#hinkleypoint — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #hinkleypoint, aggregated by home.social.
-
#IWR:
"
Britisches Atomkraftwerk Hinkley Point C verzögert sich weiter und wird teurer – Atomstrom kostet mindestens 15 Cent pro Kilowattstunde
"
"Zwischenzeitlich wurde der Termin zunächst auf 2027, später auf 2029 und nun auf 2030 verschoben."23.2.2026
#AKW #Atomkraft #Atomkraftwerk #EDF #England #EPR #GreatBritain #HinkleyPoint #HinkleyPointC #HPC #Kernenergie #NPP #UK
-
#NRZ:
"
Das Atomkraft-Revival bleibt eine Fantasie
"
"Essen. Während Kretschmer und Söder ein Comeback der Atomkraft herbeisehnen, bekommt NRW Kopfschmerzen wegen anstehender Castor-Transporte. Hallo Ideologie!"".. Günstig war Atomstrom noch nie."
https://www.nrz.de/niederrhein/article410471853/das-atomkraft-revival-bleibt-eine-fantasie.html
15.11.2025
#AKW #Atomausstieg #Atomkraft #Atomstrom #China #HinkleyPoint #Kernenergie #NRW #SMR #Solarenergie #Stromversorgung
-
#NRZ:
"
Das Atomkraft-Revival bleibt eine Fantasie
"
"Essen. Während Kretschmer und Söder ein Comeback der Atomkraft herbeisehnen, bekommt NRW Kopfschmerzen wegen anstehender Castor-Transporte. Hallo Ideologie!"".. Günstig war Atomstrom noch nie."
https://www.nrz.de/niederrhein/article410471853/das-atomkraft-revival-bleibt-eine-fantasie.html
15.11.2025
#AKW #Atomausstieg #Atomkraft #Atomstrom #China #HinkleyPoint #Kernenergie #NRW #SMR #Solarenergie #Stromversorgung
-
#NRZ:
"
Das Atomkraft-Revival bleibt eine Fantasie
"
"Essen. Während Kretschmer und Söder ein Comeback der Atomkraft herbeisehnen, bekommt NRW Kopfschmerzen wegen anstehender Castor-Transporte. Hallo Ideologie!"".. Günstig war Atomstrom noch nie."
https://www.nrz.de/niederrhein/article410471853/das-atomkraft-revival-bleibt-eine-fantasie.html
15.11.2025
#AKW #Atomausstieg #Atomkraft #Atomstrom #China #HinkleyPoint #Kernenergie #NRW #SMR #Solarenergie #Stromversorgung
-
#NRZ:
"
Das Atomkraft-Revival bleibt eine Fantasie
"
"Essen. Während Kretschmer und Söder ein Comeback der Atomkraft herbeisehnen, bekommt NRW Kopfschmerzen wegen anstehender Castor-Transporte. Hallo Ideologie!"".. Günstig war Atomstrom noch nie."
https://www.nrz.de/niederrhein/article410471853/das-atomkraft-revival-bleibt-eine-fantasie.html
15.11.2025
#AKW #Atomausstieg #Atomkraft #Atomstrom #China #HinkleyPoint #Kernenergie #NRW #SMR #Solarenergie #Stromversorgung
-
#NRZ:
"
Das Atomkraft-Revival bleibt eine Fantasie
"
"Essen. Während Kretschmer und Söder ein Comeback der Atomkraft herbeisehnen, bekommt NRW Kopfschmerzen wegen anstehender Castor-Transporte. Hallo Ideologie!"".. Günstig war Atomstrom noch nie."
https://www.nrz.de/niederrhein/article410471853/das-atomkraft-revival-bleibt-eine-fantasie.html
15.11.2025
#AKW #Atomausstieg #Atomkraft #Atomstrom #China #HinkleyPoint #Kernenergie #NRW #SMR #Solarenergie #Stromversorgung
-
How 'peaceful' nuclear energy gave us weapons (and still does)
It's Complicated#ItsComplicated - Civil #NuclearPower is thought to be about providing a low carbon energy alternative to fossil fuels, not #NuclearWar. But the closer you look these two industries are intrinsically linked for nuclear-armed countries.
Jul 24, 2025
"Josh Toussaint-Strauss investigates how the connection between civil nuclear power and nuclear weapons spans decades and continents as well as exposes siphoning of public money and the origins of the Iran nuclear program.
"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share a common history, similar technologies, skills and research and development. For example, the process of enriching #uranium to make it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make #NuclearWeapons. The UK’s first nuclear power stations were built primarily to provide fissile material for nuclear weapons during the #ColdWar.
"The development of both the nuclear weapons and nuclear power industries is mutually beneficial. The UK government uses the #HinkleyPoint C nuclear power station to subsidise #Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures through the civilian industry.
"After all, the civil nuclear power industry grew out of the #AtomicBomb programme in the 1940s and the 1950s. It was under the misleading slogan of ‘#AtomsForPeace’, that the US exported highly enriched uranium to countries around the world. Many of those countries went on to produce military nuclear weapons."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymVyBEjZ9z4
#UraniumMining #UraniumEnrichment #NuclearWar #NoNukes #NoWar #NoNuclearWar #NuclearWasteIsToxic #NuclearWasteIsForever
-
How 'peaceful' nuclear energy gave us weapons (and still does)
It's Complicated#ItsComplicated - Civil #NuclearPower is thought to be about providing a low carbon energy alternative to fossil fuels, not #NuclearWar. But the closer you look these two industries are intrinsically linked for nuclear-armed countries.
Jul 24, 2025
"Josh Toussaint-Strauss investigates how the connection between civil nuclear power and nuclear weapons spans decades and continents as well as exposes siphoning of public money and the origins of the Iran nuclear program.
