EPRs
France’s nuclear safety authority won’t decide until early next year whether a key piece of equipment on a nuclear reactor being built by Electricite de France SA in Normandy is safe or needs to be changed, the regulator said. “I don’t see us making a decision or taking a position before the beginning of 2016,” Pierre-Franck Chevet, president of Autorite de Surete Nucleaire, told a hearing at the French Senate Tuesday. The finding could range from rejecting the equipment as unsafe to allowing its use under certain conditions, he said. In a blow to the showcase atomic generator being built at Flamanville, Normandy, the French regulator in April said Areva SA had found steel in the top and bottom of the reactor vessel is weaker than expected. The vessel is designed to hold nuclear fuel and prevent radioactivity from escaping. Construction of the Flamanville EPR began in December 2007, with the date for completion repeatedly pushed back from an initial goal of 2012. The most recent completion date is 2017. The cost has more than doubled to 8.5 billion euros ($9.5 billion) from 3.3 billion euros originally.
Bloomberg 16th June 2015 read more »
Bradwell
NUCLEAR investment could blight Bradwell for almost 200 years if a new Chinese power station is approved, experts have warned. Professor Andy Blowers, chairman of the Bradwell Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG), made the stark forecast days after a leading trade union wrote to the Government expressing concerns that the site will be “handed over lock, stock and barrel” to Chinese investors. Professor Blowers said: “Fundamentally, I don’t think personally that the justification for new nuclear power stations in the country is there, least of all for investment on the Bradwell site. “This power station, if built, would be in operation for around 60 years, so if they got something together by 2030, which seems unlikely, it will be operating until close to the end of this century. “With the nuclear waste having to cool for a long time, they wouldn’t be able to completely leave the site until the end of the next century, close to 2200.” As part of the reported deal agreed to finance Somerset’s Hinkley Point C atomic plant, the Chinese National Nuclear Corporation is eyeing up Bradwell as a location for their own 3,000 megawatt plant, ten times the size of the old Magnox site. He said: “My point is rather more fundamental than the union’s (GMB’s). It is a case of no investment, not alternative investment. There shouldn’t be investment from anybody, even British investors. The idea of creating more rubbish when we don’t have any way to dispose of what we’ve already got just seems quite frankly immoral.”
Essex Chronicle 18th June 2015 read more »
Moorside
The route for a corridor of pylons that will connect a new nuclear facility in Cumbria to the National Grid has been unveiled. The pylons will link new sources of electricity including the proposed new nuclear power station at Moorside into the grid in Cumbria and Lancashire. National Grid has chosen a route that runs overland around the coast of Cumbria and under Morecambe Bay.
BBC 17th June 2015 read more »
Nuclear Policy
Now that it is plain that nuclear power has failed miserably to compete with renewable energy even on the somewhat skewed playing field represented by the (proposed) Hinkley C deal, nuclear supporters are trying to engineer a ‘blank cheque’ to be given to nuclear developers. That would be the outcome of the call, made in a report issued by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). The IPPR favour developing nuclear power as a publicly owned development, on the same basis as projects like HS2. There would be a ‘cost plus’ contract given to the nuclear power developers, who could, and no doubt would, be able to waste taxpayers money on a grand scale without any risk to their own profit margins. IPPR have finally cottoned on to the fact that nuclear power stations never get built on a competitive privately owned risk basis. The fact that that nuclear power is so uncompetitive that it needs this sort of treatment should lead us to the conclusion that it is much better to spend the money on something else, renewable energy for example, of which there is no shortage. But no, the calls of the British engineering establishment must be met, no matter how mid-20th century they may be! Curiously the IPPR report exaggerates the prices paid to onshore and offshore wind. The latest ‘contracts for difference’ issues to these technologies are at £80 per MWh and £120 per MWh, yet the IPPR puts them as being more expensive (see page 29). Maybe the IPPR should get its reports peer reviewed more carefully. More seriously the IPPR is close to the Labour Party. It would be rather unfortunate if the Labour Party supported the IPPR’s approach and came out as being, in effect, more pro-nuclear than the Conservatives if it adopted a ‘blank cheque’ approach. Jonathan Reynolds, Labour’s energy spokesperson has indeed backed the report with a twitter message. Electricity Market Reform was dreamt up to fund new nuclear. That failed. Now were going to have the spectacle, sometime in the future i(f Labour gets in next time) of policy once again being distorted to give a failing dinosaur technology supposed priority over renewable energy.
