
At one point, Rupert pulled out his Geiger counter and read the dose: 3 microSieverts per hour. “How much radiation would it give in a year to people who came back here,” he asked. Thomas replied: “About an extra milliSievert a year, which is not much considering you get 2mSv a year from natural background”.
“The long term impact on your health would be absolutely nothing.”
Now anyone with a calculator can easily multiply 3 microSieverts (3 x 10-6 Sv) by 24 hours and 365 days. The answer comes out to be 26 mSv (0.026Sv), not “about 1mSv” as the “leading expert on the health effects of radiation” reported.
I must personally ask if Gerry Thomas is a reliable expert; her CV shows she has published almost nothing in the way of original research, so we must ask how it is the BBC has taken her seriously. Continue reading
EDF want French tax-payers’ financial aid for UK Hinkley Point Nuclear Projectr
EDF Asks French Government for Aid for Hinkley Point Nuclear Plant CEO Jean Bernard Levy says EDF won’t engage in project without necessary commitments from state http://www.wsj.com/articles/edf-asks-french-government-for-aid-for-hinkley-point-nuclear-plant-1457797452 By INTI LANDAURO March 12, 2016
PARIS— Electricité de France SA Chief Executive Jean-Bernard Levysaid he is seeking financial support from the French government to develop the Hinkley Point nuclear plant in southern England, as the project faces fierce scrutiny following the resignation of the company’s No. 2.
In a letter sent to company employees on Friday, Mr. Levy said EDF wouldn’t engage in the £18 billion ($25.89 billion) project unless it was able to secure necessary financial commitments from the state, which holds almost 85% of the utility.
Two EDF officials who requested anonymity confirmed Mr. Levy’s comments. The letter was sent four days after Chief Financial Officer Thomas Piquemal quit unexpectedly on concerns that the project would threaten the company’s financial stability.
The Hinkley Point project is the centerpiece of a series of business deals between the U.K. and China announced last year, with China General Nuclear Power Corp. agreeing to take a 33.5% stake in it.
The past week’s letter and CFO resignation are signs that scrutiny over the project has grown, despite support from the French and U.K. governments.
Even though the conditions granted by the U.K. government—with the pledge to buy the electricity generated around three times the current market price—would make it profitable, union representatives on EDF’s board have said Hinkley Point could saddle the company with too much debt.
EDF, which has €37.4 billion ($41.70 billion) in net debt, had its credit rating put on review for a downgrade by Moody’s Investors Service last month. Also last month, EDF said it would reduce its dividend and offer stockholders part payment in shares to bolster its finances, as well as selling assets and reducing capital spending. The utility is separatelyinvolved in the financial rescue of state-controlled Areva SA, which has lost money for the past five years. EDF last year agreed to pay at least €1.25 billion for a majority stake in Areva NP, the unit that manufactures nuclear reactors.
Separately, the risk associated with the construction of EDF’s EPR reactor design also raises uncertainty about the project. To this day, no plants using the technology have been completed. The first two being built, in Finland and in northern France, have run way over budget and are years behind schedule.
Write to Inti Landauro at inti.landauro@wsj.com
How EDF taught Britons to love nuclear power, especially targeting women
Targeting women In 2012 EDF began a publicity campaign in the UK to soften up the public, which was predominantly anti-nuclear, including paying for editorial in women’s magazines because its market research found that women were more like to oppose nuclear power than men.
A complaint I made to the Advertising Standards Authority was upheld, regarding the use of advertising from EDF that was not labelled as advertising and looked like editorial, in Marie Claire – the “magazine for women who want to think smart and look amazing”. The articles were provided by EDF, under the headline “Nuclear power: the facts”, but contained inaccuracies.
Even after the ASA ruled in my favour, EDF still continued making dubious claims in the pages of the magazine, such as that in the 2030s “nuclear reactors in Somerset and Suffolk could supply around 40 per cent of the country’s energy needs”.
In its dreams, maybe. because even while this was going on the French National Audit Office had recommended abandonment of the EPR as too complex and expensive.
“The problem is, politicians like big projects. By contrast, energy efficiency, although much more beneficial, is almost invisible, and is certainly lots of small projects.”
And energy projects don’t come much bigger than nuclear power. As Jimmy Cliff might have put it: “the bigger they come, the harder they fall.”
The mystery of Britain’s love affair with new nuclear, The Fifth Estate, David Thorpe | 8 March 2016
Electricite de France’s chief financial officer Thomas Piquemal has resigned after opposing the announcement next month of a final investment decision on building a new nuclear reactor at Hinkley Point C in the UK.
EDF shares immediately dropped in value and further questions are being asked over the wisdom of proceeding with the plant, which would be the first new nuclear power station to be built in the UK in two decades. It was originally planned for completion in 2017 and is now unlikely to be built until at least 2025 – if ever. Continue reading
Labour and Nukes: conspiracy of hope killed off?
nuClear News, March 2016 Lisa Nandy, the Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change has called on the government to come up with a “Plan B” in case Hinkley Point C is never built. But instead of taking the opportunity to argue the case for more renewables she has called on the government to find cheaper ways to get more nuclear stations built in future. (1) She now wants the Government to look at new reactor types including Molten Salt Reactors, Heavy Water Reactors, and Fast Reactors (2) A far cry from Jeremy Corbyn’s manifesto last summer which pointed to the 8 countries, 55 cities and 60 regions which are planning to go 100% renewable over the next few decades which Britain should be part of. He said Britain needs the Big 60 million not the Big 6. In his interview with Greenpeace’s Energydesk he said “no” to new nuclear power stations. (3)
Letter from Stop Hinkley Campaign to EDF Energy
nuClear News Mar 16
Dear EDF Energy, We are writing to you before another EDF Board Meeting at which it is rumoured a final investment decision on Hinkley Point C could be made to urge you to scrap this project altogether.
- Debts of €37 billion (£28 billion) and its share price has fallen from €29 in April 2014 to €10.32 last week. Financing a massive project like Hinkley Point C will clearly place a significant strain on finances. (2) The union notes that the debt related to Hinkley Point C will need to be 100% fully consolidated into the EDF accounts – an amount which exceeds the market capitalization of the Group.
- EDF is now facing a €100m bill for upgrading its nuclear power stations in France according to a report by French Government auditor – the Cour des Comptes – rather than €55bn previously estimated. (3)
- EDF has also agreed to buy between 51 and 75% of the struggling French reactor builder Areva NP which is valued at €2.7bn. So will have to find at least €1.4bn for that.
- The French waste agency Andra has estimated that the cost of its deep geological disposal project could be as high as €30bn rather than the €20bn estimated by EDF. (4) French energy minister Ségolène Royal has signed a decree setting the ‘reference cost’ at €25 billion – still a jump of €5bn for EDF. (5)
Britain: Nuclear threat to renewables
We have previously reported assertions by Dr Dave Toke that spending on Hinkley Point C would obliterate spending on renewables, because of the way the Levy Control Framework is organised. (19) At the moment it looks as though the UK will miss its European target which requires us to produce around 30% of our electricity supplies from renewable resources –about 108TWh in 2020 rising to 141TWh in 2030. The current Government doesn’t appear to have any ambition to go beyond this low level of renewable supply
nuClear News Mar 16[excellent graphs on original] The Government’s National Policy Statement (NPS) on Energy, published in July 2011, foresaw a need for 113 Gigawatts (GW) of electricity generating capacity in 2025 compared with 85GW now. 59GW of this would be new capacity, of which 33GW would need to be renewable energy, mostly wind, to meet commitments to the European Union. This would leave 26GW for industry to determine. At the time there was 8GW of non-renewable capacity under construction leaving a balance of 18GW still to be determined. The Government said it wanted a substantial portion of this to be nuclear. (1)
Resignation of EDF’s finance director heralds crisis in UK Hinkley nuclear project
Hinkley Point C nuclear project in crisis as EDF finance director resigns
Proposed £18bn Somerset plant has been pushed by George Osborne but some on French company’s board fear risky spending, Guardian, Terry Macalister, 7 Mar 16, The £18bn Hinkley Point C nuclear project was in crisis on Sunday night after reports that the finance director of EDF, the company behind the scheme, had resigned.EDF tells contractors to restart work on Hinkley Point, report says
Thomas Piquemal has stood down from his post after expressing trenchant opposition to those on the EDF board who want to give the green light to the project within weeks, sources said.
The resignation of such an important figure on the EDF board will make it much harder for the remaining executives to proceed with Hinkley in the short term……..
Piquemal is said to have been arguing that pursuing what would be the world’s most expensive power project at this moment could jeopardise the French group, which already has rising debts.
Union members on the EDF board are also implacably opposed to Hinkley Point, saying it is too expensive and a risk to the energy company’s future…….http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/07/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-project-in-crisis-as-edf-finance-director-resigns?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco
Radiation exposure to 20 workers at Faslane nuclear base
Workers exposed to radiation at Faslane nuclear base, Scotsman, 5 Mar 16 Twenty workers were exposed to radiation at the Faslane nuclear base as a result of a safety breach, according to newly released documents.
The workers were inadvertently exposed to a low dose of ionising radiation as they were repairing a leaking tank on a Trident nuclear weapons submarine at the same time a nearby reactor was undergoing trials………[other radiation incidents at Faslane] ……
SNP defence spokesperson Brendan O’Hara MP said: “The MoD – once again – stands accused of a very poor approach to radiation safety at the Faslane base……..
‘’These incidents and how they were subsequently handled, pose real and serious questions , not just about nuclear safety procedures at the base – but also whether the regulator the ONR is doing enough – and quickly enough – to address these concerns.
‘’The MoD must investigate and explain why these failings occur and lay out precisely what it is doing to get it sorted.’’……..http://www.scotsman.com/news/workers-exposed-to-radiation-at-faslane-nuclear-base-1-4046659
UK govt urged to lower tax on energy efficient homes – report
Report calls for lower stamp duty on UK’s energy-efficient homes Tax should be lowered by up to £5,000, according to Policy Exchange report, which says the government is doing far too little to cut energy waste, Guardian, Damian Carrington, 2 Mar 16 The stamp duty paid on energy efficient homes should be up to £5,000 less than on leaky, hard-to-heat homes, according to a new report that says the government is doing far too little to cut energy waste.
The report is from the thinktank Policy Exchange, which is close to the government, and ministers are considering the idea. It estimates the stamp duty change would lead to 270,000 households a year improving their energy efficiency.
“Improving home energy efficiency can save households money, as well as substantially reducing their carbon emissions,” said Richard Howard, author of the report, and a former chief economist for the crown estate. “Policies which link property values more closely to energy performance could kickstart an energy efficiency revolution in this country.”
The report heavily criticises ministers, who have cut back energy efficiency programmes which are widely seen as the cheapest way to cut energy bills and meet carbon targets. “The UK still has amongst the least efficient housing stock and highest rates of fuel poverty in Europe,” it states.
The government aims to improve the insulation of 1m homes this parliament, far fewer than the 4.5m in the last parliament. It has also abandoned the failed green deal programme, which was meant to reach millions of homes with unique loans but only taken up by 16,000 households. “This leaves a major policy gap,” says the report.
The Policy Exchange proposal is to lower the stamp duty on energy efficiency homes while increasing it by the same amount on inefficient homes, meaning the tax taken by the government remains the same overall……
The report says: “There is huge potential to improve domestic energy efficiency. Research shows that a more ambitious approach to energy efficiency could deliver carbon savings of 24m tonnes of carbon dioxide a year by 2030 – equivalent to taking more than 10 million cars off the road – and save households of £8.6bn a year in energy costs.”…….
Another report published on Wednesday indicates that a roll-out of energy storage technology could save energy customers £50 a year, as well as cutting emissions on improving energy security. Energy storage technologies, from liquid air to big batteries, are developing rapidly and can store excess renewable energy and cut the need to build new power stations and lines.
The report was written by the Carbon Trust and Imperial College London and commissioned by Decc and three of the UK’s big six energy energy companies. A spokesman for one, SSE, said: “The report shows that, with the correct market structures, price signals and policy certainty, projects such as SSE’s proposed pumped storage scheme at Coire Glas can make a valuable contribution to society.” http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/02/report-calls-for-lower-stamp-duty-on-uks-energy-efficient-homes
Cornwall, UK, gets wind farm without any govt funding- community energy!
“The benefits of the Big Field wind farm are too great for it not to go ahead just because subsidies are being withdrawn. Being community-owned will ensure that the economic benefit of the wind farm can be retained locally and re-invested in Cornwall.”
Good Energy promises UK’s first subsidy-free windfarm, http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/02/good-energy-promises-uks-first-subsidy-free-windfarm Guardian, Fiona Harvey, 3 Mar 16
Green power company believes it can build onshore windfarm in Cornwall with local people helping finance it, despite government scrapping subsidies. The UK’s first onshore windfarm to be built without government subsidy is now under planning in Cornwall, to be financed in part by the local community.
The Big Field windfarm, near Bude, will consist of 11 turbines, none of more than 125m in height to the tip of the blade, and provide electricity for 22,000 homes. Its backers hope it will point the way to further such projects, after the damages to the onshore wind industry caused by the reversal of policy on government support for clean energy.
Likely to cost about £30m to build and install, Big Field is planned by the green power company Good Energy. While other wind and solar farms have been cancelled or left in limbo by the government’s scrapping of incentives for onshore wind, the company decided instead to try to raise funds locally to support the installation.
An initial application for planning permission for the turbines was filed under the previous subsidy regime. However, that was blocked, and with the withdrawal of government support for onshore wind, the plan looked at an end.
Good Energy revived its prospects with a new project that would use the same number of turbines, of the same size, but with 50% more generation capability, because of changes to the turbine technology.
The revised scheme will only go ahead if planning permission is granted, but the company is hopeful that the support of local residents in agreeing to co-finance the project will help to tip the balance. The inquiry will start in April and, if the green light is given, the windfarm could be operational in 2018.
Bill Andrews, who lives close to the site, said: “This is a very welcome development. A lot of my neighbours already support this wind farm, and giving local people the chance to invest in the project would mean the community will see even more of the benefit.”
The abrupt alterations to government support for wind and solar energy have caused severe disruption in the UK’s renewable energy industries. Thousands of jobs have been lost, companies forced to close, projects mothballed or abandoned, and future developments left in doubt.
Onshore wind technology has tumbled in price in recent years, a factor the government used to justify its withdrawal of support, but the economics of energy generation are complex. Ministers have also introduced new rules to make it more difficult to construct renewable energy projects, and increased subsidies to the fossil fuel industries through the “capacity market”.
Juliet Davenport, chief executive of Good Energy, said: “The benefits of the Big Field wind farm are too great for it not to go ahead just because subsidies are being withdrawn. Being community-owned will ensure that the economic benefit of the wind farm can be retained locally and re-invested in Cornwall.”
Good Energy said it was too early to decide how much of its own money and how much the local community would be expected to put into the project, or what returns investors could expect. However, if successful, it hopes this could provide a new blueprint for small onshore wind farms.
UK govt to spend £642 million developing new submarines for Trident nuclear missiles
Anger as £642m Trident nuclear submarines investment is confirmed, Herald Scotland, 3 Mar 16 A further £642 million will be invested in developing the new generation of submarines carrying the UK’s nuclear deterrent, Michael Fallon has confirmed.
The defence secretary said the nuclear deterrent “provides the ultimate guarantee of our security” as he announced the extra spending on the boats which will carry the Trident weapons.
But he was condemned by anti-Trident campaigners for making the announcement before MPs have had a chance to give the final go-ahead for the project……… It takes spending on the project’s assessment phase to £3.9 billion……
Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: “I ask Michael Fallon, what is the point of a parliamentary vote on Trident if the Government’s going to spend millions on replacement anyway?
“This is completely unacceptable. This is about huge amounts of money being spent on out-of-date technology that will be redundant by the time it is built.
“There is a growing body of evidence which shows that Trident is vulnerable to cyber warfare and attacks by underwater drones.
“The Government appears to be burying its head in the sand – stuck in a 1980s mindset that we are a great power fighting in the Cold War.
“We ask for some objectivity in considering Trident. It is time the Government thought very carefully about the real security threats we face from terrorism, climate change and global pandemics, but also be honest about the very real threat posed by our own nuclear weapons system.”……
the Trident missile system, which was launched in the 1990s as a replacement for the predecessor, Polaris, is due to end its service from 2028. It takes about a decade to build and prepare a new submarine for service. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/14319629.Anger_as___642m_Trident_nuclear_submarines_investment_is_confirmed/?ref=rss
Solar power powers up; London – with World’s biggest floating solar 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
The danger of flying nuclear materials between UK and USA
MoD admits flying nuclear materials
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/01/mod-admits-flying-nuclear-materials-between-uk-and-us
Campaigners highlight safety risks after defence minister admits there have been 23 such flights in the last five years, Guardian, Rob Edwards, 1 Marc 16 , Materials used in nuclear weapons have been flown between the UK and the US 23 times in the last five years, the Ministry of Defence has admitted.
Though the MoD does not give details, the flights are believed to have carried tritium, plutonium and enriched uranium, all vital ingredients of Tridentwarheads. They probably started or ended at the RAF base at Brize Norton in Oxfordshire.
The flights have alarmed politicians and campaign groups, who are worried about accidents causing widespread radioactive contamination. The MoD, however, insists that the transports complied with stringent safety rules.
The Guardian reported on 9 February that two MoD emergency exercises in 2011 and 2012 codenamed Astral Bend envisaged planes carrying nuclear materials crashing. One imagined a leak of enriched uranium and plutonium spreading up to five kilometres across south Wales.
That prompted a question about the nuclear flights in the House of Commons last week by the Scottish National party’s defence spokesman, Brendan O’Hara MP. In response, the government admitted the frequency of such flights for the first time. “In the last five years, 23 flights carrying defence nuclear materials were undertaken,” the defence minister, Penny Mordaunt, told MPs in a written answer.
“All flights were between the UK and the United States on fixed-wing aircraft under the control of UK armed forces.” Details of the cargoes were kept secret “as disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice national security,” she said.
O’Hara said: “This answer is alarming and highlights a practice most of the public are unaware of. The MoD need to outline what risk and safety assessments they made about these flights and precisely when and what areas of UK airspace were used. I fear the MoD does not have a great track record on transparency when it comes to nuclear issues – and this answer clearly begs more questions.”
Experts say that the UK and the US regularly exchange tritium, plutonium and enriched uranium under a mutual defence agreement. Anti-nuclear campaigners have tracked road convoys transporting nuclear materials between the nuclear bomb plants at Aldermaston and Burghfield in Berkshire and RAF Brize Norton.
The independent nuclear engineer, John Large, argued that the MoD’s air shipments would not comply with international safety regulations for civil nuclear transports. A crash could “contaminate large tracts of land with potential radiological consequences for unprotected members of the public”, he said.
Tom Clements, who heads a group monitoring a nuclear weapons plant at Savannah River in South Carolina, claimed that the MoD flights would not meet US standards for civil nuclear shipments. The flights had “disturbing” implications for the world’s attempts to reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons, he said.
Peter Burt from the UK Nuclear Information Service, a not-for-profit group, highlighted the high risks of air shipments. “The RAF regularly fly nuclear materials over large urban areas such as Bristol, Cardiff, and Swansea, which raises serious questions about what would happen in the event of an accident involving one of these flights,” he said.
The MoD maintained that the air transports were safe. “The transport of defence nuclear materials is carried out to the highest standard in accordance with stringent safety regulations,” said an MoD spokeswoman.
“In over 50 years of transporting defence nuclear materials in the UK, there has never been an incident that has posed any radiation hazard to the public or to the environment.”
Huge rally in Britain against Trident nuclear missile system
Trident rally is Britain’s biggest anti-nuclear march in a generation
Thousands of protesters including Jeremy Corbyn and other party leaders gather in London for CND march and rally, Guardian, Mark Townsend, 28 Feb 16, Thousands of protesters have assembled in central London for Britain’s biggest anti-nuclear weapons rally in a generation.
Campaigners gathered from across the world: some said they had travelled from Australia to protest against the renewal of Trident. Others had come from the west coast of Scotland, where Britain’s nuclear deterrent submarines are based.
As the huge column of people began moving from Marble Arch after 1pm, the mood was buoyant and spirited despite the cold. Naomi Young, 34, from Southampton said: “You can’t use nuclear weapons. You would destroy the environment and kill hundreds of thousands of people. Why spend £100bn to buy a weapon unless you want to destroy the earth?”
Many waved placards with phrases including “Books Not Bombs”, “Cut War Not Welfare” and “NHS Not Trident”.
A common theme among protesters was the cost of renewing Trident during a period of austerity……..
Organisers of the march, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, were confident the turnout would send a robust message of growing support against renewing the nuclear weapons system – at an estimated cost of least £41bn – and argued that worries about job losses were a red herring…….http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/27/cnd-rally-anti-nuclear-demonstration-trident-london
The collapse of UK’s planned nuclear power programme ?
Horizon boss’s statement exposes fantasy nature of UK nuclear power programme http://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.com.au/2016/02/horizons-boss-statement-exposes-fantasy.html The boss of one of the three supposed consortia claimed to be building Britain’s nuclear power stations has all but admitted that his project is a fantasy one. As can be read in the Telegraph story below, the boss of the ‘Horizon’ project has said that new nuclear power in the UK depends on private investors. Well, that is not going to happen. Who would want to put shares in a venture that might (as in the case of its project in Taiwan) take 15 years not to be completed, or which may not work very well? Nobody. The only possible exceptions to this are (foreign) governments with political, rather than than money-making, objectives. Even they are disappearing! (France and China).
Of course, some people, breezily argue, the government could pay for the power stations. As if we need to spend billions and billions money on nuclear power stations that never seem to be finished instead of hospitals……
In reality the nuclear power programme collapsed in 2012 when it emerged that the Treasury insisted that nuclear power should not receive a state blank cheque. E.ON, RWE, SSE and Centrica all withdrew from nuclear power construction plans. But now for four years our energy and carbon reduction programmes have been distorted in order to preserve the British engineering establishment’s soft spot for nuclear power. The current government defends its lack of investment in real green energy by referring to its fantasy plans for new nuclear power stations.
EDF has announced once again (Feb 16th), that its decision on building Hinkley C will be taken ‘soon’ (soon has meant the same for the last 3 years) and in practice it is waiting, in effect, for the French Government to agree that French electricity consumers/taxpayers should subsidise nuclear power for the British! All to save the pride of the EDF leadership! It sounds bizarre, and I doubt whether even EDF’s hold on the French Government can engineer such an outcome.
EDF could still turn their ship around of course, by helping achieve France’s targets to expand renewable energy. But are they capable of dragging themselves away from their nuclear-dream-turned-sour, or will they waste what few reserves they have left in planning new reactor designs?
See the Telegraph article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/12156773/UK-new-nuclear-plan-will-fail-without-private-investors-says-Horizon-chief.html
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 