Tax-payer funding to go to Britain’s small nuclear reactor companies!
In pursuit of partners: the UK doubles down on small modular reactors, Power Technology 9 December 2015 At the end of November, the UK Treasury announced a doubling of nuclear funding alongside a design competition to “revive the UK’s nuclear expertise and position the UK as a global leader in innovative nuclear technologies”. With small modular reactors a particular focus, Taylor Heyman profiles the companies that will be looking to throw their hat in the ring.
In the run-up to the 2015 Paris climate talks, UK chancellor George Osborne announced funding of £250m over five years to put the UK at the forefront of world research and development of small nuclear reactors (SMRs)….
The autumn statement also included details of a design competition to be launched in early 2016 to find the “best value small modular reactor design for the UK”, the Treasury said in the spending review policy paper. The competition is the beginning of a government strategy to complete an SMR sometime in the 2020s…
UK SMR: the contenders
There are bound to be a number of big players clamouring for the opportunity to work with the UK government in developing the UK’s first SMRs. Last December, the National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL), in conjunction with a range of research organisations and companies, released a feasibility study focusing on SMRs in the UK, commissioned by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC). The review found four financially and techically viable options for SMR designs, by China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), B&W and Bechtel, Westinghouse and NuScale.
CNNC’s ACP100 design is a 310MWt pressurised water reactor designed to produce between 100 and 150MWe. The IAEA began a safety review of the design in July 2015, assessing the reactor’s safety, environmental impact and other elements of the design.
The BWXT mPower™ from B&W and Bechtel is an integral 530MWt pressurised water reactor which will produce around 180MWe. The team won the first round of funding from the cost-sharing funding initiative with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and Bechtel, but decided to scale back their funding in April 2014. This considerably slowed the pace and scale of development.
Westinghouse, a company well-established and employing over 1,000 people in the UK has already presented the British Government with its proposal to partner in deploying SMR technology throughout the UK. The Westinghouse SMR design is a 225MWe integral pressurized water reactor with all primary components located inside the reactor vessel.
The NuScale offering is a 160MWt reactor which operates using the principles of natural circulation rather than traditional pumps. It can produce 50MWA. The idea behind the smaller design is scalability; reactor units can be added or taken away depending on demand. NuScale Power won the second round of DOE funding in 2013, receiving $217m over five years in cost-share funds to develop, license and commercialise its SMR technology. The first is projected for 2024 in Idaho, US.
No doubt other contenders for the partnership will come to the fore once details of the January competition are released by DECC. Whichever company is chosen, NNL hopes to play a role in the development of SMRs for the UK. “We have a strong capability in reactor design, including SMRs,” says NNL’s director of external relations Adrian Bull. “So we feel we would be well-placed to carry out significant scope within the overall programme.” http://www.power-technology.com/features/featurein-pursuit-of-partners-the-uk-doubles-down-on-small-modular-reactors-4749180/
Toshiba’s financial travails threaten UK’s nuclear power plans
Toshiba travails pose another threat to UK’s nuclear future, The Week Dec 11, 2015
Company is said to be touting for new investment as costs of its accounting scandal bite. First it was Hinkley Point, now it’s Moorside. Another project to add to the UK’s new generation of nuclear power plants has apparently hit the rocks.
Sources “with direct knowledge of the matter” told Reuters that Toshiba is asking around among Japanese financial institutions for help to fund the Moorside project, being built near the Sellafield site in west Cumbria. The plant will house three reactors designed by Toshiba subsidiary Westinghouse Electric to produce 3.4 gigawatts of power, slightly more than Hinkley Point in Somerset.
Two years ago the project was estimated to cost around £8bn, the Guardiannotes, but this could have doubled since, as the assumed cost of labour and meeting stringent regulations has increased. Reuters says Toshiba’s share of the costs would be £2bn, but since its accounting scandal it is now thought to have “become difficult for Toshiba to do this on its own”.