"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share a common history, similar technologies, skills and research and development. For example, the process of enriching #uranium to make it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make #NuclearWeapons. The UK’s first nuclear power stations were built primarily to provide fissile material for nuclear weapons during the #ColdWar.
"The development of both the nuclear weapons and nuclear power industries is mutually beneficial. The UK government uses the #HinkleyPoint C nuclear power station to subsidise #Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures through the civilian industry.
"After all, the civil nuclear power industry grew out of the #AtomicBomb programme in the 1940s and the 1950s. It was under the misleading slogan of ‘#AtomsForPeace’, that the US exported highly enriched uranium to countries around the world. Many of those countries went on to produce military nuclear weapons."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymVyBEjZ9z4
#UraniumMining #UraniumEnrichment #NuclearWar #NoNukes #NoWar #NoNuclearWar #NuclearWasteIsToxic #NuclearWasteIsForever
-
How 'peaceful' nuclear energy gave us weapons (and still does)
It's Complicated#ItsComplicated - Civil #NuclearPower is thought to be about providing a low carbon energy alternative to fossil fuels, not #NuclearWar. But the closer you look these two industries are intrinsically linked for nuclear-armed countries.
Jul 24, 2025
"Josh Toussaint-Strauss investigates how the connection between civil nuclear power and nuclear weapons spans decades and continents as well as exposes siphoning of public money and the origins of the Iran nuclear program.
"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share a common history, similar technologies, skills and research and development. For example, the process of enriching #uranium to make it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make #NuclearWeapons. The UK’s first nuclear power stations were built primarily to provide fissile material for nuclear weapons during the #ColdWar.
"The development of both the nuclear weapons and nuclear power industries is mutually beneficial. The UK government uses the #HinkleyPoint C nuclear power station to subsidise #Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures through the civilian industry.
"After all, the civil nuclear power industry grew out of the #AtomicBomb programme in the 1940s and the 1950s. It was under the misleading slogan of ‘#AtomsForPeace’, that the US exported highly enriched uranium to countries around the world. Many of those countries went on to produce military nuclear weapons."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymVyBEjZ9z4
#UraniumMining #UraniumEnrichment #NuclearWar #NoNukes #NoWar #NoNuclearWar #NuclearWasteIsToxic #NuclearWasteIsForever
-
How 'peaceful' nuclear energy gave us weapons (and still does)
It's Complicated#ItsComplicated - Civil #NuclearPower is thought to be about providing a low carbon energy alternative to fossil fuels, not #NuclearWar. But the closer you look these two industries are intrinsically linked for nuclear-armed countries.
Jul 24, 2025
"Josh Toussaint-Strauss investigates how the connection between civil nuclear power and nuclear weapons spans decades and continents as well as exposes siphoning of public money and the origins of the Iran nuclear program.
"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share a common history, similar technologies, skills and research and development. For example, the process of enriching #uranium to make it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make #NuclearWeapons. The UK’s first nuclear power stations were built primarily to provide fissile material for nuclear weapons during the #ColdWar.
"The development of both the nuclear weapons and nuclear power industries is mutually beneficial. The UK government uses the #HinkleyPoint C nuclear power station to subsidise #Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures through the civilian industry.
"After all, the civil nuclear power industry grew out of the #AtomicBomb programme in the 1940s and the 1950s. It was under the misleading slogan of ‘#AtomsForPeace’, that the US exported highly enriched uranium to countries around the world. Many of those countries went on to produce military nuclear weapons."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymVyBEjZ9z4
#UraniumMining #UraniumEnrichment #NuclearWar #NoNukes #NoWar #NoNuclearWar #NuclearWasteIsToxic #NuclearWasteIsForever
-
How 'peaceful' nuclear energy gave us weapons (and still does)
It's Complicated#ItsComplicated - Civil #NuclearPower is thought to be about providing a low carbon energy alternative to fossil fuels, not #NuclearWar. But the closer you look these two industries are intrinsically linked for nuclear-armed countries.
Jul 24, 2025
"Josh Toussaint-Strauss investigates how the connection between civil nuclear power and nuclear weapons spans decades and continents as well as exposes siphoning of public money and the origins of the Iran nuclear program.
"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power share a common history, similar technologies, skills and research and development. For example, the process of enriching #uranium to make it into fuel for nuclear power stations is also used to make #NuclearWeapons. The UK’s first nuclear power stations were built primarily to provide fissile material for nuclear weapons during the #ColdWar.
"The development of both the nuclear weapons and nuclear power industries is mutually beneficial. The UK government uses the #HinkleyPoint C nuclear power station to subsidise #Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and other nuclear-armed states are also striving to maintain expensive military infrastructures through the civilian industry.
"After all, the civil nuclear power industry grew out of the #AtomicBomb programme in the 1940s and the 1950s. It was under the misleading slogan of ‘#AtomsForPeace’, that the US exported highly enriched uranium to countries around the world. Many of those countries went on to produce military nuclear weapons."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymVyBEjZ9z4
#UraniumMining #UraniumEnrichment #NuclearWar #NoNukes #NoWar #NoNuclearWar #NuclearWasteIsToxic #NuclearWasteIsForever
-
#HinkleyPointC delayed to 2029 at the earliest as budget increases substantially
by Jack Loughran
January 24, 2024"#Environmental campaigners are currently making efforts to block its construction over claims that the government did not assess the environmental impact of its proposals for a #water supply."
#NoNukes #UK #CashStrapped #WaterIsLife #EDF #HinkleyPoint #ExtremeWeather #ClimateCrisis #NuclearPlants #UK #CoastalFlooding #RenewablesNow
-
#OTS:
"Litschauer/Grüne: China stoppt Zahlungen an britisches Atomkraftwerk Hinkley Point C
Vorgehen zeigt erneut die Unsicherheit von Atomprojekten auf""Auch der Plan von CGN, ein weiteres Atomkraftwerk im Südosten Englands zu bauen, ist in der Schwebe."
