NEI Nuclear Notes

The U.K. is buzzing this week after Prime Minister Tony Blair once again said that nuclear energy must be consider as part of his nation's future energy mix in order to curb greenhouse gas emissions and support further economic growth. Here's the relevant passage from the speech he delivered on Tuesday: Next year too, building on Britain's Kyoto commitments, we will publish proposals on energy policy. Global warming is too serious for the world any longer to ignore its danger or split into opposing factions on it. And for how much longer can countries like ours allow the security of our energy supply be dependent on some of the most unstable parts of the world? For both reasons the G8 agreement must be made to work so we develop together the technology that allows prosperous nations to adapt and emerging ones to grow sustainably; and that means an assessment of all options, including civil nuclear power. These comments were followed up with another statement from U.K. e...

Here's an article from yesterday's New York Times that caught my eye. It's by Mark Landler and he's reporting from the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos : FEW subjects seem less suited to the intoxicating air of the World Economic Forum’s annual conference than nuclear energy. Aging, expensive, unpopular, and still vulnerable to catastrophic accidents, it is the antithesis of the kinds of cutting-edge solutions that beguile the wealthy and well intentioned, who gather each winter in this Alpine ski resort. In the balance of the piece, Landler plays a lot of catch up concerning the resurgence of interest in nuclear energy in Europe, though he falls prey to the common canard used by anti-nukes that the industry and its supporters are touting nuclear energy as the "one" solution to global climate change. But what really caught my attention was the absence of one name: Tony Blair . If there is anyone in Europe who has been sounding the alarm on climate change...

The debate on new nuclear build in the U.K. began in earnest earlier today, as Prime Minister Tony Blair's speech on future energy policy before the Confederation of British Industry was disrupted by a pair of Greenpeace protesters . Vowing, "I'm going to give this speech if it's the last thing I do," Blair marched to a smaller auditorium inside London's Business and Design Centre and delivered his speech in full : Mr Blair said nuclear power was a difficult issue but should be settled by open debate, not protests to stop free speech. The energy review would be headed by the Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks and report by the middle of next year, he announced. It would measure the UK's progress against a review carried out two years ago. And it would "include specifically the issue of whether we facilitate the development of a new generation of nuclear power stations", he said. Mr Blair said energy policy was "back on the agenda with a vengeanc...

As you might expect, U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair's speech last night backing new nuclear build in the U.K. is stoking conversation across the Atlantic. Here's Peter C. Glover : Though nuclear power is not the whole answer, until a sensible alternative comes along - and 'renewables' are about as sensible an answer as lighting a match under water - then nuclear power will have to produce around 20% of our future needs, at least - and cut carbon emissions to almost nil. The environmentalists would soon go quiet once the blackouts, failure of cold water, cold houses and aged deaths started to occur under their crackpot schemes. Actually, that's pretty tough on renewables. Here at NEI, we believe new nuclear build will make the electric grid safe for intermittent power sources like renewables. Here's Tim Sewell : Tony Blair has outraged elements of the green movement with his speech last night putting energy diversification back on the agenda "with a veng...

With oil and natural gas production in the North Sea declining , the Royal Society of Edinburgh says that Scotland needs to keep energy alternatives in mind : A 50% rise in energy demand in the next 45 years means that Scotland needs to keep its nuclear option open, according to a group of the country's most senior academics. With a sharp fall in generating capacity looming, the Royal Society of Edinburgh warns that demand for energy will continue to rise, and a mix of solutions is required. Its estimate of a 50% increase by 2050 is based on trend growth in demand and 2% average annual economic growth. Given the spiralling rates of energy consumption, the institute concluded that the option of replacing nuclear power plants should be left open, but with a plea that it should not become a political football. The RSE has posted video of the press conference announcing the publication of the report. The RSE also has serious concerns about Scotland's electrical grid . For more ...

In the wake of an unssuccessful attempt to prevent U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair from delivering a speech on energy policy that said Britain needs to consider building a new generation of nuclear plants, Oliver Kamm in the Times of London says it's time for the public to change its perception of Greenpeace and other pressure groups : The intention of yesterday's Greenpeace protest at the CBI conference was, the organisation's spokesman said, "to stop Tony Blair delivering his speech". Not since the author of Tarka the Otter, Henry Williamson, evangelised for the English landscape and wartime fascism has British political debate seen a more explicit identification of the ecological cause with contempt for democracy. Some might be tempted to treat seriously Greenpeace's objections to nuclear energy, or GM crops, while not necessarily endorsing its tactics. That is misguided. Greenpeace's determination to shut down debate is not aberrant hotheadedness but ...

