World’s largest nuclear project, UK’s Hinkley Point C, now in doubt
Britain casts doubt on EDF’s $24 billion nuclear project, Reuters LONDON | BY NINA CHESTNEY AND WILLIAM SCHOMBERG, 29 July 16 Britain has cast doubt on a $24 billion (18 billion pounds) project with French utility EDF to build the UK’s first new nuclear plant in decades, delaying a final decision on the plan just weeks after the Brexit vote ushered in a new prime minister.
The surprise decision to review the Hinkley Point C project was made public hours after the board of French state-controlled EDF voted to proceed with it.
The British government, which had been expected to sign contracts on Friday, said instead that it wanted to give the plans further consideration, postponing its verdict until early autumn.
The review came little more than a month after Britons voted to leave the EU in a referendum that forced the resignation of Prime Minister David Cameron – whose administration gave the initial go-ahead to the project – and the accession of Theresa May.
The vote, and the resulting economic uncertainty, threw doubt on the future of major British infrastructure projects, including the nuclear plant……..
Analysts and unions said the review under new Prime Minister May would likely delay the project further……..
Although EDF and Chinese partner China General Nuclear are responsible for the 18-billion-pound ($24 billion) cost of the project, Britain has committed to pay a minimum price for the power generated by the plant for 35 years.
Critics, including some British lawmakers and academics, say the country would be overpaying at that minimum price, which equates to double current market levels.
“Because of the fall in the energy price over the past 12 months, the project does look very expensive and there have been a lot of calls for other projects to be considered or for this to be taken back to the drawing board,” said Oliver Salvesen, analyst at investment bank Jefferies………
The British review could lead to increased resistance in France to the project, which was only narrowly approved by the EDF board on Thursday……
If the project goes ahead after the government’s review, the plant would not come online until the 2030s, industry experts estimate. EDF will still have to shoulder the costs of the long construction phase during which the investment will not generate any cash flow, which is credit negative for the firm, said Paul Marty, vice president and senior credit officer at Moody’s……..http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-edf-britain-nuclear-idUKKCN1090EW
Nuclear industry astonished as British government stalls plans to build Hinkley C nuclear power station
Plans to Build World’s Largest Nuclear Plant on Hold, EcoWatch, Climate News Network 29 July 16
The British government astonished the nuclear industry late last night by refusing to go ahead with plans to build the world’s largest nuclear plant until it has reviewed every aspect of the project.
The decision was announced hours after a bruising meeting of the board of the giant French energy company EDF, at which directors decided by 10 votes to seven to go ahead with the building of two 1,600 megawatt reactors at Hinkley Point in Somerset, southwest England………
critics of the controversial project were delighted. John Sauven, the executive director of Greenpeace, said: “Theresa May now has the chance to stop this radioactive white elephant in its tracks.”
“She should look at the evidence and see that this deal would be a monumental disaster for the taxpayers and the bill payers. Countless experts have warned that for British families this power station will be terrible value for money, Sauven added.”
Until last night, the UK was the most positive country in Europe about nuclear power and planned to build a total of 10 nuclear power plants, Hinkley Point being the first of them. This was despite the fact that nuclear costs continue to escalate while its main competitors—renewables of all kinds—fall in price.
The Hinkley Point project is now more expensive than offshore wind power, which is the most expensive renewable and is far more costly than solar and onshore wind. Biogas and small-scale hydro projects in Britain, all so far underdeveloped, are also cheaper than nuclear…….
Safety Fears
The price of all renewables is going down as they develop, while the price rises for nuclear power, with safety fears and threats from terrorism pushing costs up.
It is also argued, even by the UK’s national electricity grid, that the day of the large power plant is over, to be replaced by small local generators providing electricity near to homes and factories—something that renewables are ideally suited for.