15.12.2023
#AKW #Atomkraft #CGN #China #EDF #England #EPR #GreatBritain #Großbritannien #HinkleyPoint #HinkleyPointC #Kernenergie #NPP #UK
-
Sizewell C nuclear plant could kill 500m fish, campaigners say
#Environmental groups claim planned Suffolk power station will devastate marine life and key bird habitat
by Karen McVeigh
Wed 28 Apr 2021 08.15 EDTArticle image: Sizewell B nuclear power station looms over the RSPB Minsmere wetlands. The proposed plant would be built on nature reserve’s southern boundary.
"More than 500 million fish, including #protectedspecies, could be sucked into the cooling system of a proposed £20bn #NuclearPowerPlant in Suffolk if construction goes ahead, environmental campaigners say.
"A local campaign group, Together Against Sizewell C (#Tasc), claims the subsequent deaths of millions of fish is 'inhumane and unacceptable' and flies in the face of the government’s #GreenAgenda. Also opposing the development, the #birdconservation group RSPB expressed concern over predicted levels of fish loss on the #marinebirds that feed on them.
"The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), a government agency, has assessed the marine impacts of the plant and said it was confident the mortality rates caused by Sizewell C would be 'sustainable' and the impact on the wider marine community 'insignificant'.
"#EDF, the French state-owned company behind the plan to build Sizewell C, claims the proposed plant could generate 3.2GW of electricity, enough to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, or power 6m homes. The Nuclear Industry Association describes it as “a vital next step” in the UK’s efforts to secure new low-carbon electricity as older nuclear reactors are shut down.
"However, environmental campaign groups, including #Greenpeace, argue that nuclear reactors are unnecessary and expensive, compared with a combination of #RenewableEnergy and #BatteryStorage technology. The RSPB and the local community group #StopSizewellC said the reactor poses a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the adjacent Minsmere nature reserve. Campaigners say a new nuclear power station will have a severe impact on marine life.
"Planning documents published by EDF have revealed that almost 8 million fish were “impinged” – or sucked into the cooling system – by the existing plant Sizewell B each year between 2009 and 2013. Extrapolating from these figures, Tasc has estimated that 28 million fish could be impinged in the cooling system of both plants each year, which is 560 million over the two decades the plants are expected to operate, between 2035 and 2055. The proposed plant is larger than Sizewell B and will take in 2.5 times the amount of seawater, Tasc said.
"Pete Wilkinson, the chair of Tasc and a co-founder of Greenpeace UK, said the estimates were “staggering”. Such wildlife loss was the “tip of the iceberg”, he said, as it did not take into account fish fry, eggs, crustacea and other aquatic life.
“Tens of millions of fish, crustaceans and other marine biota will be sacrificed for the purposes of cooling a plant which is not needed to keep the lights on, which will do nothing to reduce global carbon emissions, which will be paid for from the pockets of all UK taxpayers and bill-paying customers, leaving future generations with a lasting legacy of an impoverished environment,” he said.
Wilkinson said he expected Cefas to condemn the impact on fish at the inquiry stage of the Sizewell C planning process.
“Cefas’s stated aim is ‘to help keep our seas, oceans and rivers healthy and productive, and our seafood safe and sustainable … ’ Instead, it seems that Cefas appears quite at ease presiding over the deaths of millions of fish and clearly feels the huge number of fish deaths is acceptable in that the overall health of fish stocks will not be compromised.”
“Adam Rowlands, the RSPB’s Suffolk area manager, said: 'It is our position that the project should not go ahead. The potential impacts on the environment are too great. Fish impingement is one of our concerns. These fish provide a valuable food supply to rare birds nesting and breeding in the area.'
“Protected species breeding in the area include little and common terns and in the winter there are a number of internationally important red-throated divers. 'They won’t feed on dead fish,' Rowlands said.
“Asked what impact such a loss of fish might have, Rowlands said: 'We haven’t seen evidence to convince us that removing that amount of fish from the population wouldn’t have an impact.'
“If the plant goes ahead, it will be built on part of Sizewell marshes, a site of special scientific interest. It will also be adjacent to the southern boundary of the RSPB-owned Minsmere nature reserve, a Ramsar (internationally important wetland) site and special protection area. Minsmere is one of only five sites in Britain to receive the Council of Europe European Diploma for protected areas award, whose renewal depends on Sizewell C not causing any damage.
“A spokesperson for Cefas said: 'There is no scientific evidence that the proposed new nuclear developments will cause large-scale destruction of marine life or impact protected species.'
“Its role in relation to the Sizewell C project was to ensure 'the marine evidence base is scientifically robust, to fully assess the potential marine impacts and, where feasible, to work with EDF engineers to reduce potential impacts by design optimisation', the spokesperson said, adding that issuing any objection to the proposal was outside its remit.
‘”Our objective is to ensure that the adverse impacts of human activities don’t affect the long-term viability of communities, habitats, or populations of vulnerable and declining species.
“‘Where impacts do occur, such as mortality of fish on power station intake screens, we assess these against other sources of mortality (natural and anthropogenic) and the ability of the population to withstand such losses. Compared to the natural population size, relatively few fish will be impacted and we are confident that mortality rates caused by the new nuclear industry are sustainable and the impact on the wider marine ecosystem will be insignificant.'
“It said it had produced three chapters of the environmental statement, including on marine ecology and fisheries, submitted by Sizewell C to the planning process for public and regulatory scrutiny. It added: 'In undertaking this nationally important work for EDF to develop UK’s new nuclear capability, we avoid conflicts of interest by not providing advice to government regulators on new nuclear developments.'
“A spokesperson for Sizewell C said: 'Our assessments show that the fish impacted are mainly sprat and herring. The intake of these species by Sizewell C is 0.01% of the stock in the area. Fisheries scientists describe the impact of new nuclear power stations on the marine ecosystem as ‘insignificant’.'
