Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima

Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima
We feel very sad for the people of Japan who want to end nuclear energy whilst a potential new government and big business are desperate for it

No Fukushima at Oldbury

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

Saturday, 30 October 2010

Merkel under pressure!

Anti-nuclear protests in Berlin

Greenpeace protesters have rappelled from the roof of Chancellor Angela Merkel's party headquarters and hung a massive anti-nuclear banner over the facade as parliament debates government plans to extend the lives of Germany's nuclear power plants.
Merkel wants to roll back plans to close all of Germany's 17 nuclear plants by 2021. She proposes instead to extend their use by an average 12 years to keep energy supplies inexpensive and steady as the country moves toward an increasing dependence on renewable sources.
Opponents accuse the government of pandering to energy companies. Thursday's Greenpeace banner accused Merkel's party of shaping "policies for the nuclear industry."
The proposal is widely expected to pass parliament's lower house.

Friday, 29 October 2010

SANE meet Steve Webb MP to discuss his involvement in our campaign

We recently had a reassuring meeting with our MP Steve Webb!

He is committed to campaigning with us in the next twelve weeks when the revised NPSs are being consulted on.

Steve is committed to having the Shepperdine site removed from the eight listed suitable sites.

We have exciting news about a major event being planned in Thornbury in November, we will be issuing invites and a press release next Monday. We understand that Steve will be attending the event!

Monday, 18 October 2010

Hergen Haye issues email latest about NPS

Please note that Hergen has offered that DECC would visit us locally at Thornbury to discuss our concerns over this matter.

Today the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, the Rt Hon Chris Huhne MP, launched the consultation on the coalition’s revised draft National Policy Statements (NPSs) on Energy. 
The Energy NPSs will be critical to delivering low-carbon energy supplies through the role they will play in the planning system, as well as helping to create the right environment for business to invest in the energy market.  Decisions on new nationally significant energy infrastructure projects will be taken in accordance with the framework of policies set out in the Energy NPSs, and therefore should be subject to public consultation and both scrutinised and ratified by Parliament before designation.
The Government has decided to run a further consultation as a result of the changes made to the draft Energy NPSs and Appraisals of Sustainability (AoSs) following the responses received to the previous consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny.  More information about this new consultation can be found at
The principal purpose of consultation on the revised draft Energy NPSs, as with the previous consultation, is to identify whether they provide a suitable framework for decision-making on applications for development consent for nationally significant energy infrastructure.  The accompanying AoSs provide information on the likely significant effects on the environment of the draft Energy NPSs should they be designated, as well as setting out the effects on other aspects of sustainability.
The consultation document aims to highlight the main, but not all, changes to the draft Energy NPSs and AoSs made following the consultation which closed earlier this year. It does not attempt to highlight every change made or to discuss why the changes have been made - that discussion is contained within the Government’s Response to the earlier consultation which, along with the individual responses received, can also be viewed
For this consultation to be most effective, we would ask interested parties to focus their responses on those aspects of the policy that have changed and on any aspects which they think should change in the light of the revised AoSs, or any relevant change in circumstances since the previous consultation. However, all consultation responses will be considered.
Many respondents to the previous consultation were interested in the sites that were nominated to be included in the Nuclear NPS as potentially suitable for new nuclear power stations. The revised draft Nuclear NPS contains a list of eight sites that the Government views as potentially suitable for the deployment of new nuclear power stations by 2025. For further information, including if you are interested in responding on sites, please see the Consultation document on the revised draft Energy NPSs which is available from the consultation website mentioned above.
We will be running three consultation events to provide people with more information about the consultation and provide an opportunity to feedback their comments.  These are being held on the dates listed below and you can register to attend through the consultation .
·         Bristol, 29th November 2-4.30pm
·         Manchester, 30th November 10-12.30pm
·         London, 2nd December, 10-12.30pm
If you feel that it would be helpful for us to attend a meeting organised in your local area during the consultation period, please contact us

Kind regards,

Hergen Haye, Head of New Nuclear
Giles Scott, Head of Development Consents and Planning Reform

Technicals flaws in GDA of new nuclear reactors?