The sources said Toshiba “had made requests to Japanese insurers as well as some banks, including Norinchukin Bank, and has hired HSBC as a financial adviser”…..http://www.theweek.co.uk/67731/toshiba-travails-pose-another-threat-to-uks-nuclear-future
Britain’s heavy burden – its Trident nuclear programme
Nuclear Deterrent or Millstone?, America, December 21-28, 2015 Issue David Stewart For decades, Britain has possessed an independent nuclear deterrent capability. While public attention to that nuclear capacity has waxed and waned, it has always been controversial. The issue has arisen again here in Britain, launched, as it were, by several factors: the election of Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong supporter of nuclear disarmament, as leader of the U.K. Labour Party; a looming need to upgrade and replace the current nuclear force, evoking concern about cost; and, finally, the Scottish independence referendum, which last year brought renewed focus on the Royal Navy’s submarines, packed with nuclear weapons, that are home-ported on Scotland’s west coast. Most recently, a controversial commentary during a television program by a high-ranking U.K. military officer brought the debate back to life, as has, indirectly, the terrorist attack in Paris.
The cost of the proposed replacement keeps rising; the most recent estimate is £163 billion—about $244 billion. Prime Minister David Cameron is determined to proceed with the modernization. The opposition focuses on the enormous price tag during a time of austerity and great need elsewhere. To many the proposed expenditure appears obscene. A further dimension to the debate is just emerging: Is such a huge cost justified even by purely strategic measures?
Many point out that France’s nuclear capacity did not deter the awful attacks on Paris in late November. The practical threat has shifted, even changed altogether. Nuclear deterrence and intercontinental ballistic missile delivery systems are useless against the danger that a group like ISIS represents….
A second Scottish independence referendum looks likely as the Scottish National Party is set to sweep next May’s Edinburgh Parliament elections. The S.N.P. utterly opposes Trident and its renewal. An independent Scotland would insist on the removal of missiles from Scottish soil and waters. Scottish politicians have wondered aloud if a U.K. government would ever countenance basing such weapons as close to London as they currently are to Glasgow. That position is striking a chord among many Scottish voters….. http://americamagazine.org/issue/nuclear-deterrent-or-millstone
Toshiba having problems getting money to build UK nuclear power project
Toshiba seeks financial help with £8bn UK nuclear project http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/10/toshiba-seeks-financial-help-with-8bn-uk-nuclear-project, Terry Macalister
Japanese technology firm in talks with financial institutions to support atomic construction programme after share price tumbles Toshiba, the technology company at the centre of plans to build more nuclear reactors in Britain, is looking for outside help to fund its £8bn programme after a collapse in its share price.
The Japanese group is in talks with local financial institutions to support the construction of an atomic plant near the Sellafield facility in Cumbria, after running up losses following an accounting scandal.
The emergence of Toshiba’s problems will add to worries over Britain’s nuclear plans after the French energy group EDF, which plans to build the Hinkley Point C station in Somerset, dropped out of France’s CAC 40 index of leading shares.
There is widening concern in the City about the escalating costs of huge nuclear projects, which are damaging company share valuations and undermining the government’s commitment to new nuclear at a time when it has promised to phase out coal-fired power stations.
It has become difficult for Toshiba to do this (fund the NuGen programme in the north-west of England) on its own,” one source told Reuters, which reported that Toshiba had hired HSBC bank to help find new funds.
On Monday, the Japanese financial regulatorrecommended that Toshiba be fined 7.37bn yen (£40m) for overstating profits and the share price of the company is down 40% since the start of the year.
Toshiba is a 60% shareholder in the NuGen project to build 3.4 gigawatts (GW) of electricity generating capacity close to the Sellafield plant, where spent fuel is reprocessed.
Neither Toshiba nor NuGen, a partnership with Engie (formerly GDF Suez) of France, was available for comment. The cost of building three reactors designed by a Toshiba subsidiary, Westinghouse, was estimated two years ago at £8bn but experts believe that figure could have at least doubled. That is in line with the price tag for Hinkley, which EDF puts at £18bn.
The 3.2GW Somerset reactors, to be built by EDF with the help of Chinese state companies, have been given the go-ahead by the UK government but the project is awaiting the final investment decision from France.
This week EDF blamed the 85% holding by the French state and lack of free float shares for its removal from the CAC index. But many analysts in the City of London have released gloomy equity forecasts on EDF, fearing Hinkley might go over budget like the company’s Flamanville reactor project in Normandy.