“The spokesperson said they would use a more modern 'fish returns system' than the one at Sizewell B, to ensure higher survival rates and that the returned fish that did not survive would be 'eaten by other sea life'.
“A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said it was responsible for 'stringent regulation' of the nuclear industry to prevent harm to the environment and local communities. Speaking about an #EDF subsidiary created to build and run #HinkleyPoint C and Sizewell C nuclear power stations, they said: 'We are currently considering NNB Generation Company’s environmental permit application for their proposed cooling water discharge, and will determine it once we have assessed the impacts to the marine environment – including fish populations.'
“The Sizewell C planning process began in May 2020 and an examination is now under way by the Planning Inspectorate. This stage of the process is expected to take about six months, during which local people and organisations can make representations."
-
Sizewell C nuclear plant could kill 500m fish, campaigners say
#Environmental groups claim planned Suffolk power station will devastate marine life and key bird habitat
by Karen McVeigh
Wed 28 Apr 2021 08.15 EDTArticle image: Sizewell B nuclear power station looms over the RSPB Minsmere wetlands. The proposed plant would be built on nature reserve’s southern boundary.
"More than 500 million fish, including #protectedspecies, could be sucked into the cooling system of a proposed £20bn #NuclearPowerPlant in Suffolk if construction goes ahead, environmental campaigners say.
"A local campaign group, Together Against Sizewell C (#Tasc), claims the subsequent deaths of millions of fish is 'inhumane and unacceptable' and flies in the face of the government’s #GreenAgenda. Also opposing the development, the #birdconservation group RSPB expressed concern over predicted levels of fish loss on the #marinebirds that feed on them.
"The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), a government agency, has assessed the marine impacts of the plant and said it was confident the mortality rates caused by Sizewell C would be 'sustainable' and the impact on the wider marine community 'insignificant'.
"#EDF, the French state-owned company behind the plan to build Sizewell C, claims the proposed plant could generate 3.2GW of electricity, enough to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, or power 6m homes. The Nuclear Industry Association describes it as “a vital next step” in the UK’s efforts to secure new low-carbon electricity as older nuclear reactors are shut down.
"However, environmental campaign groups, including #Greenpeace, argue that nuclear reactors are unnecessary and expensive, compared with a combination of #RenewableEnergy and #BatteryStorage technology. The RSPB and the local community group #StopSizewellC said the reactor poses a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the adjacent Minsmere nature reserve. Campaigners say a new nuclear power station will have a severe impact on marine life.
"Planning documents published by EDF have revealed that almost 8 million fish were “impinged” – or sucked into the cooling system – by the existing plant Sizewell B each year between 2009 and 2013. Extrapolating from these figures, Tasc has estimated that 28 million fish could be impinged in the cooling system of both plants each year, which is 560 million over the two decades the plants are expected to operate, between 2035 and 2055. The proposed plant is larger than Sizewell B and will take in 2.5 times the amount of seawater, Tasc said.
"Pete Wilkinson, the chair of Tasc and a co-founder of Greenpeace UK, said the estimates were “staggering”. Such wildlife loss was the “tip of the iceberg”, he said, as it did not take into account fish fry, eggs, crustacea and other aquatic life.
“Tens of millions of fish, crustaceans and other marine biota will be sacrificed for the purposes of cooling a plant which is not needed to keep the lights on, which will do nothing to reduce global carbon emissions, which will be paid for from the pockets of all UK taxpayers and bill-paying customers, leaving future generations with a lasting legacy of an impoverished environment,” he said.
Wilkinson said he expected Cefas to condemn the impact on fish at the inquiry stage of the Sizewell C planning process.
“Cefas’s stated aim is ‘to help keep our seas, oceans and rivers healthy and productive, and our seafood safe and sustainable … ’ Instead, it seems that Cefas appears quite at ease presiding over the deaths of millions of fish and clearly feels the huge number of fish deaths is acceptable in that the overall health of fish stocks will not be compromised.”
“Adam Rowlands, the RSPB’s Suffolk area manager, said: 'It is our position that the project should not go ahead. The potential impacts on the environment are too great. Fish impingement is one of our concerns. These fish provide a valuable food supply to rare birds nesting and breeding in the area.'
“Protected species breeding in the area include little and common terns and in the winter there are a number of internationally important red-throated divers. 'They won’t feed on dead fish,' Rowlands said.
“Asked what impact such a loss of fish might have, Rowlands said: 'We haven’t seen evidence to convince us that removing that amount of fish from the population wouldn’t have an impact.'
“If the plant goes ahead, it will be built on part of Sizewell marshes, a site of special scientific interest. It will also be adjacent to the southern boundary of the RSPB-owned Minsmere nature reserve, a Ramsar (internationally important wetland) site and special protection area. Minsmere is one of only five sites in Britain to receive the Council of Europe European Diploma for protected areas award, whose renewal depends on Sizewell C not causing any damage.
“A spokesperson for Cefas said: 'There is no scientific evidence that the proposed new nuclear developments will cause large-scale destruction of marine life or impact protected species.'
“Its role in relation to the Sizewell C project was to ensure 'the marine evidence base is scientifically robust, to fully assess the potential marine impacts and, where feasible, to work with EDF engineers to reduce potential impacts by design optimisation', the spokesperson said, adding that issuing any objection to the proposal was outside its remit.
‘”Our objective is to ensure that the adverse impacts of human activities don’t affect the long-term viability of communities, habitats, or populations of vulnerable and declining species.
“‘Where impacts do occur, such as mortality of fish on power station intake screens, we assess these against other sources of mortality (natural and anthropogenic) and the ability of the population to withstand such losses. Compared to the natural population size, relatively few fish will be impacted and we are confident that mortality rates caused by the new nuclear industry are sustainable and the impact on the wider marine ecosystem will be insignificant.'