The campaign group objecting to the construction of a new generation nuclear power station at the site known as 'Oldbury'  have found a serious flaw in the Government's technical assessment of the new generation of nuclear reactors.
Both the Areva EPR and the Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors, which have not yet been tried and tested anywhere in the world, have been assessed by the HSE and the Environment Agency who want now to release a conditional approval of these reactors as a part of the licencing process for installation in the UK.
However, during a recent public consultation the group, Shepperdine Against Nuclear Energy, learned that the assessment has been carried out on a theoretical 'generic' site using only one reactor and in a coastal location. Given that none of the electricity companies proposing to build these new power stations intend to build a site with less than one reactor the cummulative impacts of more than one reactor on a site have not yet been looked at.
The EON/RWE joint venture who want to build on the site in the village of Shepperdine, 2.5km north of Oldbury-on-Severn in South Gloucestershire will have either two of the Areva or three of the Westinghouse reactors and therefore the impacts will be two or three times that of the data in the technical assessments. Worse still, because the Shepperdine site is not coastal the impacts due to the need for cooling towers has not been considered at all.
The GDA licencing process is inadequate and given this is a completely new technology, untried or tested anywhere in the world, we find this extremely worrying. The Government is rushing in to this whole thing and must slow down before serious mistakes are made which can not then be reversed.
These reactors will be larger than any nuclear reactor currently in operation anywhere in the world by far, four times the output of the existing reactors at Oldbury and as such the technical requirements are completely different.
At the very least, the GDA licencing should make it perfectly clear that it only relates to coastal locations where direct cooling techniques are possible. However, this is only if the cumulative impacts of more than one reactor on the same site have been looked in to properly.
The campaign group have completely lost confidence in the technical assessment of these reactors. They have not even looked in to the methods of storage of the highly toxic waste produced by this high burn up technique in any detail. The Government's plans for long term disposal of this waste are so uncertain that DECC have advised that it will have to remain on site for 160 years plus. Yet the brief details on this assume it will be on site for up to 100 years. Either way it is far too long for the community to put up with this hazardous material on their doorstep. Not forgetting this will be on the flood plain of the River Severn for generations to come!

"We remain very concerned that the current track record and financial stability of both Areva and Westinghouse may leave the possibility of half completed projects when the energy companies run out of funds. Unless the then government bail them out with taxpayers funds" says Reg Illingworth of SANE

"We know that the Shepperdine site offers massive logistical and construction issues that E-on and RWE say can be mitigated. I can imagine an archaeologist in 1000years looking at the half built structure and laughing out loud at the human generation that attempted to build it" he added


Sunday, 17 October 2010

Let's start an energy revolution

Wouldn't it be great if Chris Huhne in his speech about energy took the bull by the horns and started a true energy revolution.

We know different, we will get a government/energy company compromise trying to encourage the foreign owners of our infrastructure to invest in the UK and not in China or The Middle East.

Napoleon used to call us Brits "a nation of shopkeepers"----well there are now few shops to keep and we need some encouragement to be "a nation of small and community energy producers"

Mr Huhne take this opportunity to empower us by giving more to the small, dynamic, hard working entrepreneurs and take something from the global energy companies that run our country.

Do a Baby Bell like they did in the US, split up these oligopolies and encourage what could be potentially closer to competition in this controlled trading environment.

We need strong leaders to stand up to the e.ons, RWEs and edfs ...can you be counted upon?

Instead of the revolution we the people will experience more revulsion as the cow gets milked and the cream goes abroad.

That's us Brits for you....!

Saturday, 16 October 2010

Hermann Scheer solar pioneer dies yesterday

Check out the link above.

Let us take Hermann's legacy and make it reality in the UK.

The government needs to free our economy from the greed of a few largely foreign energy companies

Thursday, 14 October 2010

NDA Greed .......Money, Money, Money...Its a nuclear world!

Well today we got what we knew would happen!

The greed of the big energy companies and the governments desperate acts to appease them led to one of the biggest Quango of all to be given as much money as possible.

Not a halfpenny taken from their excessive greedy budget that leads them to have parties in 5 Star hotels in the best hotel in Manchester.

