Work officially ‘started’ at Sizewell C Nuclear on Monday – but it was really only political theatre.
Ipswich Star, By Paul Geater 18 Jan 24
This week we had big fanfares and a major ceremony to “mark the start” of construction at Sizewell C.
But what did it all mean?
In one sense construction has already started. Land has been dug up, mature trees have been cut down, and one of the new entrances to the site is being cleared.
However, the Final Investment Decision (FID), the point at which the various parties are committed to building the station is still, apparently, several months away – so Monday’s ceremony really does look like nothing but a piece of political theatre.
What is clear, though, is that there is clear political will for this project to go ahead. The Government and the official opposition are both committed to it whatever the cost they may be exposed to.
I can understand that. I still don’t think it makes a great deal of economic sense – but given the uncertainties across the globe and the need to move to carbon zero energy I can see why they want to proceed with nuclear whatever the cost.
Personally I don’t have any concerns about the potential safety of the plant – while there are potential dangers with nuclear generation the experience over the last 60 years in this country suggests it can be operated safely.
And given that there are already two nuclear plants at Sizewell that need to be protected from the sea, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to put the new plant next to them so the protection can be shared.
I still have serious concerns with EDF and the government – who must be seen as equal partners in the project – over the way it is going to be built and the devastating impact it will have on local communities.
By adopting a “bull in a china shop” attitude towards its construction, EDF and the government are planning to cause substantial environmental damage to some of the most precious parts of the Heritage Coast that are closely linked in with Minsmere and Dunwich Heath……………………………………
Creating a new nature reserve two miles inland is great – but it can’t replace a massive area that’s directly linked to the coast.
But I fear that battle is lost now. With both the current government and the likely future government keen on the project, the best we can hope for is that some new habitats will make up for the lost treasures………………….
There’s also been a failure to really engage with local people. There have now been local community forums set up but they are being treated with suspicion by many. https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/24054795.opinion-sizewell-c-still-doesnt-engage-residents/
Dissension in the nuclear lobby – it had to happen – Small Nuclear versus Big Nuclear.
Comment. As the UK fumbles its way through its “Civil Nuclear Roadmap” folly, the Rolls Royce lobby paints Hinkley and Sizewell projects as obsolete trash, and touts Rolls Royce’s non existent small reactors as Britain’s energy salvation .
Jeremy Warner: Outsourcing Britain’s nuclear renewal is insanity.
Rolls-Royce’s modular reactors are an obvious way to break free of EDF’s
grip.
Here we go again. Einstein’s definition of insanity is to keep doing
the same thing and expecting different outcomes. You would think that the
Government had learned its lesson on nuclear renewal after the debacle of
Hinkley Point C. Clearly not.
Having already made the same mistake once, by
pledging a replica of the ruinously costly Hinkley at Sizewell on the
Suffolk coast, ministers are doubling down and promising a third such
monstrosity somewhere else.
According to the Government’s “Nuclear
Roadmap”, published last week, another of these leviathans in an as yet
unspecified location is to be given the go-ahead later this year. On the
most recent estimates, Hinkley Point C is expected to cost at least 80pc
more than its original budget and is years behind schedule. Some fear that
it won’t be until the early 2030s before the reactors are fully
operational, such have been the technical and safety complications
encountered in the construction phase.
Ministers have also had to agree to
punishingly expensive output prices to persuade the main developer,
France’s state-controlled EDF, to build in the first place, committing
consumers to high electricity costs for decades to come. So much for the
promise once made by the ever courteous Vincent de Rivaz, the one-time boss
of EDF in Britain, that Hinkley Point would be cooking our Christmas
lunches by 2017.
Even allowing for the learning process – theoretically,
later projects to the same design should cost less, with past mistakes
taken on board – it beggars belief that the Government should attempt to
repeat such a tried and demonstrably poor value for money technology.
Given the experience of Hinkley Point C, why are we still pursuing the hugely
costly, largely obsolete technology of EDF’s gigawatt stations when there
are perfectly viable, but smaller, homegrown alternatives just waiting for
the opportunity to fill the gap? If we are to spend £28bn a year of
taxpayers’ money on going green, as promised by Labour, we should at
least be confident that a large part of the wider economic benefit is
reserved for UK supply chains, and is not instead squandered on supporting
jobs abroad in France, China, Denmark and the US.
