Renew On Line (UK) number 72

Extracts from NATTA's journal
Renew, Issue 172 Mar/Apr2008
   Welcome   Archives   Bulletin         
 

Contents


1. Big UK wind push

2. Zero Carbon Buildings

3. Nuclear Decision

4. Energy Policy developments

5. Tory Green Energy Promises

6. Brown on Energy...and Climate

7. Biofuels and biomass get going

8. EU News: REFIT spreads

9. Global News: Climate High, Bali Low

10. World Round up: Oz, NZ, Canada try

11. Nuclear news: US and UK plans

11. Nuclear news

USA on GNEP
Opening the special Global Climate meeting he convened in Washington in Sept (see earlier), President Bush said ‘My administration established a new initiative called the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. This partnership will work with nations with advanced civilian nuclear energy programs, such as France and Japan and China and Russia. Together we will help developing nations obtain secure, cost-effective and proliferation-resistant nuclear power, so they can have a reliable source of zero-emissions energy.’ Interestingly, the UK is not included in his list- maybe it isn’t pro-nuclear enough, and plans to stop reprocessing!

US Cools it
But back in the USA, not all has been going to plan. In a first for the US , last summer one of three nuclear reactors at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant in Alabama had to be shut down because it could not use water from the Tennessee River due to the heat wave- there are rules about raising its temperature beyond certain levels. Similar problems have occurred in previous years in France and climate change will make it worse as time goes on.

US MOX plant
Evidently unphased by this problem however, the US Dept. of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has initiated construction of the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River site near Aiken, South Carolina. The new facility is being built to convert a minimum of 34 tonnes of surplus US weapons grade plutonium. The fuel will be used in commercial nuclear reactors in North Carolina and South Carolina. ‘The start of construction of the U.S. MOX facility helps us fulfill an international non-proliferation agreement and marks a major step forward in our efforts with Russia to dispose of surplus weapon-grade plutonium so that it can never be used again for nuclear weapons’ said NNSA’s deputy administrator for Defense Nuclear Non-proliferation, William Tobey. Under the agreement, the US and Russia committed to dispose of 34 tonnes of surplus weapons grade plutonium. But of course it could also use ‘new’ plutonium from other sources- including other reactors, in the US and elsewhere, given the new US commitment to spent fuel reprocessing and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (see above).

Next UK Nukes
British Energy says the existing sites at Sizewell in Suffolk, Dungeness in Kent, Bradwell in Essex, & Hinkley in Somerset, were the most likely for new plants. But to give itself more time, it will extend the lives of the 35 year old Hinkley B and Hunterston plants by five years, to 2016.
Insurance cover: While the government says the new programme won’t cost taxpayers anything, Defra let slip that land polluted by a ‘nuclear occurrence’ would render the Environmental Secretary liable to foot the bill under the Radioactive Contaminated Land Regulations Act 2007.
Costs Oxford energy Don Dr Dieter Helm, says that no country had yet built nuclear plants without state aid or rigged markets.

UK Jobs threat
The Oxford Research Group’s ‘Secure Energy Briefing’ report on Nuclear power produced for last years nuclear consultation, claimed that a UK nuclear revival would deprive renewable energy of ‘much needed expertise’. It suggested that although ‘advocates of nuclear power are presenting nuclear power as a possible solution to job losses’ in reality ‘there is a very limited pool of scientists and engineers in the UK; they are a valuable resource. A nuclear revival in the UK would deprive emerging technologies, such as renewable energy, of much needed expertise.’ In addition, a nuclear programme would draw away investment and that would ‘impact negatively on the renewables market’ .


Nuclear Strike Avoided
Last year, breaking the governments 2% pay rise norm, UK Atomic Energy Authority workers, at Harwell, Culham, Dounreay and Sellafield etc, won a phased 3.9 % pay increase, after rumblings about possible industrial action.