“It said it had produced three chapters of the environmental statement, including on marine ecology and fisheries, submitted by Sizewell C to the planning process for public and regulatory scrutiny. It added: 'In undertaking this nationally important work for EDF to develop UK’s new nuclear capability, we avoid conflicts of interest by not providing advice to government regulators on new nuclear developments.'
“A spokesperson for Sizewell C said: 'Our assessments show that the fish impacted are mainly sprat and herring. The intake of these species by Sizewell C is 0.01% of the stock in the area. Fisheries scientists describe the impact of new nuclear power stations on the marine ecosystem as ‘insignificant’.'
“The spokesperson said they would use a more modern 'fish returns system' than the one at Sizewell B, to ensure higher survival rates and that the returned fish that did not survive would be 'eaten by other sea life'.
“A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said it was responsible for 'stringent regulation' of the nuclear industry to prevent harm to the environment and local communities. Speaking about an #EDF subsidiary created to build and run #HinkleyPoint C and Sizewell C nuclear power stations, they said: 'We are currently considering NNB Generation Company’s environmental permit application for their proposed cooling water discharge, and will determine it once we have assessed the impacts to the marine environment – including fish populations.'
“The Sizewell C planning process began in May 2020 and an examination is now under way by the Planning Inspectorate. This stage of the process is expected to take about six months, during which local people and organisations can make representations."
-
Sizewell C nuclear plant could kill 500m fish, campaigners say
#Environmental groups claim planned Suffolk power station will devastate marine life and key bird habitat
by Karen McVeigh
Wed 28 Apr 2021 08.15 EDTArticle image: Sizewell B nuclear power station looms over the RSPB Minsmere wetlands. The proposed plant would be built on nature reserve’s southern boundary.
"More than 500 million fish, including #protectedspecies, could be sucked into the cooling system of a proposed £20bn #NuclearPowerPlant in Suffolk if construction goes ahead, environmental campaigners say.
"A local campaign group, Together Against Sizewell C (#Tasc), claims the subsequent deaths of millions of fish is 'inhumane and unacceptable' and flies in the face of the government’s #GreenAgenda. Also opposing the development, the #birdconservation group RSPB expressed concern over predicted levels of fish loss on the #marinebirds that feed on them.
"The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), a government agency, has assessed the marine impacts of the plant and said it was confident the mortality rates caused by Sizewell C would be 'sustainable' and the impact on the wider marine community 'insignificant'.
"#EDF, the French state-owned company behind the plan to build Sizewell C, claims the proposed plant could generate 3.2GW of electricity, enough to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, or power 6m homes. The Nuclear Industry Association describes it as “a vital next step” in the UK’s efforts to secure new low-carbon electricity as older nuclear reactors are shut down.
"However, environmental campaign groups, including #Greenpeace, argue that nuclear reactors are unnecessary and expensive, compared with a combination of #RenewableEnergy and #BatteryStorage technology. The RSPB and the local community group #StopSizewellC said the reactor poses a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the adjacent Minsmere nature reserve. Campaigners say a new nuclear power station will have a severe impact on marine life.
"Planning documents published by EDF have revealed that almost 8 million fish were “impinged” – or sucked into the cooling system – by the existing plant Sizewell B each year between 2009 and 2013. Extrapolating from these figures, Tasc has estimated that 28 million fish could be impinged in the cooling system of both plants each year, which is 560 million over the two decades the plants are expected to operate, between 2035 and 2055. The proposed plant is larger than Sizewell B and will take in 2.5 times the amount of seawater, Tasc said.
"Pete Wilkinson, the chair of Tasc and a co-founder of Greenpeace UK, said the estimates were “staggering”. Such wildlife loss was the “tip of the iceberg”, he said, as it did not take into account fish fry, eggs, crustacea and other aquatic life.
“Tens of millions of fish, crustaceans and other marine biota will be sacrificed for the purposes of cooling a plant which is not needed to keep the lights on, which will do nothing to reduce global carbon emissions, which will be paid for from the pockets of all UK taxpayers and bill-paying customers, leaving future generations with a lasting legacy of an impoverished environment,” he said.
Wilkinson said he expected Cefas to condemn the impact on fish at the inquiry stage of the Sizewell C planning process.
“Cefas’s stated aim is ‘to help keep our seas, oceans and rivers healthy and productive, and our seafood safe and sustainable … ’ Instead, it seems that Cefas appears quite at ease presiding over the deaths of millions of fish and clearly feels the huge number of fish deaths is acceptable in that the overall health of fish stocks will not be compromised.”
“Adam Rowlands, the RSPB’s Suffolk area manager, said: 'It is our position that the project should not go ahead. The potential impacts on the environment are too great. Fish impingement is one of our concerns. These fish provide a valuable food supply to rare birds nesting and breeding in the area.'
“Protected species breeding in the area include little and common terns and in the winter there are a number of internationally important red-throated divers. 'They won’t feed on dead fish,' Rowlands said.
“Asked what impact such a loss of fish might have, Rowlands said: 'We haven’t seen evidence to convince us that removing that amount of fish from the population wouldn’t have an impact.'
“If the plant goes ahead, it will be built on part of Sizewell marshes, a site of special scientific interest. It will also be adjacent to the southern boundary of the RSPB-owned Minsmere nature reserve, a Ramsar (internationally important wetland) site and special protection area. Minsmere is one of only five sites in Britain to receive the Council of Europe European Diploma for protected areas award, whose renewal depends on Sizewell C not causing any damage.
“A spokesperson for Cefas said: 'There is no scientific evidence that the proposed new nuclear developments will cause large-scale destruction of marine life or impact protected species.'
“Its role in relation to the Sizewell C project was to ensure 'the marine evidence base is scientifically robust, to fully assess the potential marine impacts and, where feasible, to work with EDF engineers to reduce potential impacts by design optimisation', the spokesperson said, adding that issuing any objection to the proposal was outside its remit.