The dangers of transporting nuclear waste by sea
Nuclear waste transport risks ,Tor Justad, http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2015/12/08/nuclear-waste-transport-risks-tor-justad “…..I would wish to draw attention to the proposal from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to transport nuclear waste by sea from Scrabster to Barrow – a distance of over 400 miles.
This high level nuclear waste/spent fuel emanates from the Dounreay nuclear site and is intended for Sellafield – described as “the most toxic nuclear site in Europe”.
The campaigning group Highlands Against Nuclear Transport (Hant) has been campaigning since 2013 to stop this plan on the grounds that the risk to the environment, fishing, aquaculture and tourism is unacceptable.
Transporting nuclear waste by sea is opposed by environmental groups throughout the world and Hant is of the view that all nuclear waste should remain on the sites where it is produced which is in line with Scottish government policy. Hant provided an input at a Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) seminar in Lerwick in August 2015 on “Transportation of Dounreay’s nuclear materials by rail or by sea to Sellafield – is it a safe solution for reducing the nuclear legacy in Scotland?” and was pleased to hear from SIC and Kimo representatives at that seminar that they supported Hant’s position.
The need for emergency response vessels stationed around the Northern Isles and Western Isles is important to safeguard these coasts against marine accidents and emergencies of any kind but the need is increased by the proposal to transport nuclear waste.
As is well known, nuclear radiation knows no land or sea boundaries so this issue is of concern to all coastal communities in the Highlands and Islands.
Hant will continue to campaign on this issue and would urge individuals and interested organisations to support this campaign.
Britain’s nuclear power programme a cash cow for overseas companies
Half of £24bn nuclear reactor investment will go to overseas suppliers More than £12bn of the UK government spend on two new power plants will go abroad, mainly to companies in France, a government adviser warns, Guardian, Terry Macalister, 7 Dec 15 More than half of the £24bn expected to be spent on the first British nuclear reactors for two decades could go abroad to foreign suppliers, a leading UK academic and government adviser has warned.
The issue is of extreme political sensitivity because George Osborne has already faced criticism for providing huge subsidies to Hinkley, which is being developed by EDF Energy of France.
It will be seriously tough for British manufacturers to meet the needs of EDF in line with the commitment that 60% of the value of the project will remain in this country,” said Sir Keith Burnett, who is a member of the Council of Science and Technology reporting to the prime minister, David Cameron.
Burnett, the vice-chancellor of Sheffield University, said that 40% of the total value of the work at Hinkley Point atomic plant would largely go to French firms.
At least £4bn worth of spending on items such as pipes and pumps – around 15% of the project by value – will be up for grabs for the UK but only if local companies can provide the higher specification supplies required by EDF. Burnett thinks that will be difficult to achieve…….
Part of the problem is that small and medium-sized British firms have not had the opportunity to supply equipment to a new nuclear power station since Sizewell C in Suffolk was completed in 1995.
The Hinkley Point C facility in Somerset is still awaiting the final investment decision from the largely state-owned EDF and its Chinese partners, although ground preparation is already under way………http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/06/nuclear-reactor-investment-pay-overseas-suppliers-hinkley-point
UK’s nuclear industry urged to launch a new propaganda drive
Nuclear industry urged to woo public support for ‘low carbon, secure’ energy, Express and Star UK, 3 
Dec 15 “……Lord Hutton, chairman of the Nuclear Industry Association, launched a new drive to engage with the public as plans continue to build new nuclear power stations.
He told the association’s annual conference in London that the nuclear industry had “work to do” to help improve public awareness of nuclear power…….
“There is a world of opportunity opening up,” he said, adding that a new “concordat” launched today could help change public opinion about nuclear power.
“The industry already engages in public outreach, especially in areas where they operate, or plan to build. This can be through open public consultations or school events, but as an industry we need to get the message to a wider audience, to those people who aren’t in nuclear communities…..
The aim is to take the narrative beyond the media, by encouraging people to be proud of the sector and the work they do, having the confidence to talk to other parents in the school playground, or to family and friends.
Helping the wider public understand what nuclear is, can help change opinion about the sector.”… http://www.expressandstar.com/business/city-news/2015/12/03/nuclear-industry-urged-to-woo-public-support-for-low-carbon-secure-energy/
UK Government’s Nuclear Plans – Will they work?
NU CLearNews Dec 15 Last month we asked why the Government is persevering with the world’s most expensive power plant ever at the same time slashing support for renewable energy. (1) Renewable energy is going from strength to strength. Solar photovoltaics could provide the same amount of electricity as Hinkley Point C for half the subsidy cost (2) and we could have six times the power-generation capacity for the same money by investing in wind turbines instead of Hinkley. (3) Although the Government’s motivation is still a bit of a mystery – either it thinks we still need baseload; it wants to sustain a national nuclear industrial capability sufficient to maintain the UK’s nuclear-armed status; or it is prepared to pay over the odds to the nuclear industry to avoid democratising the energy industry.
Britons fear Donald Trump might use NATO nuclear weapons, if he becomes President
Britons seek to ban Donald Trump, eliminate nuclear weapons he might use as president,
Oregon Live, Douglas Perry 3 Dec 15 It’s beginning to look like Donald Trump really could win the Republican nomination for president, and the party’s mainstream leaders are starting to panic.
Across the pond, some Britons are way past panic. They’re rallying support to formally ban Trump from the British Isles. And, just in case the businessman/reality-TV star does become the U.S. commander in chief, there’s a separate effort from the Scottish National Party to end Britain’s Trident nuclear-weapon program, noting that the U.S. president is the de facto decider when it comes to NATO countries using nuclear weapons.
“The UK’s independent nuclear deterrent isn’t, I believe, all that independent,” SNP defense spokesman Brendan O’Hara said in Parliament last week. “In reality, it will be an American commander-in-chief who will ultimately decide, and in 18 months time that commander-in-chief could be President Donald Trump.”…….http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/12/britons_seek_to_ban_donald_tru.html
Welcome to the fantasy world of UK’s Energy Secretary Amber Rudd
Nu Clear News Dec 15 The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Amber Rudd, is living in a “fantasy world” where nuclear is affordable and fracking produces useful amounts of gas, according to Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland. “Aiming to close down coal power stations is commendable but planning to replace them with a new fleet of gas-fired power stations will automatically lock us into a high-carbon power system, guaranteeing we won’t meet UK climate targets,” he added. (1)
Hackers could shut down UK’s £31 billion nuclear weapon system – warns defence expert
A former Defence Secretary has warned that the UK’s £31 billion nuclear weapon system could be shut down by hackers, Business Insider SAM SHEAD , 24 Nov 15, Former Defence Secretary Lord Browne has told the BBC that the UK’s nuclear weapon system, Trident, could be rendered obsolete by hackers.
The ex-Labour minister, who was Defence Secretary between 2006 and 2008, said “weak spots” in Trident need to be addressed — otherwise Prime Minister David Cameron won’t be able to rely on the nuclear deterrent “when he needs to reach for it.”
Trident, the UK’s nuclear programme, consists of four Vanguard-class submarines armed withTrident II D-5 ballistic missiles. It is the most powerful capability of the British military forces but at £31 billion it’s also the most expensive.
Lord Browne told BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg that the Tory government has an “obligation” to assure MPs that all aspects of Trident have been assessed against the risk of a cyber attack and that the appropriate security measures were in place.
“If they are unable to do that then there is no guarantee that we will have a reliable deterrent or the prime minister will be able to use this system when he needs to reach for it,” he added……http://www.businessinsider.com.au/trident-at-risk-from-hack-lord-browne-nuclear-weapons-hacking-2015-11
Shaky consensus in Britain’s parliament, about Trident nuclear weapons system
Nuclear consensus comes under pressure in Commons vote, Ft.com John McDermott, Political Correspondent, 24 Nov 15 The fragility of Britain’s cross-party consensus on nuclear weapons was revealed on Tuesday in a sour debate on the renewal of the Trident deterrent, which Michael Fallon said would cost at least £6bn more than planned.
The defence secretary confirmed that the price tag for four new submarines to replace the Vanguard Class had risen to £31bn from £26bn, not including a £10bn contingency fund. David Cameron, prime minister, acknowledged on Monday that their delivery could take five years longer than planned.
