|
Nuclear Industry supporters raise the stakes
The Royal Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Physics, and
the Royal Society have joined forces to try to convince the government
that it needs to support the construction of new nuclear power stations.
Meanwhile the Government's chief scientific advisor Prof David King
added to his March
2002 argument, that a new generation of nuclear power stations is
required as a 'bridge' to a future of renewable energy sources by
warning that only Antartica may be habitable a hundred years from
now.
Bringing these two threads together James Lovelock, the originator
of the Gaia hypothesis, has urged the Green movement to give up
its objection to nuclear power stating in an article in the Independent
'Only nuclear power can now halt global warming'.
It turns out that Lovelock is poorly informed because he actually
believes his backers 'Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy'.
They, in turn believe that a small amount of chronic irradiation
is beneficial, and point to the Superphénix fast breeder
reactor as proof that nuclear power is the way forward.
Intermittent Power: Connected to the grid in 1986 Superphénix
functioned for 10 months in its first ten years. The licensing process
in 1993, had emphasized electricity production but, in 1997 it was
closed as its legal status was unsound.
'Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy' acknowledge that for nuclear
power to make any impact on climate change fast reactors are needed.
(because the huge number of ordinary nuclear reactors needed would
use up reserves of uranium in approximately 23 years). So the real
Lovelock agenda is the 'holy grail' of fast reactors and a Plutonium
economy.
WANA Comments:
Nuclear power, a hazardous technology sited in large power stations,
is not only an obvious target for terrorism, it is insufficiently
robust to meet the very climate challenges that Lovelock warns us
of.
Because of rising sea levels nuclear power stations cannot be safely
sited on the coasts, and with their use of cooling water from rivers,
inland reactors are hostage to droughts.
Nuclear power is hopelessly uneconomic. In Britain we have a bankrupt
nuclear industry without a viable product. The untried and untested
reactors that BNFL are currently promoting have cut out safety features
in order to try to cut costs. The Government's energy review concluded
that a new generation of reactors in 15-20 years might be more competitive
than those available today.
It is all a huge distraction from James Lovelock's rightful concern
about global warming, and about the need to respond with urgency.
Promoting energy efficiency and expanding the role of renewables
is not only more robust and cost effective than nuclear, with political
will across the world it can start working right now.
The generation game.
Current support for a nuclear rennaissance suggests an ignorance
of the ability of nuclear power to contribute anything in the time
scale proposed by Lovelock as the main reason for its adoption.
Generation I were the original PWR's and in Britain the Magnox reactors.
Generation II were the PWR's ordered in large numbers in the US
and are all reaching the end of their design lives, plus the AGR's
in Britain.
The chart (see WANA May 2002 - content #8 - 'Westinghouse
- The Truth') shows the rise and fall of the first two generations
of Westinghouse PWRs. Westinghouse dominated nuclear reactor construction
worldwide but their order book 'peaked' over 28 years ago, and due
largely to cancellations, only 56% of the total generating capacity
ordered is in operation.
Generation III consist of the so-called advanced passive reactors.
Westinghouse (now owned by BNFL) are pushing the untried and untested
AP1000 as a desperate last throw to stay in business. The AP600
on which it is based has been around as a concept since the mid
1980's. It has a licence in the US but no-one has invested in it.
There are doubts that either the AP600 or AP1000 would get a licence
in the UK because they omit safety features regarded as essential
for a PWR, and introduce new features which are untested in a full
scale reactor under fault conditions.
The 2002 Energy Review concluded that, as AP1000 technology is yet
to be built anywhere in the world, reliance cannot be placed on
claimed construction cost and performance.
Generation IV reactors were referred to in the 2002 Energy Review
(para 47).
"...an AP1000 programme could not be completed
any earlier than twenty years from now. Beyond that date, new designs
of smaller, more modular reactors with inherently safer characteristics
could become available."
The Energy Review concluded: "A key message is that the process
of learning and cost reduction can happen more quickly with renewables
than with nuclear or coal sequestration, because the turnaround
time for projects is faster."
So in conclusion, Gen III as currently promoted is unlikely to be
licensable under the current system, would take at least 7 years
to get underway even if the NII was bypassed, and would anyway take
20 years to make a significant contribution.
Generation IV is pie in the sky, but sets such high standards for
safety reliability and economy, that it rules out the fast breeder
reactors that Lovelock's friends desire.
Trawsfynydd Lake
Environment Agency Wales want to know what you think the possible
impact might be if the level of the lake was to be changed. This
might happen accidentally if "the dams fall gradually into
disrepair." Alternatively it could be drained intentionally,
and used for agriculture or even housing.
Do you think it should be regarded as contaminated?
WANA Comment
* The total estimated radioactivity in lake sediment in 1988 was
760,000,000,000 bequerels. (disintegrations per second)
* The sediment in the the least contaminated part of the lake had
889 Bq/Kg, but the most contaminated parts had 15,732 Bq/Kg.
* The highest levels of contamination are along the North West shore
of the lake.
* The dominant radionuclides present in 1988 were Caesium 137, and
Plutonium 241.
* There is sufficient alpha decay in a single particle of Pu to
ensure that the particle, if it is in dried sediment, becomes electrically
charged and 'takes off' into the air.
The lower limit of radioactive substances requiring regulation is
defined as
400 Becquerels/Kg. Thus at first glance all the Trawsfynydd sediment
(to a depth of 300mm) constitutes radioactive waste. The health
effects of internal radiation from radionuclides inhaled or ingested
and incorporated into human tissue are underestimated by the NRPB.
This is because they average the effects over large volumes of tissue,
although it is well known that radiation damage to body cells is
caused by discrete tracks which either hit vital structures or miss
them altogether.
Richard Bramhall of the Low Level Radiation Campaign commented "I
get very angry with this irresponsible kite flying. The EA knows
full well that the mud is massively contaminated with all sorts
of radioactive muck including hot particles which ought not to be
disturbed in case they get into our lungs and lymphatic systems.
Until someone discovers a way to decontaminate the lake there is
only one sane outcome - the water level must stay high and people
should not be encouraged to engage in water sports."
Send your views to: Duncan Jackson, Enviros Consulting, 61 The Shore,
Leith, Edinburgh EH6 6RA
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority- safety issues unresolved.
Details of draft contracts for the firms that are going to manage
nuclear sites after April 2005 have emerged. These reveal that responsibility
for safety is still under discussion.
The Site Management Contractor has to comply with its obligations
under applicable law, the nuclear site licence, and its own Safety
Management Prospectus. As part of this it has an absolute obligation
'to maintain the site safety culture'. However "....the Contractor's
health and safety responsibilities and the extent of the Authority's
'supervisory' role are still under discussion, and further consideration
is being given to the level of involvement of the Authority in communications/meetings
with regulators.
The Energy Bill which is still going through Parliament makes it
clear that the NDA will have the power to step in, and take over
a nuclear site when things go wrong. The question is- will they
have ability, and how will they maintain that ability?
This is another matter that is apparently under discussion. Different
models are being considered, ranging from a dedicated team of troubleshooters
always on standby (unlikely) to giving the site management job to
contractors who are doing a good job on another site (likely).
European Pressurised water Reactors - talks grind on.
THE PRICE OF STEEL THREATENS THE BUILDER OF EPR No. 1
Framatome & Siemens appeared to have signed an unprofitable
contract to build the first European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR)
in Finland. The boom of metal prices is hindering the subcontracting
negotiations of the FIN5. In particular, the rise in the price of
steel will affect the profitability of the supplier, Framatome ANP.
"The situation is troublesome for us. We have
made a fixed price contract with TVO and if the raw materials cost
more, we can be stranded into trouble in our own projects",
says Ralf Guldner, the CEO of Framatome.
During the first half of year the price of steel has risen rapidly,
with the price of recycled steel almost doubling from last summer.
There are no deals yet on the big steel projects,
except for the pressure vessel, so the influence of steel prices
on the whole nuclear project remains unclear for now.
Some of the Finnish construction companies are nevertheless
prepared for a difficult situation even without additional price
pressures. They have claimed project parts to be too big favouring
Central European construction companies at the expense of the Finns.
French still hooked on nukes
On June 1st the French National Assembly adopted a draft energy
policy bill that declares preservation of the nuclear option a priority
of French energy strategy and supports construction of a new reactor
of the Framatome EPR (European PWR) design.
Price of Share in EPR No. 2 'too high
Meanwhile German utilties have told Electricite De France (EDF)
that its asking price for a share in an EPR to be built in France
is too high.
According to German industry sources, German utilities may not agree
to buy into an EDF-led EPR project on the basis of EDF's offer because
they calculate that the EDF asking price represents an investment
cost per installed kilowatt about 25% higher than the price Areva
is charging Finnish utility TVO for the first EPR being built as
Olkiluoto-3.
Cardiff petitioners succeed in Brussels
On April 24th 2004, petitioners concerned about emissions from Nycomed
Amersham on the outskirts of Cardiff gained support for their case
in the European Parliament during a hearing in Brussels. The petitioners
claim the Welsh Assembly minister in March issued a new license
to the factory without a formal environmental impact assessment
and without the recommended health study.
The chairman of the European Parliament's Petitions Committee, Roy
Perry, said the Committee would convey its preliminary view to the
UK authorities that there should be a full environmental impact
assessment and that the Commissioner should expedite a study on
tritium levels in food.
He also said that the Committee would refer the case for further
health studies to the European Parliament's STOA (Scientific and
Technical Options Assessment) programme.
Authorities must find truth behind birth defects
Western Mail May 31 2004 BABIES are being born in Wales with three
times the rate of birth defects of their counterparts in England,
according to new statistics.
The ONS report refers to industrial discharges as a possible cause
of raised levels, and concluded that there is a need to examine
smaller geographical areas to investigate hypotheses of iatrogenic,
environmental or occupational hazards.
"Ideally the data required for these purposes would be as complete
as possible, requiring good ascertainment not only in live and stillbirths,
but also, for many anomalies, in abortions and spontaneous miscarriages.
What a pity that this is likely to be ignored in Cardiff, where
the new National Public Health Service for Wales has stated that
it will not back the research into perinatal mortality in Cardiff
called for by Professor Alison Macfarlane, following evidence of
possible links with tritium discharged by Nycomed Amersham.
As the Western Mail says: "this is the time for asking questions
and demanding answers."
EVENTS Jun 26th 11am, WANA Meeting - Cardiff
County Hall Atlantic Wharf, Cardiff July 3rd, 4th, Low Level Radiation
and Health Conference [jillandmark@lineone.net]
Published by WANA PO Box 1 Llandrindod Wells LD1 5AA
Tel: 01982 570362 Email: hughrichards@gn.apc.org
http://www.kare-uk.org/wana-index.htm
|