Skip to main content

Great Britain Okays Nuclear Energy

rhs-chelsea-flower-show

Once, it was dead.

A White Paper on energy, released in 2003, described nuclear power as an "unattractive option" and included no plans to replace existing reactors when they closed. Although it left a tiny door ajar open to more nuclear plants, Friends of the Earth said the policy sounded "the death knell" for nuclear power in Britain.

One thing you learn in life is not to declare something dead unless there’s no evidence of breath on the mirror.

The Prime Minister [Gordon Brown] will set "no upper limit" on the number of nuclear plants that will be built by private companies. That would mean nuclear, which provides about 20 per cent of Britain's electricity, could meet a bigger share after the new generation of nuclear stations come on stream over the next 15 years.

This comes via the Independent’s Andrew Grice. While Brown says the sky’s the limit, the number being contemplated currently is eight. Why is this happening now? Well, Tony Blair, the previous prime minister, had already laid the groundwork by advocating for nuclear energy against that 2003 report, and it may be that Brown is seeing his options narrow a bit. Why should this be? The Guardian’s Michael White writes:

Ministers want the private sector to make the running, but fear that the parallel contraction of the UK's coal and oil-fired generating capacity, on environmental grounds, will trigger a serious energy gap unless the government moves decisively.

(I think “to make the running” above means “to make it happen” in Amurrican. We’ve noted the government’s attempts to exit the energy business in recent weeks.)

We might add to this formulation that Great Britain has a set of aging plants expected to be retired in the next 15 years and these new ones will likely act as more robust replacements.

Some of the “she said” in the he said she said reporting paradigm are getting pretty tired.

John Sauven of Greenpeace said: "This is bad news for the fight against climate change. Nuclear power cannot get us out of the carbon hole.”

and

The Liberal Democrats also warned that a switch to more nuclear energy would do nothing to solve the immediate problems caused by the doubling of oil prices over the past year.

It makes you think Liberal Democrats have the life span of mayflies and think only in terms of tomorrow or perhaps next week. (Granted, politicians everywhere and across the ideological spectrum think too much in terms of now – you might argue that we wouldn’t be where we are “now” if more thinking was done about “now” when it was “then.”)

As for Greenpeace, well, it’s not as though you can’t count on them for a tart quote when you’re doing a nuclear story, so there it is.

But in sum, this is terrific news. Europe is quickly moving toward a nuclear solution, with Asia on its heels . We’ll be looking to see how industry in Britain responds to this vote of confidence.

Picture of alliums in the cancer research garden at the Chelsea Garden Show in London.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…