Share
Jon Excell
Editor
The Engineer
Weightman review should calm UK energy jitters
In recent weeks we’ve seen signs that the post-Fukushima jitters were beginning to impact the UK’s apparently impregnable nuclear new-build plans.
First came the news that Scottish and Southern Energy had pulled out of plans to develop a 3.6GW power plant in Cumbria. Then, last week, The Guardian reported that German utility giant RWE is reviewing plans to build two new power stations in Wales and Gloucestershire.
Clearly, it’s too early to judge whether these developments will derail the plans in question, but they have fuelled concerns that the UK nuclear industry is becoming less attractive to investors.
Against this backdrop, yesterday’s final post-Fukushima report - which finds no reason to curtail UK nuclear new build plans - couldn’t have come at a better time for the industry.
The review, put together by chief nuclear inspector Dr Mike Weightman, makes a number of recommendations but concludes that there are no fundamental safety weaknesses in the UK’s nuclear power station design.
However, while the Weightman review is a welcome shot in the arm for the UK nuclear industry, it remains a parlous time for our energy sector in general.
In his speech to the conservative party conference last week - in which he announced that the UK will cut emissions “no slower but no faster” than the rest of Europe - George Osborne effectively called time on David Cameron’s pledge to lead “the greenest government ever”.
And though it remains to be seen whether Osborne will actually be able to step back from the UK’s commitment to cut emission by 35 per cent by 2022, his stance is somewhat worrying.
For many, both within and outside the energy sector, low carbon energy - whether renewables, clean coal or indeed new nuclear - isn’t just going to keep the lights on, but it could, with an ambitious government behind it, put the UK at the heart of the global energy industry.
Osborne’s comments suggest that this ambition may be lacking, that the government is inclined to subscribe to the dangerous view that low carbon targets are a luxury that we can ill-afford, and that the goals of reducing emissions and providing affordable energy are somehow mutually exclusive.
We disagree. From new nuclear, to offshore renewables, and carbon capture and storage the UK has the expertise to lead the world. Failure to innovate, will not just impact our future energy security but will also cost us a major opportunity for economic growth.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (11)
Peter Field | 12 Oct 2011 4:22 pm
Low carbon energy and clean coal (presumably CCS) are not going to keep the lights on. With the critical period being 2015 onwards, lights will be kept on by standard fossil fuel power stations and ageing nuclear. Either further new combined cycle gas plants will be built, or existing coal plant kept going till over 50 years old, will keep the lights on.
Renewables and CCS will, at enormous cost, reduce our overall use of carbon. Only much later will new nuclear and CCS appear.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Phil Mortimer | 12 Oct 2011 4:58 pm
The really worrying thing about all of this is the continued dithering by government. Most ministers are not engineers and do not understand the complexities of the power business. Wind, wave and other exotic green options will not keep the lights on and are looking increasingly like a blind alley. The real cost of power in 2015+ is likely to be reflected in outages, brown outs and other interruptions if plans to take out 1960s built power plants to ensure emissions compliance are pushed through. This will be tough for those in hospitals, nursing homes and other vulnerable scenarios. It is about time someone in government got a grip on all of this and if required get some state owned plant into commission. The private sector will only move when it has a risk free copper bottomed set of opportunities. We now have a private monopoly that is fleecing the consumers and crying wolf about investment.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 12 Oct 2011 5:13 pm
We have a lead in certain sectors at present compared with other countries in Europe excepting Germany who started with clean energy well before the rest of Europe. It is acknowledged by France for instance that the UK is well ahead in windfarms and their siting offshore etc. Instead of letting each country reinvent the wheel we could be exporting this expertise - if only it was acknowledged!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Bryan Leyland | 12 Oct 2011 7:04 pm
The world has not warmed for 10-15 years and because of the ongoing la nina, it will not warm for another year. But we also have the declining number of sunspots which, historically have indicated cooling.
So manmade global warming is a hypothesis without any real world support.
New renewable energy is a hugely expensive and ineffective way of reducing CO2. The whole industry only exists because of huge direct and indirect subsidies. They have cost more that a trillion dollars so far.
It is high time we looked at the evidence and abandoned this foolishness.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tim Wright | 12 Oct 2011 10:05 pm
The reality is that there remains an over-capacity in the generation market beyond 2015. Continued dithering by government only creates uncertainty in a market that will see our generators look to build outside of the UK where returns are clearer.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Oct 2011 8:11 am
I cannot see the place or benefit of CCS unless it is associated with some form of conversion to a 'permanent" solid form or used in a bioreaction to convert to something useful. Using energy to pump CO2 anywhere is a good after bad.
Nuclear should be in the mix but we don't have indigenous supplies and it would be foolhardy to extensively rely on the good will of external parties.
We are on the edge of the ocean. Wave and tidal energy are very under exploited and represent opportunities over 2/3 of the Earth's surface.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Oct 2011 10:27 am
Price of electricity in UK 13 - 16 p/unit
Price of electricity in China 2.5 - 4 p/unit
And we want to double or if not treble our price with wind and renewables and not talk about shale gas.
When the last engineering company leaves the UK, they won't put out the lights - they would already have gone.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tim Wright | 14 Oct 2011 1:09 pm
The statement about the world not warming is not entirely accurate. The most recent highest recorded average global temperature was 1998 and there has been cooling since, but the level of cooling is only within the 'noise' limits and trends can only be observed over longer timescales. The ten years prior to 2009 where the hottest on record at that time, and the warmest years from available data were 1934, 1998 and 2005.
It is a physical fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and its level has been rising (180 ppm in last ice age, 280 ppm prior to industrial revoluion, 390 ppm now), and is accelerating. We know that the burning of fossil fuels is significant in this rise as the level of carbon 12 is increasing.
There is therefore plenty of support for the effect man is having on climate change.
If renewable energy is ineffective in terms of CO2 reduction then what is effective?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 17 Oct 2011 9:15 am
Quite right!
Could those who say there is no effect please step outside & have alook at the glaciers that are disappearing rapidly wherever they are placed wordwide - this is a visual display that your La Nina argument is infantile - those glaciers aren't coming back!
Think like engineers- the logic is not that we should carry on burning all the resources at the same rate, but rather look at the new technologies to have an alternative & then attempt to reduce demand. There is little alternative, unless you only care about your generation. Yes the demand will exceed the supply unless extreme actions are taken now, but arguing to preserve the status quo is like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andy Smith | 17 Oct 2011 3:22 pm
How can anyone who claims to be an engineer say that there is no global warming. The evidence from every direction indicates that global warming is due to manmade CO2 emissions. We need to reduce those emmissions rates before it is too late and the UK should be leading the world with the engineering technology to acheive this.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment