Posts Tagged ‘nuclear’

EDF to cut jobs to control cost of nuclear project

Damian on EDF nuclear plants in UK : Hinkley Point A Nuclear Power Station
The Hinkley Point nuclear power station site in Somerset. EDF is believed to be cutting 150 jobs from its 800-strong workforce. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

EDF energy is cutting scores of jobs to control costs at the site of its proposed new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset. The company is in the middle of difficult negotiations with ministers over the level of public subsidy the new reactors will receive over the next 40 years but insisted the project is not being mothballed and that it is not “holding a gun to the government’s head”.

The company has already spent £800m on developing the £14bn project and lost its junior partner when Centrica pulled out in February. “As part of good project management, and to control costs, EDF Energy has taken steps to refocus its activities at its Hinkley Point C project,” said a spokeswoman. “This reflects its priorities ahead of securing the financing necessary for the project.”

EDF refused to give the number of workers losing their jobs, citing ongoing consultations with staff and unions, but the Guardian understands it will be about 150 of the current 800-strong workforce. The company said further pre-construction planning work would continue but that preparation of the site had halted.

EDF wants to build two new reactors at Hinkley. It says they would provide reliable and low-carbon electricity making up 7% of the UK’s demand and provide 25,000 job opportunities during construction, with 900 long-term posts. The UK government has placed new nuclear reactors at the heart of its energy policy, to replace the ageing fleet of nuclear and coal plants which are being phased out.

But the two sides have been unable to agree on the subsidy the plant would receive, paid for by consumers through their energy bills. EDF had originally said it would make its final investment decision by the end of 2012. Both sides have a great deal to lose, but as the negotiations have dragged on observers have suggested the likelihood of the government abandoning plans for a series of new nuclear plants.

“It is proving extremely difficult to get that first nuclear power plant built and there is an increasing feeling in industry that at £14bn a throw there is no chance of getting beyond one,” said Lord Robin Teverson, the LibDem spokesman on energy in the House of Lords.

A spokesman for the department of energy and climate change said: “Progress is being made in our discussions with EDF. Both sides have an interest in reaching a positive agreement.”

EDF and the government face a number of major obstacles in delivering new reactors even beyond the challenging financing. The project has yet to be approved by the European Union, which limits the state aid that can be given to industrial projects. The UK also has no site for the long term disposal of nuclear waste, after the rejection of a proposal in Cumbria by local councils. Such a facility was considered a prerequisite for the building of new reactors by David Cameron before the 2010 election.

The EDF spokeswoman said: “The case for new nuclear in the UK remains as strong as ever.” She said Ed Davey, the energy secretary had granted planning permission for Hinkley and that the reactor design has been approved by regulators. But a senior EDF executive said recently: “We cannot afford to burn money every day, every week, every month without a clear understanding of where it’s leading us.”

Environment news, comment and analysis from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

BIS: £31 million injection for new nuclear technology in the UK

The nuclear industry received a boost today as Business Secretary Vince Cable announced major new funding awards that will enhance the supply chain and increase opportunities to commercialise new technologies in the sector.

The funding will support 35 projects across the UK in developing new technologies for the construction, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants. This will bring together over 60 experienced organisations including Laing O’Rourke, Sheffield Forgemasters and EDF. They will work alongside innovative small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and universities.

The £18 million joint funding between the Technology Strategy Board, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) is expected to leverage in an additional £13 million making the total value of the projects £31 million.

Business Secretary Vince Cable said:

There are huge global opportunities that the UK is well placed to take advantage of in the nuclear industry. Our strong research base will help develop exciting new technologies that can be commercialised here and then exported across the globe.

The Technology Strategy Board is playing a vital role in helping UK businesses realise their potential and compete on a bigger scale. There are many innovative SMEs across the nuclear sector and this joint funding reinforces the government’s commitment to a nuclear strategy that will create jobs and growth.

