Boris Johnson: Treasury is endangering community renewables, Guardian, Adam Vaughan, 12 Nov 15
Mayor of London calls on the government to reconsider plans to remove tax relief for investors in community energy projects Boris Johnson has warned the Treasury it is endangering efforts by local communities around the UK to build their own renewable energy projects.
In a letter to the financial secretary to the Treasury, David Gauke, the mayor of London and Tory MP called on the government to reconsider its proposals to remove various forms of tax relief for investors in community energy.
More than 100 green energy groups have already said the change will “decimate” the sector, which has installed community-owned solar panels on village halls, small hydro schemes on rivers and wind turbines on farms.
Johnson is concerned that “the proposals may endanger the expansion of the sector given the investment required for the upfront capital costs” and “there is a danger of unintended consequences”, wrote the deputy mayor for environment and energy, Matthew Pencharz.
The mayor also thought that while such schemes might be small individually, in aggregate they are important to the security of London’s future energy supply, and a key part of efforts to cut the capital’s carbon emissions.
The short-term nature of the tax changes – which are due to come into effect at the end of November – could also put an end to schemes that are already in development or fundraising, he said.
One high-profile scheme for a community-owned solar array in a West Sussex village that was at the centre of anti-fracking protests, has already been shelvedas a result of the Treasury’s plans, announced in the finance bill last month. A recent report found more than £100m worth of community energy projects were at risk from the changes…….http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/11/boris-johnson-treasury-is-endangering-community-renewables
November 16, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
decentralised, UK |
Leave a comment
Hinkley Point nuclear plan puts survival of EDF at risk, say employee shareholders http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/13/hinkley-point-nuclear-plan-puts-survival-edf-at-risk-say-employee-shareholders
French energy firm should halt expensive UK project in which it has has nothing to gain and everything to lose, says association of employee-shareholders EDF’s £18bn project to build two nuclear reactors in Hinkley Point, Britain, is so expensive and so risky that it puts the survival of the French utility at risk, an association of employee-shareholders said on Thursday.
EDF Actionnariat salarié (EAS) said in a statement that the interests of EDF are gravely threatened by the Hinkley Point project, which it calls “a financial catastrophy foretold” in which EDF has nothing to gain and everything to lose.
“EAS asks the management of EDF to stop this risky project, whose financial risks are to big for our company and which could put EDF’s very survival at risk,” the association said.
EDF staff own 1.72% of the utility’s capital, making employees the second-largest shareholder after the state, which hold 84.5%, according to ThomsonReuters data.
Last month, EDF announced a partnership with Chinese utility CGN to build Hinkley Point, but the two companies have not yet made the final investment decision to go ahead with the project, which EDF reluctantly agreed to finance on its already stretched balance sheet after other partners pulled out.
EDF, which already has to borrow money every year to pay its dividend, faces a €55bn (£39bn) upgrade of its nuclear fleet over the next decade, will spend some €5bn to install Linky smart meters in coming years and needs to invest billions in the reactor unit of Areva, which it plans to buy next year.
Standard & Poor’s last month warned that it might downgrade EDF’s debt if it goes ahead with Hinkley Point, because of the project’s high execution risks and substantial investment needs.
November 14, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, France, UK |
Leave a comment
Published by Arclight2011
9 November 2015
Oped source;
http://www.europeannewweekly.wordpress.com
With some 18,000 subscribers Dana has been touted as a “leader” of the anti nuclear movement but as Fukushima 311 Watchdogs on Facebook gets some 11,000 subscribers, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in the UK has some 30,000 members and this does not include a recent surge in membership from Scotland, Wales and England due to the promotion of no nuclear by The extremely popular Jeremy Corbin. I also do not include the tens of thousands Taiwanese activists, Indian activists, Japanese activists etc etc who visit many of the more moderate anti nuclear web pages and social media formats.
Dana remembered
Dana Durnsford occupies a small part of the nuclear debate. When his You Tube channel began streaming his show and saying that the west coast of Canada was a dead zone, to say the least I was a bit concerned! I was on the Rainbow Warriors on Facebook and we crowd sourced an investigation with some Canadian colleagues (including First Nations) to find out what the situation was. We quickly discovered over a couple of days that the coast was still the same as it was in previous years. This was testimony from witnesses that I have grown to trust so I was distrustful as to Danas Claims but decided to see what evidence he could supply.