Paying money to a resolute bunch of followers from various SSGs from around England who are the equivalent to a nuclear taliban wailing " nuclear is good....." from the top of their reactor buildings

To them The Big Society is a contradiction, as a small group of people in their own special society demand more and more money from us the Great British Public!

The NDA remains as the main target of all reasonable tax payers......we will be watching you !

Can we ever afford the legacy waste of original 20th century nuclear?

Why would you ever want new nuclear waste?

Maybe Cameron knows a reason?

As Chris Huhne and the lib dems seem to appreciate any diversion to 20th century nuclear kills off 21st century renewables!

What is more profitable to the owners of our electricity infrastructure.... ask the owners!

Will the government have the guts to cut the NDA overspending today?

This article comes from Whitehaven the home of the NDA 


A ROW has erupted over a spend of £500 a head for 104 people at a nuclear conference in a lavish Manchester hotel.
Delegates from around the UK attended the two-day conference at the five-star Lowry, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s hotel of choice for its annual get-together with stakeholders from around its 19 nuclear sites.
The conference cost £52,000 – £500 for each delegate.
The NDA paid the bill for all the delegates, one of whom was Coun Tim Knowles, attending on behalf of the Nuclear Local Authorities. But he said: “I didn’t want to go. It was bad value for money.”
The row erupted after a meeting of the West Cumbria Stakeholders Group when Coun Knowles criticised the spectacle of “people being chauffeured to Manchester and staying at expensive hotels”. But afterwards he himself was taken to task by the group’s chairman, David Moore, for not saying he had enjoyed the same hospitality. “Those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones,” Coun Moore said.
Yesterday Coun Knowles said: “Everybody at the local stakeholders’ meeting knew where I was staying, there was no need for me to say. I didn’t want to go, I had to because I was a delegate and that’s where the conference was being held, at the most expensive hotel in Manchester.
“My main point is that the NDA’s approach to stakeholder relations is dysfunctional. The cost of this conference must have been huge.”
The NDA confirmed the £52,000 cost and felt it was value for money. “We got The Lowry at a most competitive rate among hotels in Manchester. This was a two-day conference with a one-night stay for the delegates. As the booking was made a year in advance it was easier to go ahead than cancel.” However, the authority said it is now looking at different forms of engaging with stakeholders, partly because of the need to cut costs.

Steve Webb MP for Yate and Thornbury confirms Oldbury is still on the list!

We have had an email from Steve Webb MP stating that after speaking to Charles Hendry, Minister of State for DECC, he can cofirm that the Shepperdine site is still deemed as suitable and is still on the revised list of eight sites.

Steve confirms that he is disappointed at the decision!

We are preparing to educate even more of our community about the unsuitability of this site for such a large development.

There are 5,000 leaflets being hand delivered to households in The Severn Vale and The Forest of Dean and it is likely that due to demand we will up the distribution to 10,000 in the next month.

We are pleased that DECC are giving us the opportunity to reconsult with our community and we are sure that our community are doing a far better job at this than DECC who popped down to Thornbury for three days in February and the E-on/RWE consortium who are the developers and therefore not interested in objective consultation.

As a community we must be prepared to work hard to show all concerned that Shepperdine is not viable to ourselves or the electricity consumers in the UK.

We are what Mr Cameron wants in The Big Society---people who care deeply for our community and fund all of our objective campaigning ourselves through time, money,and you could say metaphorically through blood, sweat and tears!

Thanks for your continued support

Wednesday, 13 October 2010

SANE on Points West this evening

Three members of SANE along with Stop Hinkley, and employees of Edf and Horizon and other groups are to feature in a Points West package on New Nukes over the next three nights.

The link to the site is

DECC accidentally release new consultation website on the revised draft NPS!

We have just heard through the NGO network that DECC accidentally published the information below on their website this morning. There were various documents listed but the links had not yet been put up. The links are now password protected so we cant see anything further.

However, from what we have been told by those that saw the information it looks like Oldbury is going to remain on the list of suitable sites in the new NPS.

Needless to say we are shocked by this news, clearly DECC are not listening to us at all! If this information is correct we will have to make even more noise.... be prepared DECC we will make sure you listen.