Telegraph 13th Jan 2024
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/13/uk-go-full-nuclear-ensure-solutions-british/
This week’s nuclear news
TOP STORIES.
Israel Is Terrified the World Court Will Decide It’s Committing Genocide.
The ‘Ghost Budget’: How America Pays for Endless War. US prepares for nuclear war at foreign bases – with “Steadfast Noon”.
‘PR Fairy Dust’ Has Canada Tripling Nuclear Capacity by 2050. Cancelled
NuScale contract weighs heavy on new nuclear.
Nuclear Continues To Lag Far Behind Renewables In China Deployments.
****************************Covid. Yes, it’s still there – it’s NOT over yet.
Climate. Analysis: Record opposition to climate action by UK’s right-leaning newspapers in 2023. 2023 confirmed as world’s hottest year on record. Human ‘behavioural crisis’ at root of climate breakdown, say scientists.
Nuclear. It’s all over the UK media – enthusiasm for Civil Nuclear Roadmap – methinks the ladies and gentlemen do protest too much. Meanwhile – back at the Israel-Palestine-Lebanon-USA-Iran ranch – it’s all getting perilous – while I try to keep that stuff out of this newsletter
Noel’s notes. Aw gee! Did ya know that Australia is partnering USA in making multiple strikes on Yemen?. Who can be believed? New heights of folly as UK government releases its Civil Nuclear Roadmap.
*************************************
AUSTRALIA.
- ‘Do or die’: MPs launch urgent bid to spare Assange from US extradition.
- Defence Minister Marles announces Australia has joined in U.S. attacks on Yemen.
- The Coalition is hoodwinking Australia about nuclear energy. Coalition, pro-nuclear lobbyists, argue Australia needs nuclear energy; oppose renewables.
- Peace Pod: an aural adventure in anti-militarist activism. With teacher resources.
*********************************
CLIMATE. “The defense of nuclear power as a low-carbon energy weakens the European Union’s action against climate change”.
ECONOMICS. Nuclear power and net zero: Too little, too late, too expensive. Sizewell C: UK and France-owned EDF look to raise £20bn for Suffolk nuclear site. Housing unaffordability – implications for Somerset with huge increase in nuclear workers for Hinkley Point C.
EMPLOYMENT. Nuclear defence workers to strike over pay. Hotel near Bridgwater could be repurposed to house Hinkley Point C workers.
ENERGY. Reducing energy demand- technologies are available, scalable and affordable today. ’The potential is extraordinary’: Business action on energy efficiency could save $2tr a year, new research claims. Unplanned nuclear power outages are reducing UK’s electricity output.
ENVIRONMENT.
- Coldwater Creek to finally have warning signs after decades of nuclear contamination.
- Ayrshire radiation highlighted as Labour’s nuclear support attacked.
- Nuclear Power: The Thousand Year-Plus Albatross Around Humanity’s Neck.
- Nuclear: Plan to relax UK planning rules for small reactors draws mixed response. Inside Bradwell’s Dark Secrets.
- Utility scale solar farms contribute to bird diversity.
ETHICS and RELIGION. ‘The Evidence of Genocide Is Not Only Chilling, It Is Also Overwhelming and Incontrovertible’: Quotes from International Court of Justice.
HEALTH. The mystery of a Truchas woman who died with extraordinary amounts of plutonium in her body.
HISTORY. The Spectacular Failure of the Zionist Project
INDIGENOUS ISSUES. Commission decision a ‘gut-punch’, so years-long battle over radioactive waste mound will continue.
LEGAL. An international law expert explains why South Africa’s case at the ICJ is so important. Craig Murray: Observations on Israel’s defense in the International Court of Justice.
MEDIA. Nuclear technology: the shady beginnings and the uncertain future. Book (fiction): The Secret of the Three Bullets- How New Nuclear Weapons Are Back on Battlefields
OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . No to nuclear power: stop the expansion. Will Sizewell nuclear project go ahead? Campaigners question the timetable and the funding.