Even France, which has 58 reactors and is building a Hinkley prototype at Flamanville in Normandy, has no plans to build any more. All its new energy projects are renewables and it has plentiful supplies of untapped wind and solar power, which are cheaper……..http://www.ecowatch.com/plans-to-build-worlds-largest-nuclear-plant-on-hold-1949913505.html
Britain’s High Court rules that UK nuclear agency ‘manipulated’ £7bn clean-up contract
UK nuclear agency ‘manipulated’ £7bn clean-up contract High Court ruling exposes government to potential £200m damages claim Ft.com by: Catherine Belton, 30 July 16 Britain’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority “manipulated” and “fudged” a tender process for a £7bn contract to clean up the country’s nuclear power plants, the High Court has ruled.
The judgment, handed down on Friday, raises fresh questions over the way government entities hand out multibillion-pound contracts and casts further doubt on the UK’s nuclear industry a day after the government’s decision to launch a review of the £18bn Hinkley Point project. It could eventually cost the government hundreds of millions of pounds in damages.
The NDA said it was considering its legal options after the ruling, which found that it had wrongly awarded one of the government’s largest contracts to Babcock, the UK engineering company, and Texas-based Fluor……..
The court found that the NDA had “manipulated” the valuation process in order to avoid disqualifying the Babcock-Fluor bid. “In my judgment the NDA sought to avoid the consequence of disqualification by fudging the evaluation,” Justice Fraser wrote in his ruling.
He found that the NDA “fell short” in meeting its obligations of “transparency and equal judgment”……..
he contract involves the clean-up of 12 of the UK’s 25 nuclear sites, including the Sizewell, Hinkley and Dungeness “Magnox” nuclear power stations built in the 1960s which have reached the end of their lives.
The government is facing increasing scrutiny over its procurement process following the referral of G4S and Serco to the Serious Fraud Office for overcharging on electronic tagging contracts for offenders, and the West Coast main line rail franchising debacle two years ago. https://next.ft.com/content/7f11f174-55ad-11e6-9664-e0bdc13c3bef
France disturbed at possibility of Theresa May dumping Hinkley C nuclear station plan
French Are Left Reeling as May Mulls Nuclear-Power Dilemma, Bloomberg, Robert Hutton RobDotHutton Francois De Beaupuy FrancoisDeBeaup July 29, 2016 —
-
New prime minister could dump project and blame Cameron
-
U.K. concerns are over Chinese involvement and rising cost
Even so, the French were stunned on Thursday evening when Britain said it needed more time to think about the plan. A planned signing was canceled. Hollande, with an election coming next year, has been attacked by labor unions who say the 18 billion-pound ($24 billion) project could bankrupt state-owned Electricite de France SA………
May’s joint chief of staff, Nick Timothy, last year described the decision to allow Chinese involvement in the project as “baffling.” He raised the prospect of China being able to shut down British energy production “at will” in an article for the Conservative Home website.
Brexit Talks
But there are risks to blocking the deal. It would infuriate the French, a needed ally in the Brexit talks. It would also lead to a dispute over where the costs of unwinding the project should fall………
“My assumption is still that the U.K. will probably sign off on it,” said Joel Kenrick, a political adviser to Energy Secretary Chris Huhne from 2010 to 2012.. “But then, I can’t actually see it being built. EDF have just got such a poor track record.” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-29/french-are-left-reeling-as-may-mulls-her-nuclear-power-dilemma
Future of UK’s Bradwell and Sizewell nuclear projects now in doubt as government to review Hinkley plan
Bradwell & Sizewell futures unclear after delayed Hinkley decision http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/story/2016-07-28/bradwell-sizewell-futures-unclear-after-delayed-hinkley-decision/
A late move by the government to review all of the component parts of the proposed nuclear power deal in the region has cast doubt that it will go ahead in its current form.
The French Energy giant EDF has agreed to fund a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset which was expected to pave the way for new plants to be constructed at Sizewell in Suffolk and Bradwell in Essex.
In a dramatic twist though, the Government says it now won’t decide whether to proceed with the projects until the autumn.
The £18 billion Hinkley project is “on ice” to allow the prime minister Theresa May to “make up her mind”, ITV News understands.
