nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Bangor University to collaborate with Rolls Royce and the University of Oxford to develop nuclear power for space

 Bangor University is continuing its relationship with Rolls-Royce in the
field of space nuclear power technology. Rolls-Royce has secured funding
from the UK Space Agency under the National Space Innovation Programme
(NSIP), which adds more support for the development of its space nuclear
power technology. The new £4.8m award from NSIP Major Projects will help
to significantly advance the development and demonstration of key
technologies in the space nuclear Micro-Reactor. The Rolls-Royce National
Space Innovation Programme will have a total project cost of £9.1m and
aims to progress the Micro-Reactor’s overall technology readiness level,
which will bring the reactor closer to a full system space flight
demonstration.

 Bangor University 24th July 2024

https://www.bangor.ac.uk/news/2024-07-24-bangor-university-to-collaborate-with-rolls-royce-and-the-university-of-oxford-on

July 27, 2024 Posted by | Education, UK | Leave a comment

  What Labour’s Great British Energy really means for Scotland and is nuclear on the cards?

We know it will be based in Scotland, we know it’s going to invest
in green energy projects, and aim to leverage private investment into the
same. But Thursday’s announcement has thrown up more questions about the
specifics which the Government are yet to answer – especially on what the
project means for Scotland.

There remains no clarity on when people might
expect to see energy bill pressures easing up on their household finances.
The Government has only gone as far as to say that bill reductions can be
expected within the next five years, as a result of their actions. Crown
Estate Scotland is a devolved body and the revenue raised through rents
north of the Border is sent back to the Scottish Government. Its reserved
counterpart can invest directly in Scotland, however, and the two bodies
already work closely together on some projects.

Whether the Crown Estate Scotland will get the same new borrowing powers as its rest-of-UK
counterpart remains to be seen. GB Energy will seek to work alongside GB
Nuclear, a vehicle which came about under the previous government.

This could raise red flags for the Scottish Government, which remains opposed to
nuclear power. It is understood the UK Government views nuclear policy as a
matter for the Scottish Government. And while the Scottish Government said
on Thursday that it believed the “UK Government’s intended investment
in nuclear should instead be used to bolster further renewables” a
spokesperson added there was otherwise a “great deal of agreement between
the two Governments on many of the priorities that have been identified”.

 The National 25th July 2024

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24477272.labours-gb-energy-really-means-scotland-nuclear/

July 27, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Seek shelter ‘best option’ in nuclear incident

Caroline Robinson, 25 July 24, BBC News, Ben Chapple, BBC News, Guernsey

Channel Island authorities will advise people to seek shelter in the unlikely event of a nuclear incident affecting the islands.

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) looked at nuclear risks to the islands as part of “routine risk and business continuity planning”.

It said the risk of a nuclear incident occurring was extremely low and its review considered the worst-case scenarios.

The UKHSA recommended shelter-in-place and stockpiling iodine be considered, but the pan-island Radiation Advisory Group decided shelter was the most appropriate choice for the islands.

‘Shelter-in-place’

Nearby nuclear sites in France, radioactive waste dumped in the Hurd Deep trench off Alderney in the 1950s and 1960s and the transport of nuclear materials by ship in the seas around the Channel Islands were the risks considered.

The sites in France looked at were the Orano La Hague nuclear fuel reprocessing site, the Flamanville nuclear power station and Cherbourg’s naval dockyard, where nuclear submarines are dismantled.

The UKHSA said if an incident happened at one of these sites wind direction and weather were important – wind could blow the radioactive material towards the islands and rain would cause more of it to land on the islands.

Based on five years of weather data it said with the prevailing wind being from the west and south west it was unlikely a plume would be blown towards the islands.

The UKSHA said if any material was due to arrive in the island the “best option” for people was to “shelter-in-place”.

This means going inside, closing doors and windows and turning off ventilation fans and air conditioning…………………………………………………………….. more https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3grzg9j3xgo

July 27, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear Free Local Authorities back joint statement condemning AUKUS nuclear proliferation

The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities have joined environmental and peace groups around the world in endorsing a statement that will be delivered to a conference at the United Nations.

The 2024 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Preparatory Committee will meet today to begin work to make preparations for the next conference of signing to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (or NPT).

The statement will be delivered to committee delegates by Jemila Rushton, Acting Director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Australia. The NFLAs are a member of ICAN.

Particular reference is made to the adverse impact of AUKUS, the military alliance forged between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States in opposition to China, on geopolitics in the Pacific.

Amongst its more controversial elements is the provision of nuclear-powered submarines by the other partners to Australia. We share the concern of other signatories that AUKUS violates in spirit both the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Rarotonga – South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. The submarines will be powered by weapons-grade nuclear fuel, supplied by the other partners and will operate from Australian bases within a nuclear free zone.

Although present plans provide for these submarines to be conventionally armed, it is not inconceivable that over time they could be rearmed with nuclear weapons. The Leader of the Opposition in the Australian Parliament, Peter Dutton, is currently actively lobbying for Australia to establish a civil nuclear programme and such a programme is critical to support the development of nuclear weapons capacity.

The statement has also been endorsed by our colleagues Labrats, CND Cymru and Together against Sizewell C.

For more information please contact the NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk

July 26, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

UK: Ed Miliband unveils plans for mini-nuclear reactors .

Ed Miliband will press ahead with a new generation of mini nuclear power
plants, with plans to unveil reactor designs by September. The energy
secretary has told MPs that he will give his “absolute support” to
plans to build a fleet of “small modular reactors” around Britain as
part of his clean energy drive.

Looser planning rules are expected to allow
these reactors almost anywhere outside built-up areas, ……………………………………………………….

He is now turning his attention to nuclear power, with a final decision on
Sizewell C due, alongside efforts to finish the Hinkley Point C plant.
Miliband has also committed to continuing the previous government’s drive
to make Britain a world leader in small modular reactors.

A decision on which designs to take forward is due by the end of the summer. Miliband
told MPs this week: “We will strive to keep to the timetable set out.”
Describing nuclear power as “very important for the future”, he said:
“This government were very clear in our manifesto about the role that
nuclear power — both large-scale nuclear and SMRs — can play.”

A final decision is also due this year on liberalising planning rules for
modular reactors. Currently nuclear power plants can be built only on eight
named sites but the previous government wanted developers to be able to
identify their own location based on a new list of safety and environmental
criteria.

Miliband is seen as unlikely to opt for tougher rules, after
repeatedly stressing to MPs this week that local concerns over development
would not be allowed to veto projects seen as vital to energy security and
economic growth. Under the draft rules, only “population density” and
“proximity to military activities” will rule out nuclear plants,
meaning they cannot be built in areas with more than 5,000 people per
square kilometres, covering most towns and cities. This is designed to
“minimise the risk to the public” in the event of a radioactive spill.


All other criteria would be discretionary, including size, flood risk,
proximity to civil airports, the natural beauty, ecological importance or
cultural heritage of the site.

 Times 19th July 2024

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/ed-miliband-unveils-plans-for-mini-nuclear-reactors-in-net-zero-drive-f3z7htx8x

 **GB Energy**

July 22, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Shiny New MP’s Fizzingly Push For More Nuclear Waste – Hotter the better! And a Complaint to Advertising Standards – Standards? What Standards!

  BY MARIANNEWILDART,  https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2024/07/18/shiny-new-mps-fizzingly-push-for-more-nuclear-waste-hotter-the-better-and-a-complaint-to-advertising-standards-standards-what-standards/

Well we are now awash with new shiny MPs pushing the “clean” “green” nuclear myth and falling over themselves to write fizzingly enthusiastic letters “urging” the new Labour government to “deliver” new unlicensed untested nuclear crapola which the public would be paying for before during and well after any electricity production. Meanwhile Sellafield is bursting at the seams with nuclear wastes which keep on coming – nuclear wastes whose only “solution” is to “decommission” ie disperse, dump, incinerate and forget, make room for more.

How have we come to this – it has taken a lot of effort on the part of the industry and pro nuclear governments from Thatcher to Blair and now Starmer and a lot of forgetting on the part of mainstream environmental NGOs who were the ‘green’ conscience of the people and started out with fierce unequivocal opposition to nuclear but somehow got inveigled into demanding “climate jobs’ with no anti-nuclear caveats giving the now “climate friendly” nuclear industry exactly what it wants.

I wonder how the following adverts [on original] which were in local press over June will be viewed by humanity in future years, or by aliens?

Westinghouse the front end of the industry with its “clean” “climate friendly” uranium fuel and Sellafield, the arse end of the industry with its sponsorship of the “Pride of Cumbria Awards” the Shame of Cumbria is palpable with every radioactive particle that washes back from Sellafied’s radioactive sewers with the tide.

Full Page adverts over consecutive weeks in local press

Anyway more in hope than in expectation of Advertising Standards actually doing its job and making a ruling against breathtaking greenwashing by the most dangerous industry, here is a complaint – also sent to the Westmorland Gazette and Westinghouse on July 8th (no reply from either).

I would like to make a complaint about the advert run in the Westmorland Gazette (and Whitehaven News?) for Westinghouse.

The advert was produced on the same page (on consecutive weeks) with an advert for Sellafield “Proud to be sponsoring the Pride of Cumbria Awards 2024″”.The Westinghouse advert claims that its products: Nuclear Fuel, AP1000 reactors and assisting Sellafield in decommissioning, are “clean” and “carbon free.”

This can be easily refuted as falsehood.

The nuclear fuel produced by Westinghouse at the Springfields site has been burned in nuclear reactors across the UK (and abroad) since the mid-1940s.

Clifton Marsh Landfill

Some of the many waste streams from the manufacture of nuclear fuel are dispersed to the River Ribble and Clifton Marsh Landfill although in January 2022 “the Clifton Marsh low level waste landfill site, operated by Suez, stopped accepting consignments of radioactive waste for disposal. As most of the solid radioactive waste from Springfields is disposed at Clifton Marsh, this has significantly affected routine waste management operations on site. Together with ONR we have discussed and reviewed SFL’s contingency plans to manage waste in the short term, which includes temporary accumulation of radioactive waste on site, improvements to waste characterisation and alternative disposal options. It was anticipated that Clifton Marsh would become available for disposals during the second half of 2022, although this has not yet occurred,” Environment Agency report . Decommissioning Plans Include Incineration of Radioactive Wastes Three Miles from Preston by “Clean” Westinghouse are proposing an incineration plant on their Springfields site just 3 miles from Preston for ” a large, refractory lined oven designed to treat a wide range of low and intermediate-level radioactive materials.” The feed into the incinerator would include European radioactive wastes of up to 3 tonnes a day. Countries such as Germany have now rejected new nuclear on health, safety, climate and financial grounds but still have wastes to dispose of would be keen to use Westinghouse’s new incineration plant.https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/New-UK-waste-treatment-facility-planned#:~:text=Plans% 20to%20jointly%20develop%20a,for%20the%20European%20nuclear%20market.

River Ribble

“The Ribble estuary near Preston receives radioactive substances from liquid effluent, discharged directly from the nearby Springfields Fuels Ltd site, and also transported down the coast from the Sellafield Ltd site via the Irish Sea. Estuaries are complex environments, influenced by both the marine tidal processes and the freshwater input from rivers. Some of the radioactive substances eventually become deposited in sediment in the estuary and on the nearby salt marsh.” …”The amount of shielding provided by boat hulls varied from almost none in a small pleasure boat, to 50 percent in a medium sized houseboat. Thick, dense clothing materials like rubber boots reduced the dose received from beta radiation by around 80 percent, wax jacket by 20 to 40 percent, while thin, less dense materials like woollen jumpers did not provide any protection” Environment Agencyhttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c323240f0b674ed20f75e/scho0211btkg-e-e.pdf

“Carbon Free”

The latest carbon emissions report for the Preston Springfields site by Westinghouse is 38,617 tonnes for 2019. This is the equivalent of 20,000 cars on the road. https://westinghousenuclear.com/media/5kulvl03/springfields-carbon-reduction-plan.pdf?ver=d5dd1Fr giH03Wqky98f_fA%3D%3D

The uranium fuel rod wastes from Westinghouse end up at Sellafield in Cumbria. The carbon footprint for looking after Westinghouse’s burnt uranium fuel rods last year was, according to Sellafield, 600,000 tonnes of CO2. This is far higher than all the emissions generated by all vehicles using the M6 through Cumbria every year according to Cumbria Action for Sustainability’s figures (CaFS give nuclear a free ride excluding figures despite their gargantuan C02 footprint)

AP1000 reactors – Bankruptcy, Crime and Failed Reactor Coolant Pumps

The advert states “Our AP1000 plant is setting operational records in its global fleet and is ready for deployment in the UK.” Yes it is setting operational records in being the most expensive, and fault ridden reactor to date causing Westinghouse to go into bankruptcy. “By 2016 Westinghouse began to grasp the scope of its dilemma, according to a document filed in its bankruptcy: Finishing the two projects would require Westinghouse to spend billions of dollars on labor, abandoning them would mean billions in penalties. Westinghouse determined it could not afford either option.” It chose Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/how-two-cutting-edge-us-nuclear-projects-bankrupted-westingho use-idUSKBN17Y0C7/ Alongside this were charges of Westinghouse executive with dozens of crimes including ” felony counts including conspiracy, wire fraud, securities fraud, and causing a publicly-traded company to keep a false record.”https://thebulletin.org/2021/08/us-attorney-details-illegal-acts-at-construction-projects-sealing-t he-fate-of-the-nuclear-renaissance/

Westinghouse’s “global fleet” is largely in China where AP1000 reactor coolant pumps have failed forcing shut down of the reactors. https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/031419-us -designed-chinese-nuclear-reactor-forced-to-shut-by-pump-defect

Scientists in China are concerned enough to have provided “environmental radiation impacts assessment for the hypothetical accident in Haiyang nuclear power plant” saying that “the impact of east wind in August will mainly affect the west area of HYNPP, but it also has an impact on Northeast China, the Korean Peninsula region and Kyushu, Japan. The research results are aimed at supporting emergency decision-making of nuclear accidents and improving nuclear emergency response capabilities in surrounding areas.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0149197020301153?via%3Dihub Former US nuclear regulator Arnie Gunderson has suggested that the AP1000 deployed in the UK could cause a catastrophe that would be “like Chernobyl on steroids.” https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/nuclear-expert-arnie-gundersen-warns-of-cherno byl-on-steroids-risk-in-uk-from-proposed-cumbria-plant-10109930.html

Clearly Westinghouse’s claim to be “clean” and “carbon free” is false.

yours sincerely

Marianne Birkby

on behalf of Lakes Against Nuclear Dump

July 21, 2024 Posted by | spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

Absent but not missed: No mention of nuclear in King’s Speech

 https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/absent-but-not-missed-no-mention-of-the-n-word-in-kings-speech/ 18th July 2024

The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities could not help but notice that the first speech made by King Charles III at the State Opening of Parliament (17 July) was nuclear free as His Majesty was spared having to utter the word.

By tradition, the Sovereign reads the speech, written for him by Whitehall officials and signed off by Ministers, to a combined gathering of Lords and MPs. This sets out the legislative programme for the coming Parliament. Clearly with the return of a new Labour Government, elected with a huge majority, Ministers are keen to get on and exercise their mandate and the speech was brimming with forty proposals for new legislation[i].

On energy there was an emphasis on meeting the urgent 

On energy there was an emphasis on meeting the urgent challenge of climate change whilst reducing customers’ bills through a ‘clean energy transition’, but His Majestry was notably not called upon to extole nuclear energy as a means to do so so; instead the speech referenced the need to ‘accelerate investment in renewable energy, such as offshore wind’ by creating a new vehicle Great Britain Energy which will be publicly owned and headquartered in Scotland. Nuclear was thankfully nowhere to be seen, seemingly stll on its summer holidays[ii].

Interestingly, the Background Briefing Notes issued to accompany the publication of the speech by Number 10 also makes no reference to nuclear.[iii]

Also interestingly, Ed Miliband shortly after his arrival at the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero issued a statement as Secretary of State to his staff – this too makes zero reference to nuclear as a component in the fight to achieve Net Zero.[iv]

Nuclear then appears late for the party, as per usual, or may even have been excluded from the invite list.

For it is notable that whilst Labour’s energy manifesto makes much of getting new nuclear projects at Hinkley and Sizewell ‘over the line’, extending the lifetime of existing plants, and backing new nuclear including Small Modular Reactors by the end of the government’s first term in 2030, mention of any of this has been noticably absent in the government’s recent pronouncements

The NFLAs hope that Ministers on being appraised of the huge costs and massive challenges of delivering a new nuclear programme has quietly opted to go for the common sense approach of choosing cheaper, practicable and achieveable renewables to deliver truly green energy, energy security, lower bills and Net Zero. Fingers crossed.

July 21, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear Free Local Authorities challenge UK government on New Cleo’s application for “justification” of its small nuclear “fast” reactor

2 In April 2024, the Nuclear Industry Association applied for
‘justification’ on behalf of NewCleo and its lead-cooled LFR-AS-200 fast
reactor to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
The department will support the future Secretary of State in their role as
the authority responsible for the ‘justification’ decision.

This was the first application for ‘justification’ for a so-called advanced modular
design in the UK. In its media release, NewCleo oozed confidence its
reactor design will meet with approval:

‘Justification’ is a regulatory
process which requires a Government decision before any new class or type
of practice involving ionising radiation can be introduced in the UK. A
justification decision is one of the required steps for the operation of a
new nuclear technology in the UK, but it is not a permit or licence that
allows a specific project to go ahead.

Instead, it is a generic decision
based on a high-level evaluation of the potential benefits and detriments
of the proposed new nuclear practice as a pre-cursor to future regulatory
processes.

The design failed the government’s readiness test to be entered
into the Generic Design Assessment (GDA). Even if justification is
forthcoming, with the design not selected for the GDA, it would surely have
to undergo an equally rigorous, but more uncertain, process.