During Prime Minister's Question Time earlier today, U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair fielded a question on why it's so important to begin work on a new generation of nuclear power plants as soon as possible : Mr. Jamie Reed (Copeland) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend agree with me—and with trade unions, business leaders, the people of Copeland and nuclear industry analysts—that a policy of nuclear generation as a last resort is really a policy of no nuclear generation at all? The Prime Minister: I know that, for obvious reasons, my hon. Friend has a specific interest in this issue. If we do not make the decisions on nuclear power now, both our energy security and our effort to defeat climate change may be put at risk. The reason is simple: over the next 10 or 15 years, we will move from self-sufficiency in oil and gas to importing 80 or 90 per cent. of it. We will lose the existing nuclear power stations. We have already done an immense amount in terms of energy efficiency, ren...

There has been a lot of chatter in the last few days about the issue of commercial nuclear energy in the United Kingdom (click here and here for past posts). Here are some of the highlights. Prospect magazine provides in-depth background information and a balanced breakdown of the advantages and disadvantages of each energy source: Within its five-year life span, this government is going to have to make sure that some difficult and potentially unpopular long-term infrastructure decisions are made. The trickiest of these relate to power generation. In the muscular days of the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB), the minister of power (remember Manny Shinwell?) could instruct the board to do what he wanted. That all changed with privatisation in 1989-90. The CEGB vanished, and the role of government changed to that of facilitator and regulator. Yet were the lights went out, the government would be blamed, even though it can no longer order the building of power stations. Tony ...

Some may say that U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair is only counting the days before he leaves 10 Downing Street, but that's not the case when it comes to energy policy. From the BBC : Prime Minister Tony Blair has given his strongest signal yet that he backs the building of a new generation of nuclear power stations in the UK. The prime minister told the CBI annual dinner that the issue was "back on the agenda with a vengeance". He said Britain faced the prospect of being largely reliant on foreign gas imports for its future energy needs. Thanks to The Oil Drum: United Kingdom , for the pointer. And in their comments section comes an interesting expression of support: I am 100% behind this. I only hope he can last long enough to pull it off. I am no great fan of Blair, but at last, he is grasping the nettle. If he is looking for a legacy, then Nukes would be it, and help this country get past PO and mitigate GW. Without Nukes, the lights start to go out within 10 years. An...

Over the Holidays, I missed the fact that the Guardian (U.K.) had commissioned a poll on the British public's feelings about nuclear energy : Almost half of Britons say no new nuclear power stations should be built in the UK, according to a Guardian/ICM poll which comes as ministers consider whether to restart Britain's controversial atomic power programme to meet growing energy demand. The poll finds that neither the pro- nor the anti-nuclear lobby can rely on a clear majority of public support: 48% of people oppose expanding nuclear energy, while 45% support it. The findings show the scale of the public relations exercise required. About 19% of the UK's electricity is generated by its 14 nuclear power stations, but this is expected to drop to 7% by 2020 as older reactors are switched off. There's just one catch: The Poll, conducted for the paper by ICM Research, was taken between December 15 and 18, 2005 -- about two weeks before the current crisis roiling European ...

From 10 Downing Street : Tony Blair has said he remains keen to see 'binding agreements' put in place to deal with the problems the world faces from climate change. Speaking to MPs today during PMQs, he refuted suggestions that his 'resolve was weakening' on the issue, but said that any framework on emission targets needed to be agreed by everyone. In particular, he said, the US, China and India - as the world's largest and fastest-growing economies - had to sign up to make any such treaty worthwhile. Earlier this month, at an international conference on climate change in London, the PM said the world needed to deal with the challenge of global warming 'on a sustainable basis'. Mr Blair pointed out that the evidence of climate change was getting stronger and even those who doubted it accepted there were concerns over energy security and supply. Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy , Environment , Energy , Politics , Technology , Economics , Climate Change , U.K. ...

With U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair set to leave the scene in a few weeks, some folks are speculating on what areas his presumptive successor, Gordon Brown, might break with the current PM. As it turns out, new nuclear build is one of area where there won't be any policy change at all. From the Guardian : Gordon Brown is to face down sceptics in his party and give the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations, which will be built across the country. In a move immediately condemned by environmental organisations, the Prime Minister-elect will give the green light to the plans that will show that he is backing Tony Blair's support of the nuclear industry. Boosted by a new poll, which shows Brown pulling ahead of David Cameron on the issue of competence to run the country, the Chancellor will signal his support this week for a dramatic renewal of the nuclear power programme that will see the building of up to eight new stations, possibly within 15 years. Thanks to ...