POLITICS. Energy Transition Minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher enthuses over “the rebirth of France’s nuclear industry”. Mr President, saying that nuclear power will save the climate is a lie. France Moves Away from Renewable Targets in Favor of Nuclear Power.
UK Government unveils biggest nuclear expansion in 70 years. Mini nuclear plants to be built almost anywhere in UK. On the road to nowhere… UK Ministers launch nuclear ‘Roadmap’ in election year. UK’s Nuclear Roadmap is Pure Fantasy. UK Government’s nuclear power expansion plans branded hot air. Bradwell Nuclear – Falling Off the (Road)Map. Allan Dorans: Scottish Labour’s support for nuclear fuel poses a risk. Government remains committed to Sizewell C timetable before a general election. Ministers told to say how Sizewell C will be funded as new nuclear plan launched.
Setback for Japan’s Nuclear Revival as Reactor Restart Delayed. NZ’s anti-nuclear stance is at risk of compromise but must be upheld.
POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. What Does ‘Rules-Based International Order’ Mean When US Can Bomb Yemen at Will? Peace from River to Sea.– (pages 21-25). Net-Zero and Nonproliferation: Assessing Nuclear Power and Its Alternatives.
SAFETY. UK’s dwindling nuclear fleet – four ageing reactors to be kept going beyond their planned closure date. Sellafield nuclear safety and security director to leave. Nuclear convoys: Blacked-out lorries carry ‘deadly cargo’ through the village. Fresh Trident safety fears as submarines’ ‘life expectancy’ extended repeatedly.
Japan’s Hokuriku Elec reports second oil leak from Shika nuclear plant. Japan’s NRA orders probe on quake damage at Shika nuclear power plant. Japan quake stressed nuclear plant beyond design limit: panel. Japanese nuclear plant admits 20,000 litres of oil leaked when it was hit by 10ft tsunami sparked by New Year’s Day earthquake – as officials call for drones to monitor radiation levels.
SECRETS and LIES. Dutch engineer spread Stuxnet in Iran nuclear plant in 2008: report. New Revelations Shed More Light On Sabotage Of Iran Nuclear Program.
Outrage as Government admits it kept medical results on nuke test veterans a ‘state secret’ in a move Tory grandee Sir John Hayes said ‘beggars belief’. Nuclear Free Local Authorities question the Chief Constable on alleged misconduct among Civil Nuclear Constabulary.
SPINBUSTER. In the name of ‘fake news,’ NewsGuard extorts sites to follow the government narrative.
TECHNOLOGY. Killer Robots: UN Vote Should Spur Action on Treaty. Dissension in the nuclear lobby – it had to happen – Small Nuclear versus Big Nuclear. Touting a ‘new age of nuclear fusion‘. Nuclear, CCS & LNG Are Distractions As Shipping Goes Low Carbon.
WASTES. Carlsbad depositary- 79% of waste came from nuclear wastes from Idaho National Laboratory. Kebaowek First Nation strongly opposes nuclear waste storage facility in Chalk River. Behind the (somewhat dirty) scenes of nuclear waste processing.
WAR and CONFLICT. Could Israel’s War in Gaza Spiral Into a Regional War?
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. Israel’s nuclear arsenal: what we know. Nuclear Arms Buildup Isn’t Just about War. It Also Harms People and Communities. IG report finds Pentagon failed to account for more than $1B in weapons sent to Ukraine. Biden’s $582 Million Arms Sale to Saudi Arabia. Can It Be Blocked?.
The real reason why the USA pushed for the world to “triple nuclear power” at COP 28.
While China dominates the wind- and solar-power sectors, nuclear energy is one area where officials believe the U.S. could compete with its long menu of newer reactor types and fuels.
U.S. puts diplomatic clout behind sales of cutting-edge reactors that have yet to show commercial success
Washington Heats Up Nuclear Energy Competition With Russia, China
By William Mauldin and Jennifer Hiller, Jan. 6, 2024 https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/washington-heats-up-nuclear-energy-competition-with-russia-china-f2f18e75
WASHINGTON—To compete with its biggest geopolitical rivals, the U.S. government is looking toward small nuclear reactors.
Not a single so-called small modular reactor has been sold or even built in the U.S., but American officials are trying to persuade partner countries to acquire the cutting-edge nuclear reactors still under development by U.S. firms. The goal: to wrest nuclear market share from Russia—the global industry giant—and defend against China’s fast-growing nuclear-technology industry.
The U.S. hopes that putting its clout behind a new technology can cement future commercial and diplomatic relationships and chip away at China’s and Russia’s ability to dominate their neighbors’ energy supply.
The Biden administration also sees nuclear energy as a way to export reliable green (?) energy, since nuclear-power plants split atoms and don’t burn carbon-based fuels that contribute most to climate change. With Russia’s broad 2022 invasion of Ukraine sending Poland and other European countries looking for new energy partners, U.S. officials and industry leaders see a potential opening in the market for U.S. exports to compete with China’s growing nuclear ambitions.
While China dominates the wind- and solar-power sectors, nuclear energy is one area where officials believe the U.S. could compete with its long menu of newer reactor types and fuels. The U.S. aims to sign agreements for partnerships lasting 50 years or longer to provide U.S. technology to Moscow’s former energy partners and to fast-growing countries in Southeast Asia worried about overreliance on Chinese and Russian energy.
“If we’re the supplier, we support the energy security of our allies and partners,” said Ted Jones, head of national security and international programs at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a U.S. industry group. “We help prevent them from finding themselves in the situation of Europe with respect to Russian gas and nuclear.”
At the core of the U.S. campaign is a technology, yet-unproven in the U.S., called a small modular reactor, or SMR. SMRs generate about one-third the energy of a conventional nuclear reactor and can be prefabricated and shipped to the site. Among other potential advantages, they are intended to be cheaper than larger reactors, which often have to be custom designed, and they can be installed to meet growing demand for energy, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
‘Very, very long-term strategic partnership’
U.S. officials say they are working with developers of SMRs, and the government-run Export-Import Bank and the U.S. International Development Finance Corp., to win overseas orders that will bring down costs and build an order book for the new technology, all while linking the countries’ energy systems to the U.S. and its allies. By 2035, the U.S. Nuclear Energy Agency estimates that the global SMR market could reach 21 gigawatts of power, enough to power two billion LED lightbulbs.
“It’s important that the United States maintains that leadership in the transition from the laboratory to the grid and deployment and commerciality,” said Geoffrey Pyatt, the State Department’s assistant secretary of energy resources. “It’s about building a very, very long term strategic partnership.”
To make nuclear-energy exports a viable tool of foreign policy, U.S. companies will have to prove they can deliver smaller reactors for export on time and budget, a goal that has eluded larger nuclear-power plants in the West.
The U.S. has yet to build an SMR, and none is yet under construction in the U.S. The concept’s economics remain unproven, as does the timeline for building such a reactor. One company, Kairos Power, recently received construction approval for a demonstration project in Tennessee. It plans to focus on the domestic market. NuScale Power, one of the major U.S. players, recently canceled an SMR project in Idaho when a group of utilities in the Mountain West couldn’t get enough members to commit.
To make the concept work, most SMRs’ developers would need a pipeline of orders so they could move into factory-style production, lowering unit costs.
Among the potential customers U.S. industry and government officials are looking at are Polish energy company Orlen, which wants to build SMRs designed by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy.
The U.S. Export-Import Bank and U.S. International Development Finance Corp. have offered to arrange up to $4 billion in financing for a plant planned by NuScale in Romania, with an aim of going online in 2029 or 2030. U.S. officials also say they are in discussions with Bulgaria, Ghana, Indonesia, Kazakhstan and the Philippines on new nuclear projects.
China is leading the world in reactor construction and recently started commercial operations of a plant with two SMRs. The country is now building 22 of the 58 reactors under construction around the world, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. China has built reactors in Pakistan and aims to join Russia as a major exporter of nuclear technology.
Last year, China and the U.S. were jockeying to provide civilian nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. Washington appeared close to a deal, part of a regional pact with Israel, but it was derailed by Hamas’s attack on Israelis in October and the subsequent war in Gaza.
U.S. sales pitch: We’re less risky than Russia and China
Russia’s state-owned Rosatom, meanwhile, is a major exporter of both reactors and nuclear fuel.
According to the latest World Nuclear Industry Status Report, it was building 24 reactors: 19 large reactors in countries from Turkey to Bangladesh, a barge to be equipped with two small reactors under construction in China but intended for use in Russia, and three reactors at home. Of the reactors under construction in Russia, two are large; the third is an SMR that would use liquid metal for cooling. Rosatom started commercial operations of two SMRs on a floating barge in 2020, though that project took longer and cost more than expected.
Washington is counting on partner countries’ interest in working with U.S. firms and what officials are selling as a less risky tie-up than working with Moscow and Beijing on projects that have a lifespan of 50 years or more.
“It’s never good if our allies are dependent on a potential adversarial country for energy,” said Bret Kugelmass, chief executive of nuclear-power startup Last Energy, which plans to build microreactors that would generate 20 megawatts of electricity and be sited near factories.
The process for hammering out a network of government and commercial deals can take years, with U.S. officials working alongside foreign counterparts, export credit agencies, nuclear-energy firms and utilities, not to mention the U.S. Congress. Russia and China have the advantage of state-led financial sectors to fund projects that can span a decade until power flows.
U.S. industry executives and government officials say they are now working on shortcuts to marketing reactors, including setting up a single government-to-government deal that includes corporate contracts and public and private financing assistance.
The new deals are designed to appeal to partner countries that want a simpler path to getting a reactor, without the heavy dose of Chinese financing that U.S. officials say might have strings attached.
Mass layoffs at small nuclear reactor companies
Pioneering Nuclear Startup Lays Off Nearly Half Its Workforce. NuScale is the second major U.S. reactor company to cut jobs in recent months.
Huff Post, By Alexander C. Kaufman, Jan 5, 2024,
Almost exactly one year ago, NuScale Power made history as the first of a new generation of nuclear energy startups to win regulatory approval of its reactor design ― just in time for the Biden administration to begin pumping billions of federal dollars into turning around the nation’s atomic energy industry.
But as mounting costs and the cancellation of its landmark first power plant have burned through shrinking cash reserves, the Oregon-based company is laying off as much 40% of its workforce, HuffPost has learned.
At a virtual all-hands meeting Friday afternoon, the company announced the job cuts to remaining employees. HuffPost reviewed the audio of the meeting. Two sources with direct knowledge of NuScale’s plans confirmed the details of the layoffs.
NuScale did not respond to a call, an email or a text message seeking comment.
Surging construction costs are imperiling clean energy across the country. In just the past two months, developers have pulled the plug on major offshore wind farms in New Jersey and New York after state officials refused to let companies rebid for contracts at a higher rate.
But the financial headwinds are taking an especially acute toll on nuclear power. It takes more than a decade to build a reactor, and the only new ones under construction in the U.S. and Europe went billions of dollars over budget in the past two decades. Many in the atomic energy industry are betting that small modular reactors ― shrunken down, lower-power units with a uniform design ― can make it cheaper and easier to build new nuclear plants through assembly-line repetition.
The U.S. government is banking on that strategy to meet its climate goals. The Biden administration spearheaded a pledge to triple atomic energy production worldwide in the next three decades at the United Nations’ climate summit in Dubai last month, enlisting dozens of partner nations in Europe, Asia and Africa.
The two infrastructure-spending laws that President Joe Biden signed in recent years earmark billions in spending to develop new reactors and keep existing plants open. And new bills in Congress to speed up U.S. nuclear deployments and sell more American reactors abroad are virtually all bipartisan, with progressives and right-wing Republicans alike expressing support for atomic energy…………
Until November, NuScale appeared on track to debut the nation’s first atomic energy station powered with small modular reactors. But the project to build a dozen reactors in the Idaho desert, and sell the electricity to ratepayers across the Western U.S. through a Utah state-owned utility, was abandoned as rising interest rates made it harder for NuScale to woo investors willing to bet on something as risky a first-of-its-kind nuclear plant.
In 2022, NuScale went public via a SPAC deal, a type of merger that became a popular way for debt-laden startups to pay back venture capitalists with a swifter-than-usual initial public offering on the stock market.
