Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Morris MP

GET UPDATES FROM David Morris MP
 

Nuclear Power is on the Horizon

Posted: 12/04/2012 00:00

The last few years have been an exciting, yet scary and unknown time for the nuclear industry. After decades of inaction under various governments the coalition announced a major initiative to see new nuclear power station construction.

Following that was the hammer blow of Fukishima (the Japanese nuclear power station that ran into difficulties after the earthquake/tsunami).

More recently the pull out of the German energy giants E-On and RWE NPower from UK Nuclear has given rise to yet another debate on the future of our energy policy.

As ever the luddites have jumped on the move as evidence that we can solve all of our energy problems with some small scale onshore wind farms. Whilst others have expressed genuine fear that the aim of a building a fleet a 21st century nuclear power stations could be derailed. Both are wrong.

We must remember that E-On and RWE's UK subsidiary Horizon Nuclear Power has not disappeared; in fact much of the work which is underway is still going ahead. This is because Horizon is up for sale and there are a number of reasons to believe it will be bought out.

Firstly, we must understand the background the E-on'sto E.ON and RWE's decision. After Fukishima a paranoid German government massively scaled back Nuclear Power production. This has seriously affected both the Horizon shareholders and has led to a reassessment of their investment options.

Secondly, Horizon Nuclear is not a bad investment; nothing could be further from the truth. For a whole range of reasons - not least the two excellent sites they own and the team of nuclear professionals they have pulled together - Horizon could be seen as a very attractive investment.

A simple look around the world's potential investors suggests that there are a number of organisations that could have both the money and the desire to take this project forward.

Thirdly, the government is determined to see more nuclear development; they see it as vital to the future of UK Energy Supply. It is hard to imagine a scenario where Horizon is liquidated, only for the government to encourage someone else to take on its two sites only to then spend years reassembling the 130 experts Horizon already have.

The truth is Horizon's problems are not their own, they're the parent companies problems. Horizon remains a viable investment with the solid support of the government (and for that matter the opposition). Anyone who thinks they've worked for years, assembled sites and begun reactor procurement just to shut up shop at the first sign of trouble are very much mistaken.

Consider this in addition to the fact that EDF and Centrica are going ahead with their developments at Sizewell, Hinkley Point and later on at places like Heysham (in my constituency). It's hard to see a scenario where new Nuclear doesn't play a major part in UK energy production.

The truth is that we need an energy mix in this country. Constituencies like mine cannot be built over with onshore wind and we ought not to rely on gas from unstable regimes. Nuclear has its part to play and it will feature in our energy future. I believe that Horizon's two sites will be built but I think to get there we have to show the whole world that the government and for that matter the opposition are committed to their success.

 
The last few years have been an exciting, yet scary and unknown time for the nuclear industry. After decades of inaction under various governments the coalition announced a major initiative to see new...
The last few years have been an exciting, yet scary and unknown time for the nuclear industry. After decades of inaction under various governments the coalition announced a major initiative to see new...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 111
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RahSolar
Stupidity is not a crime so you’re free to go
03:24 AM on 04/14/2012
'After Fukishima a paranoid German government massively scaled back Nuclear Power production. '

That was because the German Chancellor (who holds a doctorate in physics) saw how inept the Japanese are at getting the situation under control.
Japan is one of the top 10 industrialized and technologically advanced countries on the globe and the whole Fukushima thing got away from them.

Sounds like sound reasoning to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RahSolar
Stupidity is not a crime so you’re free to go
03:18 AM on 04/14/2012
'After Fukishima a paranoid German government massively scaled back Nuclear Power production.'

That's because the German Chancellor (who holds a Doctorate in physics) saw how ineffective the Japanese were at getting the situation under control.
Especially since Japan is one of the top 10 industrialized and technologically advanced countries on the planet.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
08:14 PM on 04/12/2012
You get what you pay for with today's tories.

It's on the horizon at the moment, but with the financing situation, it's heading down below the horizon.
11:52 PM on 04/12/2012
Not until the governments show the public the true costs of Nuclear power generation will there be any real hope of an acceptable UK nuclear power industry. Till then it will remain only an English thing and Scotland, especially if nuclear power is government policy, will go her own independent way. No doubt nuclear powere is far and away the most expensive form of electricity generation which is why succeeding governments have hidden the subsidy they give it. It is also the least versatile source for load balancing as reactors cannot be taken off and on line either quickly or easily. It does, though, reward the investors well, mainly due to the hidden subsidies and the profits to be made for construction, fuel processing, decommisioning and the storeimg of waste products forever.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atoms4Peace1
Applying the atom peacefully since 1978
04:59 AM on 04/13/2012
New paradigms require outside the box thinking. Too many antinukes make the mistake of assigning megalithic financing woes to SMRs.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
07:56 AM on 04/13/2012
With no evidence presented that there is a change in the cost paradigm, based on small modular reactors, it's reasonable to assume there is not.

