Britain's next nuclear power station will be built on Anglesey,North Wales, under a £7.5 billion plan being drawn up by two of biggest energy providers in the UK. Horizon Nuclear Power, a joint venture owned by E.ON and RWE, is expected to make a formal announcement today on the lead site for its first new UK nuclear power station. A 232-hectare plot at Wylfa on the north coast of Anglesey has been chosen as the front-runner for the plant, due to enter service in 2020. Wylfa was selected over another, smaller site owned by the joint venture at Oldbury-on-Severn, South Gloucestershire, which Horizon hopes to develop later.
Times 30th Mar 2010
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/utilities/article7080736.ece
Times Graphic 30th Mar 2010
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00702/Nuclear_702682a.jpg
Telegraph 30th Mar 2010
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/utilities/7536690/RWE-and-EON-to-build-first-nuclear-plant-on-Anglesey.html
BBC 30th Mar 2010
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/8594152.stm
Tuesday 30 March 2010
Chernobyl Day Remembered .....
To commemorate Chernobyl Day on April 26th Radiation Free Lakeland are asking children and adults to send in their drawings of other creatures such as Brown Bear, Grey Owl, Reindeer, Wolf and Lynx found in Finnish Lapland. Finnish Lapland is often described as one of Europe's last true wilderness areas - with a rich diversity of wildlife and land based culture of the indigenous Sami people.
The drawings will then be sent to world leaders who are promoting new nuclear build, with a letter asking that uranium mining should not be allowed in the wilderness areas of Finnish Lapland - just one of the areas worldwide now threatened as a direct result of the pronuclear lobbying of MPs such as Jamie Reed, government departments such as the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the industry.
There are many new applications for vast uranium mines in Finnish Lapland
which would destroy the taiga and the tundra - this destruction would release tens of millions of tonnes of CO2. Lapland is an important migratory and breeding ground for many of the waterfowl and waders that
overwinter here such as the Bewick's Swan.
Radiation Free Lakeland are opposing new nuclear developments to protect
our climate, our wildlife and our own DNA.
Of special interest to schools :
Offer by award winning wildlife artist Marianne Birkby to come along and work with students on drawing Finnish Lapland's threatened wildlife in charcoal.
Please tel: 015395 63671 for more details or email drawings (with name and age) to : rafl@mariannebirkby.plus.com
The drawings will then be sent to world leaders who are promoting new nuclear build, with a letter asking that uranium mining should not be allowed in the wilderness areas of Finnish Lapland - just one of the areas worldwide now threatened as a direct result of the pronuclear lobbying of MPs such as Jamie Reed, government departments such as the Department of Energy and Climate Change and the industry.
There are many new applications for vast uranium mines in Finnish Lapland
which would destroy the taiga and the tundra - this destruction would release tens of millions of tonnes of CO2. Lapland is an important migratory and breeding ground for many of the waterfowl and waders that
overwinter here such as the Bewick's Swan.
Radiation Free Lakeland are opposing new nuclear developments to protect
our climate, our wildlife and our own DNA.
Of special interest to schools :
Offer by award winning wildlife artist Marianne Birkby to come along and work with students on drawing Finnish Lapland's threatened wildlife in charcoal.
Please tel: 015395 63671 for more details or email drawings (with name and age) to : rafl@mariannebirkby.plus.com
Sunday 21 March 2010
Press release: Jonathon Porritt - "Wrong to impose nuclear on future generations but clean, sustainable energy is deliverable"
A new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point is not needed and would leave
an unacceptable legacy of radioactive waste to future generations, the
leading environmentalist Jonathon Porritt told a packed meeting of the Stop
Hinkley campaign in Taunton last night (Tuesday 16 March).
“It would be totally wrong to impose on future generations a problem for
which we have no solution,” he said. “We don’t know how to deal with
nuclear waste. There is no clear strategy. We are just hoping that the next
generation can sort it out.”
This included the spent nuclear fuel which would be stored at a new
Hinkley nuclear power station for as long as 160 years.
Porritt, a former director of Friends of the Earth and head of the
government advisory body, the Sustainable Development Commission, said he had both
practical and ethical objections to a new construction programme of
nuclear plants, of which Hinkley “C” would be the first.
“I have huge concerns about the cost of nuclear power,” he said. “Don’t
believe a single word that comes out of the industry. This is an industry
that has obscured, concealed, lied and deviated from the truth from the
1950s onwards.” He gave the example of the £76 billion it now emerged it would
cost to decommission existing nuclear facilities, let alone any new ones.
This money would have to come directly from the taxpayer.
The economics of nuclear power were so unreliable, he added, that it was
possible that Hinkley C would never be built because investors would have
nothing to do with it.
He was also sceptical that new nuclear reactors like the ones proposed at
Hinkley would help in the battle against climate change. “Even if we
replaced all our existing fleet of reactors, as the government wants, we would
still only cut about 4% of our 1990 level of carbon dioxide emissions,” he
said. “The idea that we can wheel in nuclear power to deal with our low
carbon imperative is a flawed argument.”
No new nuclear plant was likely to be up and running before the middle of
the next decade, he added, which would be too little too late.
Instead, Porritt painted a picture in which Britain’s future energy
needs would be met by access to endless and clean sustainable energy. “I am
absolutely persuaded that this is deliverable,” he said.
His prescription included four elements – a major campaign on energy
efficiency, massive investment in renewable power, more use of combined heat and
power generation and, in a transition period, the development of cleaner
fossil fuels.
On energy efficiency he said that the UK could reduce energy consumption
by 30 to 40% over the next two decades by measures like improving the
efficiency of the existing housing stock. “The government just hasn’t done
enough,” he said. “The fact that you don’t hear politicians talking about this
is a nightmare.”
On renewable power he said that we were “the most blessed country in Europe
”, with tides, wind and waves waiting to be exploited round our coasts. “
This is no longer a niche industry,” he added. “Renewable power has become
a major international industry and now commands billions of pounds of
investment around the world.”
Porritt said he was in favour of a power-generating barrage across the
Severn Estuary, in spite of its potential environmental and social costs. This
would meet up to 10% of the country’s electricity needs.
Porritt concluded that although “climate change is serious, we have an
alternative to nuclear power. I find this hugely exciting. But there’s a
battle for the hearts and minds of green activists. That’s why your Stop Hinkley
campaign is so important, and it needs to get bigger.”
About 150 people attended the Stop Hinkley meeting in the Temple Methodist
Hall, Taunton. They were encouraged to sign a petition against the new
Hinkley “C” power station. This will be presented to the government when a
planning application is submitted by Electricite de France, probably in
August.
Jim Duffy, Coordinator of Stop Hinkley said: "People said they found
Jonathon's upbeat talk inspirational - the way he handled the heavy subject
matter was in an easy entertaining manner. Some waverers said they were
convinced by his arguments. I think decision-makers should pay attention to the
brighter outcome for present and future generations that this very respected
environmentalist has mapped out."
Jim Duffy 07798 666756
_www.stophinkley.org _ (http://www.stophinkley.org )
Radio interviews: Crispin Aubrey 07920 523673 who produced the text for
this press release.
Also see Dr Richard Lawson's blog. Green campaigner, Richard chaired the
meeting:
_Jonathon Porritt speaks on Nuclear Power in Taunton_
(http://greenerblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/jonathon-porritt-speaks-on-nuclear.html)
an unacceptable legacy of radioactive waste to future generations, the
leading environmentalist Jonathon Porritt told a packed meeting of the Stop
Hinkley campaign in Taunton last night (Tuesday 16 March).
“It would be totally wrong to impose on future generations a problem for
which we have no solution,” he said. “We don’t know how to deal with
nuclear waste. There is no clear strategy. We are just hoping that the next
generation can sort it out.”
This included the spent nuclear fuel which would be stored at a new
Hinkley nuclear power station for as long as 160 years.
Porritt, a former director of Friends of the Earth and head of the
government advisory body, the Sustainable Development Commission, said he had both
practical and ethical objections to a new construction programme of
nuclear plants, of which Hinkley “C” would be the first.
“I have huge concerns about the cost of nuclear power,” he said. “Don’t
believe a single word that comes out of the industry. This is an industry
that has obscured, concealed, lied and deviated from the truth from the
1950s onwards.” He gave the example of the £76 billion it now emerged it would
cost to decommission existing nuclear facilities, let alone any new ones.
This money would have to come directly from the taxpayer.
The economics of nuclear power were so unreliable, he added, that it was
possible that Hinkley C would never be built because investors would have
nothing to do with it.
He was also sceptical that new nuclear reactors like the ones proposed at
Hinkley would help in the battle against climate change. “Even if we
replaced all our existing fleet of reactors, as the government wants, we would
still only cut about 4% of our 1990 level of carbon dioxide emissions,” he
said. “The idea that we can wheel in nuclear power to deal with our low
carbon imperative is a flawed argument.”
No new nuclear plant was likely to be up and running before the middle of
the next decade, he added, which would be too little too late.
Instead, Porritt painted a picture in which Britain’s future energy
needs would be met by access to endless and clean sustainable energy. “I am
absolutely persuaded that this is deliverable,” he said.
His prescription included four elements – a major campaign on energy
efficiency, massive investment in renewable power, more use of combined heat and
power generation and, in a transition period, the development of cleaner
fossil fuels.
On energy efficiency he said that the UK could reduce energy consumption
by 30 to 40% over the next two decades by measures like improving the
efficiency of the existing housing stock. “The government just hasn’t done
enough,” he said. “The fact that you don’t hear politicians talking about this
is a nightmare.”
On renewable power he said that we were “the most blessed country in Europe
”, with tides, wind and waves waiting to be exploited round our coasts. “
This is no longer a niche industry,” he added. “Renewable power has become
a major international industry and now commands billions of pounds of
investment around the world.”
Porritt said he was in favour of a power-generating barrage across the
Severn Estuary, in spite of its potential environmental and social costs. This
would meet up to 10% of the country’s electricity needs.
Porritt concluded that although “climate change is serious, we have an
alternative to nuclear power. I find this hugely exciting. But there’s a
battle for the hearts and minds of green activists. That’s why your Stop Hinkley
campaign is so important, and it needs to get bigger.”
About 150 people attended the Stop Hinkley meeting in the Temple Methodist
Hall, Taunton. They were encouraged to sign a petition against the new
Hinkley “C” power station. This will be presented to the government when a
planning application is submitted by Electricite de France, probably in
August.
Jim Duffy, Coordinator of Stop Hinkley said: "People said they found
Jonathon's upbeat talk inspirational - the way he handled the heavy subject
matter was in an easy entertaining manner. Some waverers said they were
convinced by his arguments. I think decision-makers should pay attention to the
brighter outcome for present and future generations that this very respected
environmentalist has mapped out."
Jim Duffy 07798 666756
_www.stophinkley.org _ (http://www.stophinkley.org )
Radio interviews: Crispin Aubrey 07920 523673 who produced the text for
this press release.
Also see Dr Richard Lawson's blog. Green campaigner, Richard chaired the
meeting:
_Jonathon Porritt speaks on Nuclear Power in Taunton_
(http://greenerblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/jonathon-porritt-speaks-on-nuclear.html)
We'll open a nuclear power station every 18 MONTHS, say Tories
By James Chapman
Last updated at 9:26 AM on 19th March 2010
* Comments (108)
* Add to My Stories
One new nuclear power station would be opened every 18 months under a Conservative blueprint to avoid the first widespread electricity blackouts since the 1970s.
Shadow energy spokesman Greg Clark told the Daily Mail there would be 'no limit' on the expansion of nuclear power under a Tory government.
'In the past, we haven't been entirely clear - this is a very clear statement that we are in favour of nuclear power,' he said.
sizewell b
'No limit': The Tories want to open at least one new nuclear plant every 18 months, starting in 2018, to help plug a looming power gap. By 2023, all of Britain's nuclear power stations - except Sizewell B (pictured) - will be obsolete
Mr Clark said he intended to allow energy firms to open at least one new nuclear plant every 18 months, starting in 2018, to help plug a looming power gap.
A Conservative government would ask Parliament to approve a national energy plan, limiting the chances of legal challenges by environmental groups.
Mr Clark also set out proposals to reward communities which agree to host wind farms, saying they will benefit from discounted electricity bills and be allowed to keep business rates averaging £70,000 a year to spend locally.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259045/Well-open-nuclear-power-station-18-months-say-Tories.html?ITO=1490#ixzz0is00Z0oD
Last updated at 9:26 AM on 19th March 2010
* Comments (108)
* Add to My Stories
One new nuclear power station would be opened every 18 months under a Conservative blueprint to avoid the first widespread electricity blackouts since the 1970s.
Shadow energy spokesman Greg Clark told the Daily Mail there would be 'no limit' on the expansion of nuclear power under a Tory government.
'In the past, we haven't been entirely clear - this is a very clear statement that we are in favour of nuclear power,' he said.
sizewell b
'No limit': The Tories want to open at least one new nuclear plant every 18 months, starting in 2018, to help plug a looming power gap. By 2023, all of Britain's nuclear power stations - except Sizewell B (pictured) - will be obsolete
Mr Clark said he intended to allow energy firms to open at least one new nuclear plant every 18 months, starting in 2018, to help plug a looming power gap.
A Conservative government would ask Parliament to approve a national energy plan, limiting the chances of legal challenges by environmental groups.
Mr Clark also set out proposals to reward communities which agree to host wind farms, saying they will benefit from discounted electricity bills and be allowed to keep business rates averaging £70,000 a year to spend locally.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259045/Well-open-nuclear-power-station-18-months-say-Tories.html?ITO=1490#ixzz0is00Z0oD
Wednesday 10 March 2010
Revelations from an EDF insider : EPR reactor prone to major nuclear accident risk!
The French Network for Nuclear
Phase-out (Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire") reveals confidential documents
disclosed by an anonymous insider from EDF (Electricité de France, the
main French power utility). These documents show that the design of
the EPR presents a serious risk of a major nuclear accident - a risk
deliberately taken by EDF to increase its profitability. Because it is
potentially vulnerable to a situation which could have uncontrollable
consequences, the EPR reactor is extremely dangerous.
Download
the confidential documents (in French) from www.sortirdunucleaire.org
"Sortir
du nucléaire" has set up a group of experts to analyse these recently
received documents thoroughly. Here are the first lessons we can learn
from them, which are of the utmost importance.
Some operating
modes could cause the EPR reactor to explode because of a control rod
cluster ejection accident (these control rod clusters moderate the
nuclear reaction). These operating modes are mainly related to an
objective of economic efficiency, requiring the power of the reactor to
adapt to electricity demand. Thus, in order to find a hypothetical
economic justification for the EPR, its designers chose to take the very
real risk of a major nuclear accident. Moreover, most of the arguments
given in favour of the EPR (power, efficiency, waste reduction and
safety) have been proved to be false.
EDF and Areva (the
leader of the French nuclear industry) have tried to find a
solution to the problems related to the operating mode of the reactor:
these efforts have failed preventing those kinds of accidents. The
French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has apparently been kept in the
dark about these issues.
