Secret British Report Calls For Nuclear Power Phaseout

CIVIL NUCLEAR

Secret British Report Calls For Nuclear Power Phase Out

the most difficult method known to man to boil water to make steam to drive turbines to make electricity to boil water to make a cup of tea

by Rob Edwards
for New Scientist
London - Dec 13, 2001
Nuclear power may have had its day. The best way to cut carbon pollution and tackle global warming is to replace oil and coal-fired power stations with renewable energy sources, says a draft British government review leaked to New Scientist. Nuclear power is simply too dangerous and expensive.

The review attempts to lay out Britain's energy strategy for the next 50 years. If the government accepts its recommendations, Britain will become one of the most environmentally friendly energy producers in the world.

The long-awaited study had been widely expected to embrace the nuclear industry's plans for up to 15 new nuclear stations. Instead, it relegates nuclear power to an also-ran that could be totally phased out by 2050 if renewable sources deliver as expected.

This happens under both main scenarios put forward in the study. One, labelled "global sustainability", assumes government intervention by regulation and financial incentives, leading to a 30 per cent contribution from renewables and a 60 per cent cut in carbon emissions. The alternative "world markets" scenario envisages a big rise in oil and gas consumption driven by consumer demand, resulting in a 20 per cent increase in carbon pollution.

Public fears about nuclear safety seem to have influenced the review, which was undertaken by the Cabinet's Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU). The technology has "an uncertain role", the report says, "since concerns about radioactive waste, accidents, terrorism and proliferation may limit or preclude its use". It also wants the cost of insuring against accidents and disposing of radioactive waste to be borne by nuclear stations rather than the government.

This makes nuclear power very expensive. It is estimated that it will cost 3.0 to 4.5 pence per kilowatt-hour by 2020, compared with 1.5 to 2.4 p/kWh for onshore wind power. Combined heat and power comes in at 1.6 to 2.4 p/kWh and gas-fired generation at 1.8 to 2.1 p/kWh. "Nowhere in the world have new nuclear stations yet been financed within a liberalised electricity market," the report points out.

The report is enthusiastic about the potential of renewable energy, which it says is the most flexible way to reduce carbon emissions. It suggests producing at least 20 per cent of electricity from renewable sources by 2020, compared with the current target of 10 per cent by 2010. That could be achieved by massively expanding the number of wind turbines on land and offshore, and by introducing wave power and underwater tidal generators.

This is backed by another government study published this week, suggesting that Scotland on its own could produce 60 gigawatts of renewable power, three-quarters of Britain's installed generating capacity.

It also urges the government to encourage the development of combined heat and power, which uses the heat from electricity generation rather than wasting it, and to set a target for a 20 per cent improvement in domestic energy efficiency by 2010.

The report will be a bitter disappointment to the nuclear industry, which had been expecting it to kick-start a nuclear renaissance. But it does urge the government to contribute to international efforts to design cheaper, safer reactors, and to ensure that Britain's nuclear regulators are "adequately staffed" to assess them.

Nick Goodall, chief executive of the British Wind Energy Association says he is delighted by the report. But Malcolm Grimston, a senior research fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, who used to work in the nuclear industry, warns that it might be too optimistic about the prospects for renewables-just as the nuclear industry was about its technology 30 years ago.

This article will appear in the Dec 15 issue of New Scientist

CIVIL NUCLEAR

Britain Joins Armenia And Bulgaria On Nuclear Watch List

Vienna (AFP) Nov 27, 2001
Armenia and Bulgaria have the most dangerous nuclear plants in Europe, while Britain houses the worst eight reactors in western Europe, according to an ecological study released here Tuesday.

Thanks for being here; We need your help. The SpaceDaily news network continues to grow but revenues have never been harder to maintain. With the rise of Ad Blockers, and Facebook - our traditional revenue sources via quality network advertising continues to decline. And unlike so many other news sites, we don't have a paywall - with those annoying usernames and passwords. Our news coverage takes time and effort to publish 365 days a year. If you find our news sites informative and useful then please consider becoming a regular supporter or for now make a one off contribution.
SpaceDaily Contributor $5 Billed Once credit card or paypal		SpaceDaily Monthly Supporter $5 Billed Monthly paypal only

The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2016 - Space Media Network. All websites are published in Australia and are solely subject to Australian law and governed by Fair Use principals for news reporting and research purposes. AFP, UPI and IANS news wire stories are copyright Agence France-Presse, United Press International and Indo-Asia News Service. ESA news reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space Media Network on any Web page published or hosted by Space Media Network. Privacy Statement All images and articles appearing on Space Media Network have been edited or digitally altered in some way. Any requests to remove copyright material will be acted upon in a timely and appropriate manner. Any attempt to extort money from Space Media Network will be ignored and reported to Australian Law Enforcement Agencies as a potential case of financial fraud involving the use of a telephonic carriage device or postal service.