Dave Toke’s Blog 17th June 2015 read more »
The cost of green energy and low-carbon policies are hitting low-income groups hardest, according to a new report from the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR).
Edie 17th June 2015 read more »
IPPR Report: When the Levy Breaks: Energy Bills, Green Levies and a Fairer Low Carbon Transition.
IPPR 17th June 2015 read more »
Many thanks to Paul Flynn MP for pointing out the truth about nuclear: too expensive to generate. He said: Nuclear power was promised as an energy source that would be too cheap to meter. It is now too expensive to generate. If we were planning a nuclear policy from scratch, would we choose to do a deal with two French companies, one of which is bankrupt, while the other, Électricité de France, has a debt of €33 billion? Would we also collaborate with a country with a dreadful human rights record—China, whose national investment department is coming into the arrangement—and with Saudi Arabia, with its atrocious record on human rights, where people are executed on the street? We are left with the dregs of investment from throughout the world—fragile and tainted. The sensible money deserted Hinkley Point years ago. Centrica had an investment of £200 million, and it abandoned it and ran away, because it saw the project as a basket case. Still, nuclear power has wide support in this House, from almost all parties except the Scottish National party. I hope that this morning the new Minister, whom I welcome to her new work, can apply her distinguished forensic skills to taking a fresh look at the situation. Many people are gravely disturbed by the prospect of new nuclear power. That is particularly so among Treasury civil servants. We are in an extraordinary situation, where there is still public support in spite of Fukushima. One of the main reasons for that is that the British public were “protected” by a skilled public relations operation from knowing the terrible cost of Fukushima—between $100 billion and $250 billion. Radiation is still leaking four years after the event, and tens of thousands of people cannot return to their homes.
Radiation Free Lakeland 17th June 2015 read more »
Newport West MP Paul Flynn fears that a financial and safety ‘catastrophe’ could await if the Government keeps nuclear plans in place. Civil servants have a duty to break their silence and declare the time for nuclear power is over, veteran Welsh Labour MP Paul Flynn said as he launched a scathing attack on the UK Government’s plans to develop the industry. The Newport West MP secured a Westminster Hall debate at which he raised safety worries and warned of multi-billion pound costs to the taxpayer. He said: “Nuclear power was promised as an energy source that would be too cheap to meter. It is now too expensive to generate.”
Wales Online 17th June 2015 read more »
Heysham
David Morris MP: On Wednesday in Parliament I had a meeting with the new minister in charge of new nuclear builds Andrea Leadsom MP, to discuss how progress can be made quickly with the build of Heysham 3. Heysham has been designated as one of eight sites nationally where a new nuclear power station can be built and in the coming weeks and months I will be pressuring the Department to ensure Heysham is moved higher up the list of priorities. On Friday I also had a meeting with Station Director of Heysham 2 Alan Oulton to discuss the future of the station and the site of Heysham 3.
The Visitor 16th June 2015 read more »
Dounreay
M+W Group has been appointed as the lead design and safety case consultant for the Dounreay Shaft and Silo nuclear decommissioning project. The M+W Group seven-year deal covers design, safety and environment case development as well as construction management support. The project will establish new retrieval, processing and packaging facilities that will enable waste from the Dounreay shaft and silo to be treated safely and securely, rendering it suitable for long-term storage and future disposal. Used for over 40 years to store intermediate level waste, the shaft is the deepest storage area of its kind in the world and decommissioning presents several unique technical and engineering challenges.
Penn Energy 16th June 2015 read more »
Decommissioning
A private consortium that will receive tens of millions in public money on top of a £4.2 billion contract to decommission 12 nuclear power stations in the UK has two members of staff currently advising the government’s nuclear, energy and climate change policy. Cavendish Nuclear, the nuclear arm of engineering services giant Babcock International, and Fluor, a Texas-based engineering group, will get an extra £30 million from the state to carry out decommissioning work. It brings the total budget for this year to £632 million. In addition to this years top-up Babcock is reportedly demanding money from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to continue the decommissioning process after it argued that the workload was more than it was anticipating. In an email to Energydesk, DECC claimed the giant contract “included a ‘consolidation period’ to enable the PBO to reconcile the bid it submitted in 2013 and against the situation it actually inherited in September 2014. The new plan emerging from that process is not due to be presented to the NDA until later this year. “ Staff from Cavendish and Babcock have been on secondment to the department of energy and climate change (DECC) since November 2014, according to documents seen following a Freedom of Information request and will remain there through to next year though DECC pointed out the staff do not work at the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). When asked ‘what benefits does Babcock receive from having secondees working in government departments?’ a spokesperson for the company refused to comment, and suggested we contact DECC instead.
Energy Desk 17th June 2015 read more »
Radwaste
Residents and community groups are being asked for their views on a proposal to store more nuclear waste in a repository at Drigg in West Cumbria. As part of an 8-week consultation, the Environment Agency has organised a drop-in session today in Drigg.
ITV 18th June 2015 read more »
Radhealth
Dr Chris Busby’s research has been criticised as ‘weak and unreliable’ but he insisted that he was simply presenting the data. An academic who published a research paper claiming the incidence of breast cancer near a Welsh nuclear power station was five times what it should be has defended himself against critics who have cast doubt on his findings. Dr Chris Busby, who concluded there were elevated risks of various types of cancer downwind from Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station in Gwynedd, challenged his detractors to undertake a critique of his research to academic standards. His critics have included the well-known environmentalist and Guardian columnist George Monbiot and other proponents of nuclear power.
Wales Online 17th June 2015 read more »
Nukes vs Climate
An international coalition of clean energy groups have launched a new campaign asking for the nuclear power industry to be barred from the UN climate talks in Paris. The Don’t Nuke The Climate campaign is being led by the Netherland’s World Information Service on Energy (WISE), and supported by green groups from Germany, Russia, France, Austria and the US. WISE director Peer de Rijk explained: “We are calling on 1,000 civil society organisations to join us for a campaign to block the nuclear industry’s lobby activities at COP21 and instead ensure the world chooses clean energy. It is the only real climate solution.”
Edie 17th June 2015 read more »
The nuclear power industry and its governmental allies are spending huge amounts of money to promote atomic power as an “emissions-free” energy source. Their goal is to encourage the construction of new nuclear reactors worldwide and prevent the shutdown of dangerous old reactors that cannot compete economically with clean energy sources like wind and solar power. Nuclear power is very ineffective at addressing climate change. When the entire fuel chain is examined nuclear power is a net producer of greenhouse gases. Yes, it emits less CO2 than electricity from coal, but adding enough nuclear power to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of nuclear weapons materials, result in a Chernobyl or Fukushima-scale accident once every decade or so, and, perhaps most significantly, squander the resources necessary to implement meaningful climate change policies.
WISE International 17th June 2015 read more »
Nuclear Weapons
NATO’s top commander has attacked Russia’s purchase of over 40 new missiles as the Cold War rhetoric continues to escalate.
Express 17th June 2015 read more »
Reuters 17th June 2015 read more »
Sprinkled throughout the back roads of American are the remains of Armageddon. Or what could have been Armageddon had the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union suddenly gone hot. The ghosts of America’s atomic arsenal, from development to deployment, are accessible if you know where to look: in Arizona and South Dakota, decommissioned nuclear missiles still aim skyward; in Nevada and New Mexico, the remains of nuclear testing still scar the desert; and in Tennessee and Washington state, the facilities that developed uranium and plutonium for America’s nuclear bombs gather dust.
Vice 16th June 2015 read more »
Trident
A whistleblower who alleged that Britain’s nuclear-armed submarines have major security flaws has left his post in unspecified circumstances, the Royal Navy said on Wednesday, after an inquiry found no safety breaches had occurred. Able Seaman William McNeilly released a lengthy dossier online last month in which he said the Trident nuclear defence system was vulnerable to its enemies and potentially devastating accidents because of safety failures. The government held an inquiry into his allegations which concluded many of his assertions were factually incorrect or the result of misunderstandings.
Reuters 17th June 2015 read more »
Iran
There’s a huge problem with Obama’s claims about Iranian nuclear breakout under a final deal.
Business Insider 17th June 2015 read more »
Renewables – geothermal
The renewables industry has urged the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to investigate the potential of geothermal energy, after the Scottish Government green-lit five feasibility studies north of the border. The research, costing a total of £234,000, will be carried out in Fife, West Lothian, North Lanarkshire and Aberdeenshire. It will aim to explore the technical feasibility, economic viability and environmental sustainability of geothermal power plants at the various sites.
Edie 17th June 2015 read more »
Renewables – small wind
The first fully-funded turbine project developed by Glasgow-based developer Urban Wind following a £30 million investment from Zouk Capital has begun to generate power. After securing planning consent for a turbine on the property in 2014, the landowner, a farmer in Leven, Fife, turned to UrbanWind’s to finance development of a 500kW turbine. Construction involved a team of 10 engineers and took seven weeks from the initial breaking ground and laying the concrete foundations through to completion.
Scottish Energy News 18th June 2015 read more »
Renewables – onshore wind
Scotland’s Energy Minister Fergus Ewing has repeated his call that the UK Government does not go ahead with proposals to axe subsidies for onshore wind farms. Further to media reports that the UK Department of Energy (DECC) is set to make an announcement shortly, Ewing said that the Scottish Government maintained its opposition to early closure of support for onshore wind power, provided through the Renewables Obligation. He highlighted the Scottish Government’s opposition was because of the impact on consumers, communities and business. “We don’t believe an early closure of the Renewable Obligation is a sensible decision and will expose the UK Government and hence the taxpayer to the risk of Judicial Review. “However if such a decision goes ahead it must be ameliorated by a grace period covering all projects currently in planning.”
Scottish Energy News 18th June 2015 read more »
DRASTIC cuts to the public funding of onshore wind-farms, which, it is feared, could hit Scotland’s economy by as much as £3 billion and jeopardise hundreds of jobs, are expected to be announced as early as today, according to sources within the renewables industry. The Commons announcement has been expected for some time following the promise in the Conservative election manifesto to “end any new public subsidy” for onshore wind-farms, which the party believes many people feel are a blight on local communities. Sources within the industry made clear that “it is the talk of the industry” that the announcement from Amber Rudd, the Energy Secretary, to end the Renewables Obligation subsidy scheme – funded through green levies on consumers’ bills – is imminent. It would result in thousands of new tu rbines not being built. At the weekend, the Scottish Conservatives said subsidies for new onshore wind-farms should be scrapped as rural areas had “had enough”. They claimed the SNP Government’s target of generating 16 gigawatts of energy by 2020 from wind-farms had, the latest figures showed, already been “effectively surpassed”. Speaking to the Scottish Parliament’s Economy Energy and Tourism Committee, Fergus Ewing, Scotland’s Energy Minister, urged Whitehall not to go ahead with ending support for onshore wind power, emphasising its negative impact on consumers, communities and businesses.
Herald 18th June 2015 read more »
Olsen Renewables has said it has received official consent to develop the third phase of the Crystal Rig wind farm in the Lammermuir Hills in East Lothian. The Norwegian firm said it plans to install six turbines that will be capable of generating three MegaWatts each. It reckons the additional electricity generated will be enough to power a further 10,600 households. It has been given consent to install six turbines of up to 110 metres in height.
Herald 18th June 2015 read more »
Renewables – offshore wind
The world’s second largest windfarm has been officially opened in North Wales First Minister of Wales Carwyn Jones AM joined RWE’s Chief Executive Officer Peter Terium to officially open RWE’s flagship Gwynt y Môr, and boost the UK’s capacity for offshore wind power by 14%. At full power, Gwynt y Môr’s 160 turbines generate a 576MW of low carbon electricity which is enough power for more than 400,000 UK homes and the same as powering a third of all the households in Wales.
Wales Online 18th June 2015 read more »
Grid Networks
Innovation in electricity distribution networks will be an important element in the transition to a sustainable low-carbon energy system. The nature of networks as regulated monopolies means that the locus of the evolution of protective space for innovation is regulatory institutions, and that the politics of creating protective space is the politics of institutional change. In this paper I examine the case of Britain, where protective space for research, development and demonstration projects was created over the course of the 2000s in the form of funding mechanisms within the regulatory regime. The case study is used to test structural and discursive theories of gradual institutional change. I conclude that these theoretical frameworks are consistent with the evidence, but that the characterisations of change actors and of dominant policy paradigms are insufficiently flexible. I also conclude that the framework for innovation in the British regulator remains incomplete.
IGov 17th June 2015 read more »