Scotland stays Brave
Last Sept. Scotland’s renewable power capacity overtook its nuclear capacity. SNP First Minister Alex Salmond decided to mark this event by instigating a ‘Green Energy Day’ on Sept 7th. Prefiguring the Scottish Governments very forthright submission to the UK governments nuclear consultation, he said ‘Scotland neither wants nor needs new nuclear power stations.. we can have secure energy supplies without landing future generations of Scots with the burden of toxic radioactive waste’.
But Bill Coley, the chief executive of British Energy, has been calling on the SNP to reverse it’s anti-nuclear policy. Coley insisted ‘I do not know how you can meet your climate change objectives without nuclear at the price that people would be able to pay. As an engineer I do not know how you would do that.’
According to the Scotsman, Coley believes a new generation of nuclear plants can be built close to existing sites, including Hunterston and Torness, by 2018. But he conceded that might not be possible in Scotland: ‘If the political climate is such that new nuclear build investment is not wanted then of course we will focus that new build investment elsewhere’.
*Using capacity rather than delivered energy makes the comparison maybe a little unfair, given the different load factors- but then much of the renewable capacity in Scotland is hydro with good load factors and Scotland has some wind farms with very much higher load factors than the average. Even so, on a good day nuclear supplies about 40% of Scotlands power (not recently though, with plant closures!) while renewables are not yet at 20%.

Chernobyl saved
The ‘temporary’ structure built around Reactor 4 to try to contain the residues from the Chernobyl nuclear plant explosion in the Ukraine in 1986 is at long last to be replaced by a properly engineered containment system- a $500m metal shelter. It will take about 5 years to finish.
The existing containment was not a complete seal and there have been worries about leaks- although some of it is now less active, most of the nuclear material exposed by the explosion is still in there somewhere, only about 5% was vented into the atmosphere at the time. But that was enough to be likely to lead to many cancer deaths, although there are disputes about the exact figures: the UN IARC-WHO put the range at 6,700-38,000, with 16,000 being their best guess. Greenpeace however suggest the total could be 98,000. See Renew 164

Germany ‘needs nuclear’
Germany can only meet its target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 36% by 2020 if it keeps nuclear power plants. So says the German industry group BDI in a study co-authored by consulting firm McKinsey. It claimed that, without nuclear or serious economic impacts, emissions could not be cut by more than 31% by 2020, compared with 1990 levels. Even achieving 31% would need further investment in technology and would raise the cost of cutting CO2 emissions up to 175 euros/CO2 tonne saved, up from the currrent 20 euros. However, opposition to nuclear remains high in Germany, and the conservative government is honouring the phase out programme initiated by the Social Democrats, its coalition partner. Source: Reuters

Belgium to slow phase out?
Belgium is phasing out its nuclear plants, but its new Christian Democrat-Liberal government coalition wants to extend the lives of some of the seven operating reactors, in the light of uncertain energy supplies and prospects for non-carbon energy.

Source: Modern Power Systems
* Sweden voted to phase out nuclear almost 30 years ago, but progress has been minimal. State Secretary Ola Altera told Reuters ‘In the short term, it is not really realistic, especially since the climate issue has stepped forward as the main priority’.
But no new plants are planned.

FBR back France is to develop a sodium-cooled fast breeder reactor prototype, whose design features are to be decided by 2012, with the start up aimed for 2020. A gas-cooled fast reactor is also planned.

NATTA/Renew Subscription Details

Renew is the bi-monthly 30 plus page newsletter of NATTA, the Network for Alternative Technology and Technology Assessment. NATTA members gets Renew free. NATTA membership cost 18 pa (waged) 12pa (unwaged), 6 pa airmail supplement (Please make cheques payable to 'The Open University', NOT to 'NATTA')

Details from NATTA , c/o EERU,
The Open University,
Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA
Tel: 01908 65 4638 (24 hrs)
E-mail: S.J.Dougan@open.ac.uk

The full 32 (plus) page journal can be obtained on subscription
The extracts here only represent about 25% of it.

This material can be freely used as long as it is not for commercial purposes and full credit is given to its source.

The views expressed should not be taken to necessarily reflect the views of all NATTA members, EERU or the Open University.

We are now offering to e-mail subscribers a PDF version of the complete Renew, instead  of sending them the printed version, should they wish.