Furthermore, the reactor operates using MOX (mixed uranium and plutonium reprocessed
fuel). Although, the press has previously reported NewCleo’s plan ‘to
take advantage of the UK’s massive stockpile of waste at Sellafield, where
it wanted to invest £2bn in a waste reprocessing factory and advanced
modular reactors that would have created around 500 jobs’, the government’s
recently published Civil Nuclear Roadmap makes clear that this material
will not be forthcoming: ‘We are providing clarity to vendors by
committing not to support the use of plutonium stored at Sellafield by
Advanced Nuclear Technologies whilst high hazard reduction activities are
prioritised at Sellafield’.

The other puzzle is X-Energy, which was given
£3.4m by government, but seemingly, like NewCleo, has been turned down for
consideration for a GDA. X-Energy have previously announced plans to deploy
its reactor design at a site in Hartlepool.

In response to the news, NFLA
Scotland Advisor Pete Roche and Emeritus Professor of Energy Policy at the
University of Greenwich Stephen Thomas put together a question set
exploring and challenging the justification and Generic Design processes.
This was sent by the NFLAs to Nuclear Minister Andrew Bowie. On receiving
the Minister’s response, a second letter with supplementary questions was
drafted and sent, and this has just been replied to by a senior Department
of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) official. The correspondence is
reproduced in this briefing for your information.

NFLA 16th July 2024

https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/A416-NB302-Correspondence-with-DESNZ-and-EA-over-nuclear-design-justification-Jun-2024.pdf

July 19, 2024 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear convoys travelling to Coulport should be peacefully stopped

The National, Brian Quail, Glasgow, 17 July 24

IN this time of post election soul-searching, I would like to present your readers with two simple but vital facts. First, there are two roads by which heavy-duty vehicles can cross the border between England and Scotland, and two only. Secondly, to stop vehicles is a routine matter for Police Scotland

The MoD frequently sends convoys carrying Trident warheads from Aldermaston in Berkshire to Coulport in Scotland. They have to do this regularly to make sure that when they are fired, they will actually work and kill thousands of innocent people (this is called “integrity verification”, I kid you not). Indiscriminate slaughter is the one and only thing they are designed to do.

But the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) entered into force in January 2021 at the United Nations and is supported by 122 states. Thus, the highest court in the world has specifically condemned nuclear weapons as illegal. This ruling is “jus cogens” or compulsory law; that is, a peremptory norm from which there is no derogation (like FGM, piracy, genocide, or enslavement), as opposed to customary law, where parties make mutual agreement.

A Trident warhead is a hydrogen bomb. and by the TPNW, undeniably illegal. To stop these convoys at the border and refuse to allow them to continue their criminal enterprise requires nothing more than normal police procedures; in fact, those guilty could also be arrested and charged with criminal conspiracy. This is enforcement of the law.

Humanity has at last “banned the bomb”, and we must act accordingly.

The appreciation of the logic of this is axiomatic for both the demand for independence and the praxis of self-governance. As long as we cravenly accept this criminal imposition on our land, we do not have independence because we do not deserve it.

As long as we continue with our present craven acceptance of our abject role playing Tonto to the British Lone Ranger in his lunatic nuclear fantasies, we can forget about independence. Marches and demonstrations have their place in this campaign but total commitment demands much more. This demands action.

This direct action is something we can and should do, now. The nuclear convoys should be peacefully and non-violently stopped. This would be an effective technique to obtain independence, and an unambiguous expression of being a normal legal state.

https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24456586.nuclear-convoys-travelling-coulport-peacefully-stopped/

July 19, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

EDF’s plans to create new saltmarsh

ByBurnham-On-Sea.com, July 16, 2024

Meet the Regulator’ event on Tuesday 16th July drop-in session overseen by the EA.

It came as locals have spoken out over EDF’s plans to create a huge new saltmarsh on the Pawlett Hams instead of introducing measures to prevent fish being killed at Hinkley Point C.

Hinkley Point C says the new saltmarsh on the Pawlett Hams would be a ‘natural alternative’ to installing an acoustic fish deterrent at the new power station.

As Burnham-On-Sea.com reported here, EDF is planning to create a saltmarsh at Pawlett Hams to create a new habitat for fish and animals instead of creating an acoustic fish deterrent system at Hinkley Point C which would stop millions of fish from swimming into the plant’s cooling system and being killed.

Local environmental campaign group Protect Pawlett Hams Action Group claims the EDF plans are an “ecological disaster in the making.”