U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair continues to kick up dust in his home country over the issue of new nuclear build. Looking ahead to this week's inaugural meeting of the Gleneagles Dialogue between the G8 and the emerging industrial nations of China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico, Blair sounded the warning again over the consequences of global warming in the pages of the Guardian : That's why Tuesday's meeting matters. It will focus on what is needed to make the transition to a low carbon economy. We need to see how the existing energy technologies we have such as wind, solar and - yes - nuclear, together with new technologies such as fuel cells and carbon capture and storage, can generate the low carbon power the world needs. UPDATE : Some other thoughts from U.K.-based blogs Anglesey Energy and Deed . Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy , Environment , Energy , Politics , Technology , Economics , United Kingdom , Tony Blair

From 10 Downing Street : Tony Blair insisted that he would take 'whatever decisions were right for this country' when choosing the future direction of the UK's energy supplies. Speaking at his monthly press conference in Downing Street, the PM said the debate on whether to build new nuclear plants should be 'conducted with an open mind by everybody.' But evidence of global warming was 'too strong to ignore', he added, and this put the issue of energy 'centre stage' "For a country like Britain, our present nuclear power is going to be phased out over 10-15 years. We have a very ambitious renewables target and there are obviously issues there that we have got to address and get right.' "I am not pre-empting the debate at all. We will take whatever decisions are right for the country.'' Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy , Environment , Energy , Politics , Technology , Economics , Electricity , Tony Blair , United Kingdom

The long anticipated U.K. Energy Review was published earlier today by the Department of Trade and Industry , and it includes a strong endorsement for keeping nuclear as a part of that nation's energy mix. And though the review also recommends increased use of renewable sources of energy (U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair wants to increase the amount of energy generated by renewables by a factor of five in just the next 15 years ), anti-nukes are still coming out in droves to grouse about the review . Then again, some critics seem to realize their arguments are running out of ammunition. Case in point: Here's columnist George Monbiot , who after debunking a number of familiar canards about the industry, still doesn't want to listen to reason: Some of our arguments against nuclear power have collapsed, but it seems to me that the case is still robust. Here's another idea: Instead of digging in your heels in opposition, why not engage in a real conversation with the inter...

More news on the details of the U.K. Energy Review are starting to leak out: The UK government is expected to say nuclear power is "economically viable" when it unveils an energy review on Tuesday, a report has said. The Observer newspaper claims to have seen a final copy of the review, which will lay out recommendations for the development of the UK's energy sector. There's nothing really new here, as U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair has been telegraphing the decision for a number of weeks now. Meanwhile, the opposition is getting ready too . For more on that effort, check out Potential Energy , the definitive blog for British nuclear news. Finally, it looks like two competing groups have formed to vie for the construction of the next generation of British nuclear power plants. Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy , Nuclear Power , Energy , Technology , Environment , Electricity , United Kingdom , Tony Blair

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, Bri...

In the run-up to last night's State of the Union speech , I missed an interesting development over in the U.K. regarding nuclear energy and the debate on climate change. From the Scotsman : In an apocalyptic assessment endorsed by Tony Blair, an international group of scientists warned in the study published yesterday that increasing temperatures caused by the greenhouse effect pose a pressing threat to humanity... The report comes as ministers consider authorising the construction of a new generation of nuclear reactors in Britain. Adding urgency to that review, the most recent official figures show that the UK's carbon emissions are rising again. Many environmental groups and some Labour MPs are opposed to new atomic power stations, although the Prime Minister is understood to be leaning towards the nuclear option. Unlike coal-power and gas-power plants, nuclear stations do not produce . "There are no magic bullets; a portfolio of options is needed and excluding any opti...

In an editorial this morning, the Times of London urged the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair to push ahead with new nuclear build : Nuclear energy is an emotive subject, and it was politically understandable, though democratically lamentable, that the Prime Minister wanted to avoid it until after this year’s general election. But, stripped of emotion, the position is stark. Britain’s 12 ageing nuclear power stations provide a fifth of the country’s energy needs. Yet all but one will be out of business by 2023. Many coal-fired plants, which produce another 30 per cent, fall foul of Brussels rules on clean air and will also be shutting down over the next two decades. By then, Britain will need to find 50 gigawatts of new capacity. Given the lead time for any successor plants to be designed, approved and phased in, decisions need to be made in the next year or two. Mr Blair should continue to encourage renewable sources. The potential of wave power and tidal waters should be explo...

I'm talking about Gordon Brown , the U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer and Prime Minister Tony Blair's presumed successor. And speaking of Mr. Blair, he's pushing on, regardless . Click here for more from the Financial Times . UPDATE : Chris Whiteside likes what he hears: Just to emphasise the point, to achieve the scale of impact to cut carbon emissions which the overwhelming majority of scientists now think is necessary, we need to reach for every available option. That includes energy saving, "burying" carbon to stop it getting into the atmoshere, making much more use of renewable energy, and replacing our present nuclear reactors with a new generation. There is not a cat in hell's chance that the UK can achieve significant overall reductions in carbon emissions without at least maintaining the 20% of our electicity generation which is currently carbon free because it comes from nuclear power. I have heard it suggested that one question mark over new nucl...