The announcement has been made alongside the publication of the government’s nuclear industrial strategy, which sets out the objectives to develop a strong and sustainable nuclear industry in the UK.

Chief Executive of the Technology Strategy Board Iain Gray said:

Delivering a new fleet of nuclear power stations to help meet the country’s energy needs involves a number of highly-sophisticated and leading edge technologies. The support announced today will help to develop capabilities in this country. That is good news for the economy because it will help us build a world-leading technology base that can provide solutions around the world as well as here in the UK.

One of the projects to receive major investment is Bristol-based OC Robotics. They have received almost £6 million in funding – the largest ever grant given to an SME by the Technology Strategy Board.

The company is developing a new technology called LaserSnake. It is a robot- controlled laser cutting tool that can be used underwater or above ground in confined and hazardous spaces. It could play a key role in nuclear decommissioning projects to dismantle vessels, support structures and pipe work.

The new funding will help OC Robotics to develop the technology to a full demonstration project which could lead to the UK being a world leader in this technology. The technology also has the potential to be used across other sectors including the military and construction industries.

Dr Adrian Simper, the NDA’s Strategy and Technology Director, said:

We were extremely pleased with the level of interest in decommissioning projects from both established organisations and smaller, newer businesses. Our decommissioning strategy focuses very much on developing innovative technologies through collaborative working, while joint funding initiatives such as this increase the investment potential and provide much broader opportunities for interested partners.

We also welcome the comprehensive nature of the subject areas, covering new build as well as decommissioning, which will enable the sharing and transfer of technologies between the different nuclear sectors.

By 2030 it is forecast that globally there will be £930 billion investment in building new reactors and £250 billion in decommissioning those that are coming off-line. The nuclear new build programme in the UK alone could generate up to 40,000 jobs at its peak. The nuclear industrial strategy sets out the basis for a long-term partnership between government and industry to exploit those opportunities.

Notes to editors:

1.The total funding from each organisation was £10 million from the Technology Strategy Board, £3 million from DECC, £3 million from the NDA and £2 million from EPSRC.

2.A breakdown of the funding is as follows:

  • £10.9 million between 16 large-scale R&D nuclear projects co-funded by the Technology Strategy Board (£5.7 million), DECC (£2 million), the NDA (£1.2 million) and EPSRC (£2 million).
  • £5.8 million investment for OC Robotics in Bristol to develop ‘LaserSnake’ – a robot controlled laser cutting tool that can be used to decommission nuclear structures, co-funded by the Technology Strategy Board (£4 million), DECC (£1 million) and the NDA (£1 million). The LaserSnake combines robot technology with a laser cutting head that was adapted for nuclear use by Cambridge-based TWI, supported by £1 million of funding from the NDA.
  • £900,000 investment for nine new nuclear related Knowledge Transport Partnerships (KTPs) between businesses and universities, co-funded by the Technology Strategy Board (£450,000) and NDA (£450,000).
  • £700,000 shared between ten projects for nuclear technology feasibility studies, co-funded by Technology Strategy Board (£363,000) and the NDA (£345,000).

3.For full lists and a regional breakdown of the please contact Simon Napper in the Technology Strategy Board press office. Email: [email protected]. Tel: 07881 842583.

4.The Technology Strategy Board is the UK’s innovation agency. Its goal is to accelerate economic growth by stimulating and supporting business-led innovation. Sponsored by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), the Technology Strategy Board brings together business, research and the public sector, supporting and accelerating the development of innovative products and services to meet market needs, tackle major societal challenges and help build the future economy. For more information please visit www.innovateuk.org.

5.The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is responsible for the clean-up of 19 historic sites dating from the earliest days of experimental research. These include the first generation of power stations (the 11-strong Magnox fleet), various research and fuel-related facilities, together with Sellafield, Europe’s largest and most complex nuclear site. R&D is key to developing solutions to a wide range of technical challenges.

