Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Pick a date:

Some time ago: EDF said the decision would be by its AGM on 12 May.
One week ago: EDF said the decision would be in "the coming week or month"
Last week: EDF said "in the summer"
Just now: Emmanuel Macron, French Economy Minster, said "September"

French trade unions in the mêlée, too; glad they have a say in UK's energy provision.

Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant decision delayed again by EDF | Business | The Guardian

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

I still stand by my earlier post (62)... "It will probably get canned"

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

"As scientists, physicians, academics, and experts from disciplines relevant to the scientific, legal, social and safety assessment aspects of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), we strongly reject claims by GM seed developers and some scientists, commentators, and journalists that there is a 'scientific consensus' on GMO safety and that the debate on this topic is 'over.'

... Dr Belinda Martineau, former member of the Michelmore Lab at the UC Davis Genome Center, University of California, who helped commercialize the world’s first GM whole food, the Flavr Savr tomato, in 1994:

“I wholeheartedly support this thorough, thoughtful and professional statement describing the lack of scientific consensus on the safety of genetically engineered (GM/GE) crops and other GM/GE organisms (also referred to as GMOs)," she wrote. "Society's debate over how best to utilize the powerful technology of genetic engineering is clearly not over. For its supporters to assume it is, is little more than wishful thinking.”

I think she's in a better position than you or me to gauge the veracity of all those thousands of peer-reviewed studies.

Genetically Modified Foods: European Scientists Ask for GMO Research

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

I agree. I'm just wondering how it will come about: technology, EDF/French failure to come up with the funding, or public opinion. Ok, scrub that last one, and replace it with activitsts' sabotage.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

It will be an all side face saving exercise.

EDF won't get the money
Government won't have the appetite to backstop the rising guarantees
Low oil prices make the case weaker in the short term

A deal will be struck that gives them all an out. It will happen after the June vote - some story will be spun around the result (regardless of which way it goes).

Brexit:
UK will say we have reviewed costs and decided against it, want to build it with a UK developer and not be tied to EU procurement rules
EDF will say that they have prioritized their strategy and portfolio and do not wish to take on such a large UK exposure right now.

No Brexit:
UK will say we have decided to not proceed with the project as it would breech some EU conditions around subsidies.
EDF will say that they have enough EU exposure right now, and wish to develop plants elsewhere.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

EDF's former CFO tells the French parliament:

Who would bet 60 to 70 percent of his equity on a technology that has not yet proven that it can work and which takes 10 years to build?

Four Areva-designed EPR reactors of the same kind EDF wants to build in Britian are under construction in France, Finland and China and are years behind schedule and way over budget.

Piquemal declined to comment on technical issues, but said the EPR involves a "major construction risk".

UPDATE 2-Former CFO wanted EDF to delay Hinkley Point project | Reuters

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Changing the argument a bit -- as you are right Norm, you need a mix and you can't just use solar.

Solar just broke a record bid-price of 3 cents/kWh (in Dubai). Bids in Mexico are around 4 cents.

The very best gas plant is around 1.2cents/kWh (before the price of gas) - gas might make this around 6-7 cents/kWh all in.

Solar panels are incredibly cheap these days (at least in sunny places).
of course, the solar what will work is CSP - that's still expensive, like 10x the cost of gas.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Didn't expect the French unions to give me a leg-up back onto my hobby horse:

Key French workers’ unions continue to oppose the £18bn project despite repeated attempts by EDF, which would build the reactors, to win their backing. The French state-owned company has delayed the decision on whether to go ahead until the summer while it consults the unions. Union representatives hold six of the 18 seats on its board.

Jean-Luc Magnaval, secretary of the central works committee, told BBC Newsnight that staff feared the high cost of Hinkley Point could cripple EDF, which is heavily indebted and recently had its credit rating cut by Moody’s. Other nuclear plants being built by EDF in France and Finland are years behind schedule and billions over budget.

Magnaval said: “We have reservations about several aspects of the project: organisation, supply chain, installation and procurement. The trade unions are unlikely to give their blessing to the project in its current state.

“We are not reassured by the documents we have received. We have been given a marketing folder, not the full information we require. We got the documents on 9 May – we are sending EDF a request for more explanations.”

Another nail in the coffin.

Hinkley Point C: French union opposition casts fresh doubt on project | UK news | The Guardian

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Portugal runs for four days straight on renewable energy alone | Environment | The Guardian

It's also amazing how quickly Portugal has built the capacity, going from about 25% to 50% of requirement in a couple of years.

I agree that Greenpeace are luddites, especially in terms of their position on GM and some kinds of renewables. But the costs of nuclear look astronomical, and the timescales seem very long. If you look at the progress in much of Europe, it's not inconceivable within 10 years to be largely relying in a mix of various renewables for the bulk of energy, and just having relatively cheap and clean gas stations as fall back rather than nuclear.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Interesting to note from that article that wind already provides 11% of UK energy (I'm guessing that that's correct, and an annualised figure). Hinckley would supply 7%. THe earliest its likely to go into commercial operation is 2024, but I don't believe anyone's fully confident of that date and its more likely to be, say, 2026 -- 10 years from now. Can we seriously not make up that 7% in the next 10 years in a green way? (Although I appreciate that plans are already in place to increase green energy production anyway, and that that 7% would have to be on top of what's already planned.)

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

The larger issue is the large plants coming offline due to age. Plus growth in consumption - those iPhone don't charge themselves.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

They do with solar chargers. Admittedly only for 4 days a year if you live in Wales.

Consumption's been largely flat for the past 10 years.

Algae's the future.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

Not that all GMOs are bad nonsense? Whilst I accept that certain big businesses could be a little more ethical most of what we eat has been genetically modified over the years. Wheat has been cultivated for over 4,000 years and what we now grow bears little resemblance to it original wild form. Same for all farm animals, most vegetables.

Time and again, scientist have shown that GMO is safe. A blanket dismissal of everything that has been genetically modified would mean having to forage for plants and only eat fish most likely.


Nuclear anything makes me uncomfortable and hydro-electric appears to cause the wrecking of villages but until people realise that they perhaps need to use less energy (never going to happen these days) or embrace green energy forms what will change?

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

A Fukushima closer to home.

Re: Nuclear Madness
 

A very scary thought indeed.