Our MP and all the main candidates in the general election together with all local councils have all made their views perfectly clear. The site at Shepperdine is NOT suitable for the proposed new generation of power stations. It makes no sense whatosever and we are at a loss to understand why no one is listening to us.

So much for Cameron's Big Society!

The information seen by NGO's earlier today:

National Policy Statements Re-consultation

Revised website for the consultation on the revised draft National Policy Statements for energy infrastructure. Between November 2009 and February 2010, the previous Government consulted on the six draft Energy NPSs and the Appraisals of Sustainability (AoS) that accompanied those NPSs. A Government Response to that consultation has been published alongside this document, which identifies the key themes and responds to them. Having considered the responses received to consultation and the outputs of the Parliamentary scrutiny process the Government has made changes to the draft Energy NPSs and AoSs. Given the changes that have been made we are now re-consulting on the revised draft NPSs and associated documents. Here you can find out more about the revised draft National Policy Statements and their related documents and respond to the consultation. The consultation closes on Monday 24 January 2011. Subject to the consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny, the Government intends to finalise and formally approve the energy National Policy Statements in Spring 2011. These National Policy Statements would then be used by the Infrastructure Planning Commission when it makes decisions on applications for development consent for nationally significant energy infrastructure. This website mirrors the Consultation Document.

DECC 13th Oct 2010


Braystones has been found to be not suitable for the deployment of a new nuclear power station by 2025. Therefore, Braystones is not within the revised draft Nuclear NPS. The Government Response to consultation on the draft Energy NPSs sets out the reasons why this site is considered unsuitable. This includes the original site assessment within the draft Nuclear National Policy Statement.

DECC 13th Oct 2010


Kirksanton has been found to be not suitable for the deployment of a new nuclear power station by 2025. Therefore, Kirksanton is not within the revised draft Nuclear NPS. The Government Response to consultation on the draft Energy NPSs sets out the reasons why this site is considered unsuitable. This includes the original site assessment within the draft Nuclear National Policy Statement.

DECC 13th Oct 2010


Dungeness has been found to be not suitable for the deployment of a new nuclear power station by 2025. Therefore, Dungeness is not within the revised draft Nuclear NPS.

DECC 13th Oct 2010


The site assessments within Annex C of the revised draft Nuclear NPS have been updated to reflect key points made during the consultation that are relevant to the NPS. The site assessments do not reflect every comment or response made. A Government Response to consultation on the Draft NPS has also been published, which contains a discussion of the key themes raised during the public consultation and the Government's response.

(Other sites have similar information to Bradwell)

DECC 13th Oct 2010

DECC Post NPS details by mistake?

I assume this means that Oldbury is still on the list. It is nice of DECC to let us know!

175: blog exclusive - government to drop two nuclear power stations from NPS reconsultation

This is entry number 175, first published on 13 October 2010, of a blog on the implementation of the Planning Act 2008. Click here for a link to the whole blog. If you would like to be notified when the blog is updated, with links sent by email, click here.

Today's entry reveals some of the changes planned to the energy National Policy Statements.

As previously reported, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is about to launch a second round of consultation on the six draft energy National Policy Statements (NPSs).

Unfortunately for DECC, its website developers have accidentally published the consultation website while it is still under development and it is quite revealing.

The news that will create headlines is that they are not only refusing to add Dungeness to the list of possible new nuclear power stations, but they are dropping two of the ten sites that were previously listed - Kirksanton and Braystones in Cumbria.  There are also changes to the text of the NPS on need and radioactive waste - see below.

The documents explaining this have yet to be loaded, so we are left with the summary that 'Braystones has been found to be not suitable for the deployment of a new nuclear power station by 2025. Therefore, Braystones is not within the revised draft Nuclear NPS.', and the same for Kirksanton.  RWE Npower nominated both sites when invited to do so back in April 2009.

The political background of course is that the Liberal Democrat Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Chris Huhne MP has committed to delivering new nuclear power as part of the government's coalation agreement, despite his party having a policy of opposing it.

