Skip to main content

U.K. Nuclear Update

In a reception for magazine editors at 10 Downing Street, U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair reiterated his support for new nuclear build, contending that Britain couldn't afford to rely on renewable sources of energy alone.

Alistair Darling, the U.K.'s new secretary for trade and industry, told the Guardian in an interview that he supports including new nuclear as part of a diverse energy portfolio:
"We run a serious risk that some day someone will go into the living room, flick the switch and and nothing will happen because we do not have the capability to generate any energy from any source at all," said Mr Darling.

Britain needed the widest possible energy mix and the minister did not accept that support for one form of energy damaged development of another, as some in the renewable sector have claimed in their arguments against increasing nuclear capacity.

Faced by the twin objectives of energy security plus lowering carbon emissions to counter global warming, Britain had little option, he said, but to act as the current fleet of atomic stations came to the end of their lives.

He said: "No solutions are easy. One of the factors in nuclear is that the costs have got to be met. We know it is expensive but to have an energy review that says we are not going to do it, especially given the carbon problem we face, does not make any sense at all."
A new study by the U.K.'s Health and Safety Executive estimates that licensing a new reactor should take 3-4 years, about half as long as it took to license the Sizewell B station.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1810959,00.html

As the Tories distance themselves from atomic power, the Liberal Democrats intensify their atomic energy resistance, and Labour fractures over the issue, Darling is furiously backing away from support.

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...