Hinkley
A think tank that includes senior Conservative figures among its members has called for the government to call time on the Hinkley C nuclear power plant. Bright Blue, whose advisory board includes Francis Maude, Nicky Morgan and former DECC minister Greg Barker, has said the government needs a new “plan A”. The group stresses that its position is not necessarily endorsed by all members of the organisation, which includes more than 100 parliamentarians. “The Government should abandon Hinkley C – pursuing it in light of all the evidence of cost reductions in other technologies would be deeply irresponsible,” said Ben Caldecott, associate fellow, Bright Blue. “We need a new ‘Plan A’. This must be focused on bringing forward sufficient renewables, electricity storage, and energy efficiency to more than close any gap left in the late 2020s by Hinkley not proceeding. This would be sensible, achievable, and cheap.” Zac Goldsmith, also a Bright Blue member, has welcomed the government’s rethink.
Solar Portal 29th July 2016 read more »
Ben Caldecott: Now that we seem to be re-entering reality, there is an opportunity to develop a new ‘Plan A’. At Bright Blue, we think that the Government should substitute Hinkley for a combination of clean energy, electricity storage, and energy efficiency. This would have a beneficial effect on each aspect of the Government’s energy trilemma: security of supply, affordability, and decarbonisation. A range of technologies can easily fill the envisioned capacity that Hinkley would have provided in the late 2020s had it been successfully delivered on the current (and already significantly delayed) construction schedule. They can also do this much more cheaply. Cancelling Hinkley would provide greater certainty for investors in other technologies thereby encouraging investment in new capacity today. Moreover, there are significant benefits for pollution, energy bills, and system security of pursuing a combination of clean energy, electricity storage, and energy efficiency to close any capacity gap left by Hinkley. This is a significant opportunity and we hope that the Government’s review results in the acceptance that there are cheaper and more practicable options to choose from.
Conservative Home 30th July 2016 read more »
It was the lunch that never was. Cantonese-style pork crackling, Somerset brie and mackerel ceviche with creme fraiche were all on the menu for the 150 VIPs invited to Hinkley Point on Friday. The guests were due to celebrate a third nuclear power station at the site finally being approved. In keeping with the rest of the decade-long battle to build Hinkley Point C, however, the celebrations did not go as scheduled. By Friday morning the marquee was being packed away and the guests were nowhere to be seen. The French company had not been expected to make a decision until later in the year, so the announcement was a surprise. After 10 years of debate about the cost, safety and quality of the Hinkley Point C project, the final stretch looked to be in sight. When Theresa May met François Hollande last week Britain’s prime minister told the French president that she would like to review the project herself. David Cameron and George Osborne had been enthusiastic cheerleaders. On Wednesday night May called Hollande again to confirm the government’s new timetable. Despite the French government being the biggest shareholder in EDF, it appears the 18 members of the company’s board headed for the crucial vote on Thursday afternoon with no knowledge of May’s rethink. Before the board meeting, the saga took another twist. An EDF director opposed to the new nuclear plant resigned and said he would not attend the meeting. There could still be a celebratory lunch in the autumn if May’s government approves the project, but the hangover from the lunch-that-never-was could be painful.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Theresa May’s government has read the small print of the Hinkley deal and maybe it’s become spooked. But whether ministers are specifically anxious by the phenomenal long-term cost of the project, the Chinese state’s involvement, or the design and near-impossible construction of what would be the most ambitious and expensive power station in the world is not yet clear. Possibly, the new prime minister has been led to understand that the whole darn thing must be rethought. Or it could just be a momentary delay. What is not in doubt is that government is still firmly committed to nuclear power as part of the UK energy mix. So it seems unlikely that No 10 is planning a radical rethink of energy policy and a return to the pre-Blair, renewable-only days. Far more likely, the plan being hurriedly hatched is to renegotiate the deal with EDF and the Chinese, in the expectation that the French company’s tricky finances will force it to abandon the Hinkley ship. Then if the EDF deal unravels it will clear the way for government to swiftly adopt Plan B. This could involve the business and energy secretary, Greg Clark, inviting the Japanese giant Hitachi to expand its existing programme of two new reactors in Britain. The company, which owns the Horizon nuclear consortium, is well down the road of planning and building a new 2,700MW power station at Wylfa on Anglesey, and is already negotiating price guarantees with government.