New Nukes
A key plank of the government’s Coalition Agreement was that any new nuclear power would not be subsidised. Liberal Democrat policy couldn’t be clearer. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has insisted again that there would be no public subsidy. But new nuclear power stations are not profitable without massive subsidies from the public purse. The government plans at least 10 new nuclear reactors for Britain. New evidence from independent nuclear economist Ian Jackson shows the government is planning billions in subsidy despite its promises – drawing investment away from the clean, safe alternatives.
IB Times 5th April 2011 more >>
Subsidy Assessment of Waste Transfer Pricing for Disposal of Spent Fuel from New Nuclear Power Stations, by Ian Jackson.
Greenpeace 5th April 2011 more >>
Ian Jackson’s technical report is quite a hard read because of the mathematical modelling, but the YouTube video below is much easier.
You Tube April 2011 more >>
Quite the nauseating display on DemocracyNow the other day. Renowned doctor and scientist Dr. Helen Caldicott, with more than 3 decades intense study on this issue to her credit, attempted to school the British journalist on the gross ignorance and misinformation that guides his rationale. So, now Dr. Caldicott is a conspiracy theorist, fair game for snide rebukes and silly faces. If Monbiot isn’t a shill for the nuclear industry, then I could certainly get him set up there in about five seconds. Monbiot reveals his anti-intellectual agenda by repeatedly resorting to a false dichotomy between coal and nuclear.
Oped news 2nd April 2011 more >>
There will be a minimum three-month delay in new reactor construction in the UK as a result of plans for nuclear safety reviews in the wake of the nuclear accident at Tokyo Electric’s Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant in Japan, UK officials said Tuesday. The UK Health and Safety Executive said it will not publish its final conclusions on the safety of the Areva EPR and Westinghouse AP1000 reactor designs until after a nuclear safety review investigates the implications of the nuclear accident at Fukushima on the safety of UK reactors. That review, being conducted by Chief Nuclear Inspector Mike Weightman, is not expected to be complete until September and the HSE had been planning to publish its conclusions under the generic design assessment, or GDA, program at the end of June. The GDA program is reviewing the safety of the reactor designs for construction in the UK. In a statement Tuesday, HSE said that it would proceed to publish all the GDA safety issues on the two reactor designs that it had identified as of June 30, as well as the reactor vendors’ resolution plans for those issues. But it said it would not issue its final conclusions in the form of design acceptance confirmations until after the completion of the Weightman report.
Platts 5th April 2011 more >>
HSE Bulletin 5th April 2011 more >>
The government’s plans to build a new programme of nuclear power stations in England will be delayed by at least three months so that lessons can be learned from the accident at Fukushima in Japan.
Guardian 6th April 2011 more >>
FT 6th April 2011 more >>
Telegraph 6th April 2011 more >>
STV 5th April 2011 more >>
A nuclear disaster on the scale of Fukushima cannot be ignored. The fact our new reactor designs are still open to improvement is an opportunity. A delay in construction is a price worth paying for making them as safe as possible, but construct them we must. It’s important to reflect on events in Japan. But trying to make reactors designed for the UK withstand the sort of earthquakes that hit Japan is unnecessary and will certainly price nuclear out of our reach. More likely threats here are terrorist attacks, including the use of aeroplanes, but such dangers have already been factored into the new designs. And the fact that the blueprints are new is also significant. Japan’s devastated power stations look more like Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, built by authorities that either didn’t care too much about safety, or didn’t understand it as well as we do now.
Daily Telegraph 6th April 2011 more >>
The energy sector has the potential to provide more jobs and opportunities for Wales but projects are too often held up by financial constraints and political controversy, Chris Kelsey writes
Over the past few months the natural world has both reminded us of our dependence on reliable energy sources and shown us how vulnerable our energy supply can be.
Western Mail 6th April 2011 more >>
Geoffrey Lean: “Britain is not going to be faced with a 14-metre tsunami”. So says Prof. Sir David King, the former Government chief scientist, arguing that Britain should not allow the events at Fukushima to delay plans to build new nuclear power stations. And it seems he has a point. But wait a minute. Back on January 2nd, 2005, just over a week since the devastating Boxing Day tsunami struck around the Indian Ocean, a top scientist was warning that “a mass of rock” off the Canary Islands was “waiting to collapse into the Atlantic” causing “giant tsunamis”. He added: “Britain would have a six hour warning before a 30ft wave hit us”. And who was this prophet of doom? The Government’s then chief scientist, one Prof Sir David King. Could they possibly be in any way related? Every time there is a nuclear accident, there are voices pointing out that it is untypical and could not happen elsewhere. Nuclear accidents will happen. Whether that is a reason to stop, or even delay, using nuclear power is a wholly different matter: that can only be decided by a sophisticated balancing of its relative risks compared to using other forms of energy. Trying to shortcut this process with exceptionalist arguments undermines rather than promotes such a rational decision.
Telegraph 5th April 2011 more >>
Chernobyl
Remembering Chernobyl: Nuclear Power is Not the Answer Tuesday 26th April 2011, 6:00 – 7:30pm Grimond Room, Portcullis House, Westminster Medact and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament are organising this public meeting at Parliament. Please join us if you can and invite your MP to attend. Marking the 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster this meeting also considers the implications of the Fukushima disaster for Britain’s nuclear policy and looks at the sustainable energy alternatives.
Medact April 2011 more >>
Letter Prof Dillwyn Williams: What is disgraceful is that there has been no international comprehensive scientific study of the health effects of exposure to the Chernobyl accident comparable to that set up after the atomic bombs in Japan. The health effects for those exposed to the atomic bombs are still occurring over 60 years later. The long-term effects of Chernobyl, with a very different type of exposure, will differ, and will hopefully be much less than those of the atomic bombs. Unless comprehensive studies are set up to review past evidence and carry out lifespan studies of those exposed, speculation will flourish. This was a European accident that led to fallout across the whole of Europe, and the European community should take the lead.
Guardian 5th April 2011 more >>
Letter Prof Andy Stirling: Whether on issues around radiation and health or alternative energy futures, the truth is that “evidence-based” “sound science” does not definitively compel any single interpretation. Peer-reviewed data, rigorous analysis and reasoned scepticism are all essential. But the cause of science is actually undermined by presenting it – without any mention of uncertainty – as if it offers some final incontestable solution. Complexities, uncertainties, ambiguities and legitimate differences of perspective all admit equally valid interpretations of the relevant “best available” knowledge. The point is that both nuclear-based or fully renewable global futures are each physically possible, technologically feasible, and potentially economically viable. Despite the constraints, our societies face real – and potentially irreversible – choices.
Guardian 6th April 2011 more >>
Radwaste
The nuclear industry is desperate to offload millions of tons of radioactive waste into landfill. This is despite the law being tightened up, quite rightly, for all other wastes (such as tyres which inevitably leak toxins into watercourses).
101 uses for a nuclear power station 6th April 2011 more >>
A commission appointed by the US Department of Energy is studying different options for dealing with spent fuel from nuclear power plants. Phil McKenna weighs the pros and cons of each.
New Scientist 6th April 2011 more >>
Radhealth
Letter: the permitted dose for the emissions from our nuclear power stations is 1mSv. There is absolutely solid proof that a dose 500 times that amount produces radiation hormesis, which prevents cancers and improves health.
Scotsman 6th April 2011 more >>
Neil Craig’s letter about nuclear contamination (5 April) is short on facts. For example, the Ukranian health ministry estimates that more than 12,000 deaths have resulted from the Chernobyl incident; radiation-related illnesses have quadrupled since 1986. Other scientific studies have shown similar results. There are also deaths not included in the statistics. I know of a number of people who were outdoors when the Chernobyl cloud passed over Scotland. They were healthy people, yet a high proportion of them died from unusual cancers in the years following.
Scotsman 6th April 2011 more >>
Stephen Salter: Nearly two billion of the present world population will eventually die of cancer. They will have been smoking, using mobile phones, eating junk food, flying at high altitudes, using household cleaners and absorbing background radiation. It is very difficult to plan an ethical, controlled, accurate experiment to attribute the cancer deaths to any cause. A 1 per cent error would be 20 million people. However, work by Richardson and Wing on long-term health of workers at Oak Ridge does get close. They found 4.98 per cent incre ase in mortality per 10mSv for doses received before the age of 45 and a 7.3 per cent increase after that age. Their report can be found in Environmental Health Perspectives August 1999 and contains 62 references.
Scotsman 6th April 2011 more >>
Hinkley
Town councillors have this week called on power company EDF to ‘take more seriously’ the proposals that a park and ride facility for Hinkley Point workers should be built next to Burnham-On-Sea’s motorway junction.
Burnham-on-sea.com 5th April 2011 more >>
Wylfa
The Celtic League has urged the Irish government to press for an international safety audit of the decision to extend the operational life of the Wylfa nuclear plant. The League say that prior to the 2010 decision to allow continued operation the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency had repeatedly stated they had no wish to tackle the difficulties associated with extending its life.
Celtic League 2nd April 2011 more >>
Bradwell
BRADWELL power station is set to enter the next stage of nuclear decommissioning earlier than planned. The Nuclear Decommission Authority has given the go ahead for Bradwell to move into the care and maintenance stage perhaps up to 12 years ahead of the original plan. The authority’s new business plan, which has been out for consultation for four months, gives Bradwell £71million for the new financial year, an extra £20million on the 2010/11 allocation.
Maldon Standard 4th April 2011 more >>
Japan
United States government engineers sent to help with the crisis in Japan are warning that the troubled nuclear plant there is facing a wide array of fresh threats that could persist indefinitely, and that in some cases are expected to increase as a result of the very measures being taken to keep the plant stable, according to a confidential assessment prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
New York Times 5th April 2011 more >>
Operator of Japan’s crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex said on Wednesday it had stopped leaks of contaminated water with high levels of radiation into the ocean.
Reuters 6th April 2011 more >>
Engineers battling to contain the crisis at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant appeared to have turned an important corner last night after they stopped highly radioactive water from leaking into the ocean from one of the facility’s crippled reactors.
Guardian 6th April 2011 more >>
FT 6th April 2011 more >>
Telegraph 6th April 2011 more >>
A plan to cover damaged reactor buildings at the crisis-hit Fukushima nuclear plant with special sheets to halt radiation leakage cannot offer a quick remedy, as the sheeting will be installed in September at the earliest due to high-level radioactivity hampering work at the site, government sources said Tuesday.
Kyodo News 6th April 2011 more >>
Japan will try not to release any more low-level radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power complex, an emergency measure to deal with the ongoing quake-triggered crisis there, industry minister Banri Kaieda said Tuesday. ‘‘We would like to make it the last time,’’ Kaieda told a press conference a day after plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. started releasing a total of 11,500 tons of contaminated water into the sea, an unprecedented move that required approval of the government’s nuclear regulatory agency. The move is partly aimed at opening up room to store more highly contaminated water currently in and around the No. 2 reactor’s turbine building, which is hampering restoration work at the plant. He said that the high-level radioactive water in and around the No. 2 turbine building is estimated at some 20,000 tons and should be transferred to the facility originally used for radioactive waste treatment ‘‘as soon as possible.’’
Kyodo News 5th April 2011 more >>
Japan is to borrow a Russian floating treatment plant for radioactive waste as it continues to pump contaminated water from the overheating Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power station into the Pacific. The Tokyo Electric Power Company today continued to expel 11,400 tonnes of low level radioactive water from tanks in the plant to make room for highly irradiated water that has flooded the reactors basements and utility tunnels. Yukio Edano, the governments spokesman as Chief Cabinet Secretary, said: Even though it was an inevitable step to prevent contaminated water with higher levels from flowing into the sea, the fact that we had to intentionally release water contaminated with radioactive substances is very regrettable and we are very sorry.
Times 6th April 2011 more >>
Spent Fuel meltdown in Fukushima Unit 4: Arnie Andersen, Fairwinds Associates.
Vimeo 31st March 2011 more >>
As engineers continue to fight to prevent catastrophe at the tsunami-hit Fukushima nuclear plant, executives at its controversial operating company are also struggling to prevent a financial meltdown. Shares in the Tokyo Electric Power Company plunged again on the Nikkei stock index yesterday. They fell 18% to a 60-year low of 362 and the company said it was delaying publication of its annual earnings report due to the crisis. In Tokyo, the air is thick with talk that Tepco might have to be nationalised as losses mount and investors brace themselves for compensation claims running into billions. Government intervention could leave investors out of pocket, sparking outrage in a country where capital has been king since the end of the second world war. The omens aren’t looking good as the human and environmental tragedy grows worse by the day and the Japanese lose faith in their nuclear industry.
Guardian 6th April 2011 more >>
India banned all food imports from Japan on Tuesday, the first country to impose a blanket block over radiation from a stricken nuclear plant, as shares in its operator plunged to an all-time low.
Telegraph 6th April 2011 more >>
Radioactivity in fish exceeding health guidelines was detected for the first time off northern Japan as Tokyo Electric Power Co. dumped tainted water into the ocean to gain control of its crippled nuclear plant. Cesium radioactivity in sand-lance caught south of the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant was 526 becquerel per kilogram, compared with a health ministry standard of 500 becquerel.
Bloomberg 5th April 2011 more >>
Experts fear that damage to the Fukushima reactors is worse than partial meltdown. It may be years before the true state of the reactors is known and a full clean-up can begin. But already scientists have been piecing together a picture of what happened inside the reactors from fragmentary and sometimes incorrect data about pressure, radiation levels and most of all the radioisotopes leaking from the plant.
Nature 5th April 2011 more >>
France
The question of spent fuel pools in French reactors has not been studied enough, including in Areva’s next-generation EPR reactor, France’s Ecology Minister said on public radio on Monday.
Reuters 4th April 2011 more >>
Canada
Ontario Power Generation has failed to consider alternatives to building new nuclear reactors at Darlington, the Canadian Environmental Law Association argued Monday. That means it hasn’t submitted an adequate environmental impact statement under federal law, the association told a panel reviewing the proposal for new reactors. And that in turn means the panel isn’t in a position to recommend giving the go-ahead for OPG to proceed with preparing the site for construction, Theresa McClenaghan argued.
The Star 4th April 2011 more >>
Energy Business Review 5th April 2011 more >>
Poland
Poland is determined to push on with plans to build its first generation of nuclear power stations over the next decade despite the Japanese reactor crisis sparking a global reassessment of the controversial energy source.
Guardian 5th April 2011 more >>
South Africa
South Africa’s cabinet have approved a 20-year Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) that calls for nuclear power to fuel a fifth of country’s new electricity production by 2030. The document is currently going through promulgation or the process of being declared as a new law. The plan includes 9.6 GW of nuclear; 6.3 GW of coal; 17.8 GW of renewables; and 8.9 GW of other generation sources in addition to all existing and committed power plants (including 10 GW committed coal).
Nuclear Engineering International 5th April 2011 more >>