EDF approved UK Hinkley nuclear project, but now there’s a new delay
Hinkley nuclear plant faces fresh delay after EDF approves investment, Ft.com 28 July 16
Ministers announce new review immediately after EDF gives green light to £18bn project The plan to build an £18bn nuclear reactor at Hinkley Point was hit with a last-gasp delay on Thursday night as the government decided to hold a new review hours after EDF, the project’s French developer, gave it the go-ahead.
He said: “The UK needs a reliable and secure energy supply and the government believes that nuclear energy is an important part of the mix. The government will now consider carefully all the component parts of this project and make its decision in the early autumn.”
One person said the scheme was expected to proceed after the review but the fresh delay had been a surprise.
The news came after EDF had given the go-ahead for the UK’s first nuclear power plant in 20 years, approving the Hinkley Point scheme at a board meeting on Thursday.
Directors approved the long-delayed project during a meeting in Paris. But opposition from within the company was underlined by the resignation in protest of a board member as the meeting started. The board was more divided than had been expected…….
critics say the project could also risk the financial future of EDF, the highly indebted French utility, whose chief financial officer Thomas Piquemal quit in March, warning that its future was being put in danger by Hinkley Point.
The scheme has been subject to multiple delays and budget revisions since first being proposed in the mid-2000s as part of what Tony Blair’s government promised would be a “nuclear renaissance” for the UK.
New reactors are also being planned in north Wales and in Cumbria, while EDF wants to help develop two sites after Hinkley Point — at Sizewell in Suffolk and Bradwell in Essex.
EDF had hoped to take the final investment decision earlier this year but it was postponed amid growing opposition from board members and executives.
That opposition persisted until the end, despite the company’s decision to push ahead with the scheme. As the meeting got under way, Gérard Magnin quit as a state representative on EDF’s board, calling the company’s nuclear strategy “highly risky”.
In the end, the vote was carried by 10 to 7. It was closer than expected, with all six union representatives and one shareholder representative voting against the measure.
Ministers in the UK must now give their final sign-off to the scheme, having already agreed to pay £92.50 — double the current wholesale price — for each megawatt hour of electricity it produces for 35 years………https://next.ft.com/content/181077e2-54dc-11e6-befd-2fc0c26b3c60
Like Brexit, UK’s Hinkley nuclear plan is based on shaky politics, not on economic reality
Areva, the French state-owned company which makes the reactors, is being taken over by EDF but it is being investigated by France’s Nuclear Safety Authority over “irregularities” in 400 parts. Areva also faces a state aid investigation.
Even many of the staff inside EDF think Hinkley is a colossal white elephant. The company’s unions, who are represented on the board, fear the project will sink the company and have started legal action to delay the decision, while its finance director resigned in March.
For Hinkley, as with Brexit itself, political chicanery has triumphed over economic reality.
Hinkley’s nuclear plant fails all tests – bar the politics https://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2016/jul/28/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-plant-fails-all-tests-bar-the-politics
Huge, expensive and difficult to build, Hinkley is a throwback to the last century, just as the world is embracing the smart energy systems of the future, Guardian, Damian Carrington, 29 July 16 The new nuclear reactors now given the go-ahead at Hinkley Point have failed every test bar the one that finally mattered – political expediency.
The plant, to be paid for by UK energy customers, could cost them £37bn and is a leading contender for the most expensive object ever built on the face of the Earth. A former Conservative energy secretary calls it “one of the worst deals ever” for Britain.
It faces formidable commercial, technical and legal obstacles to getting built remotely on time or budget, or indeed at all. And while the rest of the world is accelerating ahead with the smart energy systems of the 21st century, Hinkley is a throwback to the nuclear age of the 20th.
But the French government, which majority-owns Hinkley’s builders EDF, wants to preserve its national nuclear industry. The UK government, blinded by the dazzle of a mega-project, is happy to let its citizens pick up the bill.
It has taken almost a decade to get to this point. In 2007, EDF said British Christmas turkeys would be being roasted with its nuclear electricity in 2017. The earliest possible switch-on now is 2026, another decade away.