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Barry Gardiner: There was a time for sober reflection on what had been a badly negotiated nuclear power contract, which left UK customers paying £92.50MW/h for electricity 35 years into the future, when the cost of onshore wind is already down to £70 and offshore is being delivered for £80. Had the government radically renegotiated the contract two years ago, I would have applauded them. By leaving it to this late stage they could insist on tweaking the contract to secure a reduced price every year the project is further delayed beyond 2025, but to risk 25,000 jobs and send such an appalling signal to investors about the reliability of the UK as an investment partner is an act of recklessness, as damaging for the manner in which it was done as for its substance. I support the development of new nuclear as part of the energy mix we need to deliver a low-carbon future. Hinkley Point C itself can provide the UK with 7% of our total expected electricity needs. But providing EDF with a 35-year guarantee of £92.50 per unit of power, with bill-payers topping up the difference if wholesale prices fell below that level, was a catastrophically bad deal. For two years, Labour has been calling for the government to develop a plan B, but ministers have told us they didn’t need one. This latest delay could mean the government and public will pay through the roof for expensive back-up capacity to ensure the lights don’t go out.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
The boss of EDF says he is still confident about Hinkley Point C being built despite the UK government throwing the nuclear power plant into doubt by launching a fresh review. Jean-Bernard Levy, the chief executive of EDF, said on Friday he had no doubt about the government’s support for the £18bn project.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Why have ministers delayed final approval for Hinkley Point C? The government’s decision to delay final approval of the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear power station has cast fresh doubt on the project. Theresa May’s government plans to review the proposed £18bn plant before making an announcement in early autumn.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Simon Jenkins: The message of last night’s Hinkley Point fiasco could not be clearer. The project cannot go ahead. But who in government has the guts to say so? Hinkley Point C is the product of prestige, political vanity, diplomatic machismo and corporate lobbying. It was an example of how rotten Whitehall’s oversight of government became in the Cameron years. Now, the sole defence of Hinkley from its apologists concerns the cost of cancellation, in jobs, sunk costs wasted, Foreign Office embarrassment and a hole in government energy policy. None are good arguments for proceeding. Energy experts are now emphatic.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
How Hinkley Celebrations were put on ice.
Telegraph 29th July 2016 read more »
Mrs May told Mr Hollande in person last week when she went to Paris — and over the phone on Wednesday night — that she would review the project and postpone a final decision by several weeks, according to two people with knowledge of the matter. Catching the French president off guard, she said she would “need time” to decide for herself on the project. Intrigued, the French leader asked whether such a review would force a delay to EDF’s board meeting the following week. Mrs May sought to reassure her French counterpart by saying it was not a sign of opposition. On Wednesday, she called him again to inform him of the autumn deadline. But on Thursday night, the UK government’s announcement seems to have come as a complete surprise to senior EDF managers involved in the Hinkley Point talks.
FT 29th July 2016 read more »
Chinese investors expressed surprise on Friday at Theresa May’s move to delay the final go-ahead for the Hinkley Point nuclear plant, a decision seen as part of a rethink on Chinese investment in the UK. A senior official in the Chinese nuclear industry who was scheduled to attend the signing said: “We are really questioning what’s going on. We were all set to go over when it was suddenly pushed back. It seems the UK government has a lot of doubts, we aren’t sure where all this is coming from.” The official said the project still made economic sense: “We believe Hinkley can still be built under budget and on time.” The UK’s decision to delay signals fears in Downing Street that Beijing could “shut down Britain’s energy production at will”. Nick Timothy, Mrs May’s joint chief of staff and a highly influential figure in the new administration, was a critic of David Cameron’s attempts to secure Chinese “gold”, which he said was buying British silence on human rights abuses. But Mr Timothy also said Chinese investment in sensitive sectors raised security concerns, including the possibility that Beijing could close down nuclear reactors in Britain as a form of energy blackmail.
