uk nuclear reactors get go ahead

My biggest concern is them putting another one on the existing Sellafield site. Sellafield has a bad history of accidents and negligence.

That coupled with the fact that they seem adamant that they will be building the countries underground nuclear waste repository here (Cumbria)....the size of Carlisle....amongst countless abandoned mineshafts that keep collapsing....right under the nations largest supply of freshwater...AND they want to frack all over the place, where there is old fault lines, and we do get the odd m4+ earthquake.

Sometimes I feel there is no hope.

originally posted by: woogleuk
My biggest concern is them putting another one on the existing Sellafield site. Sellafield has a bad history of accidents and negligence.

That coupled with the fact that they seem adamant that they will be building the countries underground nuclear waste repository here (Cumbria)....the size of Carlisle....amongst countless abandoned mineshafts that keep collapsing....right under the nations largest supply of freshwater...AND they want to frack all over the place, where there is old fault lines, and we do get the odd m4+ earthquake.

Sometimes I feel there is no hope.

The first generation nuclear power plants sucked up water and channeled it through the reactor core, then dumped the "slightly radioactive" water and hot particles back into the sea. Known as an open system.

New generation nuclear reactors have a closed system, where the water used to cool the reactor core is on a separate circuit from the water used to do the turbine power generation - a heat exchanger allows the heat to be transferred.

a reply to: stuthealien

Exactly and look how the Sea destroyed one part of said well built Railway in that area. Somerset Flooded, an old habit, Sea with 40 to 60 ft waves . They won't need a Tsunami. Brains Trust now gone skint in the UK

a reply to: stuthealien

You seem to have misunderstood what the Euro Commissions involvement was - they were simply approving the UK Governments proposal to build the plants, but they actually modified the plans somewhat to actually be a better deal for taxpayers than the original plans.

Which brings me on to my second point - someone touched on the minimum pricing - it is slightly more complicated than a "guaranteed" minimum price so they can reap loads of money.

The government had already agreed that French firm EDF will be paid a so-called "strike price" of £92.50 for every megawatt hour of energy Hinkley C generates. This is almost twice the current wholesale cost of electricity, but this was a deliberate attempt by the government to compensate for the high cost of building the plant.

However, the Commission said that if EDF's overall profits exceeded the rate estimated at the time it was awarded the contract, any gains would be shared with the public.

It said it had also defined a second, higher threshold above which the public would be given more than half of the gains, through lowering the cost of the "strike price".

"An increase in the profit rate of only one percentage point, for example, will generate savings of more than £1.2bn," it said.

It said this agreement would now last for the entire lifetime of the project - an estimated 60 years.

Link - BBC

So, in essence, if EDF make more money than they have predicted as a result of the "minimum pricing", they will effectively have to hand that money back to the taxpayer, so if electricity prices are low and they rake in a serious pile of cash, it will be taken off them.

It's all well and good having a pop at the Euro Commission, but they actually made sure we got a better deal than what was original agreed. Without them looking at the plans and amending them, we would be paying a massive price for the electricity and EDF would have been laughing all the way to the bank.

a reply to: steaming

Oh please - that railway was 100 years old (if not more) and built with Victorian technology and Somerset didn't flod - just the flood plain flooded. It just so happened that people built homes there, despite it being a known flood plain going back thousands of years.

There has been a Nuclear plant at Hinkley point for 55 years and they haven't had any issue with flooding, waves or any of the weather we've had since, because they are not built in a flood zone and not prone to high tides or waves.

Thorium reactors and Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors are the safest there is.

Accelerator-driven subcritical reactors can use and destroy fuel from a conventional nuclear reactor.
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors automaticly shut down without the need for cooling water as soon as the Accelerator is turned off.

Destroying the spent fuel from conventional nuclear reactors would be a big plus in the long run as it would not have to be stored for 1000s of years.

We have enough spent fuel rods to run Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors for 100 years.

originally posted by: ANNED
Thorium reactors and Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors are the safest there is.

Accelerator-driven subcritical reactors can use and destroy fuel from a conventional nuclear reactor.
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors automaticly shut down without the need for cooling water as soon as the Accelerator is turned off.

Destroying the spent fuel from conventional nuclear reactors would be a big plus in the long run as it would not have to be stored for 1000s of years.

We have enough spent fuel rods to run Accelerator-driven sub critical reactors for 100 years.

Well then how about being a real darling and running over too Japan and pick up those Fuel Rods first,,,

i hear u can get a good deal if u pick them up yourself.

Thanks,,

just good salvage business.

a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

The sun?. In the uk? Lol nope.

a reply to: stuthealien

Well what else do you want them to do?

Turn the lights off?


UK had a severe energy crisis!

We need power!

And solar and wind are not cutting it right now!

originally posted by: ShadeWolf
What moron puts a reactor in an active earthquake zone next to the sea?

The Japanese

a reply to: crazyewok did you not see the link for the archimedes screw ,this tech along with solar and standard wind turbines ,is ample power ,,can i please state that i also have extensive engineering experience of over 20 years ,you all go on about sun power,but the truth is the moons pull on the sea gives us 24 hour power,and that is why the archimedes system provides constant power,,much more efficient and cost affective then the wind turbines,,nuclear is not the answer especially for a small island like the uk