In its latest quarterly earnings, NuScale reported just under $200 million in cash reserves, nearly 40% of which was tied up in restricted accounts……………………………………..
NuScale, which has four other projects proposed in the U.S. and tentative deals in at least eight other countries, isn’t the only nuclear startup navigating choppy waters.
In October, Maryland-based X-energy, which is working with the federal government to develop a next-generation reactor using gas instead of water for cooling, cut part of its workforce and scrapped plans to go public.
In September, California-based Oklo appeared to lose a $100 million contract to build its its salt-cooled “micro-reactors” at an Air Force base in Alaska, as the independent Northern Journal newsletter first reported. ………. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nuscale-layoffs-nuclear-power_n_65985ac5e4b075f4cfd24dba
Nuclear disasters–in–waiting
RICHARD STONE, Science 4 Jan 24
Having taken a heavy toll on Ukraine’s ecosystems and water resources, the war with Russia threatens to create a another environmental disaster: damage to the region’s extensive nuclear infrastructure—including 15 power reactors and three research reactors.
“There continues to be a highly precarious nuclear safety and security situation across Ukraine,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said in a statement after explosions were heard near the Khmelnitsky Nuclear Power Plant and its two Soviet-era reactors on 28 November 2023—the second near-miss in a single month at the site. “All of Ukraine’s nuclear facilities remain vulnerable, either directly if hit by a missile or indirectly if their off-site power supplies are disrupted.”
Russia’s assault on Ukrainian nuclear sites began on the very first day of the full-scale invasion. On 24 February 2022, troops overran the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant, infamous for the explosion and fire there in 1986 that sent a plume of radioactive smoke into Western Europe. During 5 weeks of occupation, Russian soldiers ransacked labs and kicked up radioactive soil and dust as they dug trenches and slogged through contaminated forests in the exclusion zone around the defunct plant. To the east that spring, Russian troops frequently shelled the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology, damaging a hall containing a subcritical nuclear reactor.
Shelling has also flared up repeatedly around the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station, a complex of six reactors that constitutes Europe’s largest nuclear power plant. Russia captured the plant in March 2022 and the reactors were shut down 6 months later, eliminating the risk of a core meltdown. Still, a prodigious amount of nuclear material remains there: The reactor halls hold 1380 tons of fresh and spent uranium oxide fuel, and two repositories store an additional 2100 tons of spent fuel laced with nasty long-lived radionuclides—the ingredients, many Ukrainians fear, of a “dirty bomb” that would use conventional explosives to spread radioactive isotopes……………………………………….
The presence of IAEA observers at the Zaporizhzhia station since September 2022 has deterred the theft of dirty-bomb ingredients. But a major missile strike on one of its spent fuel repositories could turn the plant itself into a dirty bomb, spreading radioactive contamination in a radius of up to 30 kilometers, says Volodymyr Borysenko, a nuclear engineer with the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine’s Institute for Safety Problems of Nuclear Power Plants (ISPNPP).
Even a smaller strike could contaminate the reactor complex. And the spent fuel is also at risk from repeated electricity blackouts that have struck the plant, the latest in early December 2023. Diesel-fueled generators can supply power for up to 10 days, but a prolonged outage could be dangerous, as power is needed to pump cooling water into the plant’s uranium reactor cores and pools holding spent fuel.
A lesser known radioactive risk is situated about 150 kilometers upstream from the Zaporizhzhia plant on the Dnipro River. During the Cold War, the Prydniprovsky Chemical Plant was one of Europe’s largest uranium ore processing facilities. The complex accumulated some 40 million tons of tailings—leftovers of milling uranium—and other foul residues before it closed in 1992. By early 2022, Ukraine, with help from the European Union, had fenced off highly contaminated areas. But a missile or artillery strike on a tainted building or dump could disperse radioactive dust over the nearby city of Kamianske.
One relative bright spot is Chornobyl, where Ukrainian scientists are restoring labs damaged early in the war. But large parts of the exclusion zone remain off limits because of the threat of mines and unexploded ordinance, says ISPNPP Director Anatolii Nosovskiy. Complicating matters for radiation monitoring, he says, the Ukrainian army has built defensive fortifications in the zone, near the border with Belarus…………………. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adn7987
Japan earthquake raises concerns over restarting country’s nuclear plants
The earthquake struck days after Japan’s regulators lifted a two-year operational ban on a power plant run by Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), which operated the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant.