What is scary is that reaching the final decision to go ahead was the easy bit. Now they have to deliver a giant and fiendishly complex construction project, described by one nuclear engineer as like “building a cathedral within a cathedral”, that is, “unconstructable”.
EDF has never managed to build the types of reactors intended for Hinkley. Its two attempts so far, in France and Finland, remain many years behind schedule and many billions over budget. Perhaps they are hoping for third time lucky.
UK nuclear power generation is £27.5 more expensive per MWh than that generated by gas power plants
Yet the commercial foundations for this engineering miracle are incredibly shaky. EDF is on the ropes financially and had to be given a €3bn bailout in April by the French government. That may well be challenged under EU state aid rules, which would join an ongoing state aid legal case brought by Austria against UK subsidies for Hinkley.
It gets worse. The French Financial Markets Authority raided EDF this month, investigating allegations that it misrepresented the cost of Hinkley and other projects. Banks and other financial institutions already loathed the Hinkley plan, with EDF warned of further credit rating downgrades if it goes ahead, making its huge debt more expensive to maintain.
Areva, the French state-owned company which makes the reactors, is being taken over by EDF but it is being investigated by France’s Nuclear Safety Authority over “irregularities” in 400 parts. Areva also faces a state aid investigation.
Even many of the staff inside EDF think Hinkley is a colossal white elephant. The company’s unions, who are represented on the board, fear the project will sink the company and have started legal action to delay the decision, while its finance director resigned in March.
With foundations this unsound, you would think the UK could get out of the deal easily if it turns sour. But think again. The deal to be signed with EDF contains a “poison pill” which could leave taxpayers with a £22bn bill if a future UK government shuts the plant down.
The government is adamant that Hinkley, which could provide 7% of the UK’s electricity, is a vital part of a secure low-carbon future. But a barrage of recent reports from serious players say the opposite. The future is not gigantic centralised energy plants, but widespread networks of renewable energy and storage, interconnected across the continent, bolstered by energy efficiency measures and the smart management of demand.
Hinkley Point C will provide 7% of UK electricity when it starts to produce electricity in 2025
Bodies including the government’s own National Infrastructure Commission(NIC), the National Grid, industry group Energy UK, all point to a smart system that is more secure, cheaper and faster to build. They all use the same word – “revolution” – for the fast changes now happening in energy, while theInternational Energy Agency talks of a rapid “transition”.
Hinkley’s reactors are a revolution only in the sense that they overturn all logic. Energy efficiency could deliver six Hinkley’s worth of electricity by 2030, interconnector cables to Norway, Denmark and France could add another two or three Hinkleys to the grid by 2025 and four Hinkleys’ worth of electricity could be saved by 2030 by increasing the ability to store electricity and making the grid smarter, with the latter alone saving bill payers £8bn a year. Solar and wind power are also cheaper than Hinkley’s nuclear power.
EDF had said its decision on Hinkley would be made in September at the earliest. So why the sudden rush, after so many years of delay? The company’s announcement that the decision was being brought forward came on the evening after Theresa May, keen to signal post-Brexit Britain remains open for business, had met Francois Hollande for talks. For Hinkley, as with Brexit itself, political chicanery has triumphed over economic reality.
Hinkley Point nuclear station – not just a folly – but a massive folly
Why Hinkley Point is a nuclear folly of Titanic proportions https://www.newscientist.com/article/2099287-why-hinkley-point-is-a-nuclear-folly-of-titanic-proportions/ French utility company EDF is going ahead with plans for a massive new nuclear reactor in the UK, but there are many reasons to doubt it will ever be finished, says Michael Le Page
It’s also crucial for France, which largely owns EDF, the company that will build Hinkley. France needs the project to help cover the huge cost of revamping its ageing collection of nuclear plants, which currently supply three-quarters of the country’s electricity. And Hinkley matters to China, too, as one of its state-owned companies will be stumping up a third of the cost.
But despite today’s much-delayed decision by EDF to go ahead with the megaproject, its future still looks doubtful. There are huge financial, legal, technical and safety-related icebergs lurking in the seas ahead.
Behind schedule
One reason why is that the two reactors planned for Hinkley are based on a new design. The EPR design is supposed to be safer and more efficient, but it has proved so difficult to construct that not one has yet been completed.
EDF started building the first EPR, at Olkiluoto in Finland, in 2005. It was supposed to start up in 2009. Work on the second, at Flamanville in France, began in 2007 and was due to be finished in 2012. Another two EPRs are being built in Taishan, China. All four projects are years behind schedule and have cost billions more than expected.
There are also worries about the fact that a state-owned Chinese company will be supplying some of the parts and workers for the project. The UK’s intelligence agencies are said to be concerned that a “back door” could be built into the control systems, allowing China to shut down the plant if it wanted to.
Last but not least, there are various legal challenges pending. The Austrian government, for instance, is appealing against the European Commission’s decision to approve state aid for the project, saying it breaches European laws. Meanwhile, French authorities are investigating possible financial misreporting by EDF.
Even in the unlikely event that the Hinkley project dodges all these icebergs, there may not be a happy ending. Many analysts think it’s a bad deal for the UK, because it has had to promise to pay a very high price for Hinkley’s electricity.
The worst-case scenario is that the project sails on for many more years before finally sinking. That will be a disaster for everyone.
Interactive tool shows you what would happen if a nuclear bomb hit London
What would happen if a nuclear bomb hit London? Use this interactive tool to discover your fate, Mirror, UK 28 July 16 What would happen if a nuclear bomb hit Britain?
The effects would be devastating but this tool shows just how widespread they would be.
It’s a highly unlikely scenario, of course.
However, 60 years ago, crisis planners were desperately worried about the threat of a nuclear attack and identified key cities and towns in the UK which were a likely target to be wiped out with one nuclear bomb.
Here’s what the effects could be today if a nuclear bomb detonated in London.
We’ve used the Nukemap website and looked at three different bombs, all of which have been either used or tested.
It’s a highly unlikely scenario, of course. However, 60 years ago, crisis planners were desperately worried about the threat of a nuclear attack and identified key cities and towns in the UK which were a likely target to be wiped out with one nuclear bomb.
Here’s what the effects could be today if a nuclear bomb detonated in London. We’ve used the Nukemap website and looked at three different bombs, all of which have been either used or tested.
1. Ivy Mike – the first H-bomb (10.4 megatons)
Estimated fatalities: 2,336,920
Estimated injuries: 2,614,180
Fireball radius (orange): The entire city centre including monuments such as Big Ben, the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Palace would be consumed by a nuclear fireball 3.2km wide – stretching up to Camden Town and down to Brixton. The fatality rate is 100%.
Radiation radius (green): Slightly wider than the fireball radius. Without medical treatment, expect between 50% and 90% mortality from acute effects alone. Dying takes between several hours and several weeks
Air blast radius (red – 20psi): The most intense air blast would have a radius of 4.75km and demolish heavily built concrete buildings in Chalk Farm, London Bridge, Chelsea and Kensington among other areas. The fatality rate is still 100% or very close.
Air blast radius (grey – 5psi): A lesser air blast radius would still cause the collapse of all residential buildings within a 10km radius. That means houses would collapse all the way out in East Finchley, Stratford, Poplar and Streatham. Injuries are universal and fatalities widespread.
Thermal radiation radius (lighter orange): The thermal radiation radius is 29.1km. This would mean third degree burns “throughout the layers of the skin”, which could cause severe scarring, disablement and even amputation. This radius covers Watford, Hayes, Epsom, Croydon, Twickenham, Dartford and Epping.
2. The Tsar Bomba – the largest USSR bomb tested (50 megatons)……
3. ‘Fat Man’ – the Nagasaki bomb (20 kilotons)……..http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/what-would-happen-nuclear-bomb-8514152
‘Stop Hinkley’ campaign urges UK govt to switch to renewables, and yes, to Stop Hinkley nuclear
Campaigners call on government to stop Hinkley Point http://www.energylivenews.com/2016/07/26/campaigners-call-on-government-to-stop-hinkley-point/ Jul 26, 2016 Jacqueline Echevarria A group of campaigners are calling on the government to ditch the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C (HPC) in Somerset.