‘”Our objective is to ensure that the adverse impacts of human activities don’t affect the long-term viability of communities, habitats, or populations of vulnerable and declining species.
“‘Where impacts do occur, such as mortality of fish on power station intake screens, we assess these against other sources of mortality (natural and anthropogenic) and the ability of the population to withstand such losses. Compared to the natural population size, relatively few fish will be impacted and we are confident that mortality rates caused by the new nuclear industry are sustainable and the impact on the wider marine ecosystem will be insignificant.'
“It said it had produced three chapters of the environmental statement, including on marine ecology and fisheries, submitted by Sizewell C to the planning process for public and regulatory scrutiny. It added: 'In undertaking this nationally important work for EDF to develop UK’s new nuclear capability, we avoid conflicts of interest by not providing advice to government regulators on new nuclear developments.'
“A spokesperson for Sizewell C said: 'Our assessments show that the fish impacted are mainly sprat and herring. The intake of these species by Sizewell C is 0.01% of the stock in the area. Fisheries scientists describe the impact of new nuclear power stations on the marine ecosystem as ‘insignificant’.'
“The spokesperson said they would use a more modern 'fish returns system' than the one at Sizewell B, to ensure higher survival rates and that the returned fish that did not survive would be 'eaten by other sea life'.
“A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said it was responsible for 'stringent regulation' of the nuclear industry to prevent harm to the environment and local communities. Speaking about an #EDF subsidiary created to build and run #HinkleyPoint C and Sizewell C nuclear power stations, they said: 'We are currently considering NNB Generation Company’s environmental permit application for their proposed cooling water discharge, and will determine it once we have assessed the impacts to the marine environment – including fish populations.'
“The Sizewell C planning process began in May 2020 and an examination is now under way by the Planning Inspectorate. This stage of the process is expected to take about six months, during which local people and organisations can make representations."
-
Sizewell C nuclear plant could kill 500m fish, campaigners say
#Environmental groups claim planned Suffolk power station will devastate marine life and key bird habitat
by Karen McVeigh
Wed 28 Apr 2021 08.15 EDTArticle image: Sizewell B nuclear power station looms over the RSPB Minsmere wetlands. The proposed plant would be built on nature reserve’s southern boundary.
"More than 500 million fish, including #protectedspecies, could be sucked into the cooling system of a proposed £20bn #NuclearPowerPlant in Suffolk if construction goes ahead, environmental campaigners say.
"A local campaign group, Together Against Sizewell C (#Tasc), claims the subsequent deaths of millions of fish is 'inhumane and unacceptable' and flies in the face of the government’s #GreenAgenda. Also opposing the development, the #birdconservation group RSPB expressed concern over predicted levels of fish loss on the #marinebirds that feed on them.
"The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), a government agency, has assessed the marine impacts of the plant and said it was confident the mortality rates caused by Sizewell C would be 'sustainable' and the impact on the wider marine community 'insignificant'.
"#EDF, the French state-owned company behind the plan to build Sizewell C, claims the proposed plant could generate 3.2GW of electricity, enough to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, or power 6m homes. The Nuclear Industry Association describes it as “a vital next step” in the UK’s efforts to secure new low-carbon electricity as older nuclear reactors are shut down.
"However, environmental campaign groups, including #Greenpeace, argue that nuclear reactors are unnecessary and expensive, compared with a combination of #RenewableEnergy and #BatteryStorage technology. The RSPB and the local community group #StopSizewellC said the reactor poses a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the adjacent Minsmere nature reserve. Campaigners say a new nuclear power station will have a severe impact on marine life.
"Planning documents published by EDF have revealed that almost 8 million fish were “impinged” – or sucked into the cooling system – by the existing plant Sizewell B each year between 2009 and 2013. Extrapolating from these figures, Tasc has estimated that 28 million fish could be impinged in the cooling system of both plants each year, which is 560 million over the two decades the plants are expected to operate, between 2035 and 2055. The proposed plant is larger than Sizewell B and will take in 2.5 times the amount of seawater, Tasc said.
"Pete Wilkinson, the chair of Tasc and a co-founder of Greenpeace UK, said the estimates were “staggering”. Such wildlife loss was the “tip of the iceberg”, he said, as it did not take into account fish fry, eggs, crustacea and other aquatic life.
“Tens of millions of fish, crustaceans and other marine biota will be sacrificed for the purposes of cooling a plant which is not needed to keep the lights on, which will do nothing to reduce global carbon emissions, which will be paid for from the pockets of all UK taxpayers and bill-paying customers, leaving future generations with a lasting legacy of an impoverished environment,” he said.
Wilkinson said he expected Cefas to condemn the impact on fish at the inquiry stage of the Sizewell C planning process.
“Cefas’s stated aim is ‘to help keep our seas, oceans and rivers healthy and productive, and our seafood safe and sustainable … ’ Instead, it seems that Cefas appears quite at ease presiding over the deaths of millions of fish and clearly feels the huge number of fish deaths is acceptable in that the overall health of fish stocks will not be compromised.”
“Adam Rowlands, the RSPB’s Suffolk area manager, said: 'It is our position that the project should not go ahead. The potential impacts on the environment are too great. Fish impingement is one of our concerns. These fish provide a valuable food supply to rare birds nesting and breeding in the area.'
“Protected species breeding in the area include little and common terns and in the winter there are a number of internationally important red-throated divers. 'They won’t feed on dead fish,' Rowlands said.
“Asked what impact such a loss of fish might have, Rowlands said: 'We haven’t seen evidence to convince us that removing that amount of fish from the population wouldn’t have an impact.'