Other revelations

The consultation will close on 24 January 2011.  There will be public meetings in Bristol on 24th November, Manchester on 29th November, and London on 1st December. Neither Bristol nor Manchester had meetings the first time round, although London's will be a year less a day after its first consultation round equivalent.

The changes to each NPS are listed in brief, although the revised text has not been uploaded yet.

For the Overarching Energy NPS EN-1, the need argument has been updated with the recent 'Pathways to 2050' analysis.  Policy on carbon capture and storage demonstration projects is included.  Assessing exhaust stacks and cooling towers has been moved to EN-1 from EN-2 and EN-3.  The section on the historic environment has been revised to reflect the updated PPS5.

The Fossil Fuels NPS, EN-2 has been updated to say that water-borne transport for fuel and residues should be preferred over other modes.  What about rail-borne?

The Renewable Energy NPS, EN-3 has updated sections on biomass sustainability (which may need to be further updated given a current consultation) and that offshore windfarms might affect the green belt.

The revised Oil and Gas Infrastructure NPS EN-4 states that it does not cover CO2 pipelines, more on safety of shipping LNG (see previous blog entry, where I speculated whether this would be covered), more on geological assessment of salt caverns, and a new impact has been added that should be assessed, namely flaring and venting of gas.

Undergrounding policy is to be 'clarified' in the revised Electricity Networks NPS, EN-5, and there will be more on bird strike.

Most changes have occurred to the Nuclear Power NPS, EN-6.  It appears that the IPC may have a role in considering radioactive waste, if included in an application.  There is more on how applications would be dealt with for sites other than the eight now included.  The need text has been clarified so as not to imply that all eight sites are needed. There is new text on 'regulatory justification'.  Some impacts have been removed from the NPS where they are for the regulator rather than the IPC to consider.

Finally, all 3043 responses to the original consultation have been uploaded, although by the name of the respondent rather than their orgnisations.

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

Photo voltaic is cheaper than nuclear and it's costs will continue to fall

Future of solar energy continues to brighten

New technologies could make today's solar cells much more efficient and much cheaper.
Photograph by: Joe Raedle, Getty Images
Sunlight is a potentially limitless source of environmentally friendly electrical energy. Trouble is, most of its applications are more costly than mainstream alternatives like coal or natural gas.

But that may be changing as the costs of solar technology decline and we begin to appreciate the full costs of mainstream sources, including environmental costs.

Already, solar is cheaper than nuclear energy, according to a study called Solar and Nuclear Costs -- the Historic Crossover. The controversial report, prepared for a U.S. non-profit, concludes that the crossover -- the point where rising costs of nuclear intersect with the declining costs of solar -- happened this year at 0.16 $/kWh.

Importantly, the comparison of final power costs to consumers is dependent on local conditions, such as the average amount of sunshine in an area and the various subsidies, rebates and tax credits available.

The study shows the cost to a consumer of power from a solar system they install in their home is equivalent to about 0.35$/kWh. However, when various government incentives are accounted for, the cost drops to just under 0.16$/kWh.

On the nuclear side, costs are in the 0.12-0.20$/kWH range, but the report concludes that the transmission and distribution costs increase the cost to 0.22$/kWh. The average cost of nuclear power to the consumer, subsidies in, would be 0.16$/kWh, just above those of solar.

What the comparison does not appear to include is the environmental costs and liabilities of the two energy systems, which clearly favour the solar approach.

Even if this report is right, solar is still much more expensive than coal and gas as a source of power. But green energy advocates are working on that. The Rocky Mountain Institute, for example, has been working with the solar industry to figure out how to reduce "balance of system" costs for solar.

Balance of system (BoS) costs are all the costs associated with solar energy except the actual photovoltaic panel that produces the electricity. These would include business processes, installation, racks, site preparation, wiring, inverters and so on. Currently, BoS costs are about $1.60 per watt of solar power capacity, but RMI is working with industry to introduce changes that would reduce these costs to nearly half that amount.

The next step would be to reduce the costs of photovoltaic panels themselves and/or to substantially improve their efficiency. The goal is to get solar power costs down to 0.10$kWh unsubsidized, which would be a real game changer.

Fact is, solar power costs are already much lower than they used to be. This has made solar the cheapest option in a number of situations, such as small-scale applications in remote areas. Thousands of Saskatchewan farmers, for example, use solar to pump water for pastured livestock.

Now Scientists at the Center for Advanced Molecular Photovoltaics at Stanford have published research that promises to increase the output of solar cells by 1,000 per cent, while reducing costs. The key is nanotechnology.

According to their report, ultra-thin solar cells can absorb sunlight more efficiently than the thicker, more expensive-to-make silicon cells used today. This is because light behaves differently at scales around a nanometer (a billionth of a metre). They calculate that by properly configuring the thicknesses of several thin layers of films, an organic polymer thin film could absorb as much as 10 times more energy from sunlight than previously thought possible.

Light trapping has been used for several decades with silicon solar cells and is done by roughening the surface of the silicon to cause incoming light to bounce around inside the cell for a while rather than reflecting right back out.

The Stanford researchers have discovered that light can be confined for a much longer time when the materials in the solar cell are extremely thin. Overcoming the conventional limit opens a new door to designing highly efficient solar cells.

Nanoscale solar cells also offer savings in material costs, as the organic polymer thin films and other materials used are less expensive than silicon and, being nanoscale, the quantities required for the cells are much smaller.

© Copyright (c) The StarPhoenix


E-on/RWE and the cooling tower saga

A local persons contribution to the cooling tower issue at the Shepperdine site:-

The Oldbury/Shepperdine site is the only site proposed not on the sea, All the others will use sea water to cool the condensate from the turbines and therefore not need cooling towers. Because the Severn is tidal at Oldbury there is no water when the tides out and a resevoir, as used for the original power station, is not feasable. (silting up, size etc) The high cooling towers, which use natural convection, are probably (and should be) being rejected on visual grounds . The remaining alternative of forced air cooling was said to require 3% of the station output to drive the fans! This will mean something like 100 megawatts of electric being thrown away. Thats about half the output of one of the existing reactors! Millions of £'s of electric wasted to pump waste heat into the sky when it could be safely put into the ocean. They would probably be wasting something like the output of 10 wind farms similar to the one proposed locally.
Also the size of the cooling fans proposed on the movement of so much air and steam must have detremental effects locally. 100megawatts of fans cannot be silent! Does it rain down wind? Is it warmer locally. Cloudy?
Of course the German owners of E-on/RWE are used to these cooling systems. Why, because the industrial areas of Germany are so far from the sea they have no choice.

Letter from Tim Proudler of Horizon Nuclear Power

As you may be aware a re consultation will be taking place by DECC which will last a further 14 weeks from the announcement of the new NPS by DECC. This will definitely be before the end of November.

Tim's letter below will only apply to the Shepperdine site if it is still included as a suitable site .

Either way we as SANE will continue to inform our community which includes distributing 5000 leaflets in October/November.

If you know anybody who wants to get involved with our campaign but has no access to a computer please give me a phone call or send me a letter.

We must be prepared!

Dear Reg,

Thanks for forwarding the extract of the OND meeting, which talks about the re-consultation of the Government’s Energy National Policy Statements. The extract confirms our understanding, which is that the revised documents will include some changes to take account of changes to the Appraisal of Sustainability and also some changes resulting from responses received by Government to the last NPS consultation. As this will be a Government consultation it will be carried out by them rather than project promoters. Therefore, and in answer to your question, Horizon has no obligation to consult further during this re-consultation.

However, we prefer to keep people up to date on our plans regardless of our formal obligations, which is why we recently held events to let people know what are thoughts are on the likely cooling tower design.

As you’ll be aware, project promoters like Horizon will be required to formally consult upon their site specific plans, before making their main planning application for a ‘Development Consent Order’ (DCO).

Hope this is helpful,



Tim Proudler
Planning & Consents Manager - Oldbury
Horizon Nuclear Power

West Country Comes Together to Campaign ---

Bristol Network Gathering
Campaigners will be gathering to plan a Bristol-based campaign against new nuclear power in the west-country. Amongst other events a 50 foot yacht will display a huge anti-nuclear banner in Bristol docks. Workshops will discuss local responses to Hinkley and Oldbury plans.
Organised by Stop Nuclear Power Network
Saturday 23rd and Sunday 24th October.

Have you seen a French man speechless....?Mon Dieu, Sacre Bleu?

EDF executives were virtually speechless with anger this weekend over
 what they described as a unilateral withdrawal by US partner
 Constellation Energy from their project to build a French-designed EPR
 reactor on its Calvert Cliffs site in Maryland. The Baltimore-based
 utility's decision threatens to set back the French groups progress in
 the US by two or three years if a solution cannot be found. EDF had
 ambitions to build at least four EPRs with Constellation in what it once
 sold to its shareholders as the worlds biggest and most attractive
 nuclear generation market. But in private, many investors and analysts
 are delighted, at least in the short term. Assuming that the EPR project
 falls victim to the increasingly acrimonious relationship between the
 two companies, EDF would find itself with more time and money to focus
 on more pressing issues. In th! e past two years EDF has seen its net
 debt shoot up from 25bn to an estimated 45bn ($63bn) after acquiring
 British Energy in the UK at peak prices and then fighting off
 billionaire Warren Buffett to secure its partnership with Constellation
 in a costly rescue deal. EDF will struggle to find a new partner for its
 costly and complex EPR reactor, the first new generation nuclear plant
 to have been launched on the market, but which has been fraught with
 delays and cost overruns.

 FT 12th Oct 2010,s01=1.html

Charles Hendry to speak at New Nuclear Build Forum

Dear Mr Illingworth,

The UK’s nuclear new build programme continues to gather pace, and with government policy playing such a major role we are pleased to welcome Charles Hendry to the Nuclear New Build Forum on 25th November to make the keynote opening address. Please click here to see the programme in full.

With ground works commencing and procurement strategies being outlined, now is the time to ensure that outstanding issues are resolved and, crucially, to prepare the supply chain. This conference will bring together the industry’s major players to discuss the strategies and challenges involved and to ensure that the programme remains on time and on budget.

If you are keen to be part of the debate, book this week in order to take advantage of the early booking discount.

Click here to register for this event
Book now and save £100!

Here are a few of the key-figures who are speaking at this year’s event:

Charles Hendry, Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change
Alan Raymant, Chief Operating Officer, Horizon Nuclear Power
Chris Bakken, Director for Operations, Safety and Licensing, EDF Energy
Kevin Allars, Director for Nuclear New Build GDA, HSE Nuclear Directorate
Alan McGoff, Policy Lead, Nuclear New Build, Environment Agency
Anders Jackson, President, Europe, Middle East and Africa, Westinghouse
Robert Davies, UK New Build Director, AREVA
Dr Brian Murphy, Research Director, Cogent SSC
Peter Atherton, Managing Director, Head - European Utility Sector Research, Citigroup Global Markets
For more information and to register your place, please contact us on:

Telephone: +44 (0) 20 7760 8699
Or you can arrange for us to call you back

Warm regards,

Rachel Stark
Head of Conference Production, Marketforce

p.s. Please do join our LinkedIn Group and get involved in the current discussions.

Marketforce, the business media company, mobilises knowledge through the creation of strategic, senior-level conferences across the key industry sectors of Rail, Air Transport, Retail, Utilities, Financial Services, Media & Entertainment, Public Sector and Postal Services. With over 20 years experience in creating forward thinking programmes and interactive environments, Marketforce gives business communities the valued insight they need to drive industry forward. Forthcoming conferences include:

- Carbon Capture and Storage Forum
- Smart Energy Networks Europe 
- Smart Metering Forum
- Infrastructure Asset Management
- European Nuclear Forum

For further information on all of our events please visit

If you would like to unsubscribe:

Marketforce Business Media Ltd is registered in England, No: 2174487. Registered office: 3 Sutton Lane, London, EC1M 5PU

Monday, 11 October 2010

Last chance to have our say about reactor designs.


Dear Sir or Madam

Assessing new nuclear reactor designs
We are working with the Health and Safety Executive to make sure that any new nuclear power station built in England and Wales will meet high standards of safety, security, environmental protection and waste management.

We’ve implemented a new approach called ‘Generic Design Assessment’ (GDA) which enables us to identify any problems and influence the designs at an early stage, before any major construction begins.

We have now completed our detailed assessments on two new reactor designs:  Westinghouse’s AP1000™ and Areva/EDF’s UK EPR™ and our conclusions, pending consultation, are that we could issue a statement of design acceptability (SODA) for each design, although there are a number of potential issues still to be resolved.

Consultation on our assessments of the new nuclear reactor designs
We are now consulting on our findings so far. The consultation began on 28 June and will last sixteen weeks, closing on 18 October.

At the close of the consultation we will carefully consider the comments received before we reach a final decision on the acceptability of each of the two designs. We will publish the key issues raised during our consultation before the end of the year and come to a view about the acceptability of the designs in June next year.

You can comment on our findings
·  Online: Visit the Environment Agency consultation on-line at:
·  Call 08708 506 506* and ask for a consultation document
·  Email and request the consultation papers.
            * Approximate call costs: 8p plus 6p per minute (standard landline). Please note charges will vary across telephone providers.

Further information

Please Note:  We held a seminar in July attended by about one hundred people from a variety of organisations.    A report of the event is now available at the following link

NDA Taliban Scare off Cameron to protect their Tribal Lands!

The nuclear taliban known as the NDA have been able to scare off Cameron and his troops by threatening the government with the potential consequences of cuts in the decommissioning of legacy nuclear waste.
And we still want New Nukes?
The Guardian has also learned that the nuclear industry has successfully lobbied the government to safeguard the huge budget to decommission the UK's old reactors, handled by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. This year, about 60% of the NDA's budget – £1.7bn – came from taxpayers via the DECC, making up about 40% of the ministry's entire spending.
In opposition, the Conservatives had wanted to cut about 25% of DECC's funding to the NDA. But after the election, industry executives outlined to ministers the urgency of the clean-up of Britain's nuclear sites, particularly Sellafield in Cumbria. One source said: "We succeeded in scaring David Cameron off." The NDA, which is cutting its own operating budget, could even secure a slightly higher funding settlement than this year.
MPs will debate the ports programme in the House of Commons on Tuesday, with the trade body RenewableUK warning that 60,000 jobs are at stake. No final decision has been made either on the £60m ports plan or the NDA's budget, with the funding settlement for DECC only expected to be formally agreed just before the Treasury's publication of the spending review on 20 October. It is thought that the most that would be available would be funds to upgrade one port.
But the scrapping of the ports competition will sit uneasily with Cameron's declaration that this "would be the greenest government ever". It will also raise questions about the government's commitment to help the economy grow out of recession, in particular by boosting hi-tech exporters. It has already axed an £80m government loan to the engineering firm Sheffield Forgemasters.

Vicki's Tenner is Inflating all the time!

Hi everyone,

Just a quick message to let you know about a couple of nice bits of media coverage for Tenner Films this week. Firstly, the US-based blog HerFilm - which, as it sounds, is a blog focusing on women filmmakers - conducted an extensive interview with me about nuclear power, the creative process of documentary-making and the opportunities/challenges for films in our new social-media world. It's quite long, but gives a lot of background info about me and my nuclear film for anyone who's interested in finding out more about the whole Tenner Films adventure. You can read it in two parts via the following links:

And from across the pond to my own backyard... there's a very nice little article this month in my local magazine, SE24, which covers a lot of the same material as the HerFilm interview, but far more briefly! You can read it by clicking here and scrolling to p23.

Do have a read of one or both pieces if you have time and let me know what you think - you guys are at the heart of 
the Tenner Films project and it's fantastic to get your feedback and comments.

till the next time,

all best wishes,


Tenner Films
73c Herne Hill, London, SE24 9NE
020 7738 3132
07939 061006

Champagne contaminated with radioactive waste?

France Nuclear Waste Contamination

Bookmark and Share
Last updated 08 October 2010, created 08 October 2010, viewed 27
Radioactive waste leaks threatens vineyards and farming communities in the Champagne and Normandy regions, while the nuclear industry ignores French laws prohibiting dumping of foregn nuclear waste in France.

Downloads and web links

  • Webpage
Site Meter