Called ‘Stop Hinkley’, the group has sent a letter to Business, Energy and Industry Strategy Secretary Greg Clark ahead of a final investment decision for the project by EDF’s Board onThursday. They say a final investment decision for Hinkley would be “little more than spin as problems mount for nuclear delusion”.
They believe the nuclear project is too expensive, will kill British manufacturing, is bad for consumers, the taxpayer, business and potentially the environment and is a total waste of money.
Renewable energy and energy efficiency projects could be implemented very quickly and much more cheaply, they added.
They stated ditching EDF’s plans for HPC would provide the country with a “wonderful” opportunity to turn Somerset into a sustainable energy hub for England.Allan Jeffery from Stop Hinkley said: “Now even the financial press says Hinkley Point C has become a laughing stock. The cost keeps rising while the cost of renewables is falling rapidly and the potential to make savings with energy efficiency is huge. We could replace Hinkley much more quickly and cheaply without the safety fears and without producing dangerous waste we don’t know what to do with.”
According to the former Department of Energy and Climate Change, the estimated cost of the Hinkley Point C project over its lifetime could reach £37 billion.
French authorities have raided EDF’s headquarters in France before the Hinkley decision.
ELN has contacted BEIS for a comment.
Report questions value of new nuclear projects in Wales compared with renewables
New nuclear projects in Wales must be ‘cost-competitive’ with renewables, say MPs , Business Green, 26 July 16 Planned nuclear sites in North Wales should only go ahead if government can prove development is ‘value for money’, as Business Secretary Greg Clark visits Japan to fan investor interest in UK nuclear projects
Lawmakers on the Welsh Affairs Committee have published a new report insisting that before proposed nuclear developments at Wylfa Newydd and Trawsfynydd in North Wales go ahead the government must prove the financial viability and community benefit of the projects.
“The government must prove that the cost of any nuclear development is well understood and competitive with renewable sources. These costs must be made public in a format that can be easily understood,” Committee chair David Davies MP said.
“There has to be a demonstrable benefit for the local community as well,” he added. “Local businesses must form a key part of the supply-chain and be given sufficient information to allow this to happen.”………
The report concludes the government should only support the development at Wylfa Newydd if the strike price for the project’s electricity is competitive with renewables and below that of Hinkley Point C, EDF’s controversial nuclear project in Somerset which is due to receive a final investment decision this week. Hinkley’s strike price is £92.50 per MWh – more than double the current market price of power. In comparison, the strike price for onshore wind is around £80 per MWh with some experts now arguing new onshore wind farms can be built at a lower levelised cost than new gas power plants. ……..
Cost estimates for Wylfa Newydd must cover the lifetime of the project, including decommissioning and waste disposal, MPs said, after concerns were raised during their investigation that nuclear power projects are often subject to delays and cost schedule overruns. Cost estimates for Hinkley Point C have ballooned from £16bn in 2012 to almost £21bn earlier this year, while last week EDF’s Paris headquarters were raided by the French finance authorities investigating concerns about its reporting of maintenance and development costs………http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2465917/new-nuclear-projects-in-wales-must-be-cost-competitive-with-renewables-say-mps
 |
Click here to Reply or Forward
|
Cost of Hitachi nuclear plant for North Wales is far too high
Hitachi U.K. Nuclear Plant Should Get Less Than EDF, Panel Says http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-25/hitachi-u-k-nuclear-plant-should-get-less-than-edf-panel-saysAlex Morales AlexJFMorales
-
EDF’s Hinkley Point is set for $39 billion of future subsidies -
Hinkley secured guaranteed power price at twice current rate
-
Hitachi Ltd. should be paid less for the power from its planned nuclear plant in North Wales than Electricite de France SA has been promised for reactors in western England, a panel of U.K. lawmakers said, seeking to keep a lid on energy prices paid by consumers.
The government should also ensure the cost of the Wylfa Newydd project by Hitachi’s Horizon unit is competitive with renewable-power plants such as onshore wind farms, the cross-party Welsh Affairs Committee said Tuesday in an e-mailed report. The lawmakers called for a “clear and comprehensible explanation” of the lifetime costs of the 2.7-gigawatt project and for a “demonstrable benefit” to the local community.
The U.K. is struggling to build generating capacity fast enough to keep up with the closure of aging nuclear power stations and a phase-out of coal-fired plants. EDF is set to make a final investment decision on Thursday on whether to proceed with an 18-billion-pound ($24 billion) plan to build two reactors at Hinkley Point. The utility has repeatedly postponed a decision on the long-delayed project, despite securing a U.K. government guarantee that it’ll receive 92.50 pounds per megawatt-hour of power, more than double current rates.
- “The government should only build Wylfa Newydd if the strike price is below that agreed for the Hinkley Point C and competitive with renewable sources,” the committee said in a statement. “They must be transparent on cost and provide a clear and comprehensible explanation of the lifetime cost of the project, including decommissioning and waste disposal.”
Fixed Amount
Power from Hinkley Point and Wylfa will be paid for under a so-called contract for difference, which fixes the amount the utility receives per megawatt-hour, making its income predictable. If prevailing power prices are lower than the agreed “strike price,” utilities recoup the difference through consumer bills. If the prevailing price is greater, the utility returns the difference to consumers.
- Because prices have fallen since the EDF contract was agreed in 2013, the future subsidy cost to consumers of Hinkley has increased, according to areport earlier this month from the National Audit Office, which scrutinizes government spending. Using current projections for the wholesale power price, it estimated the lifetime cost of the top-ups has ballooned to 29.7 billion pounds from 6.1 billion pounds originally.The Welsh Affairs Committee also called on ministers to draw up contingency plans in case the Wylfa plant, consisting of two Hitachi advanced boiling-water reactors, isn’t completed as planned by 2025. EDF had originally envisaged its new reactors would generate power by Christmas 2017. Under its current schedule, Hinkley won’t come online until 2025, the same year as Hitachi aims to complete Wylfa.
Despite Brexit, Swedish energy company Vattenfall commits to £300m UK offshore windfarm
Vattenfall commits to £300m UK offshore windfarm despite Brexit
Aberdeen Bay windfarm near Donald Trump golf course will be key testing ground for reducing cost of offshore turbines, Guardian, Adam Vaughan, 21 Jul 16, The Swedish energy company Vattenfall is pushing ahead with a £300m windfarm off the coast of Aberdeen despite last month’s EU referendum vote.
The offshore windfarm has been dogged by years of legal battles between Donald Trump and the Scottish government over its impact on his golf course, which the tycoon ultimately lost in the courts last year.
But on Thursday Vattenfall announced its final investment decision on the European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre, which sees it buying out AberdeenRenewable Energy Group’s 25% share for an undisclosed sum.
The 11 turbines in the development will send clean energy back to the grid, but will also be a key testing ground for bringing down the cost of the technology, which is around twice as expensive as turbines on land. Ministers made clear last year that offshore was “still too expensive” and further subsidies would be conditional on the industry cutting cost.
Donald Trump’s defeat over windfarm welcomed by green campaigners
The 92.4MW project in Aberdeen Bay is all about trying experimental technologies to drive down the costs, Vattenfall said. “It’s all geared to a cost reduction,” said Gunnar Groebler, the senior vice president at Vattenfall. “We expect a lot of findings, a lot of options to further reduce the cost. If you look in Europe, the cost is clearly going south. This windfarm will help us get to the next level.”
Among the cost-cutting measures is a means of attaching the turbines to the seabed using technology that uses less material and higher voltage cabling that loses less of the electricity generated.
But the investment decision is also a vote of confidence in the industry, after the vote to leave the EU. Siemens said Brexit could freeze its offshore wind plans in the UK, though it later rowed back on the remarks.