And Fish Guidance Systems (FGS) is calling for urgent support from the Environment Agency (EA) on how a Acoustic Fish Deterrent (AFD) system will be included in EDF Energy’s plans at Hinkley Point C.

FGS says: “One of these conditions includes the application of an AFD which uses low-frequency signals to deter fish from the cooling intakes for the nuclear power plant, located two miles offshore.”

“This would save the lives of local and protected fish species in the Severn Estuary, which would otherwise be pulled through the cooling water systems and released back into the Estuary. Fish under threat include shad, while migratory species such as Atlantic salmon and shad will have a 50% and 100% respective death rate if pulled into the processing as reported in a Welsh Government Commission.”

…………………………………….EDF has suggested the creation of wetland habitat for birds and other species, combined with enhancements to fish passage on a small number of existing weirs however, several environmental groups state that this will not compensate for the millions of fish pulled in by the intakes every year, which some estimate to be 128 million. FGS urges that an AFD system is the only warranted option.

Dr David Lambert, Managing Director of Fish Guidance Systems, adds: “Acoustic Fish Deterrent systems have been successfully used at coastal power plants for nearly thirty years and EDF’s repeated appeal to the government to revoke the use of one does not take into account the important fish species and wider ecosystem. We want to use our expertise to help EDF make informed, scientifically-backed decisions…………………………  https://www.burnham-on-sea.com/news/edfs-plans-to-create-huge-new-saltmarsh-to-be-aired-at-meet-the-regulator-event-today/

July 18, 2024 Posted by | environment, UK | Leave a comment

Campaigners against Sizewell C hopeful new MPs will take their concerns to parliament

The campaign group Stop Sizewell C says it’s heard from several MPs already

Jasmine Oak, 10th Jul 2024,  https://hellorayo.co.uk/greatest-hits/west-norfolk/news/stop-sizewell-c-campaigners-new-mp-hopes/

Campaigners are calling on the new Government to consider scrapping plans to build a nuclear power plant on the Suffolk Coast

Once up and running, it’s thought Sizewell C will power up to six million homes, but activists say it’s going to devastate our countryside

Alison Downes is from ‘Stop Sizewell C’ group – and says Sir Kier Starmer needs to listen to their concerns: “The priority needs to be preventing there being any more unnecessary damage to the local environment.

“We have already seen a fair amount of damage, but that’s nothing compared with what’s to come…

“The government needs to resist any pressure from the nuclear industry for a hasty decision, especially as Sizewell C is going to take a long time, and a lot of money, to build.”

Alison’s hoping the local area’s new MPs will voice their concerns in Parliament: “Our new MP has publicly said that Stop Sizewell C was the first group she met with when she was elected.

“We also have the co-leader of the Green Party, Adrian Ramsay, in Waveney Valley. He’s been very vocal against Sizewell C.”

A spokesperson for EDF Energy has previously told us: “Our proposals for Sizewell C will see the creation of a 3.2 gigawatt power station that will create low-carbon electricity that will supply 6 million homes.

“This will be delivering clean, reliable, and affordable power for generations.”

July 16, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Hinkley Point C, the £46 billion mega-project digging tunnels under the sea

As engineers finish 30m-deep tunnels that will provide water for the £46
billion power station, Labour must decide whether to back new nuclear
plants.

Deep beneath the Bristol Channel, the latest phase of the Hinkley
Point C nuclear power station is nearing completion. Three tunnels
extending miles under the seabed are being fine-tuned by engineers in
bright orange overalls. When the plant is operational, two of these
tunnels, 6m wide and 3.5km long, will be flooded with seawater that will be
used to cool the plant. A third tunnel will return it to the sea.

Constructing all this has required some fiddly design. Each tunnel is
connected to 44m-long metal “water heads” that have been designed to
suck in water but not fish. There is also a “fish return pipe” to help
any unlucky sprat get back to the ocean. The complexity of these tunnels
speaks to the engineering challenge of building Britain’s first new
nuclear power station in 30 years. Overruns and delays mean that Hinkley
Point C is now likely to cost £46 billion by the time the first of its two
reactors is switched on in 2029.

 Hinkley is just over halfway built, and
its delivery will fall to the new Labour government. The party is
pro-nuclear but it will soon have to decide whether to give the green light
to an identical plant, Sizewell C in Suffolk, and a new breed of smaller
reactors.

Does it have the political will — and the financial firepower
— to back this new nuclear age? EDF hit out at British regulators for
ordering 7,000 changes to the design of its reactors, which were not
required in other countries where they have been built. These changes
include the fish return pipe and a requirement that Hinkley’s critical
systems have an “offline” back-up to protect them against cyberattack.
Some industry sources counter that EDF should bear most of the blame.