“If the plant goes ahead, it will be built on part of Sizewell marshes, a site of special scientific interest. It will also be adjacent to the southern boundary of the RSPB-owned Minsmere nature reserve, a Ramsar (internationally important wetland) site and special protection area. Minsmere is one of only five sites in Britain to receive the Council of Europe European Diploma for protected areas award, whose renewal depends on Sizewell C not causing any damage.
“A spokesperson for Cefas said: 'There is no scientific evidence that the proposed new nuclear developments will cause large-scale destruction of marine life or impact protected species.'
“Its role in relation to the Sizewell C project was to ensure 'the marine evidence base is scientifically robust, to fully assess the potential marine impacts and, where feasible, to work with EDF engineers to reduce potential impacts by design optimisation', the spokesperson said, adding that issuing any objection to the proposal was outside its remit.
‘”Our objective is to ensure that the adverse impacts of human activities don’t affect the long-term viability of communities, habitats, or populations of vulnerable and declining species.
“‘Where impacts do occur, such as mortality of fish on power station intake screens, we assess these against other sources of mortality (natural and anthropogenic) and the ability of the population to withstand such losses. Compared to the natural population size, relatively few fish will be impacted and we are confident that mortality rates caused by the new nuclear industry are sustainable and the impact on the wider marine ecosystem will be insignificant.'
“It said it had produced three chapters of the environmental statement, including on marine ecology and fisheries, submitted by Sizewell C to the planning process for public and regulatory scrutiny. It added: 'In undertaking this nationally important work for EDF to develop UK’s new nuclear capability, we avoid conflicts of interest by not providing advice to government regulators on new nuclear developments.'
“A spokesperson for Sizewell C said: 'Our assessments show that the fish impacted are mainly sprat and herring. The intake of these species by Sizewell C is 0.01% of the stock in the area. Fisheries scientists describe the impact of new nuclear power stations on the marine ecosystem as ‘insignificant’.'
“The spokesperson said they would use a more modern 'fish returns system' than the one at Sizewell B, to ensure higher survival rates and that the returned fish that did not survive would be 'eaten by other sea life'.
“A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said it was responsible for 'stringent regulation' of the nuclear industry to prevent harm to the environment and local communities. Speaking about an #EDF subsidiary created to build and run #HinkleyPoint C and Sizewell C nuclear power stations, they said: 'We are currently considering NNB Generation Company’s environmental permit application for their proposed cooling water discharge, and will determine it once we have assessed the impacts to the marine environment – including fish populations.'
“The Sizewell C planning process began in May 2020 and an examination is now under way by the Planning Inspectorate. This stage of the process is expected to take about six months, during which local people and organisations can make representations."
-
Sizewell C nuclear plant could kill 500m fish, campaigners say
#Environmental groups claim planned Suffolk power station will devastate marine life and key bird habitat
by Karen McVeigh
Wed 28 Apr 2021 08.15 EDTArticle image: Sizewell B nuclear power station looms over the RSPB Minsmere wetlands. The proposed plant would be built on nature reserve’s southern boundary.
"More than 500 million fish, including #protectedspecies, could be sucked into the cooling system of a proposed £20bn #NuclearPowerPlant in Suffolk if construction goes ahead, environmental campaigners say.
"A local campaign group, Together Against Sizewell C (#Tasc), claims the subsequent deaths of millions of fish is 'inhumane and unacceptable' and flies in the face of the government’s #GreenAgenda. Also opposing the development, the #birdconservation group RSPB expressed concern over predicted levels of fish loss on the #marinebirds that feed on them.
"The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), a government agency, has assessed the marine impacts of the plant and said it was confident the mortality rates caused by Sizewell C would be 'sustainable' and the impact on the wider marine community 'insignificant'.
"#EDF, the French state-owned company behind the plan to build Sizewell C, claims the proposed plant could generate 3.2GW of electricity, enough to provide 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, or power 6m homes. The Nuclear Industry Association describes it as “a vital next step” in the UK’s efforts to secure new low-carbon electricity as older nuclear reactors are shut down.
"However, environmental campaign groups, including #Greenpeace, argue that nuclear reactors are unnecessary and expensive, compared with a combination of #RenewableEnergy and #BatteryStorage technology. The RSPB and the local community group #StopSizewellC said the reactor poses a risk to the natural habitats along the Suffolk coast and the adjacent Minsmere nature reserve. Campaigners say a new nuclear power station will have a severe impact on marine life.
"Planning documents published by EDF have revealed that almost 8 million fish were “impinged” – or sucked into the cooling system – by the existing plant Sizewell B each year between 2009 and 2013. Extrapolating from these figures, Tasc has estimated that 28 million fish could be impinged in the cooling system of both plants each year, which is 560 million over the two decades the plants are expected to operate, between 2035 and 2055. The proposed plant is larger than Sizewell B and will take in 2.5 times the amount of seawater, Tasc said.
"Pete Wilkinson, the chair of Tasc and a co-founder of Greenpeace UK, said the estimates were “staggering”. Such wildlife loss was the “tip of the iceberg”, he said, as it did not take into account fish fry, eggs, crustacea and other aquatic life.
“Tens of millions of fish, crustaceans and other marine biota will be sacrificed for the purposes of cooling a plant which is not needed to keep the lights on, which will do nothing to reduce global carbon emissions, which will be paid for from the pockets of all UK taxpayers and bill-paying customers, leaving future generations with a lasting legacy of an impoverished environment,” he said.
Wilkinson said he expected Cefas to condemn the impact on fish at the inquiry stage of the Sizewell C planning process.
“Cefas’s stated aim is ‘to help keep our seas, oceans and rivers healthy and productive, and our seafood safe and sustainable … ’ Instead, it seems that Cefas appears quite at ease presiding over the deaths of millions of fish and clearly feels the huge number of fish deaths is acceptable in that the overall health of fish stocks will not be compromised.”