Over the coming months he sought Funding for a boat and camera equipment but no radiation detectors of any sort. Further videos of people showing a thriving environment on You Tube made me doubt further the veracity of his claims. Also, his aggressive stance and lack of multiple sources for news weakened my interest and I quickly moved on.
A right to speak
My general attitude to Dana was that he was providing a service to those that thought that the effects from Fukushima were dire. Of course there are many viewpoints to the ultimate effects from the Fukushima Daichi nuclear disaster in march 2011.
My view was that there is room for debate on this issue. I also thought that the debatably entertaining way that Dana discusses nuclear matters might encourage people to learn more on the nuclear issue so the show had a more serious educational aspect to it (even though some of the science and posits might be questioned).
Sentenced to what?
So, to the issue of what might happen to Dana? The use of harassment is a thorny issue on social media. In the UK Chris Spivey was recently charged for a similar style of blogging. Leaving aside the issues on free speech for the moment I will quickly describe his present situation. 
Chris has a short suspended prison sentence hanging over him and is under instruction to not have on his website any information related to the court case (Lee Rigby) nor can he discuss this news publicly. Chris has continued his blogging as normal, still using an aggressive style but with some sensible caution. So Dana should take heart. My co host Jimmy Hagan contacted Chris Spivey for a statement and he said that if it is a first offence a prison sentence is unlikely and a suspended sentence with blogging restrictions would apply.
Of course the Pro nuclear media is trying to milk this for everything it is worth but we need to bear in mind that Dana`s views only represent a small fraction of the worlds anti nuclear campaigners. In the diverse world-wide web there is room for many opinions and views.
What learning can we all take from this?
There is an important point to be had here for bloggers more generally and that is the need for caution considering that harassment cases are an effective tool for corporate and government interests and we as bloggers should be mindful to avoid such pitfalls. We should be prepared to adapt to this sort of pressure on our freedom of speech. The main points we have to raise do not include personal attacks but science based evidence and personal testimonials and independent science research where science research is being suppressed.
How can you help Dana?
By following this link;
http://fukushimaemergencywhatcanwedo.blogspot.ie/2015/11/dana-durnford-arrested-and-charged-with.html
November 9, 2015
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Arclight's Vision, civil liberties, UK |
26 Comments
Another option on the table is PRISM. Developed by GE Hitachi (GEH), PRISM is a sodium-cooled fast reactor that uses a metallic fuel alloy of zirconium, uranium, and plutonium. GEH claims PRISM would reduce the plutonium stockpile quicker than MOX and be the most efficient solution for the UK. The problem is, despite being based on established technology, a PRISM reactor has yet to be built, and the UK is understandably a little reluctant to commit in this direction. Seen as something of a gamble, it remains in the running alongside the currently more favoured MOX option.
Amid all the uncertainty, one thing is for sure. Regardless of what decision is taken, a proportion of the plutonium will end up as waste and will need to be safely disposed of.
Unlike MOX and PRISM, immobilisation has no prominent industry backers. In comparison to exploiting the plutonium for our energy needs, there is no great fortune to be made from disposing of it safely. But immobilising the entire plutonium stockpile may in fact be a more economically sound approach than reprocessing
Sellafield plutonium a multi-layered problem, The Engineer UK, 6 November 2015 | By Andrew Wade “……..It takes somewhere in the region of 5-10kg of plutonium to make a nuclear weapon, so 140 tons is a slightly worrying amount to have sitting in a concrete shed in Cumbria. While everyone at the press conference was at pains to point out that there are no major safety concerns with the current storage, it is widely accepted that a long-term plan needs to be formulated. This, however, is where things get tricky. The potential energy of the plutonium if converted to nuclear fuel is massive, but there are several competing technologies vying for endorsement, none of which are well proven as financially viable.
