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.
Kumi Naidoo: Nuclear Power and Democracy Don't Mix
Lawrence Wittner: Try a Little Nuclear Sanity
Vivian Norris: A Post-Fukushima World: Truths and Confusion About Global Energy
David Cameron paves way for Japanese to build nuclear power stations in UK
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.
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.
It's on the horizon at the moment, but with the financing situation, it's heading down below the horizon.
Remember that when LCRs (the TLA for large custom reactors?) were sold, they were `too cheap to meter' too.
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
The problem with Thorium is all that, plus $50-100bn of development costs. Bad luck.
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).
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.
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.
you are correct though we need to be realistic about energy - Thorium reactors look promising and more research should be funded in this area.
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?
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
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.
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.
The energy budget of the atom is about to shoot through the roof.
And I have no connection to that technology.
Unobtainium is a good name for the lack of safe radioactive fuel.