UK does not need nuclear power for climate change obligations
Non-nuclear future
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/28/non-nuclear-future
The Guardian, Professor David Elliott Open University 28 March 2013
I was dismayed by the statement by Professor John Beddington, the
government’s chief scientific adviser, that a nuclear energy-free
future for the UK is not something the coalition is thinking seriously
about (Report, 26 March). You quote him as adding: “We really can’t
see a future for the UK energy sector, if we are to meet our climate
change obligations and have resilience in the power sector, without a
significant component of nuclear.”
The Department of Energy and
Climate Change has provided an extensive online energy modelling
system and invited interested people and organisations to use it. The
British Pugwash Group spent a year doing just that and recently
published the results asa set of 2050 energy Pathways. It included one
I helped with, which showed clearly that it was possible to meet the
UK’s energy needs at reasonable cost with no nuclear power, while
reducing emissions below current 2050 targets. Evidently we were wasting our time.
No deal in site between EDF and UK government, on nuclear subsidy
EDF, U.K. Unlikely to Meet End-March Deadline on Nuclear Subsidy -Sources, Fox Business News, By Geraldine Amiel and Selina Williams March 28, 2013 Dow Jones Newswires French electricity company Electricite de France SA (EDF.FR) and the British government are unlikely to meet a deadline at the end of March to agree on subsidies that would allow the construction of new nuclear power plants in the U.K., people familiar with the matter said.
The people said in recent days that although discussions are still ongoing, they aren’t intensive and neither side appeared to be willing to make any compromises.
“There’s no deal in sight, discussions are ongoing and if EDF doesn’t get the price that it believes is the right price then they won’t do it, they have no choice,” Continue reading
UK’s Liberal Democrats do a U turn on nuclear power policy
A Liberal Democrat promise goes nuclear – Time for another ’sorry’
video? http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/03/26/a-lib-dem-promise-goes-nuclear/
By Andy McSmith , 26 March 2013
Looking back at page 59 of the 2010 Liberal Democrat manifesto, one
finds a promise to “reject a new generation of nuclear power
stations.”
Last week the Energy Secretary Ed Davey, a Lib Dem, gave the go ahead
for the first new nuclear power station in Britain for a generation,
at Hinkley C, in Somerset. Today, he and the Business Secretary Vince
Cable and another Lib Dem promised help to enable UK business to
compete in the global nuclear energy market.
Time for another ’sorry’ video?
UK will slug renewable energy providers for the costs of new nuclear
The question of state-sanctioned support for new nuclear power, paid ultimately by consumers, has become a fraught one for ministers.
Renewable energy providers to help bear cost of new UK nuclear reactors Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk, 27 March 2013 Experts say decision to share cost of accommodating Hinkley Point reactors among providers amounts to subsidy for nuclear The row over subsidies for the UK’s new nuclear power stations has deepened after it emerged that the £160m-a-year cost of accommodating the giant reactors on the national electricity grid will be borne by all generators, including renewable energy providers. Continue reading
EU rules do not permit UK to give nuclear operators fixed prices
British nuclear support plans flout EU rules: lawyers, Climate Spectator, 22 Mar 13 Britain’s plans to reward nuclear plant operators through fixed prices for low-carbon energy are illegal under existing EU rules and efforts to adapt them are likely to draw opposition from other member states, EU and legal sources said.
Britain plans to reform its electricity market to fix a minimum price for nuclear, wind and solar-generated power, which is carbon free.
The proposals are being assessed by the British parliament but the subsidy instruments, named contracts-for-difference (CfDs), will also require approval from the European Commission, the EU executive, under state aid rules.
“Neither under the current (…) nor under possible future frameworks could the CfD scheme for nuclear generators be declared compatible with European state aid rules,” said Doerte Fouquet, a lawyer specialised in EU law at Becker Buettner Held in Brussels. Continue reading
European laws on competition may stall UK’s nuclear power plans
Nuclear power plans threatened by European commission investigation Proposed nuclear reactor in Somerset could be delayed by two years if competition directorate launches full-scale investigation, Juliette Jowit and Ian Traynor The Guardian, 14 March 2013 Britain’s planned nuclear reactor programme could be delayed for years, and the nation’s long-term energy policy thrown into turmoil, as European commission officials launch the first stage of a formal investigation into the use of taxpayer subsidies to support the development.
Sources in Brussels have indicated that Britain hopes to win approval for a multibillion-pound deal with French energy giant EDF at the initial stage, which usually takes two months.
But if after a preliminary investigation the EC’s competition directorate decides to launch a full-scale investigation, that would last at least 18 months and probably two years or more. Such an outcome is made more likely by reports that ministers and EDF are discussing a minimum or “strike” price for the nuclear-generated electricity of a little under £100 per megawatt hour – nearly double the current market rate. Continue reading
Britain’s subsidies for nuclear power – unfair guarantees
Nuclear power’s place in a safer, cleaner Britain The Guardian, Professor Sue Roaf Edinburgh. 24 February 2013 The £240bn pledged in subsidies for new nuclear power stations in Britain would give £10,000 to each home in Britain so they could all install solar hot water, solar electric systems, controls and new boilers, where necessary with insulation and draught-stripping, and help take every home in Britain out of fuel poverty.
The solar option helps cut energy demand from homes by 50%-75%, saving huge amounts in NHS costs for mental and physical health. Solar systems generate electricity at less than half the C02 life-cycle costs for nuclear. Most importantly the nuclear route puts more people, every year, into fuel poverty as prices rise, putting profits into the pockets of Big Energy and Big Construction. The solar option actually builds local businesses and community resilience. The Arab spring showed us the power of people who can’t pay their bills. Can anyone tell me one good reason for choosing the nuclear over the solar option if our aim is to build a stronger, safer, cleaner, healthier Britain?
Chris Osman Oxford.There should be only two guarantees to nuclear operators: (a) that they can sell electricity at the price required to cover their costs, and (b) that they are guaranteed to be able to sell some agreed fraction (say 50%) of the output of their reactors while operational, regardless of the cost they have to charge. If the operators have to charge double the standard rate, then tough – it would expose the myth that nuclear fission is an economically competitive way of generating electricity.
International treaties enable the huge economic impact of a nuclear incident to be covered by governments, and thence the general public, instead of the operators. Operators should not be allowed to go bankrupt in the event of a serious incident but instead be required to charge whatever higher price for electricity from other reactors is necessary to cover the full cost. If this is 10 times the normal cost of electricity, again, tough.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/24/nuclear-energy-safer-cleaner-healthier-uk
Britain’s schools to use crowdfunding to go for solar energy
Crowdfunding Solar Schools In Britain http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3606, 22 Feb 13, Schools in the UK wanting to go solar but that are strapped for cash are able to participate in a new crowdfunding service. Continue reading
Warning on UK subsidies for nuclear power, and conflict of interest
RWE boss warns over nuclear plant subsidies , Terry Macalister and Richard Cookson, The Guardian, 20 February 2013
CEO’s concern that consumers could face ‘unnecessarily high bills’ comes as industry staff are seconded to ministries RWE npower, one of the big six power suppliers, has warned ministers not to seal a long-term subsidy deal with the nuclear industry behind the backs of consumers and saddle them with “unnecessarily high bills” for the next 40 years.
The warning from Paul Massara, RWE UK’s new chief executive, comes as the Guardian can reveal that up to 15 private sector executives with links to the atomic sector have been seconded to government departments or other public sector roles.
“We are very concerned that decisions currently being taken around guaranteed revenue from new nuclear power stations in return for their delivery could force the next three generations of British consumers to pay an unexpected and perhaps unnecessarily high bill for the next 40 years, especially given the track record of delivery of nuclear power stations,” said Massara.
“There must be an open and honest conversation about the future direction of energy bills. Customers must be given the best information to be able to make informed decisions, take control of their bills and reduce their energy waste.”…..
. “We believe UK customers should not be made to write a blank cheque to pay for new power stations,” A Freedom of Information request undertaken by the campaign group, NuclearSpin.org, showed at least 15 people working for the nuclear energy industry or its consultants have been seconded to areas responsible for policy or regulation, some being paid for by the taxpayer…….
UK’s nuclear cleanup problems are echoed in USA
Across the Pond, Florida’s Progress Energy’s Crystal River 3 Nuclear Power Plant is also in
the process of being decommissioned. Not only for consumers but those living nearby, the decisions regarding Sellafield’s decommissioning are likely to reverberate across the Atlantic.
WHO WILL PAY FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CLEANUP? Yves here. Holy moley, the cost estimates focus the mind! And the little mishap recounted below isn’t encouraging either.
Naked Capitalism, By John Daly, a non-resident scholar at the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies and chief analyst at OilPrice. Cross posted from OilPrice 20 Febv 13
Many of the civilian nuclear power plants built in the US. and Western Europe during the halcyon days of the Eisenhower administration are coming to the end of their operational lives as their operating licenses expire.
The looming deadlines leave their operators with two stark choices – apply for a license extension beyond the original forty years, or decommission.
A bad choice, however you look at it. For a license extension, aging NPPs must upgrade, while decommissioning raises the primordial question sidestepped since the dawn of the civilian nuclear age – what to do with the radioactive debris? The British imbroglio. Continue reading
UK nuclear submarine leaked radiation in Scottish waters
Radiation leak on nuclear sub off Scots coast Express UK , February 17, 2013 BRITAIN’S?nuclear?fleet?suffered?a?dangerous setback after a submarine was docked for emergency repairs following a radiation leak off Scotland. By: Marco Giannangeli HMS Tireless was taking part in a training exercise for new officers off the west coast 10 days ago when a problem developed in its ageing 30-year-old reactor system. Continue reading
UK government to subsidise nuclear power, backtracking on promises not to
At the same time some MPs are concerned that the energy bill, which is being scrutinised by MPs, would allow future governments to give nuclear power stations more money if it was needed, without telling parliament.
Suspicion about the clauses in the bill enabling future financial support have been fuelled by industry claims in recent weeks. Vincent de Rivas, chief executive of EDF, told MPs that he wanted the government to guarantee buying all the possible output from the new nuclear plants, not just what was needed.
“He [Davey] is saying there will be a subsidy. Perhaps an enormous subsidy. But you, parliament and the public, will not know what it is until it is too late to change.”
Nuclear power: ministers offer reactor deal until 2050 The Guardian UK Juliette Jowit, political correspondent, 18 Feb 13, Energy firms may get 40-year backing after government U-turn on subsidies. The government is launching a last-ditch attempt to sign up energy companies to build new nuclear power stations by proposing to sign contracts guaranteeing subsidies for up to 40 years.
The coalition agreement reached between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in 2010 promised that nuclear power stations would be built only if the industry got no public subsidy, but costly overruns for new reactors overseas and the exit of several major utilities from the UK programme, most recently Centrica, have driven ministers and officials to backtrack on that pledge and accept they will have to provide financial support. Continue reading
UK govt twists and writhes – trying to give the nuclear industry a subsidy that doesn’t look like a subsidy
The government, which has ruled out any public subsidy for nuclear power, is determined to avoid the perception that it will support new nuclear at any price, even at the risk of the talks collapsing.hangs in the balance amid increasingly fraught talks between EDF Energy and the Treasury over the price of electricity from EDF’s planned nuclear power station in Somerset.The two sides are negotiating over what price EDF should be awarded for the power it generates at Hinkley Point C, set to become the first new UK atomic plant built in a generation. But the gap between them is much wider than many in the industry were expecting. Continue reading
UK, USA, paralysed, but need permanent deep burial of nuclear wastes
In the United States, efforts to build a repository are in the doldrums
At the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan, spent fuel stored above ground at reactors is likely to have been a major source of contamination following the earthquake and tsunami in 2011. At the last count, the clean-up there is expected to cost trillions of yen, or hundreds of billions of dollars.
In a hole It is in Britain’s best interests to keep looking for a site for a deep nuclear-waste repository. Nature, 05 February 2013 The best way to dispose of nuclear waste is to bury it deep underground. With the right mixture of geology and engineering, researchers think, it should be possible to contain highly radioactive material safely for the many thousands of years that it will take to decay.
Scientists agree on this. The industry thinks the same way, and so do regulators, politicians and most environmental groups. Yet despite the expert endorsement, plans for a deep geological repository in Britain effectively ground to a halt last week, after a local council voted against plans to look for a suitable site…….
why has the process come up empty again? The answer is a lack of political will at almost every level of government. Critics say that the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, the body responsible for the repository, never did much to try to sell the facility to local residents or to address their concerns about what it might do to property prices or tourism. At a national level, politicians offered only the vaguest promise of ‘economic development’ in exchange for taking the waste. Meanwhile, local politicians advocated an alternative plan: to build more short-term storage at Sellafield, thereby creating jobs in the near-term without making long-term commitments.
“There are moral, financial and environmental reasons to make deep geological disposal work.” Continue reading
UK nuclear price guarantee a tricky and controversial question
Lid to be kept on nuclear price guarantee – strike price ‘won’t reach three figures’ : http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-2276494/Lid-kept-nuclear-price-guarantee–strike-price-wont-reach-figures.html#ixzz2Kc9vIVuf By JON REES 10 February 2013 The wholesale price guaranteed by the Government for nuclear power generation is likely to be less than £100 a megawatt hour.
Nuclear investors will be compensated if the price falls below the agreed level, but if the price is higher the energy giants must pay the difference to consumers.
Sources close to the negotiations with the Government last week claimed that the guaranteed figure – known as the strike price – ‘will not reach three figures’, which is considerably less than the £140 per megawatt hour equivalent for offshore wind.
If the strike price is set at a level that is seen as being too high it will prove politically controversial as EDF – the only company with firm plans to build new nuclear plants before 2020 – is owned by the French.
A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: ‘No commitment has been made on commercial terms or a strike price.’
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 (116)
- 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 