Groebler said Vattenfall was in the UK to stay. “We’ve repeatedly said the UK is a fundamentally interesting market for us, especially in wind, both onshore and offshore, and we have no reason to change that opinion. The best proof is the decision we are making, this is not something we do lightly.”
He added that it was too early to say what the new UK government’s approach would be towards the industry, but he had seen no signs it would differ from government strategy under David Cameron……
Paul Wheelhouse, the Scottish energy minister, welcomed the investment decision. “This project will keep our nation at the forefront of innovation by allowing energy companies to identify new ways to reduce operating costs,” he said.
WWF Scotland’s climate and energy policy officer, Fabrice Leveque, said: “This is very positive news and provides a welcome boost to Scotland’s offshore wind sector. Scotland has 25% of Europe’s offshore wind resource and this new development provides a great opportunity to progress on capturing the benefits at lowest cost and least impact to the environment.”
Vattenfall said the windfarm will be operational by 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/swedens-vattenfall-commits-uk-offshore-windfarm-despite-brexit-aberdeen-donald-trump-golf-course
UK proposal to offer subsidy contracts to Russia, China and South Korea to build nuclear power stations!
Russia, China and South Korea ‘should be invited to build UK nuclear plants’, Telegraph Emily
Gosden, energy editor 23 JULY 2016
Russian, Chinese and South Korean nuclear companies should be offered subsidy contracts to build reactors in the UK if they are cheaper than other projects already under development, a prominent nuclear lobbyist has said.
Tim Yeo, the former chairman of the House of Commons energy select committee, said EDF’s proposed £18bn plant at Hinkley Point, which is expected to get the go-ahead this week, should be allowed to proceed, but he urged the Government to rethink its approach to future projects.The Japanese-owned Horizon and Franco-Japanese NuGen consortia are both developing plans for reactors at sites in the UK and hope to secure approval for their technologies and subsidy deals from the Government.
Mr Yeo, the MP for South Suffolk for 32 years until the 2015 general election, now chairs New Nuclear Watch Europe, a lobby group whose members include the Korean nuclear firm Kepco. He urged the Government to “urgently examine which nuclear vendors can deliver the cheapest electricity, maximise the number of UK supply chain jobs and minimise the risk of construction delays”………..
He also advocated a new funding approach under which “most of the construction costs are funded by government borrowing throughout the construction period” to help cut financing costs. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/23/russia-china-and-south-korea-should-be-invited-to-build-uk-nucle/
Rail transport of nuclear wastes across North Wales is opposed by residents
The People against Wylfa B (PAWB) group leafleted railway stations across North Wales Demonstrations have been held against radioactive waste being transported by rail along the North Wales coast. Daily Post,, 24 JUL 2016 BY GARETH WYN-WILLIAMS
Members of PAWB (People Against Wylfa B) handed out leaflets at train stations including Bangor, Llandudno Junction, Colwyn Bay and Rhyl on Saturday morning, alerting commuters of the nuclear waste that is transported up to twice a week from Wylfa to Sellafield in Cumbria. The Nuclear Decomissioning Authority (NDA) say such waste has been transported since 1962 without a single accident.
But PAWB argues that if a train carrying waste was to be involved in a collision, residents would be exposed to “highly dangerous and lasting radiation”. Anti-nuclear campaigner Dylan Morgan, who has been protesting for years against a new nuclear plant on Anglesey, said: “The Wylfa trains go weekly on the North Wales coast line through our towns and villages, often at peak times and within three metres of ordinary passenger trains.
“Each of these waste flasks contain hundreds of extremely radioactive atomic fuel rods. Should one of these flasks become damaged, we would be exposed to highly dangerous and long lasting radiation.
“At Sellafield, some of that nuclear waste is reprocessed. That waste contains plutonium, which can be used for nuclear bombs like Trident.
“Sellafield receives far more waste than it can manage and has become a highly radioactive waste dump, which will pollute the environment for centuries to come and cannot be stopped from radiating.”…….http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/campaign-against-anglesey-nuclear-train-11652484
1 This Month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (103)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
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