“They hadn’t done the proper engineering design and construction
planning before they started work,” said one senior figure. Hinkley’s
Crooks blames stringent measures imposed by the Environment Agency for some
of the delays. “The processes in the agency are very, very, very
challenging, and very long. And everything is subject to legal challenge,
which goes on for ever,” he said.

EDF’s current spat with the agency
concerns the company’s plan to ditch underwater speakers that were
supposed to deter fish from swimming near the site. Both parties have
agreed these speakers won’t work, but are now wrangling over what EDF
should do instead. Until the row is resolved, Hinkley won’t have a
licence to operate.

Ironing out these problems is especially important
because EDF plans to replicate Hinkley’s design at Sizewell. It insists
that project will benefit from the lessons learnt at Hinkley. Crooks said:
“I’m highly confident Sizewell will be quicker and a lot cheaper than
this one.”

The UK government is still looking for private investors to
back Sizewell; a final investment decision was due before the election, but
never came. The project is now sitting at the top of energy secretary Ed
Miliband’s in-tray. He is expected to give it close scrutiny, as
electricity bill-payers will be on the hook for the bulk of the cost.

Miliband must also decide how much the UK wants to spend on a newer breed
of smaller modular reactors. Steve Thomas, emeritus professor of energy
policy at Greenwich University, notes that the reactor model being used at
Hinkley has run into problems and delays wherever it has been built — in
China, Finland and France. “Going forward with Sizewell C would be a
costly and risky venture and would draw resources away from the options
that would allow us to meet our climate-change goals quicker, more cheaply
and more reliably,” he said.

There are even more immediate concerns. CGN
has refused to put any more money into Hinkley to cover the overruns. EDF
won’t give a number, but industry sources suggest the project is facing a
funding gap of up to £5 billion. “We are actively looking for investors
to mitigate this cash requirement,” said Crooks. Under the terms of its
contract, EDF — or, more precisely, the French government — will have
to pick up the tab.

 Times 13th July 2024

https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/hinkley-point-c-the-mega-project-digging-tunnels-under-the-sea-7lrmp6xnm

July 15, 2024 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

EDF pulls out of competition to build mini-nuclear reactors in Britain

Sat, 13th July 2024,  https://www.lse.co.uk/news/edf-pulls-out-of-competition-to-build-mini-nuclear-reactors-in-britain-yipcxoiuz1s67eu.html

Alliance News) – Paris-based energy firm EDF has withdrawn from a competition to construct mini-nuclear reactors in Britain, the company said on Tuesday.

EDF was one of six firms shortlisted in October last year for government support to deliver a new wave of nuclear reactors to provide cheaper and cleaner energy.

Two designs for small modular reactors (SMRs) from those submitted by GE-Hitachi, Holtec Britain, NuScale Power Corp, Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC and Westinghouse Electric Corp will be chosen by the end of the year. 

The Conservative government which lost last week’s general election set up the competition as part of its aim to derive up to a quarter of all UK electricity from nuclear power by mid-century…………..

Labour, which won the election, has promised to extend the lifetime of existing nuclear plants, including the much-delayed and over-budget Hinkley Point C in southwest England.

EDF said in January that project could be delayed by four years, and cost as much as GBP8 billion more than planned.

It had been due to become operational in June 2027 but that has now been pushed back to between 2029 and 2031, it added.

Labour also made developing SMRs part of its election pitch to the country, saying nuclear would help Britain achieve energy security and its aims of decarbonising the power grid by 2030.

source: AFP

July 15, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, France, UK | Leave a comment

Radiation levels assessed for on-site burial plan at old nuclear power station

Demolition and disposal is due to start in 2030

Andrew Forgrave, 14 July 2024  https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/radiation-levels-assessed-site-burial-29523489

Potential radiation levels arising from the next-stage decommissioning of a former nuclear power station have been assessed as within safety thresholds. Magnox, owner of the Trawsfynydd site in Gwynedd, is aiming to demolish and infill the site’s ponds complex before capping it with concrete.

In two scenarios – for future site occupiers and for some local wildlife – the UK’s Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS) said dosages could exceed safe levels. But the company said its own assessments were cautious and under criteria set by Natural Resources Wales (NRW) all safety thresholds were met.

Trawsfynydd stopped generating electricity in 1991 after operating for 26 years. Years of demolition and on-site disposal are planned. The reactor buildings are scheduled for completion by 2055 with final site clearance activities ending by 2070. The site will then be released from radioactive substances regulation “some time after that”.