So the EPR reactor design seems to
increase the risk of a Chernobyl-type accident, which would lead to the
destruction of the confinement and mass dispersion of radionuclides in
the atmosphere.
On March 8th and 9th, Paris hosts an
international meeting to encourage 65 countries to acquire nuclear
technology. This meeting will be opened by the French President Nicolas
Sarkozy and chaired by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Director General Yukiya Amano. It is outrageous that France keeps on
promoting nuclear power in general and the EPR reactor in particular, as
the danger of this reactor has now been demonstrated. The construction
of the EPR in Finland, France and China must be stopped
immediately, and the planned project in Penly (France) cancelled. The
best way to prevent nuclear accidents is indeed to phase out nuclear
power and go for renewable energies.
The accident
scenario in detail:
According to calculations by EDF and
Areva, the reactor’s RIP (Instant Return to Power) control mode and the
control rod cluster configuration can induce a rod ejection accident
during low-power operation, and lead to the rupture of the control rod
drive casing (i). This rupture would cause the coolant to leak outside
the nuclear reactor vessel. Such a loss of coolant accident (LOCA - a
very serious type of nuclear accident) would damage a large number of
fuel rods by heating fuel pellets and claddings (ii), and thus cause the
release of highly radioactive steam into the containment. So there is a
great risk of a criticality accident resulting in an explosion (iii),
the reactor power being increased in an extremely
brutal way. Following the ejection of control rod clusters during
low-power operation, the reactor emergency shutdown may fail (iv).
Whatever the configuration of the control rod clusters, a rod ejection
accident induces a high rate of broken fuel rods and therefore a high
risk of a criticality accident (v).
For more details, see the
documents disclosed by an anonymous EDF source (especially document No.
1) on our website: www.sortirdunucleaire.org
Press
Contacts:
Marc Saint-Aroman, +33 (0) 5 61 35 11 06
Charlotte
Mijeon, +33 (0) 6 75 36 20 20
Nuclear physicists: Monique and
Raymond Sené, +33 (0) 1 60 10 03 49
English-speaking Media: Steven
Mitchell, + 33 (0) 9 52 49 50 22
German-speaking Media: Jean-Yvon
Landrac, + 33 (0) 6 87 30 41 10
Documents to download:
1
- Summary - “Une
technologie explosive : l'EPR” (anonymous and undated)
2 - “Bilan de
la phase préliminaire de l'étude d'EDG FA3 et perspectives”(EDF SEPTEN
May 2009)
3 - “EPR – Gestion combustible – Lot 1 – Revue de
conception du schéma de grappes FA3 du 25/10/2007”
4 –“EPR FA3 –
Synthèse de l'étude de faisabilité de l'accident d'éjection de grappe”
(EDF SEPTEN September 2007)
5 - “EPR FA3- Synthèse des voies de
sortie de la problématique éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN July 2007)
6
– Working paper: “Présentation synthétique de l'EPR” (EDF SEPTEN April
2004)
7 - “Note de présentation de la deuxième revue de projet
radioprotection EPR” (EDF, Spring 2004)
8 - “Marges disponibles pour
les activités d'exploitation du REP par rapport aux risques de
criticité” (EDF SEPTEN April 2009)
Phase-out (Réseau "Sortir du nucléaire") reveals confidential documents
disclosed by an anonymous insider from EDF (Electricité de France, the
main French power utility). These documents show that the design of
the EPR presents a serious risk of a major nuclear accident - a risk
deliberately taken by EDF to increase its profitability. Because it is
potentially vulnerable to a situation which could have uncontrollable
consequences, the EPR reactor is extremely dangerous.
Download
the confidential documents (in French) from www.sortirdunucleaire.org
"Sortir
du nucléaire" has set up a group of experts to analyse these recently
received documents thoroughly. Here are the first lessons we can learn
from them, which are of the utmost importance.
Some operating
modes could cause the EPR reactor to explode because of a control rod
cluster ejection accident (these control rod clusters moderate the
nuclear reaction). These operating modes are mainly related to an
objective of economic efficiency, requiring the power of the reactor to
adapt to electricity demand. Thus, in order to find a hypothetical
economic justification for the EPR, its designers chose to take the very
real risk of a major nuclear accident. Moreover, most of the arguments
given in favour of the EPR (power, efficiency, waste reduction and
safety) have been proved to be false.
EDF and Areva (the
leader of the French nuclear industry) have tried to find a
solution to the problems related to the operating mode of the reactor:
these efforts have failed preventing those kinds of accidents. The
French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) has apparently been kept in the
dark about these issues.
So the EPR reactor design seems to
increase the risk of a Chernobyl-type accident, which would lead to the
destruction of the confinement and mass dispersion of radionuclides in
the atmosphere.
On March 8th and 9th, Paris hosts an
international meeting to encourage 65 countries to acquire nuclear
technology. This meeting will be opened by the French President Nicolas
Sarkozy and chaired by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Director General Yukiya Amano. It is outrageous that France keeps on
promoting nuclear power in general and the EPR reactor in particular, as
the danger of this reactor has now been demonstrated. The construction
of the EPR in Finland, France and China must be stopped
immediately, and the planned project in Penly (France) cancelled. The
best way to prevent nuclear accidents is indeed to phase out nuclear
power and go for renewable energies.
The accident
scenario in detail:
According to calculations by EDF and
Areva, the reactor’s RIP (Instant Return to Power) control mode and the
control rod cluster configuration can induce a rod ejection accident
during low-power operation, and lead to the rupture of the control rod
drive casing (i). This rupture would cause the coolant to leak outside
the nuclear reactor vessel. Such a loss of coolant accident (LOCA - a
very serious type of nuclear accident) would damage a large number of
fuel rods by heating fuel pellets and claddings (ii), and thus cause the
release of highly radioactive steam into the containment. So there is a
great risk of a criticality accident resulting in an explosion (iii),
the reactor power being increased in an extremely
brutal way. Following the ejection of control rod clusters during
low-power operation, the reactor emergency shutdown may fail (iv).
Whatever the configuration of the control rod clusters, a rod ejection
accident induces a high rate of broken fuel rods and therefore a high
risk of a criticality accident (v).
For more details, see the
documents disclosed by an anonymous EDF source (especially document No.
1) on our website: www.sortirdunucleaire.org
Press
Contacts:
Marc Saint-Aroman, +33 (0) 5 61 35 11 06
Charlotte
Mijeon, +33 (0) 6 75 36 20 20
Nuclear physicists: Monique and
Raymond Sené, +33 (0) 1 60 10 03 49
English-speaking Media: Steven
Mitchell, + 33 (0) 9 52 49 50 22
German-speaking Media: Jean-Yvon
Landrac, + 33 (0) 6 87 30 41 10
Documents to download:
1
- Summary - “Une
technologie explosive : l'EPR” (anonymous and undated)
2 - “Bilan de
la phase préliminaire de l'étude d'EDG FA3 et perspectives”(EDF SEPTEN
May 2009)
3 - “EPR – Gestion combustible – Lot 1 – Revue de
conception du schéma de grappes FA3 du 25/10/2007”
4 –“EPR FA3 –
Synthèse de l'étude de faisabilité de l'accident d'éjection de grappe”
(EDF SEPTEN September 2007)
5 - “EPR FA3- Synthèse des voies de
sortie de la problématique éjection de grappe” (EDF SEPTEN July 2007)
6
– Working paper: “Présentation synthétique de l'EPR” (EDF SEPTEN April
2004)
7 - “Note de présentation de la deuxième revue de projet
radioprotection EPR” (EDF, Spring 2004)
8 - “Marges disponibles pour
les activités d'exploitation du REP par rapport aux risques de
criticité” (EDF SEPTEN April 2009)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