Top of the list – and the government’s current preference – is for some application that uses mixed oxide fuel, or MOX. MOX is made by blending plutonium with natural or depleted uranium to create a fuel that is similar, but not identical, to the low-enriched uranium used in most nuclear plants today. MOX can be – and in several European countries is – used in thermal reactors alongside uranium. But despite past concerns, there is in reality no shortage of uranium today, so no huge need to supplement it with MOX in current reactors. Where MOX could in fact lead to greater efficiencies is in fast reactors, but these are costly and difficult to operate, and would not make economic sense unless the cost of uranium fell.
To complicate matters further, developing MOX is by no means a straightforward process. Continue reading →
November 9, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Reference, reprocessing, UK, wastes |
Leave a comment
Corbyn accuses defence chief of political bias in nuclear row, BBC News, 9 Nov 15 Jeremy Corbyn has accused the chief of the defence staff of political bias after he criticised the Labour leader’s anti-nuclear stance.
Gen Sir Nicholas Houghton told the BBC’s Andrew Marr that refusing to launch nuclear weapons would “seriously undermine” Britain’s “deterrent”.And he said he would be worried if such a view “translated into power”.
Mr Corbyn called on the defence secretary to “take action” against Sir Nicholas over his comments.
In a statement, the Labour leader said: “It is a matter of serious concern that the chief of the defence staff has today intervened directly in issues of political dispute.
“It is essential in a democracy that the military remains politically neutral at all times.
“By publicly taking sides in current political arguments, Sir Nicholas Houghton has clearly breached that constitutional principle. Accordingly, I am writing to the defence secretary to ask him to take action to ensure that the neutrality of the armed forces is upheld.”
November 9, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, UK |
Leave a comment
the decision to involve Chinese companies – initially with EDF at Hinkley Point and then on their own at Bradwell and Sizewell – only makes sense if it is seen as part of a quid pro quo for the previously announced financial services deal.
They put the Chinese Communist Party and military at the heart of strategic infrastructure. They interlink the British and Chinese financial systems at a time when the latter is structurally weak, poorly regulated, and struggling with corruption.
Britain’s nuclear deal with China is a boon for bankers – and no one else, The Conversation, Jeffrey Henderson November 6, 2015 At first glance, it seems an almost inexplicable paradox. A right-wing British government has invited companies controlled by the Chinese Communist Party – and in one case, the Chinese military – into the heart of the UK’s strategically vital energy infrastructure. The nuclear deal between Britain and China goes against the advice of the security services, the military and the US government.
So to explain this paradox, we must look carefully at another major deal in the British government’s flirtation with President Xi Jinping: the inter-penetration of the two countries’ financial services.
There would seem to be no possible connection between Chinese companies building and operating nuclear power stations in 2020s Britain and a curious political role created in 1571. But the fact that the Remembrancer, a representative of the City of London Corporation, is allowed to attend and monitor debates in the House of Commons, says much about Britain’s priorities.
When considering economic and budgetary policy, the Remembrancer is at hand to ensure that our elected representatives remember that, whatever other interests they might serve, the needs of financial services must be paramount. And the near-invisible hand of the Remembrancer seems recently to have been at work ensuring that Britain’s infrastructure is made accessible to Chinese state-owned companies. Continue reading →
November 6, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
China, politics international, UK |
Leave a comment
the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) seemed to be dangerously edging towards the corporate financial interests of the nuclear industry rather than the public interests of ensuring national nuclear safety
Alarm over Government’s growth mandate for nuclear regulator, The Independent,
Last year, non-economic regulators were handed guidance entitled “Duty to have regard to growth” by the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills Mark Leftly Associate business editor @MLeftly Anti-nuclear campaigners fear regulators have been forced to cosy up to the industry and sacrifice some of their safety responsibilities as a result of government changes to their role.
At a meeting in Manchester last week, executives from the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), which oversees civil reactors and decommissioning, told representatives from NGOs that they now have to encourage the industry’s economic growth in addition to promoting safety. Continue reading →
November 4, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, UK |
Leave a comment
It is clear that this unprecedented handover of power and money to Chinese hands will prompt a justified reaction from those thousands of UK steel workers whose jobs are about to disappear due in part to the global dumping of steel by China.
Will the remnants of the steel industry and its workers see a fraction of the £76 billion to be spent by the Chancellor on his nuclear boondoggle? Not likely.
The nuclear option can and has been criticised in so many ways that the UK Government should think long and hard before proceeding with what many UK citizens will rightly consider an unpatriotic and unethical waste of money. It may even constitute a real and potent danger to our current lifestyle in Britain.
The Hinkley Point C boondoggle: a dangerous waste of money http://reneweconomy.com.au/2015/the-hinkley-point-c-boondoggle-a-dangerous-waste-of-money-57108 By Alex Russell and Peter Strachan on 2 November 2015 The UK Government’s pursuit of a new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point C represents not just a colossal waste of money, but could also be real danger to the UK’s national security, write Professors Alex Russell and Peter Strachan of Robert Gordon University. “Let us hope that the Prime Minister and Chancellor’s actions do not lead to the radicalisation of unemployed steel workers who are now being joined by unemployed renewable industry personnel.”
The Conservative government, arguably, has completely lost the plot in continuing to pursue its so called energy policy that depends so heavily on building a new fleet of nuclear power stations to keep the lights on in Britain. The government want to have 16 GW of new nuclear power stations built in the UK all using EDF’s troubled Generation-III design, of which Hinkley Point C (3.2 GW) is only the first installment.
With this project is George Osborne seeking an entry in the Guinness Book of Records as the first Chancellor of the Exchequer to commission the world’s most expensive nuclear power station? The Chancellor says the project represents good value for money. But the facts suggest otherwise. Further, and with the recent signing of a new nuclear accord as part of the State Visit of the President of China, not enough attention appears to have been given to national security issues.
Economic madness All in all, Hinkley Point C will cost an estimated £76 billion, for up to 3.2 GW of new generation capacity. Building costs are now estimated by EDF, the owner, at £24.5 billion. As a sobering thought, even offshore wind looks cheap when compared to the full commercial costs of this project.
This apparent blank cheque for new nuclear build is all the more surprising coming at a time when the Treasury has slashed support for onshore wind and solar power and other low carbon projects. Continue reading →
November 4, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, employment, politics, UK |
Leave a comment
Radioactive honey found near nuclear power station, Rt.com 2 Nov, 2015 Honey contaminated with nuclear waste has been found near a disused power station in Scotland, scientists have confirmed, with samples of the product testing positive for “elevated” radioactivity. The samples showed levels of radioactive caesium-137 that are 14 times higher than samples of honey from elsewhere in the UK, prompting scientists to call for an investigation into wider contamination at the site.
The plant, which closed in 1994, no longer produces nuclear energy. It is still in the process of being decommissioned, however.
Independent nuclear energy consultant John Large said bees are an important barometer of environmental health.“Bees are key indicators of what is happening in the environment. They forage in a three-mile radius around the hive and anything in the soil is drawn up into plants and into the nectar they collect.
“This reading is within the limit for human consumption, but caesium-137 should not be turning up in honey at all,” he added.
The results are included in the government’s Radioactivity In Food and the Environment report, published last week…….https://www.rt.com/uk/320505-nuclear-plant-honey-contamination/#.VjfDMS3IGhs.twitter
November 4, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
environment, Reference, UK |
Leave a comment
Who, What, Why: What would the radio broadcast in a nuclear war?, BBC 3 Nov 15 Who, What, WhyThe Magazine answers the questions behind the news BBC newsreader Peter Donaldson, who has died aged 70, was to have been the voice of radio bulletins in the event of a nuclear attack. What would have gone out on the UK’s airwaves if the Cold War had turned hot?
“This is the Wartime Broadcasting Service. This country has been attacked with nuclear weapons. Communications have been severely disrupted, and the number of casualties and the extent of the damage are not yet known.”
So began the script, read by Peter Donaldson, which was to go out on British airwaves in the event of nuclear war.
The Wartime Broadcasting Service was run by the BBC on behalf of the government. It was intended to replace existing radio broadcasts in the event of a nuclear exchange.
According to declassified papers, the recording of Donaldson would have been broadcast from a nuclear bunker at Wood Norton in Worcestershire and transmitted from nearby Droitwich.
The script urged people to stay calm, remain in their homes, save water and make the most of tinned food supplies. It was hoped this would provide reassurance as well as information.
“If there had been a nuclear attack, people would still have heard the BBC and hopefully they would have taken heart,” Michael Hodder, who ran the Wartime Broadcasting Service, told the BBC’s The One Show in September.
The service would also be used to make official government announcements. It was intended that there would also have been regional services performing similar functions for regional seats of government.
BBC staff would have followed procedures set out in the War Book, a Cold War instruction manual that was declassified in 2009. “Engineers in charge of transmitters had it in their safes,” says BBC historian Jean Seaton.
Initially it was planned that music and light entertainment programmes including Hancock’s Half Hour, Round the Horne and Just A Minute would be broadcast too, but by the 1980s it was decided that only official announcements would be transmitted to preserve energy.
The use of a well-known presenter was considered crucial. In a June 1974 letter, Harold Greenwood from the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications warned that an “unfamiliar voice” would lead listeners to conclude that “perhaps after all the BBC has been obliterated”.
Full script……
November 4, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
history, UK |
Leave a comment
Scottish Labour votes against renewal of Trident nuclear weapon system, Ft.com
Mure Dickie in Perth, 1 Nov 15 Scottish Labour has voted emphatically against renewing the Trident nuclear weapon system, offering a major boost to supporters of unilateral disarmament in the UK party, including its leader, Jeremy Corbyn. Party members and union delegates to a
conference in Perth both voted by 70 per cent to 30 to abandon plans to maintain a “massively expensive” and “militarily useless” submarine-launched ballistic nuclear missile system.
Ian Murray, Labour’s only MP in Scotland and a member of the UK shadow cabinet, said the more than two-thirds majority meant disarmament was now formal policy for the Scottish party. That would mean it must be considered by UK Labour policy planners and could be included as part of Labour’s platform for the Scottish parliamentary elections next May. “It should be in the manifesto,” Mr Murray said.
The vote highlights uncertainty about Labour’s policy on Trident since Mr Corbyn’s election and will be portrayed by the Scottish National party as evidence of deep divisions between him and the UK party’s mainstream.
But many Scottish Labour members praised the decision of Kezia Dugdale, the Scottish party’s new leader and an opponent of unilateral disarmament, to allow delegates to choose to debate and vote on Trident and other issues.
The vote came after a vigorous and often passionate debate in which opponents of Trident renewal stressed what many called the fundamental immorality of nuclear weapons while supporters focused on the threat that scrapping them would pose to thousands of well-paid jobs.
Union representatives were divided on whether to back Trident renewal, with many fearing that promised defence industry diversification would not deliver equivalent employment for highly skilled workers…….. delegate Stephen Low said scrapping nuclear weapons would free money to be spent in more economically productive ways.
“I’d rather have pie in the sky on my horizon than a mushroom cloud,” Mr Low said. “You get a lot of bang for your buck with Trident . . . but you don’t get that many jobs.”
Defence policy is decided by the UK party, but Bill Butler, a candidate for the party in next May’s Scottish parliamentary election, said it could help build momentum for nuclear disarmament……..http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/fb106dec-809b-11e5-84dc-31c8b3b18e5f.html#axzz3qGtjP1GJ
November 2, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, UK, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
MPs attack ‘desperate’ £25bn Hinkley nuclear power station plan http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3298926/MPs-attack-desperate-25bn-Hinkley-nuclear-power-station-plan.html By NEIL CRAVEN, FINANCIAL MAIL ON SUNDAY, 1 November 2015 A group of MPs have slammed a plan to build a £25billion nuclear power station, as opposition to the Government’s nuclear energy policy gathers steam.
An Early Day Motion that calls the plan to build at Hinkley Point, in Somerset, as ‘an act of desperation’ has been signed by 16 MPs in just 10 days.
Paul Flynn, MP for Newport West, which lies across the Bristol Channel from the planned site, has tabled the motion.
It says that similar reactors in France and Finland have suffered ‘catastrophic delays and financial losses’.
Experts also say the plan could cost billions more than expected and produce electricity that is far more expensive than market rates.