First to be tackled will be the ponds complex – a set of buildings running alongside the site’s two reactor buildings. This is due for demolition in 2030 and this could take up to two years.

For this Magnox needs to amend its environmental permit and has applied to NRW for permission. A four-week public consultation was launched this week.

Martin Cox, NRW’s head of operations for northwest Wales, said: “We understand this permit variation is of particular interest to the public and local community. As the regulator for this application we are committed to keeping the community and environment healthy.

We must be satisfied the proposed demolition, disposal, and capping is done in ways that are safe and meet our standards for the protection of people and the environment while allowing the site to be released from radioactive substances regulation in the future.”

The ponds complex contains concrete pools formerly used to cool and store used nuclear fuel before it was sent to Sellafield in Cumbria for reprocessing. This process ended in 1997 and 99.9% of all radioactive waste has been removed from the site.

Below the ponds and storage vaults are box-like structures capable of storing about 5,000 cubic metres of material, which is twice the volume of an Olympic-sized swimming pool. The plan is to fill these with “slightly radioactive” broken concrete from the demolished structures above them.

Magnox has submitted a “site-wide environmental safety case”, supported by more than 30 technical reports, to NRW. One includes radioactivity estimates by NRS for the ponds complex spanning four scenarios: natural evolution, human intrusion, site occupancy, and environmental impact.

Dosage levels for “inadvertent” human intrusion were found to meet safety thresholds “in all credible scenarios”. Screening criteria was also met for wildlife and plants in the surrounding area apart from the uppermost stretch of Afon Tafarn-helyg, a tributary of the Afon Dwyryd. Magnox noted its criteria was stricter that NRW’s under which the threshold would be met.

For site occupiers Magnox said a few features, just below ground, might breach its safety guidelines but not NRW’s. It added: “This exceedance is for a configuration that cautiously assumes a 0.15 m (minimum) cap thickness. Moreover such worst-case dose rates would be expected to drop below 0.017 mSv/year after around 100 years beyond the assumed end-state date (2083) and the probability of receiving such a dose is expected to be low.”

In any case radioactivity estimates are expected to decrease prior to demolition as further decommissioning continues. Additional borehole investigations are being conducted this year beneath the ponds complex to get a better understanding of groundwater flows. NRS added: “In short, the proposed disposals will be safe while they are being implemented, for the decades while the site remains under regulatory control, and then afterwards into the indefinite future.”

When considering Magnox’s bid for a permit variation to allow on-site disposal at Trawsfynydd NRW will be consulting with experts in Public Health Wales and the Office of Nuclear Regulation. The process is expected to be “lengthy”.

You can take part in the consultation, and view related documents, here. 

July 15, 2024 Posted by | decommission reactor, UK | Leave a comment

Anti-nuclear protestors to march from Norwich to Lakenheath

By Jude Holden, 12 July 24  https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/24449062.anti-nuclear-protestors-march-norwich-lakenheath/

A 10-day peace camp against nuclear weapons being stationed in Suffolk will begin with demonstrators walking 40 miles from Norwich to Lakenheath.

The protest follows reports that the United States Air Force base, RAF Lakenheath is preparing facilities to house and guard nuclear bombs.

Around 150 members from the Lakenheath Alliance for Peace are expected to walk and cycle from Norwich to Lakenheath on Saturday, July 13.

This is expected to take up to three days before the group establishes a vigil for peace at the base’s main gate.

A hand delivered letter is set to be delivered to the base commander with more people expected to arrive at the camp.

The Alliance aims to be at the base between July 15 until Thursday, July 25.

Lakenheath Alliance for Peace activist, Alison Lochhead said this will be a peaceful protest “We have absolutely no intention of being arrested whatsoever, we are there for a peaceful vigil”, she said.

But added: “However, if the powers that be decide to arrest us, well that’s another thing altogether.

“We’re there to raise awareness about the situation.”

Ms Lochhead continued: “Our cause is essential. All these proposals go on behind closed doors. They are bringing back nuclear weapons onto UK soil without any debate whatsoever.

“It is really important that people raise their voices in any way they can.

“That could mean joining us on the walk, or writing a letter to their MP or standing outside the base or even just talking to friends and relations about it.”

She added: “At the moment the military tensions in this world are so high. It is scary.

“We really don’t need to crank it up further and I think people just need to say please deescalate all of this, there are other ways to solve conflict.”

The walk will start outside Norwich City Hall at 10am and the group will then go via the Peace Pillar in Chapelfield Gardens, then on to Unthank Road, Newmarket Road, through Cringleford and on towards Hethersett and Wymondham.

The vigil, which will go on round the clock.

July 13, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »