News Archive – August 2005

Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Increases

Decommissioning Britain's 20 ageing nuclear power stations will cost at least £8bn more than originally estimated, according to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's (NDA's) new draft Strategy Document. The NDA says the cost of decommissioning has gone up to £56bn, compared to the £48bn previously anticipated. If the decision is taken to reclassify plutonium as waste, rather than an asset, another £10bn could be added to the total cost. The NDA also hopes to speed up the decommissioning process.

The Guardian 12th August 2005
The Times 12th August 2005
The NDA wants comments on its Draft Strategy Document by 11th November 2005

Meanwhile the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) has announced that it had reduced the list of potential solutions to long-term interim storage, deep geological disposal, phased deep geological disposal, and near-surface disposal.
The Telegraph 12th August 2005
CoRWM Press Release 11th August 2005

New Nuclear White Paper Next Year?

Tony Blair was said to have shelved a decision about whether or not to build new nuclear stations until after the General Election. It was not a vote-winner. Now, though, the question is expected to rise up the agenda. Soon after MPs return from their summer recess, ministers will begin putting the final touches to a climate change review that examines what needs to be done to meet the government's target, more ambitious than that in the international Kyoto accord, for cutting greenhouse gases. The Financial Times reports that government insiders say the findings of the climate change review, led by Margaret Beckett, environment secretary, will pave the way for an independent study of whether more nuclear power stations should be built.

Vexed issue set to rise up political agenda as emissions target looms, FT 12th August 2005

The Times says the Government’s continuing failure to produce its long promised strategy for meeting Britain’s future energy needs is damaging British industry. Uncertainty about future supplies compounds already acute concern about soaring prices and the added burden of the Climate Change Levy. Further delays in reaching a decision will affect not just industrial consumers, but households too. Immediately after the election, Alan Johnson, the minister responsible, was told by officials that policy must be decided before the summer recess if Britain was to avoid running short of energy as early as 2008. The recess is upon us, and still there is silence. The main reason appears to be Labour’s extreme reluctance to say where it stands on nuclear power. Our Populus survey today shows that popular distrust of nuclear energy has if anything increased. The poll found that 59 per cent of those questioned believe that it would be irresponsible to build more nuclear power stations while problems remain in disposing of nuclear waste. Half of those polled believe that nuclear power is unsafe.

Nucleus of the problem, Leader article, The Times 8th August 2005
Voters prefer wind farms to new nuclear reactors, The Times 8th August 2005

Professor Dennis Anderson at the Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College says The Times fails to mention a problem that has afflicted nuclear power for 50 years, namely the propensity of its advocates to underestimate costs. According to a study by the Royal Academy of Engineering, the costs of new nuclear plant, including those of decommissioning and waste disposal, would be 10 per cent less than the best available gas and coal-fired plant. Why then doesn't the industry go ahead on its own? The answer is that costs are likely to be appreciably higher than such estimates, up to 100 per cent higher according to a highly regarded study by Massachusetts Institute of Technology economists, assuming the reactors are built on time and at cost. This difference amounts to £1 billion- £1.5 billion per 1,000MW station, which is presumably why the Treasury is hesitant.

Place of nuclear power and coal in future energy policy, Letters, The Times 11th August 2005