Remember that when LCRs (the TLA for large custom reactors?) were sold, they were `too cheap to meter' too.
06:55 PM on 04/12/2012
still chairman of the conservative friends of Nuclear energy I see David.

The problem with Nuclear power is that if you factor in the cost of clean up after a Fukushima type event - then the bottom line is that it is way too expensive.
Top that with the fact that their is only 100 years or so of Uranium on the Earth & it seems like a pointless exercise with far too many risks attached (large areas around chernobyl & i imagine fukushima may be uninhabitable for 1000s of years)

Thorium...that is a much safer option - but unfortunately you cant build nukes out of the by products
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
08:16 PM on 04/12/2012
The other problem is the huge capital cost, even off the french shelf. You don't see german CEOs wander away if there's an economic case.

The problem with Thorium is all that, plus $50-100bn of development costs. Bad luck.
10:48 PM on 04/12/2012
Having to spend ~$100 billion every 30-40 years to clean up a Fukushima-scale accident would only add ~0.1 cents/kW-hr to the cost of nuclear electricity. The driver of nuclear cost is the upfront capital cost of new plants.

Long term uranium supply is simply not an issue. There are many centuries, if not millenia worth of high-grade ore.

Risks/impacts of nuclear are negligible compared to those of fossil fuels. Worldwide fossil fuel use causes ~1000 deaths every single day; far more than the total eventual death toll from Fuksushima (the only significant accident in non-Soviet nuclear power's entire 50+ year history).
12:00 AM on 04/13/2012
Aye! But a death from a fossil fuel accident is just that but a nuclear accident can go on killing people for a great many years. It is not radiation that is the real danger but contamination. A very small contaminant in the body will go on killing that body for well over a normal lifespan and just look at Dalgety Bay in Fife with contamination since WWII or at the sands and seabed in Sutherland that they cannot hope to ever clear.
lastpost
see biography
02:14 PM on 04/12/2012
"the coalition announced a major initiative to see new nuclear power station construction."
Jobs for the “glow in the dark” boys?

"ran into difficulties"
Whereas Chernobyl was a slight hiccup, and Three Mile Island a minor malfunction.

"the pull out of the German energy giants E-On and RWE NPower from UK Nuclear "
should tell the wise something.

"we can solve all of our energy problems"
if, and only if, we can find a leader. Who can capitalise on all angles we Angles can come at this problem from. See WW2 for details.

"A simple look around the world's potential"
alternative energy options shows massive possibilities, to the long sighted.

"Anyone who thinks they've worked for years"
does not appreciate the longevity of the radiation left behind to clear up.

"Consider this"
its survival of the most adept. Not survival of those who ape those who aren’t going to survive.

"The truth is"
we, in this nation, have an innate natural ability to question what is believed to be impossible. That is why we can prevail, if not artificially impeded. Quoting “wind farms” continually, suggests no awareness of all the other options open to us. Hardly credentials for a chosen one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atoms4Peace1
Applying the atom peacefully since 1978
05:02 AM on 04/13/2012
when someone studies aerospace engineering, they dream one day of working for Boeing. They want to put their training to use. Doesnt mean they are all gung ho over airplanes. Or maybe they are. A persons choice of career should be a reflection of their interests and passion and willingness to help the greater good and humanity. I chose nuclear engineering for those reasons.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
12:33 AM on 04/15/2012
And it is the job of the numerate to rein in your enthusiasm for building new plants to make very expensive power. Even before we start worrying about the risk of destroying economic activity for a hundred years out to a few counties' radius if you have a bad day at the office.
photo
hearthammer
If left is right and right is wrong, decide!
10:10 AM on 04/12/2012
Sorry, nukes may be the way forward for England but not for Scotland.
12:39 PM on 04/12/2012
As long as Scotland isn't like the state of California, which likes to use the electricity from nuclear, but wishes to export the risk to neighboring states.
photo
hearthammer
If left is right and right is wrong, decide!
04:10 PM on 04/12/2012
Not at all. We don't want ANY nukes here. The previous nuke stations were not installed by a Scottish government and are being allowed to run their course. They will NOT be repalced. We are spending money on renewables in order to get rid of them.
04:16 PM on 04/12/2012
For 2008, only 4.6% of California's electricity imports came from nuclear. The larger share came from large hydro (18.1%), natural gas (41.9%), and coal (33.7%).

http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-200-2009-010/CEC-200-2009-010-CMF.PDF

Renewables (excluding large hydro) now exceed nuclear generation in many locations in the State. All of this sounds like progress to me.
12:03 AM on 04/13/2012
Amen! And I worked on Radiation detection for more years than I want to remember.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atoms4Peace1
Applying the atom peacefully since 1978
05:05 AM on 04/13/2012
Im still working it and its been three decades.
03:06 AM on 04/12/2012
All three comments here condemning nuclear power and expressing the joys of renewable energy keep leaving out two important facts. Our thirst for energy keeps growing exponentially and renewables cannot achieve that currently or in the predictable future. We as a country need to base our energy policy on sound reality and not on hope. Nuclear energy is safe and clean in this country and there are stats to back it up. It's that simple.
07:01 PM on 04/12/2012
the inhabitants of Chernobyl and Fukushima & those in the surrounding massive exclusion zones may possibly disagree with your "safe and clean" view of nuclear power.
you are correct though we need to be realistic about energy - Thorium reactors look promising and more research should be funded in this area.
02:30 AM on 04/16/2012
I was referring to the the U.S. I guess I should had been more specific. Sorry.
12:07 AM on 04/13/2012
Strange then that Scotland is meeting the majority of her needs from renewables already and we are just scratching the surface yet.
01:07 AM on 04/13/2012
Yes bob,but once you go independant,The rest of the UK ARE NOT GOING TO CARRY ON BUYING THAT ENERGY OFF YOU AT INFLATED PRICES,so the investers will just vade away.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
You can't take the sky from me.
02:45 AM on 04/12/2012
Nuclear power is the only way large cities will remain sustainable.
12:08 AM on 04/13/2012
Care to give us some figures?
09:22 AM on 04/16/2012
A contradiction - nuclear power itself is not sustainable so how can it make cities something it is not?
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
02:06 AM on 04/12/2012
Nukes are dead. World wide, people don't want them.

Nukes power is trillion dollar cancerous disasters, million year cancerous wastes, and civilization ending proliferation.

Offshore wind and waste bio fuels are half the price of nukes.

There is no excuse for nukes.

Who paid you for this, sir?
03:09 AM on 04/12/2012
Who paid you to be a fan of offshore wind and bio fuels? Do you believe that everyone who disagrees with you has been paid to do it???
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
03:33 AM on 04/12/2012
I use facts, you use bs emotionalism.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
05:49 AM on 04/12/2012
Projection.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atoms4Peace1
Applying the atom peacefully since 1978
06:30 AM on 04/12/2012
It takes an area the size of Los Angeles to provide its power with solar. In the end, its about real estate.

Nukes keep you safe. Ask the US Navy. New people are coming up every year with proper training. New reactors are being advanced,

Its a good time to enter college to study this subject matter. A bright future for the next generation
12:11 AM on 04/13/2012
Real Estate my rump. Every roof is a site for both wind and light power generation. As is every wall.
05:22 AM on 04/13/2012
Nuclear is less popular every day in universities. Nano solar is an academic rock star.
11:11 PM on 04/11/2012
For 2011, wind development has outpaced coal in the EU by some 450%, and nuclear by 3 times this amount.

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/02/07/70-of-new-eu-power-from-renewable-energy-in-2011-47-from-solar-21-from-wind/

It's not paranoia that led to Germany's commitment to renewables, but pragmatic investment decisions and measurable results. The financial capacity for investing in nuclear power is not the same as the willingness to do so. I can make no sense of this article? It appears to be very confused in its assumptions about what is rational for investors and consumers with respect to long term risk and free markets for energy and nuclear power.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
10:29 PM on 04/11/2012
Anyone who believes nuclear power still has a future may want to read "400 Fukushimas?" at www.aesopinstitute.org

This article is a case of the blind leading the bland.

See Cheap Green on the same site for some surprising cost-competitive alternatives that will soon change the energy landscape.

One example is the hydroelectric fuel cell invented in Vietnam. The fuel is ordinary water: salt or fresh. A 2,000 watt generator for a home priced at $1,600 is scheduled to be in the market in that nation in June.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Atoms4Peace1
Applying the atom peacefully since 1978
06:31 AM on 04/12/2012
The real estate doesnt support it. The atom has the most effective energy budget.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
06:51 AM on 04/12/2012
The threat to humanity from little known facts about the Fukushima meltdown make the cost of nuclear absurdly high.

The energy budget of the atom is about to shoot through the roof.
12:14 AM on 04/13/2012
They are still clearing up the shore at Dalgetty Bay in Fife since WWII and say they will never clear the seabed and sands of Sutherland.
12:22 PM on 04/12/2012
Anyone hungry for a SPAM sandwich? Seriously, all you ever post is advertising for a site peddling unobtanium.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
03:13 PM on 04/12/2012
The hydroelectric fuel cell is very real and is the first technology to signal cheap green energy is becoming available.

And I have no connection to that technology.

Unobtainium is a good name for the lack of safe radioactive fuel.