6.The government’s economic policy objective is to achieve ‘strong, sustainable and balanced growth that is more evenly shared across the country and between industries’. It set four ambitions in the ‘Plan for Growth’ (PDF 1.7MB), published at Budget 2011:

  • to create the most competitive tax system in the G20
  • to make the UK the best place in Europe to start, finance and grow a business
  • to encourage investment and exports as a route to a more balanced economy
  • to create a more educated workforce that is the most flexible in Europe.

Work is underway across government to achieve these ambitions, including progress on more than 250 measures as part of the Growth Review. Developing an Industrial Strategy gives new impetus to this work by providing businesses, investors and the public with more clarity about the long-term direction in which the government wants the economy to travel.

info4local Subject Documents

Government publishes nuclear strategy

26 March 2013

Responding to an industrial strategy for nuclear power published by the Government today (Tuesday 26 March), Friends of the Earth’s Head of Campaigns Andrew Pendleton said:

“The UK needs a coherent industrial strategy – but this isn’t it. Bringing out separate strategies on nuclear, gas, oil and wind shows a lack of joined-up thinking by the Coalition on how we move to a low-carbon economy.
 
“Nuclear power is an outdated and hugely expensive energy source, delivered vastly over-budget and late, by a declining industry defined by escalating costs.
 
“The global eco-tech revolution will happen with or without Britain. So that we are not left behind, the Government should be positioning us at its forefront by harnessing our bounty of clean British energy from the wind, sun and sea – this will create thousands of jobs and build a prosperous, secure economy.”

ENDS

1. Click here for more information about the Government’s industrial strategy for nuclear power.

2. Friends of the Earth’s Clean British Energy campaign, backed by TV Dragons’ Den’s Deborah Meaden, is urging the Government to act now to fix our broken energy system by setting a target in the Energy Bill to clean up our electricity by 2030. Slashing energy waste and developing renewable power from our wind, sun and waves will tackle climate change, create thousands of UK jobs, and make our future fuel bills more predictable.

If you’re a journalist looking for press information please contact the Friends of the Earth media team on 020 7566 1649.

Published by Friends of the Earth Trust

Press releases by RSS

Environment Agency: Environmental permits issued for new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C in Somerset

The Environment Agency has issued three new environmental permits today to NNB Generation Company Limited (NNB GenCo) for their proposed new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C in Somerset.

The permits are required for the station to operate and will allow it to:

• Discharge and dispose of radioactive wastes;

• Discharge cooling water and liquid effluents into the Bristol Channel;  and

• Operate standby power supply systems using diesel generators.

The limits and conditions that the Environment Agency has set in the permits will ensure that people and the environment are properly protected. 

Copies of documents including the Environment Agency’s Decision Documents are available on our website at the following link – www.environment-agency.gov.uk\hinkleypoint.

NNB GenCo’s permit applications were made to the Environment Agency in summer 2011.  The decisions to issue the permits came after the Environment Agency had carefully considered all of the responses that it had received to both public consultations that it held on the applications, and on its draft decisions.  Comments received included those from organisations such as the Health Protection Agency and Natural England, from other interested organisations, and from people living in the area of the proposed power station.   

Brian Payne, the Environment Agency’s Hinkley Point C Project Manager, said “The environmental permits we’ve issued for Hinkley Point C set limits and conditions that will ensure people and the environment will be properly protected.  I’d like to thank all who responded to our public consultations. We’ve carefully considered all of the comments we received and the documents we are publishing today explain our decisions”.

Any media enquiries should be directed to the Environment Agency press office on 01392 442008

-Ends-

 

NOTE TO EDITORS

NNB GenCo propose to build a twin reactor power station at Hinkley Point C using the EDF / Areva UK EPR design.  Each of the UK EPR reactors would each generate 1600MW of electricity, enough in total to power about 5 million homes.  The Environment Agency and the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) have already assessed the acceptability of the UK EPRTM reactor design in their Generic Design Assessment programme.

The ONR issued a nuclear licence for the site in November last year and the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change is currently considering whether a Development Consent Order for Hinkley Point C should be granted.

Copies of documents including the Environment Agency’s Decision Documents are available on our website at the following link – www.environment-agency.gov.uk\hinkleypoint – and are also available to view at the following locations:  

• Environment Agency Office,

Rivers House, East Quay, Bridgwater, Somerset TA6 4YS. T: 03708 506506

• Environment Agency Office,

Rivers House, St. Mellons Business Park, Fortran Road, St. Mellons, Cardiff CF3 0EY. T: 02920 245330

• West Somerset Council, West Somerset House, Killick Way, Williton, Somerset TA4 4QA. T: 01643 703704

• Minehead Customer Centre, 1-3 Summerland Road, Minehead TA24 5BP,  T: 01643 703704

• Sedgemoor District Council, Bridgwater House, King Square, Bridgwater, Somerset TA6 3AR. T: 01278 435591

• Burnham-on-Sea Library, Princess Street, Burnham-on-Sea, Somerset TA8 1EH.  T: 01278 780505

• Highbridge Public Library, Alpha House, Market Street, Highbridge,  Somerset TA9 3BP.T: 0845 345 9177

• Somerset County Council, Major Energy Projects, Environment Directorate, County Hall, Taunton, Somerset TA1 4DY.  T: 01823 357129

• North Somerset Council Corporate Services Unit, Somerset House, Oxford Street, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset BS23 1TG. T: 01934 427434

• Vale of Glamorgan Council, Pollution Control Team, Civic Offices, Holton Road, Barry CF63 4RU. T: 01446 709 779

The documents can be viewed at the Environment Agency Office during normal office hours (9am-5pm, Monday to Friday). Please ring in advance to arrange an appointment by calling the National Customer Contact Centre on 03708 506 506. You can also request a copy of the documents (a charge may be made to cover the cost of copying). 

Follow us on Twitter: @EnvAgencySW


 

info4local Subject Documents

Nuclear operators must be financially liable

Decommission Work Continues At Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
Damaged reactors in the Fukushima nuclear power plant. Photograph: The Asahi Shimbun/Getty Images

Two years ago today a huge tsunami devastated Japan, killing many thousands and causing one of the world’s worst nuclear disasters. Japan‘s people will grieve for many years and they will be paying for the nuclear clean-up for many years. Yet, as negotiations over how much subsidy new nuclear power stations in the UK will get from energy customers, the financial liability of reactor operators for accidents remains tiny.

Things were supposed to have changed following Chernobyl in 1986. The international nuclear community recognised its deficiencies and proposed reform of the governance structures in a number of areas, including international nuclear liability regimes. The definition of damage was to change, with the minimum amount utilities would have to pay in the event of an accident was to increase and the timescale in which those affected could claim damages was to lengthen.

But 27 years after Chernobyl and two years after Fukushima, the proposed changes to the liability regimes are still to be adopted by the signatories of the international conventions. Consequently, in the UK, the current maximum that a nuclear operator is liable is still only £140m. The government is seeking to revise the maximum limit, but is waiting on the post-Chernobyl revisions to be adopted by other countries. If it is introduced, it will raised the operator’s liability ultimately to £1bn.

As of October 2012, approximately £9.4bn (1,335 bn yen) had been paid out in compensation as a result of the Fukushima accident and this is expected to double in the next year. At this stage the final cost can only be roughly estimated, but the utility company, Tepco, has suggested that cost for compensation and decontamination maybe in the order of £70bn (10 trillion yen).

As can be seen in the case of Fukushima, the financial compensation already paid out is far higher than even the proposed higher limits for a utility in the UK and the amount the accident may ultimately cost is likely to be an order of magnitude larger. Therefore, in the event of a major accident, as in Japan, it is the state that must step in and foot the bill.

The issue of third party liability and the financial responsibility of nuclear operators and suppliers is important not only because it should set in place adequate financial safeguards to guarantee compensation and pay for remediation work in the event of an accident, but also because it affects the types of investment being chosen by the power sector.

Not having to be responsible for potential damages is a government or societal subsidy, because if the utilities and nuclear operators were required to set aside funding and/or take out additional insurance, to cover such eventualities, it would reflected in a higher price for nuclear electricity. Other power sources, such as renewables – and increasingly the fossil fuel sectors – are being required to internalise into their prices their environmental costs. Unless this is done across all sectors and across all forms of environmental damage, it will further distort investment decisions.

It has been a strange couple of years for nuclear power in the EU, with some countries firmly turning away from nuclear power (such as Belgium, Germany and Italy) while others, such as the UK, have continued to plan and develop their nuclear power programmes. However, what is clear since Fukushima, and increasingly clear in the UK, is that the cost of new build has gone up significantly and the potential accident costs are not reflected in the price being paid for nuclear electricity.

• Antony Froggatt has written about nuclear liability for Greenpeace International and is the co-author of The World Nuclear Industry Status Report

Environment news, comment and analysis from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

Nuclear decommissioning finally begins

Members of the media visit TEPCO's tsunami-crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant
Workers carry out radiation screening on a bus during the media tour of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Photograph: Issei Kato/AP

Radiation levels in the abandoned communities near Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have fallen 40% in the past year. Inside the wrecked facility, construction workers rush to complete state-of-the-art equipment that will remove dozens of dangerous radioactive nuclides from cooling water. Soon, a steel shield will be driven into the seabed to prevent contamination from the plant from leaking into the Pacific Ocean.

Almost two years after a deadly tsunami crashed into the plant, crippling its backup power supply and triggering the world’s worst nuclear crisis for a quarter of a century, the gravest danger posed by Fukushima Daiichi has passed.

But for all the signs of progress since the Guardian visited the atomic facility a year ago, the biggest, and most complex, nuclear decommissioning operation the industry has ever seen has barely begun.

The pipes, cables and other equipment strewn across the plant’s grounds this time last year are now functioning components in a complex, technologically fraught mission to cool the crippled reactors, while experts struggle to figure out how to extract the melted nuclear fuel lying deep inside their basements.

The three reactors struck by meltdown and hydrogen explosions two years ago were brought to a safe state known as “cold shutdown” in December 2011, nine months after the tsunami left almost 20,000 dead or missing along Japan‘s north-east coast.

Now, Japan is about to embark on a clean-up that could cost at least $ 100bn – on top of the cost of compensating evacuees and decontaminating their abandoned homes.

Fukushima Daiichi’s manager, Takeshi Takahashi, conceded that decommissioning the plant could take 30 to 40 years.


Decommission Work Continues At Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
Fukushima’s reactor No. 3 (left) and No. 4. Photograph: Asahi Shimbun/Getty Images

“Even though we are still faced with a difficult task, we’ll keep pushing on with the decommissioning process,” he told a small group of visiting foreign journalists on Wednesday. “It will take a long time to complete our work, especially on the three reactors that suffered meltdown, but we’ll do our best to keep them stable.”

The clean-up operation will begin at building No 4, where the fuel rods inside survived unscathed after it was hit by the tsunami, then badly damaged by a hydrogen explosion.

By the end of this year, Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) says it will begin removing fuel assemblies from the reactor building’s storage pool and placing them in a nearby cooling pool, where they will remain for four years before being stored in even safer dry casks in a purpose-built facility on higher ground.

In total, workers will have to extract more than 11,000 new and used fuel assemblies from seven badly damaged storage pools. Work to remove melted fuel won’t begin until 2021, and the entire decommissioning project is expected to take up to 40 years.

Managers from firms contracted by Tepco to help decommission the 40-year-old plant say they are confident progress is being made, despite the radiation hazards faced by their employees.

Perhaps the most dangerous job on the site has fallen to Hiroshige Kobayashi and his colleagues. As a manager at Kajima Corp, Kobayashi is responsible for clearing and processing the rubble and debris from reactor No 3, where radiation levels easily outstrip those at other parts of the site.

On the ocean side of neighbouring reactor No 4, where a meltdown did not occur, Tepco recently measured radiation at 172 microsieverts/hour; but in the same area outside reactor No 3, levels soar to 1,710 microsieverts/hour. By comparison, a chest X-ray is equivalent to 50 microsieverts and a return flight between Tokyo and New York 200 microsieverts, according to the Japan Atomic Energy Agency.

The dangers associated with working in highly radioactive areas of Fukushima Daiichi prompted the World Health Organisation (WHO) to warn last week that one-third of the plant’s workers face an increased risk of developing thyroid cancer, leukaemia and all solid cancers during their lifetimes.

Kobayashi declined to comment on the WHO report, but acknowledged that workers face unprecedented danger from persistently high radiation levels.

“It’s a fact that the levels in reactor No 3 are very high, so we are trying to deal with that by using remote control technologies and staying as far away from the reactor as possible,” he said.

Hopes that robots would quickly be able to reach areas of the plant inaccessible to humans suffered a setback when Quince, a $ 6m robot, lost contact with its operators while monitoring inside one of the reactors in October 2011.

“We’re in a situation where we’re using technologies we’ve never experienced before, such as GPS and lasers when we’re dealing with the debris,” Kobayashi said.

Although Tepco has managed to insert remote-controlled cameras into the damaged reactors’ outer vessels, it is still no closer to gauging the state of the damaged fuel – a prerequisite for removing it.

To add to Tepco’s troubles, irradiated water is increasing at such a pace that the utility is running out of space for the tanks it needs to store it.

Several strong quakes have shaken north-east Japan since 11 March 2011, but Takahashi insisted that the reactor No. 4 building – where 1,500 fuel assemblies stored in a pool on the top floor have drawn concern because of their vulnerability to seismic activity – could withstand an earthquake of similar intensity to the one that destroyed the plant two years ago.

Despite those reassurances, Takahashi conceded that the plant has become the focal point of a nuclear crisis whose victims, like the facility itself, are a long way from returning to any semblance of normality.

On the drive through the 20-kilometre evacuation zone to Fukushima Daiichi, visitors pass entire villages that remain frozen in time. Half a dozen cars sit abandoned in a supermarket car park, shops and restaurants lie deserted, and thousands of black bags filled with contaminated soil and grass cover fields once used to grow rice, while authorities decide how, and where, to dispose of them.

The only movement comes from lorries carrying equipment and building materials, and buses ferrying workers in protective blue and white clothing to and from the plant.

Meanwhile, the tens of thousands of residents who once called this forbidding landscape home still have no idea when, or if, they will be able to return.

Repeating Tepco’s mantra of the past two years, Takahashi apologised “to the world” for the “inconvenience” caused by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. While he shared his colleagues’ optimism over decommissioning, it was tinged – as his surroundings demand – with realism.

“It will be a long time before this power plant becomes a part of history,” he said.

Environment news, comment and analysis from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

DECC: Energy Secretary responds to Cumbria nuclear waste vote

Press notice: 13/010

Cumbria County Council has voted to withdraw from the process to find a host community for an underground radioactive waste disposal facility.

Copeland Borough Council voted in favour of remaining in the process to identify a host community for a geological disposal facility. However, it has previously been agreed that parties at both Borough and County level needed to vote positively in order for the process to continue in west Cumbria. As such, the current process will be brought to a close in west Cumbria.

The Government will now embark on a renewed drive to ensure that the case for hosting a GDF is drawn to the attention of communities, and to encourage further local authorities to come forward over the coming years to join the process.

The Government will also reflect on the experience of the process in west Cumbria, and will talk to the local authorities themselves and others who have been involved to see what lessons can be learned. No changes to the current approach will be introduced without further public consultation.

Responding to the Councillors’ decisions, Edward Davey, Secretary for Energy and Climate Change, said:

“We respect the decision made today by Cumbria councillors. They have invested a great deal of time in this project and have provided valuable lessons on how to take forward this process in future. While their decision to withdraw is disappointing, Cumbria will continue to play a central role in the energy and nuclear power sectors.

“We are clear that nuclear power should play a key role in our future energy mix, as it does today. I am confident that the programme to manage radioactive waste safely will ultimately be successful, and that the decisions made in Cumbria today will not undermine prospects for new nuclear power stations.

“It is however absolutely vital that we get to grips with our national nuclear legacy. The issue has been kicked into the long-grass for far too long.

“We remain firmly committed to geological disposal as the right policy for the long-term, safe and secure management of radioactive waste. We also remain committed to the principles of voluntarism and a community-led approach.

“The fact that Copeland voted in favour of entering the search for a potential site for a GDF demonstrates that communities recognise the benefits associated with hosting such a facility.

“For any host community there will be a substantial community benefits package, worth hundreds of millions of pounds. That is in addition to the hundreds of jobs and major investment that such a huge infrastructure project could bring.

“We will now embark on a renewed drive to ensure that the case for hosting a GDF is drawn to the attention of other communities.”

  1. The Managing Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) process aims to identify a host community for a geological disposal facility (GDF) for radioactive waste. The 2008 Managing Radioactive Waste Safely White Paper is published on the MRWS website
  2. In November 2011, Government agreed that parties at both Borough and County level needed to vote positively in order for the process to continue in west Cumbria. See the report on the Cumbria website
  3. Allerdale Borough Council is due to vote later today, but given the “No” vote already received from Cumbria County Council the current MRWS process cannot proceed in west Cumbria.

info4local Subject Documents

Plans for New Nuclear Power Station Unveiled

Designs for a new nuclear power station in the UK, Hinkley Point C, have been unveiled today. These are the first nuclear plants to be built in Britain for 25 years, and will be located near Bridgwater in Somerset.

The European Pressurized reactor, designed by two French firms, is affirmed to be environmentally sound and safe, according to regulators. After a five-year procedure, there are still a number of obstacles that need to be addressed before nuclear engineering company Areva and energy suppler EDF can start construction.

The Environment Agency and the Office for Nuclear Regulation examined four potential nuclear power plant designs back in 2007, but three of the applicants withdrew, leaving the EPR as the only remaining design.

China, France and Finland have already used the design for new reactors, but costs are mounting as construction has taken more time than planned. After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, the Flamanville EPR station in Normandy had to make major design changes. Last month, EDF revealed this cost to be over two billion euros (£1.8 billion).

The accident pressed designers to reevaluate the UK EPR design, leading to 16 changes, including supplementary flood protection measures and the supply of pumping equipment and mobile generators.

The Nuclear Regulation deemed the UK EPR “the most-assessed design ever” with the process costing £35 million, which will be regained from Areva and EDF.

EDF is yet to confirm its investment in the new design to be built on its existing site in the West Country, with original promises to come to a decision by the end of 2012. The company has now revised this to “the earliest possible date.”

EDF’s decision may be dependent on nuclear electricity price guarantees, which they are negotiating with the government. The Planning Inspectorate’s planning permission decision is immanent, which will be followed by final approval from Secretary of State and Energy, Ed Davey, which can take up to three months.

Japanese firm Mitsubishi has designed a remote controlled and radiation-resistant robot that is currently working inside Fukushima’s nuclear power station to clean it up.

Image Copyright Teollisuuden Voima Oy – Courtesy Wikimedia Commons

Image used for representational purposes only

Enviro News – News