“Adam Rowlands, the RSPB’s Suffolk area manager, said: 'It is our position that the project should not go ahead. The potential impacts on the environment are too great. Fish impingement is one of our concerns. These fish provide a valuable food supply to rare birds nesting and breeding in the area.'
“Protected species breeding in the area include little and common terns and in the winter there are a number of internationally important red-throated divers. 'They won’t feed on dead fish,' Rowlands said.
“Asked what impact such a loss of fish might have, Rowlands said: 'We haven’t seen evidence to convince us that removing that amount of fish from the population wouldn’t have an impact.'
“If the plant goes ahead, it will be built on part of Sizewell marshes, a site of special scientific interest. It will also be adjacent to the southern boundary of the RSPB-owned Minsmere nature reserve, a Ramsar (internationally important wetland) site and special protection area. Minsmere is one of only five sites in Britain to receive the Council of Europe European Diploma for protected areas award, whose renewal depends on Sizewell C not causing any damage.
“A spokesperson for Cefas said: 'There is no scientific evidence that the proposed new nuclear developments will cause large-scale destruction of marine life or impact protected species.'
“Its role in relation to the Sizewell C project was to ensure 'the marine evidence base is scientifically robust, to fully assess the potential marine impacts and, where feasible, to work with EDF engineers to reduce potential impacts by design optimisation', the spokesperson said, adding that issuing any objection to the proposal was outside its remit.
‘”Our objective is to ensure that the adverse impacts of human activities don’t affect the long-term viability of communities, habitats, or populations of vulnerable and declining species.
“‘Where impacts do occur, such as mortality of fish on power station intake screens, we assess these against other sources of mortality (natural and anthropogenic) and the ability of the population to withstand such losses. Compared to the natural population size, relatively few fish will be impacted and we are confident that mortality rates caused by the new nuclear industry are sustainable and the impact on the wider marine ecosystem will be insignificant.'
“It said it had produced three chapters of the environmental statement, including on marine ecology and fisheries, submitted by Sizewell C to the planning process for public and regulatory scrutiny. It added: 'In undertaking this nationally important work for EDF to develop UK’s new nuclear capability, we avoid conflicts of interest by not providing advice to government regulators on new nuclear developments.'
“A spokesperson for Sizewell C said: 'Our assessments show that the fish impacted are mainly sprat and herring. The intake of these species by Sizewell C is 0.01% of the stock in the area. Fisheries scientists describe the impact of new nuclear power stations on the marine ecosystem as ‘insignificant’.'
“The spokesperson said they would use a more modern 'fish returns system' than the one at Sizewell B, to ensure higher survival rates and that the returned fish that did not survive would be 'eaten by other sea life'.
“A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said it was responsible for 'stringent regulation' of the nuclear industry to prevent harm to the environment and local communities. Speaking about an #EDF subsidiary created to build and run #HinkleyPoint C and Sizewell C nuclear power stations, they said: 'We are currently considering NNB Generation Company’s environmental permit application for their proposed cooling water discharge, and will determine it once we have assessed the impacts to the marine environment – including fish populations.'
“The Sizewell C planning process began in May 2020 and an examination is now under way by the Planning Inspectorate. This stage of the process is expected to take about six months, during which local people and organisations can make representations."
-
Are #Coastal #Nuclear Power Plants Ready for #SeaLevelRise?
As shorelines creep inland and #storms worsen, nuclear reactors around the world face new challenges.
by John Vidal, August 21, 2018
"The outer defensive wall of what is expected to be the world’s most expensive nuclear power station is taking shape on the shoreline of the choppy gray waters of the Bristol Channel in western England.
"By the time the US $25-billion #HinkleyPointC nuclear station is finished, possibly in 2028, the concrete seawall will be 12.5 meters high, 900 meters long, and durable enough, the UK regulator and French engineers say, to withstand the strongest storm surge, the greatest tsunami, and the highest sea-level rise.
"But will it? Independent nuclear consultant #PeteRoche, a former adviser to the UK government and #Greenpeace, points out that the tidal range along this stretch of coast is one of the highest in the world, and that #erosion is heavy. Indeed, observers reported serious flooding on the site in 1981 when an earlier nuclear power station had to be shut down for a week, following a #SpringTide and a #StormSurge. However well built, says Roche, the new seawall does not adequately take into account #sealevel rise due to climate change.
"#Flooding can be catastrophic to a nuclear power plant because it can knock out its electrical systems, disabling its cooling mechanisms and leading to overheating and possible #meltdown and a dangerous release of #radioactivity. Flooding at the #FukushimaDaiichi plant in Japan as a result of the March 2011 tsunami caused severe damage to several of the plant’s reactors and only narrowly avoided a catastrophic release of radioactivity that could have forced the evacuation of 50 million people.
"In the #UnitedStates, where nine nuclear plants are within three kilometers of the #ocean and four reactors have been identified by Stanford academics as vulnerable to #StormSurges and sea-level rise, flooding is common, says David Lochbaum, a former nuclear engineer and director of the nuclear safety project at the Union of Concerned Scientists (#UCS).
"Lochbaum says over 20 flooding incidents have been recorded at US nuclear plants since the early 1980s. “The most likely [cause of flooding] is the increasing frequency of extreme events,' he says."
#ExtremeWeather #ClimateCrisis #NuclearPlants #UK #HinkleyPoint #CoastalFlooding
Full article:
https://hakaimagazine.com/features/are-coastal-nuclear-power-plants-ready-for-sea-level-rise/ -
Britain’s flagship nuclear plant scrambles to avoid cash crunch
by Rachel Millard, Matt Oliver, February 2023
"EDF said there is a high likelihood that state-owned China General Nuclear (CGN) will not want to contribute to a crucial fresh round of funding for the #HinkleyPoint C project in #Somerset."
#NoNukes #Renewables #UK #NuclearIsNotCarbonFree #CashStrapped #Marshland #WaterIsLife