Ashima Sharma, January 5, 2024, https://www.power-technology.com/news/japan-earthquake-raises-concerns-over-restarting-countrys-nuclear-plants/?cf-view
The 7.6 magnitude earthquake that hit Japan’s western coast on 1 January has raised concerns over the push to bring the country’s nuclear capacity online.
The earthquake struck just days after the country’s regulators lifted a two-year operational ban on Tepco’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant.
Tepco’s plant is located around 120km from the earthquake’s epicentre but has been offline since 2012. Tepco was also the operator of the wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant and in 2021 was banned from transporting new uranium fuel to its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant.
The move was to prevent Tepco from restarting the facility’s seven nuclear reactors, ten years after two of its reactors incurred a triple meltdown at Fukushima.
Following the quake, Tepco reported water spillage from two nuclear fuel pools of the No. 7 and No. 2 reactors at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant.
The company ascertained that about 14 litres of water containing radioactive materials spilled from the pools, although it said the radiation levels were normal.
The Shika nuclear power plant, operated by another company, Hokuriku Electric, and located 65km from the epicentre, also reported spillage from spent nuclear fuel pools and oil leaks.
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, there was a strong public and political sentiment to phase out nuclear plants in the country. However, over the years, severe power crunches coupled with rising energy prices have pushed Japan towards restarting idle reactors.
In 2023, Japan’s Kansai Electric Power restarted its 12th nuclear reactor at the Takahama plant. The 826MW Takahama No. 2 was the country’s second-oldest operating reactor, having entered service in 1975.
TODAY. Nuclear Industry’s New Year Resolution – “Let’s get sloppier about safety
yeah, well - it’s a new day, it’s a beautiful new year - let’s look on the bright side. The global nuclear lobby is certainly doing that with its glowing plans for tripling of nuclear energy by 2050
Safety is now a downgraded priority. A couple of today’s examples – Japanese nuclear safety regulators lifted an operational ban on a nuclear plant owned by Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, deciding that it’s now safe after all. In the USA, the NRC (federal nuclear safety agency) decides that cracks in a backup emergency fuel line at a South Carolina nuclear plant are not so serious any more.
Let’s forget the nuclear industry’s history of major (and continuing) disasters, “minor” mishaps and near-misses. And let’s forget the dangers of crumbling old reactors, untested new gee-whiz ones, cracking and corroding copper pipes and waste containers, terrorism risks, drone dangers, cyber-security hazards, transport risks, extreme weather events, weapons proliferation, mishaps in space, and crookedness and corruption in the industry.
Yey! let’s waltz away into 2024 with the jolly prospect of nuclear power solving the climate crisis, energy crisis and so on. We can brush up the old big reactors (saves us the cost of scrapping them – leave that job to our grandchildren ), build myriad little tiny reactors in every country, (sell them especially developing places that have no expertise in nuclear technology) , and bring happiness and wealth to that small but highly organised phalanx of global nuclear ‘Influencers” – while the rest of us party on, and our bought politicians smile benignly.
After all, there are the various nationall safety and radiation protection agencies to save us . Right?
Trouble is – safety reporting procedures are designed to protect the nuclear industry, not the public.
Agencies like USA’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission rely on the International Atomic Energy Agency – whose brief is to promote the nuclear industry - a brief beautifully expressed by its slimy Director General, Rafael Grossi.
Let’s consider- the “safety” of ionising radiation:
- The established health ministeries rely on the Commission on Radiological Protection, which relies on The Radiation Protection Commission which relies on the international Commission on Radiological Protection, which relies on the IAEA / RERF (Reference Materials)
- The IAEA / RERF relies on the military industrial nuclear complex of five veto-wielding Security Council members
They pass the nuclear safety handball back and forth between each other - as the nuclear-industrial-military complex rolls on towards armageddon.
The failed Nuscale project lets Utah down — again
Every time we gamble on a nuclear project like Nuscale to deliver carbon-free power, we are hampering our ability to meet critical climate goals by 2030.
By Lexi Tuddenham | For The Salt Lake Tribune, Dec. 29, 2023 https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2023/12/29/opinion-failed-nuscale-project/
Early last month, Nuscale made headlines by canceling its 462 MW proposal for a small modular nuclear reactor (SMNR) at the Idaho National Laboratory. Here in Utah, the news was met with little surprise.
For the past six years, we’ve been raising crucial questions about the viability of the so-called “Carbon Free Power Project” (CFPP). Was it a project that could deliver power on time and at a reasonable cost to ratepayers? How much would taxpayers and ratepayers ultimately pay, and who would bear the environmental, public health and financial risks? Could it meet our energy needs at a time when electrification is more critical than ever?
In 2015, the Nuscale project was eight years out. In 2022, it was still eight years out. As we watched other nuclear power projects be abandoned or blunder online years late and billions of dollars over cost, there was a sense of inevitability about who would suffer when this project failed: the communities who had placed their faith in its fantastical promises of affordable, reliable and “clean” power.
We were told that these SMNRs would be revolutionary — smaller, more cost-effective and with cutting-edge technology, but as we watched the costs swell from $55/MWh to $89/MWh and well beyond, even with huge federal subsidies, it was clear the financial risks were only mounting. With the collapse of the hypothetical project, Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) member communities in rapidly growing areas like Hurricane and Washington City are now left with the reality of scrambling for alternatives to meet their future energy needs.
As we see nuclear projects around the country experience delay after delay, the Nuscale experience is one reason why we continue to watch the developments of the Terrapower Natrium reactor in Kemmerer, Wyoming, with a mix of skepticism and concern. The other reason is that the Terrapower project has promised not just electricity to Pacificorp customers, but also jobs in a community that desperately needs them. This is irresponsible at best.
The projected timeline for the Terrapower reactor to come online has already been pushed to 2030, which Terrapower external affairs director Jeff Navin admits is “cutting it close.” In addition, the community faces an economic abyss between the projected closure of the coal plant and the startup of the nuclear facility, and federal officials recently noted that with no permanent waste repository existent in the U.S., spent nuclear fuel will be stored “temporarily” on-site. Similar concerns can and should be raised about the proposed nuclear plants at Hunter and Huntington in Utah. At the end of the day, it is workers who are being let down, and it is communities who have to deal with the long term consequences.
We know that the next few years are of critical importance in our ability to combat the worst effects of climate change before we kick off even more warming feedback loops. Every time we gamble on a nuclear project like Nuscale to deliver carbon-free power, we are hampering our ability to meet critical climate goals by 2030. As timelines for such projects are inevitably dragged out, in the interim we continue to burn fossil fuels that choke the air that people breathe and force the climate ever closer to its tipping point.
The hard truth is that there is no silver bullet for climate change. Relying on nuclear power maintains dependence on a flawed energy system that primarily benefits industries that have historically profited from past harms. Now they promise to seamlessly plug in nuclear power and conduct business as usual.
According to the latest estimates, about a billion dollars was sunk into the now-abandoned Nuscale CFPP. This is a drop in the bucket compared to some other nuclear projects this country has seen over the last 30 years. But imagine that $1 billion spent elsewhere on legacy cleanups of the nuclear and uranium mining industry, aiding Downwinders or boosting renewable energy capacity that we know can work. There is an opportunity cost for investing in nuclear when we have faster, lower-risk options that we can prioritize now. Instead, we can take on climate change with what has been called “rational hope,” by investing in wind, solar, geothermal power, storage, grid improvements and efficiency technologies that offer cost-effective climate solutions. And Utah’s potential in these areas is immense.
But this energy future requires a reimagining. It requires permitting and energy-sourcing processes that put the health and vitality of communities front and center. It means changing course to avoid mistakes of the past.
Here at HEAL Utah, we collaborate with communities to shape an energy future crafted by the people it serves. This future prioritizes clean air, a healthy environment and family-sustaining jobs, all powered by accessible, sustainable and affordable renewable energy sources. In short, this is rational hope in practice. Together, we can make it a reality.
Lexi Tuddenham is the executive director of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah (HEAL Utah).
1 This month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
– go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Antinuclear 