FT 29th July 2016 read more »
FT 29th July 2016 read more »
National security concerns about China’s involvement in constructing Britain’s first new nuclear power plant for 20 years are believed to have contributed to Theresa May’s last-minute decision to delay a deal on the £18bn project. The Prime Minister’s unexpected refusal to give Hinkley Point the green light after it was approved by the board of the French energy firm EDF dismayed the Chinese, which has put up a third of the funding for the project. Mrs May repeatedly raised concerns about the risk to national security posed by increased Chinese investment in the UK while she was Home Secretary. Mrs May’s 11th-hour decision to delay Hinkley Point wrongfooted a delegation from the China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) which had already flown into Britain expecting to sign the finalised documents yesterday. Mrs May’s close adviser and joint chief of staff, Nick Timothy, has also condemned China’s involvement in the UK’s nuclear sector due to security concerns over giving the country ¬access to important national infrastructure.
The i 29th July 2016 read more »
The decision to halt Hinkley Point last night cast the spotlight back on the hugely controversial subsidy deal thrashed out by George Osborne in his desperation to secure Chinese backing for the nuclear plant. Alex Wild, research director at the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: ‘It’s encouraging the Government is rethinking this terrible deal that would see consumers paying exorbitant bills for decades. ‘The technology is completely unproven and the costs and time needed to build the reactors has already doubled since the initial proposal. The new department needs to completely rethink the energy policies and arbitrary targets which are driving up bills and destroying jobs. ‘Even if the Government decides more nuclear capacity is needed, there are far more affordable options available.’
Daily Mail 30th July 2016 read more »
The sudden decision to put on hold the £18bn contract for a new nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point is “bewildering and bonkers”, a furious union official has said. There are fears for the 25,000 jobs that depend on the vast project, which was to be financed jointly by the French energy firm EDF and the Chinese – though environmentalists and others hoped the delay will lead to it being scrapped outright.
Independent 29th July 2016 read more »
The British government cast doubt on the future of a controversial 18-billion pound ($24 billion) project to build Britain’s first nuclear power plant in more than 20 years, pledging to review the deal just hours after the board of France’s state-run utility gave the go-ahead. “I have no doubt about the support of the British government led by Mrs. May,” EDF CEO Jean-Bernard Levy said on Friday. He referred to a recent statement by Britain’s new chancellor of the exchequer, Philip Hammond, backing the project. A decision by May’s government to back away from the project would be a significant policy change, abandoning Britain’s plan to use nuclear stations to replace aging reactors and ensure the country meets its commitments to cut emissions. It would also end the biggest Franco-British industrial project in a generation as the U.K. looks to reconfigure relationships with its continental neighbours after last month’s vote to leave the European Union. The delay doesn’t mean the government’s energy policy has changed, said the two people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified because the information isn’t public. The CEOs of EDF’s U.K. business and its partner China General Nuclear Power Corp. were reassured of this by Business and Energy Secretary Clark in separate meetings in London Friday, one of the people said. Prime Minister May had been planning to make a decision on the project in September and needs more time to study the details, the two people said.
Bloomberg 29th July 2016 read more »
UK White Elephant stumbles. 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.
Climate News Network 29th July 2016 read more »
Construction industry leaders have said they are “flabbergasted” and “disappointed” over the government’s shock decision to review its subsidy deal for Hinkley Point C.
Building 29th July 2016 read more »
Catherine Mitchell: EDF has just given the go-ahead to investment in Hinkley Point C (HPC, a new build nuclear power plant). However, the GB Government has announced that it is going to ‘think carefully’ and will announce its decision in the Autumn. This is a good decision for multiple reasons. In her inaugural speech, our new Prime Minister Theresa May said: ‘’We will do everything we can to give you more control over your lives. When we take the big calls, we’ll think not of the powerful, but you.’’ And then a few days later, she set out the principles of her Government’s economic policy, one dimension of which is support for an industrial policy: ‘“We need to reform the economy to allow more people to share in the country’s prosperity. We need to put people back in control of their lives. We need to give more people more opportunity’’. The decision to go ahead with HPC would do the complete opposite of giving people more control over their lives; it would be a continuation of David Cameron’s policy which supported big business interests over society’s (and individual) interests; and it would be a blow to GB innovation. Momentum within global energy systems is towards decentralisation of technologies and towards operating energy systems in a ‘smarter’ and more flexible and integrated way. For once, energy policy goals – of decarbonising the energy system; making energy affordable to customers; and maintaining security – is all better met within this decentralised system, and technology has developed to enable its practice. If we want to decarbonise our energy system we have to move beyond electricity to also include heat, capture the demand side, and start to use storage that electric vehicles (and other possibilities) offer. This integration is best done locally. Total infrastructure costs should be lower; customer bills will be lower the more energy efficient the system; customers can be paid for any demand side response services they provide to the system; and the local energy expenditure can be maintained in the area for the benefit of local customers. It needs a local co-ordinating actor to make it happen, and this could be distribution service providers (DSPs) – something which IGov has championed. HPC is expected online, at best, in 2025. However, onshore wind and large scale solar are already competitive against nuclear, and increasingly so against gas. Offshore wind would also be cheaper than nuclear if they received a 35 year contract like HPC, rather than their own 15 years. And Dong has announced a price of 72.7 Euros/MWh (about £60/MWh (depending on exchange rate)) for their Dutch offshore wind farm. Small scale photovoltaic solar is also becoming competitive, hence the huge uptake in small scale solar PV in GB. Furthermore, the demand side would be even cheaper if included in markets on an equal basis with supply. Using the £30bn for a rolling German kfW-type energy efficiency scheme would permanently bring down total energy demand; bring down customer bills, and make customer homes more comfortable. Decarbonising GB and the world is cheaper and easier (because less gases will have been emitted), the quicker we start. Waiting until 2025 for HPC at best, when all these other options would be quicker and cheaper, does not make obvious policy sense.
IGov 29th July 2016 read more »
Shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Barry Gardiner told BBC Radio 4’sTodayprogramme the government should change the terms of the Hinkley deal. Describing the situation as “absolute chaos”, Gardiner said the current deal was a “bad deal” for UK taxpayers. “I would change the deal,” he said. “The government is now reviewing this project – quite rightly so. But what they must do is root and branch review it. They must review the base price at £92.50, because that is too high. They must also then put in a taper that says if the project is further delayed beyond 2025, for each year’s further delay that price comes down.” Environmental camapigners welcomed the government’s decision to pause for thought. Friends of the Earth campaigner Mike Childs said the move is an opportunity to do the “right and popular” thing and end support for Hinkley. “Margaret Thatcher cancelled the nuclear build programmes in the early 1990s because the economics were dreadful. Hopefully Theresa May is about to do the same, and prevent hard-pressed energy bill payers being saddled with unnecessary cost well into the future,” he said in a statement. “Renewables and energy storage are a much better deal. With prices tumbling and speedy construction we can press on with generating masses of home-grown energy.”
Business Green 29th July 2016 read more »
Paul Dorfman: Your leader “No Point in Hinkley” hits the nail firmly on the head (July 29). The consensus among economists, nuclear industry insiders and other commentators — including the government’s spending regulatory body, the National Audit Office — is that to pursue the project is to commit fiscal hara-kiri. The unfortunate reality is that the push for Hinkley Point C nuclear power station is neither rational nor evidence-based. Rather, it is a political and corporate face-saving exercise on behalf of EDF and the French state. Meanwhile, evidence for the coming renewable evolution is mounting, with a very recent BP report confirming that “renewables account for all the increase in global power generation in 2015, with wind growing by 17 per cent and solar by 32 per cent”. Times are changing, and perhaps UK plc should consider changing with them.
Times 30th July 2016 read more »
Dr Niels Kroninger, Green Hedge Energy: Greg Clark’s decision to review the Hinkley project again looks sensible as it has become abundantly clear that there are many alternatives that will produce reliable low-carbon electricity cheaper and earlier. Until its demise, the Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) ignored reports showing that solar, wind, storage and back-up gas can produce the same output as Hinkley Point but a decade earlier and substantially cheaper. DECC repeated its (factually wrong) mantra that only nuclear could provide reliable low-carbon electricity. We must hope that the new Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy looks at the facts and does not commit to overspending hundreds of millions of pounds a year for 35 years.
Times 30th July 2016 read more »
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Andrew Warren: When Hinkley Point C was first mooted by the government in 2006, official projections were that today’s electricity consumption levels would be more than 25 per cent higher than they currently are. Despite our GDP having increased by 18 per cent over the decade, demand for electricity has consistently fallen year on year, largely due to far more efficient usage. Do we really still need this expensive white elephant?
Times 30th July 2016 read more »
Prof Sue Roaf: The plant is now predicted to cost £24bn and will power 6m homes, providing electricity for 30 years at an extortionate fixed price. For the same price we could put solar hot water and PV with battery storage on the same 6m homes and thus taking a quarter of British homes out of fuel poverty for ever. We already have over a million solar roofs in Britain on the homes of people who want to decouple their futures from the greed of energy utilities. Tens of millions have been invested in UK solar energy research and already £2.5bn has been invested in moving some dirt and laying some concrete at Hinkley Point. Who paid for that? Not the French or Chinese. This nuclear gamble is madness and the fundamental question that needs answering is why?
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Lord Hutton: Your leader misses the point. Hinkley Point C is what the UK needs, but even a project of its scale, which will generate 7 per cent of the UK’s electricity, is only one part of a much wider solution needed to meet the UK’s daunting energy challenge. We need as low a carbon energy mix as possible, with nuclear working alongside renewables and gas.
Times 30th July 2016 read more »
Tom Greatrex, the head of Britain’s Nuclear Industry Association said he remains confident it will get built. He said he was, “slightly disappointed that we haven’t got a contract being signed immediately, but not disappointed in the sense that the government and [UK business and energy minister] Greg Clark have made a statement… making it very clear that he’s committed to new nuclear being part of the future energy mix for the UK.”
Euronews 29th July 2016 read more »
There are a number of things that I really don’t want to hear discussed on the news, especially in a manner that resembles the couple of expository lines frantically shouted at the start of a disaster movie. Nuclear power is very much one of those things. Nevertheless, here we all are, speculating as to whether the Chinese might build weaknesses into the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant’s computer systems, just in case they might at some point decide to snatch control of the facility. Which hardly suggests an open, collaborative relationship of trust.
Guardian 29th July 2016 read more »
Dr David Lowry: The huge marquee for VIP nuclear guests was already erected at the Hinkley site; champagne was already on ice; VIPs were en route to Somerset to party at the final breakthrough, when hundreds of thousands of contractual pages were due to be authorised with co-signatures of the contracting parties. Suddenly, everything was off. So what really happened? The most convincing explanation for the cold feet developed by the Prime Minister, Theresa May, is the influence of her newly re-appointed, but loyal, policy advisor, Nick Timothy, who had previously been her Chief of Staff before going off to become the Director of the New Schools Network. Last October, out of Government, he wrote on the ConservativeHome website of his doubts about the UK nuclear industry collaborating with the Chinese sate investment bank and nuclear companies to build reactors in the UK.
Ecologist 29th July 2016 read more »
With the French government owned EDF Board having potentially signed one of the most expensive suicide notes ever in corporate history, giving the go-ahead to the Hinkley C Nuclear Plant, Britain right now is teetering on the brink of the biggest corporate/political corruption scandal in its history. The nuclear industry has bought all three of Britain’s political parties. It is the most classic example of The Corrupted Political System Pillar of The Prostitute State. Senior figures or members of their families from Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories all are political prostitutes working for the notoriously corrupt nuclear industry. They are lining their pockets to push through the biggest heist ever perpetrated on the British people.
Dorset Eye 29th July 2016 read more »
Nearly 150,000 people have signed our petition demanding the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, drop Hinkley and invest in renewables instead. Can you share the petition with your friends and family and help us reach 200,000 before the government makes its final decision?
Greenpeace 29th July 2016 read more »
Newsnight on Hinkley.
BBC 28th July 2016 read more »
Wylfa
A new nuclear power station planned for Anglesey will not be affected by the last-minute decision to review the Hinkley Point C plant, it is understood. A government insider said that the decision to review French energy giant EDF’s plans for Somerset was unrelated to the viability of the Wylfa Newydd proposals being developed by Japanese firm Hitachi.
Wales Online 30th July 2016 read more »
Sizewell B
Nuclear industry monitors have endorsed safety procedures at Suffolk’s Sizewell B power plant. A report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concluded that the station was well prepared in the event of an emergency. The publication follows a three-week review last October by an operational safety team made up of 15 experts from the UK, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, South Africa and the United States.
East Anglian Daily Times 28th July 2016 read more »
Sizewell C
Construction of Sizewell C – now a step closer following agreement yesterday for the financial investment for Hinkley Point C – would boost Suffolk’s economy by £1bn over a decade, it was claimed last night.
Lowestoft Journal 29th July 2016 read more »
IFRs
Cathrine Mitchell I was just on the Today programme at 8.54 am, and was not able to give my view on George Monbiot’s proposal that we restart an Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) programme to solve the twin problems of using up our stockpile of nuclear waste, and have a long term source of energy. My answer to this would have been that the problem with using nuclear waste as a fuel in reactors is that it makes the fission reaction less predictable and occurs at a higher temperature. This means that it is more difficult and complicated to keep the reactor cool and safe, and that means it is even more expensive. This was the case with Fast Breeder Reactors, and no doubt, would be the case with IFRs. Moreover, having an IFR programme would not use up the nuclear waste, but it would add more volume. Yes, some nuclear waste, including plutonium would be used in the fuel rods , but the process itself will create new nuclear waste. This is why decommissioning a nuclear power plant takes 100 years plus and why the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority thinks we are going to have to pay anywhere between £95-219 bn (2016 estimate). Thus, IFRs would have all the problems of conventional nuclear power plants, but more so. What we should do is not use our nuclear waste any more than we have to; we should find some way to store it safely (not the case at the moment); and we should not add anymore volume to what we already have (and what we have to leave to future generations to deal with). Moreover, we need to recognise that the energy system is rapidly changing (because of new technologies and new ways of operating) and is providing all sorts of new, cheaper, more sustainable, more secure opportunities which can benefit customers; and begin to transform our energy system to one which is smart and flexible…
IGov 29th July 2016 read more »
EDF
Half year results.
EDF 29th July 2016 read more »
Today, EDF and AREVA signed a memorandum of understanding that formalised the status of the progress of discussions concerning their contemplated partnership. This memorandum has three sections.
EDF 28th July 2016 read more »
EDF, Caisse des Dépôts and CNP Assurances have started exclusive negociations to form a long-term partnership for the development of Réseau de Transport d’Electricité (RTE).
