• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance
  FEATURED
REVEALED: Imperial Oil, Alberta Regulator Knew of Toxic Seepage at Kearl Mine for Years, Didn’t Tell First Nation October 3, 2023
Oil and Gas, Buildings Drive 2.1% Rise in Canada’s Climate Pollution October 2, 2023
Shell CEO Doubles Down on Renewable Cuts Despite Internal Pushback October 2, 2023
Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds October 2, 2023
UAE Holds Major Oil and Gas Conference Before Hosting COP 28 Climate Summit October 2, 2023
Next
Prev

UK confusion over nuclear future

September 8, 2013
Reading time: 4 minutes
Primary Author: Paul Brown

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  It’s the nuclear closure programme that never was. The UK government insists it needs new nuclear power stations urgently built to replace ageing installations − and yet its safety watchdog is granting lengthy extensions that could see old ones continue for decades LONDON, 9 September − The UK Government has been telling its parliament and the public that because eight large nuclear stations are scheduled to close over the next 10 years, the country needs urgently to build some new ones to keep the nation’s lights on. Yet EDF, the French state-owned company that bought the eight nuclear stations in 2009 for £12.5 billion, has no intention of closing any of them. A Government spokesman denied that its statements were misleading and explained the apparent contradiction by saying that if the stations did not pass their periodic safety reviews then they would have to close. However, there is no reason to believe they will fail safety tests.  The state safety watchdog, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, told Climate News Network that keeping them open is fine by them. The stations are constantly monitored, and periodically have major safety reviews. As long as they remain safe, they can remain in operation, provided EDF wants them to. It is a commercial decision, the watchdog says.

“Britain will be getting almost half its electricity from nuclear power − something it has never told parliament”

  • The climate news you need. Subscribe now to our engaging new weekly digest.
  • You’ll receive exclusive, never-before-seen-content, distilled and delivered to your inbox every weekend.
  • The Weekender: Succinct, solutions-focused, and designed with the discerning reader in mind.
Subscribe

This strange situation means that if the Government is successful in its policy of building eight new large nuclear stations, Britain will be getting almost half its electricity from nuclear power − something it has never told parliament or discussed as part of its energy policy. Currently, EDF’s existing nuclear stations produce nearly 20% of the country’s electricity.  Until earlier this year, according to the Government, two of them would be closing in 2016: Hinkley Point B in Somerset, England, and Hunterston B in north Ayrshire, Scotland, both of which came into operation in 1976. These were supposed to be the beginning of a whole series of closures that the Government used to argue that new stations were urgently needed. However, EDF successfully applied for a seven-year extension to the lives of the two stations. The closing date for them has now changed on the Government website to 2023, but this could extend again to 2030, provided safety is still not an issue.  The policy of EDF is to continue going for life extensions for its reactors as long as it can. This means that five more stations that are, according to the Government, due to close in 2018, 2019 and 2023, are all expected to be granted seven more years.

Cheap to run

To EDF, this rolling programme of seven-year extensions makes good economic sense. Nuclear power stations, once built, are reasonably cheap to run, and every country in the world keeps them open as long as possible. Put simply, unless prohibitive costs are involved in periodically updating the safety requirements, running them makes considerable profits. The second reason is that it costs a minimum of £2 billion to decommission a nuclear reactor, according to the European Union, and there are two reactors at each of these EDF stations. If they closed, that huge decommissioning liability would have to be shown on the nuclear generator’s balance sheet − figures that would soon overtake the net worth of the company, thus making it technically bankrupt. A Department of Energy and Climate Change spokeswoman said she did not believe the Government’s stance was misleading. The dates quoted for the closure of stations were their expected lifetimes, unless they were granted extensions. The Government, she said, could not anticipate what would happen. Meanwhile, the plans to build new stations continued – and the spokeswoman said EDF is still currently “inching forward” in its negotiations with the Government on how to finance building them.