The debate was meant to showcase divisions in Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party, meaning that concerns about the cost and timing of the government’s new plans were often replaced by squabbles and polemics.
Outside the Commons, however, senior defence figures raised questions about the Strategic Defence and Security Review, which Mr Cameron announced in parliament on Monday………http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/62c6e428-92cd-11e5-bd82-c1fb87bef7af.html#axzz3sTiS5XiU
Londan Mayor Boris Johnson scathing about £18bn cost of Hinkley nuclear plan
Boris Johnson attacks ‘disgraceful’ spending on Hinkley – just a month after David Cameron hailed the ‘flagship’ deal, Independent 21 Nov 15
Mayor of London said the estimated £18bn cost of Britain’s first nuclear power station in two decades was an ‘extraordinary amount of money’ Boris Johnson has attacked the £18bn cost of Britain’s first nuclear power station in two decades as “a disgrace” – just one month after David Cameron announced the deal and hailed it as a “flagship project of cooperation” between China and the UK.
Work on the Hinkley Point C in Somerset is set to begin within weeks after Mr Cameron announced that a deal had been struck between French firm EDF and state-owned China General Nuclear Power (CGN) in October.
China pledged £6bn investment – a third of the total cost, with EDF funding the remaining £12bn, while the Government has agreed a “strike price” – a guaranteed price paid for electricity generated by Hinkley Point of £92.50 per megawatt hour for 35 years.
However the huge cost of the plant will ultimately be paid for by consumers through their bills.
Asked by Baroness Jones, a Green party London Assembly member who is fiercely opposed to nuclear power, whether he supported the building of Hinkley Point C despite its cost, Mr Johnson said: “I’m totally with you on that one – it’s a disgrace……http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-attacks-disgraceful-spending-on-hinkley-just-a-month-after-david-cameron-hailed-the-a6742281.html
UK’s Hunterston nuclear reactor has cracks in bricks at core
Cracks in bricks at core of Hunterston nuclear reactor , BBC News 20 Nov 15 Cracks have been discovered in bricks which make up the core of one of two nuclear reactors at the Hunterston B power station in Ayrshire.
Operator EDF Energy said the cracks in three graphite bricks were found during planned maintenance on Reactor Three.
The firm insisted there were no safety implications and the finding had no impact on the operation of the reactor.
A similar issue – known as “keyway root cracking” was identified in Hunterston’s other reactor last year……….
‘Energy transition’
The core of the reactors is made up of thousands of graphite bricks.
The station began operating in 1976 and its working life has already been extended to 2023 – well beyond its planned closure date.
WWF Scotland director Lang Banks said the issue with cracks in both reactors emphasised the need “to embrace the clean energy transition”.
He said: “Despite the assurances given by the nuclear industry, with cracks now found in both reactors it’s clear the problem is spreading and that we can expect this facility to become even more unreliable in the future.
“News of more cracks in the country’s ageing fleet of nuclear power stations underscores why we’re right to be taking steps to harness cleaner, safer forms of energy.” http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34867312
India’s PM Modi does a hollow, but quite toxic, nuclear deal with Britain
Modi’s nuclear deal with Britain is hollow, but quite toxic, catch news, KUMAR SUNDARAM, 15 Nov 15
The deal
- Narendra Modi has just inked a nuclear deal with Britain
- He called it symbol of “our resolve to combat climate change’
- The deal comes when the British nuclear industry is in a crisis
The danger
- Britain has little to offer India in terms of nuclear energy
- It reinforces the myth that n-power is green, climate-friendly
- India is missing the shift from n-power to renewable energy
More in the story
- India is among the few nations on a nuclear shopping spree in the post-Fukushima world. Why?
- Nuclear energy isn’t a solution to climate change. Why is the industry peddling this myth?
Keeping to the script, Modi has just announced a civilian nuclear agreement with Britain.
The pact is largely symbolic. But it’s dangerous.
Spent force
Britain has little to offer India when it comes to nuclear energy. Its nuclear industry is facing a terminal crisis. The two power plants planned in Hinkley Point have been plagued by escalating costs, forcing the investors to abandon the project, as well as serious design risks.
Britain’s new nuclear plants in Hinkley Point are plagued by escalating costs, serious design risks
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 