EDF has today announced that it has started exclusive negociations with Caisse des Dépôts and CNP Assurances to form a long-term partnership for the development of RTE. This partnership with major public players in infrastructure funding in France will strengthen RTE’s public service remit. Caisse des Dépôts and CNP Assurances would also take a 49.9% stake in RTE on the basis of an indicative value of €8.45 billion for 100% of RTE equity.
EDF 28th July 2016 read more »
EDF’s CEO, Jean-Bernard Lévy, has informed the Board of Directors on the progress of discussions with the government about the draft compensation protocol associated with the closure of the Fessenheim nuclear power plant.
EDF 28th July 2016 read more »
NDA
The government botched a £7 billion contract to decommission Britain’s first generation of nuclear power plants, resulting in the wrong company winning the tender, a High Court judge has ruled. The judgment opens the door to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority paying damages to an American company that was part of one of the losing consortiums. It will also revive memories of the West Coast main line fiasco, when the government was forced to scrap a decision to award the contract to FirstGroup under pressure from Virgin Trains in 2012. The companies were bidding for the work of safely dismantling 12 Magnox nuclear reactors, ten of them at power plants such as Sizewell A, Wylfa and Hinkley Point A that were built in the 1960s and 1970s, and two of them at nuclear testing sites. The Magnox reactors were the British-designed systems that powered the world’s first nuclear power plants outside Russia.
Times 30th July 2016 read more »
Nuclear Transports
HANT Members and supporters set up a stall Inverness Station on Saturday 23 July 2016 to call for the halting of nuclear trains from Dounreay to Sellafield. HANT was then moved on by British Transport Police from Inverness Station, then by Eastgate Centre Security from falcon Square and finally the HSBC bank before continuing “fourth time lucky” at a site on the Inverness High Street opposite a vacant shop! HANT is concerned that Falcon Square funded partly by taxpayers money not being available for civic purposes.
HANT 27th July 2016 read more »
Chernobyl
The world’s most famous and damaging nuclear meltdown is now being considered for the world’s largest solar power plant. The Ukrainian nuclear power station Chernobyl had a nuclear meltdown on April 26, 1986. Since then 1,600 square miles of land has been deemed an ‘exclusion zone’ as the radiation levels are too high for human health. But in a recent interview, Ukraine’s ecology minister said the government was negotiating with two US investment firms and four Canadian energy companies, which have expressed interest in the Chernobyl’s solar potential.
Electrek 29th July 2016 read more »
Microgeneration
This week’s Micro Power News.
Microgen Scotland 29th July 2016 read more »
Renewables – Biomass
The Renewable Energy Association has hit out at “surprise” changes to the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) scheme which it says will mean a reduction in support for new biomass combined heat and power (CHP).
Business Green 29th July 2016 read more »
Renewables – Biodiesel
Recycled cooking oil from fish and chip shops hardly sounds like a feasible alternative to a savings account at the Halifax, but the promoters of Living Power reckon that investors can make an “effective” 8% return over the seven-year life of the scheme. Living Power takes the waste oil from restaurants and converts it into clean biofuel, which is then used to supply the National Grid with eco-friendly electricity at peak periods. The company claims that most of Britain’s waste cooking oil is used to make biodiesel, which it says is much less environmentally attractive than using it to generate electricity. The money the company raises will go into refinancing the four biofuel power stations it operates in Yorkshire, Suffolk and Norfolk.
Guardian 30th July 2016 read more »
Grid Connections
IRELAND/FRANCE: Transmission system operators RTE for France and EirGrid in Ireland have signed a memorandum of understanding to begin initial design of a 700MW link between the two countries. The 600km Celtic Link is expected to be completed in 2025 and will be used to transmit 700MW of electiricity between the northern European countries. EirGrid said the link would help the development of renewable energy in Ireland. According to RTE, independent reports said the link would prevent the need for a new gas plant in Ireland. The MoU moves the project on from five years of feasibility studies to the two-year initial design and pre-consultation stage, EirGrid said.
WindPower Monthly 25th July 2016 read more »