French energy firm EDF and China Nuclear Power Corporation agreed last month to build the plant. But criticism has come from all sides.
Chancellor George Osborne’s father-in-law Lord Howell of Guildford described the scheme as ‘one of the worst deals ever’ for British consumers and industry.
November 2, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, UK |
Leave a comment
21st October 2015 NFLA notes only a participation agreement between China, UK and EDF is being agreed today for Hinkley Point C. Many hurdles still remain. NFLA calls instead for investment in renewables and decentralised energy. The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) notes with dismay the announcement to sign an initial participation agreement between the Chinese and UK Governments and EDF over the proposed construction of a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point, and future plans for new nuclear reactors at Sizewell and Bradwell.
However, it is clear that this is still not a final investment decision and many significant hurdles still remain. NFLA note the comment published in the Financial Times that: ―senior EDF executives and a negotiating team led by China’s state-owned CGN struck an accord that will lead to a final investment decision on the plant — an irrevocable undertaking — by the end of the year.‖ (1)
NFLA also note that Chinese nuclear utilities appear to only be offering 33.5% of the share of the Hinkley Point investment, when it has been clear EDF have been looking for 40%. (2)
NFLA note that the deal has been criticised across the media, by energy policy experts (many of whom support nuclear power) and by a number of financial commentators. Whilst the UK Government is cutting back on renewable subsidies around a claim of reducing customer bills, NFLA believe this irrational and expensive deal will undoubtedly increase the amount of such bills for decades to come. The continuing hurdles that need to be overcome to realise the Hinkley C deal remain considerable. They include
: • Flawed steel-works has been identified on the reactor pressure vessel and lid of an identical nuclear reactor being built in Flamanville, France. The French nuclear regulator has suspended all work on the reactor. This could take 12 – 24 months to resolve and no work could start at Hinkley Point until these safety issues are resolved in France.
• Due to severe financial difficulties and huge levels of debt, the French Government has commenced a restructuring of EDF and Areva NP into a merged company. This will also take some considerable time to achieve, and is a major reason Chinese investment was so desperately required to realise UK new nuclear build.
• A legal challenge to the European Commission by the Austrian and Luxembourg Governments, and a group of Austrian and German renewable energy companies, over its approval of the UK – EDF state aid deal for Hinkley Point will take at least a year or more to resolve. If the courts find against the Commission the whole financing deal will be placed in jeopardy. • A reliability clause is likely within the contract. This will be linked in to the prior successful EPR operation being constructed at Flamanville-3 in France. This nuclear reactor project is now years behind schedule and billions over budget in being realised. Today EDF has asked for a formal three year delay in this project, being it will not be completed until at least 2020, 13 years after construction began. (3)
NFLA remain dismayed that the UK Government appears to be putting all its future energy policy priorities around this £24.5 billion project, whilst decimating the renewable energy industry. NFLA notes that the Solar Trade Association (STA) has undertaken analysis showing that solar PV could provide the same amount of electricity as Hinkley Point C for half the subsidy cost. (4)
The STA analysis shows that a combination of solar, energy storage and other flexibility mechanisms would cost consumers roughly 50% less than Hinkley Point C over the 35 year lifetime of the Hinkley subsidy. NFLA agree with STA that the Government needs to explain why it is drastically cutting support for solar energy whilst offering double the subsidy to Hinkley Point C. It also needs to explain why it is championing overseas state-backed utilities over British solar companies which have considerable growth prospects if a stable subsidy regime was maintained.
NFLA are also alarmed such policies risk the development of local authority energy enterprises, will not provide more fuel efficient homes or reduce increasing levels of fuel poverty, and put tens of thousands of other jobs at risk. NFLA also believe Chinese interests in this project stem more from wishing to develop its own reactor design at Bradwell so as to get international legitimacy for its cheaper product. This is little different to the major issues in the international steel industry, where cheap over-supply of Chinese steel exports is decimating the UK and European steel industry.
National security issues, as noted by many energy and security policy experts remain a real concern with Chinese access to UK critical infrastructure. In these comments, NFLA is reflecting concerns of pro-nuclear supporters like the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph, The Times, the Financial Times and the GMB trade union. NFLA Chair Councillor Norman McDonald said: ―
NFLA is alarmed and disappointed with this initial agreement to bring China into the investment coalition for building new nuclear reactors. It is a high risk venture, with many obstacles and hurdles still to overcome. Hinkley C is not the answer to the UK’s future low carbon energy needs. UK energy demand has actually been falling in recent years, and there is ample evidence that a mix of renewable energy technologies, energy storage and energy efficiency would provide our needs and decarbonise the UK energy system. Instead, the UK could be locked in to an exorbitantly expensive energy project that could still take over a decade or more to realise, leading to large amounts of additional radioactive waste being created, whilst it could still all quite easily unravel.
This is completely the wrong solution for our future energy security
For more information please contact Sean Morris, NFLA Secretary on
0161 234 3244 or 07771 930196.
Notes for editors:
November 2, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, UK |
Leave a comment
Scottish Labour to vote on abolishing Trident nuclear deterrent, Guardian, Severin Carrell, 31 Oct 15
Delegates back potentially divisive debate at conference on Sunday, as Jeremy Corbyn attacks SNP record The Scottish Labour party is to vote on abolishing Britain’s nuclear deterrent after delegates voted heavily in favour of a debate on the Trident missile system.
The decision to debate cancelling Trident’s replacement at Scottish Labour’s annual conference this weekend came as activists applauded calls from Jeremy Corbyn for the party to embrace “the sunshine of socialism”.
On Friday, delegates overwhelmingly backed calls from constituency parties to hold a potentially divisive vote on Trident’s renewal on Sunday: the party’s leadership is split on the issue, with unions and MSPs at loggerheads.
In his first speech to Scottish Labour as leader of the UK party, Corbyn attacked the Scottish National party’s track record in government in the runup to next May’s Holyrood elections, insisting only Labour had a vision for a more equalScotland……..
The Scottish Labour debate on Trident will present party leaders with a significant political challenge whichever way it goes, so they are putting heavy emphasis on the merits of the party reaching an open, democratic decision…….
While delegates to Labour’s UK conference saw Trident as a less important issue, and failed to debate it, scrapping Trident has risen much further up the political agenda on the Scottish left.
Voting to scrap Trident would appeal to many Scottish leftwing voters, helping Labour take on the SNP in the Holyrood elections,……
The wording of the Trident motion will not be finalised until Saturday and it remains unclear whether delegates to the Perth conference will vote to abolish it, but party leaders are bracing themselves for a heavy vote against Trident’s renewal……http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/30/scottish-labour-conference-votes-debate-trident-nuclear-deterrent-renewal
October 31, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, UK |
Leave a comment
Scots nuclear power plant worker caught studying BOMB-MAKING websites at work , Daily Record, 27 Oct 15 THE staff member was marched off the premises at Hunterston B, West Kilbride, this morning after a shocked colleague raised the alarm. A WORKER at a Scots nuclear power plant has been caught studying bomb-making websites at work.
The staff member was marched off the premises at Hunterston B, West Kilbride, this morning after a shocked colleague raised the alarm.
Police are now investigating the worker accessing “inappropriate material” while working at the nuclear facility.
The man, who is believed to be a Muslim who moved recently from England, has worked at the North Ayrshire facility for around four weeks.
He was spotted by a fellow colleague on Monday, who reported his concerns to management.
The contractor works as a ‘special entry assistant’ at the power station, and his role involves him going into the heart of the plant to assist tradesmen.
He was allegedly seen viewing inappropriate websites on homemade explosives on a laptop computer, which he slammed shut after being spotted by a work mate.
When he arrived for work on Tuesday, he was escorted from the premises by security guards and plant owners EDF called in police.
A source at the plant said: “The guy has only worked here for a short time.
“He is a low-level employee, but has access to the reactor, where he basically helps out tradesmen working on it.”……..
A spokeswoman for Police Scotland said the incident was being dealt with by the Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC).
No one from the CNC was available for comment. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-nuclear-power-plant-worker-6716601
October 28, 2015
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
incidents, UK |
1 Comment
nuclear-news 