Price doubles

The cost of new stations is in stark contrast to the price EDF paid for the old ones. The whole of British Energy cost EDF £12.5 billion to buy, for which it got eight large nuclear power stations, as well as considerable assets, including sites for new ones. This values the old stations, at best, at just over £1 billion each. This is in contrast to the cost of building a new reactor of at least £8 billion, which is why EDF is unwilling to start on new ones until the Government comes up with a generous guarantee of a minimum price for the electricity.  The price EDF is asking for would be double what consumers are currently paying. The problem the Government faces is that it was elected on the promise that it would not subsidise nuclear power. Various attempts to call a guaranteed price “a low carbon electricity tariff”, rather than a subsidy, have not satisfied critics. This is also complicated because the European Union is also against subsidies, because they distort competition. Despite this hurdle, EDF still plans to build new nuclear stations in Somerset and in Suffolk, England, although the decision to go ahead has been postponed several times. The expected completion date of the first new station has been put back from 2018 to 2022, and even that is considered to be optimistic. There is at least one other nuclear player in the market waiting to see how the negotiations go between EDF and the British Government. This is the Japanese electronics giant Hitachi. It plans to build new plants at other sites at Wylfa on the isle of Anglesey, Wales, and at Oldbury, in Gloucestershire, England. These proposals have also been welcomed by the Government, but again no details of how much Hitachi will get for the electricity have been agreed. Whatever happens ,the Government spokeswoman said, it is still committed to its policy of new nuclear build to keep the lights on and ensure security of supply. − Climate News Network



in Climate News Network

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

moerschy / Pixabay
Biodiversity & Habitat

Planetary Weight Study Shows Humans Taking Most of Earth’s Resources

March 19, 2023
53
U.S. Geological Survey/wikimedia commons
Biodiversity & Habitat

Climate Change Amplifies Risk of ‘Insect Apocalypse’

December 1, 2022
67
Alaa Abd El-Fatah/wikimedia commons
COP Conferences

Rights Abuses, Intrusive Conference App Put Egypt Under Spotlight as COP 27 Host

November 14, 2022
34

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Iota 9/Wikimedia Commons

‘Huge Loss’ for Local Green Economy as Vancouver Shutters Its Economic Commission

September 28, 2023
321
Jon Sullivan/flickr

Thorold Gas Peaker Plant Won’t Be Built After Unanimous City Council Vote

September 21, 2023
857
Solarimo/pixabay

Leading Climate Models Underestimate Clean Energy Progress, Overstate Cost, Study Finds

October 2, 2023
211
Power lines, Mississauga, Canada

Two First Nations Groups Vie to Build Northern Ontario Power Line

September 28, 2023
174
Cullen328/wikimedia commons

Manufactured Housing Could Dent the Affordable Housing Crunch with Energy-Efficient Designs

September 20, 2023
728
McDonald's/flickr

McDonald’s Failing to Follow Through on Climate Promises, Critics Say

December 17, 2021
2.6k

Recent Posts

jasonwoodhead23/flickr

REVEALED: Imperial Oil, Alberta Regulator Knew of Toxic Seepage at Kearl Mine for Years, Didn’t Tell First Nation

October 3, 2023
1
Dawn Ellner/flickr

Oil and Gas, Buildings Drive 2.1% Rise in Canada’s Climate Pollution

October 2, 2023
2
Ramon FVelasquez/Wikipedia

Shell CEO Doubles Down on Renewable Cuts Despite Internal Pushback

October 2, 2023
2
Northvolt plant in Sweden, Spisen/wikimedia commons

Quebec Lands $7B Battery Gigafactory Investment from Sweden’s Northvolt

October 2, 2023
2
YouTube

UAE Holds Major Oil and Gas Conference Before Hosting COP 28 Climate Summit

October 3, 2023
8
GFDL/Wikimedia Commons

Clean Energy Funding Isn’t Just About Money, Policy Expert Warns

October 2, 2023
4
Next Post

Climate threat to Southern Africa's crops

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
The Energy Mix - Energy Central
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Cities & Communities
  • Electric Mobility
  • Heat & Power
  • Community Climate Finance

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}