Minehead 'tidal reef' fails to make Government shortlist for Severn estuary renewable energy plans

A SHORTLIST of five schemes for creating renewable energy with tidal power in the Bristol Channel has been drawn up by the Government - but it does not include a proposed ‘tidal reef’ between Minehead and the Welsh coast.
Instead, a controversial Severn Barrage from Weston-super-Mare to Cardiff heads the shortlist, on which the Government will now consult during the next three months.
Also included on the preferred list was a Bridgwater Bay Lagoon scheme next to Hinkley Point nuclear power station.
Lagoons are radical new proposals which would impound a section of the estuary without damming it.
The scheme has been proposed off the shoreline between a location east of Hinkley Point and Weston-super-Mare.
It would cost an estimated £3.8 billion to construct and could generate 1.36 gigawatts of electricity per year, or nearly one per cent of the UK's total demand, while saving 1.1MT of CO² emissions.
The Government said it would be the best-perfoming of the Bristol Channel lagoon proposals in terms of cost of energy.
The shortlist was announced today by Energy Secretary Ed Miliband following a 12-month Government consultation on a longlist of 10 options for producing electricity from the tidal range of the Severn.
The longlist included a 12-mile tidal reef idea put forward by Cornish engineers Joseph Evans and Sons Ltd which would run from Minehead to Aberthaw.
Evans and Co owner Rupert Evans said the tidal reef would cost less than a barrage, have less environmental and economic impact, and generate more power more reliably.
It was an alternative favoured by campaign group Stop the Barrage NOW, which has expressed fears a barrage would devastate the estuary’s environment and wildlife.
However, the Government said tidal reef technology was not yet ready, although it could be revisited before any final decision was taken.
The Cardiff-Weston Barrage option would dam the estuary from Brean Down, near Weston-super-Mare to Lavernock Point, near Cardiff.
It would cost an estimated £20.9 billion but would have a capacity of more than 8.6 gigawatts, meeting nearly five per cent of the UK’s electricity demand.
The three other shortlisted schemes were:
Shoots Barrage at a narrower point further upstream, spanning the estuary near English Stones, which would produce 1.05 gigawatts – about equal to a large fossil fuel plant.
Beachley Barrage - the smallest barrage on the shortlist - just above the Wye River, generating 625 megawatts.
Fleming Lagoon, an impoundment off the Welsh shoreline between Newport and the Severn road crossings which could also generate 1.36 gigawatts.
Mr Miliband said: “The five schemes shortlisted today are what we believe can be feasible, but this does not mean we have lost sight of others.”
He said public consultation would continue on all 10 long and shortlisted schemes until April 23.
Mr Miliband said: “Fighting climate change is the biggest long-term challenge we face and we must look to use the UK’s own natural resources to generate clean, green electricity.
“The Severn estuary has massive potential to help achieve our climate change and renewable energy targets.
“We want to see how that potential compares against the other options for meeting our goals.
“The largest proposal to harness the power of the tides on the shortlist could save as much carbon dioxide as all the residential emissions from Wales.”

• Our images show (TOP) a map of the 10 longlist schemes and (BELOW) the sluice and turbine caissons of a lagoon. Images submitted.

Council secretly asks energy firms for £750,000 to help it decide nuclear planning applications

A SECRET district council plea for funding from companies planning to build new nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point has been branded ‘unethical’ by anti-nuclear campaigners.
Sedgemoor District Council wrote to British Energy and EDF asking for £750,000 to help the authority process planning applications which the two companies were expected to submit.
The letter was written last July by the council’s director of regeneration, Doug Bamsey, but has only just been made public following a Freedom of Information request.
Mr Bamsey said the council was willing to provide a ‘lead role and work with adjacent councils’ to provide strategic and co-ordinated responses to local issues.
He wrote: “It is, however, unable to bear the financial burden of this.
“I therefore request you consider making funds available to help us create an energy policy/planning officer who would be the key co-ordinating point, with admin capacity and a working fund for meeting rooms and so on.
“I estimate this to be in the order of approx £100,000 per annum over the next five years.”
He also asked for a further £200,000 to £250,000 over a two-year period to cover a technical and consultancy budget for issues such as legal, economic, and transport assessments.
Stop Hinkley co-ordinator Jim Duffy criticised Sedgemoor’s request as ‘secretive, misjudged, creating a conflict of interest, while also flouting Royal Institute planning standards’.
Mr Duffy said: “It is easy to imagine nuclear companies expecting a smoother passage for Hinkley C had they paid this premium.
"”Sedgemoor made a bad mistake here, not least in doing this behind the backs of its own and West Somerset councillors.”
David Taylor, of Stop Hinkley, said: “The very idea that you would ask an applicant to fund a planning officer who will be dealing with your case presents just about the clearest example of conflict of interests.”
Hinkley Point falls within West Somerset, where the financially-crippled district council would be responsible for processing planning applications.
However, West Somerset has for several years only been able to manage its planning department by using the services of a Sedgemoor officer under a partnership agreement.
A spokesman for West Somerset Council said it had been unaware of Sedgemoor’s request for financial contributions from the two energy firms.
Mr Bamsey said: “These are multi-billion pound proposals with multi-million pound studies. Our resources are very limited. We do not see it as necessarily right that local tax payers should pay for this huge project.”
He said since writing the letter, the Government had agreed to meet the costs as it would ultimately decide any future planning applications for nuclear power stations rather than local councils.
A statement from EDF, which has recently bought British Energy, said: “EDF Energy and British Energy have not entered into any agreements in relation to these proposals.
“EDF Energy and British Energy believe the planning process to assess new build projects must be robust, fair and open and serve the interests of the local community.”

Anger as Hinkley sends more nuclear waste for recycling in America

A SECOND batch of radioactive waste from Hinkley Point is to be shipped to America for reprocessing.
Hundreds of tons of metal from the decommissioning of the Hinkley Point A nuclear power station will be recycled by a smelting facility in Bear Creek, Tennessee.
The metal, classified as low level waste (LLW) will travel overland from Hinkley Point to docks in Liverpool, and then by ship to Virginia, US, and then on by road to its destination at the Energy Solutions plant in Bear Creek.
There, it will be processed and recycled into shielding blocks for use at other nuclear stations. Energy Solutions will dispose of any material which cannot be recycled.
The operation is part of a groundbreaking means of recycling valuable nuclear power station metals which has been devised by the team carrying out the Hinkley A decommissioning.
It resulted in the Environment Agency authorising the shipment of up to 235 tonnes of contaminated steel from Hinkley A to the US between September, 2007, and August 2010.
The Hinkley A decommissioning team set up a decontamination plant in the power station’s former laundry building to recover and ‘clean’ the 1,725 skips holding nuclear waste in ponds and dry storage.
More than 95 per cent of the skips contained intermediate level waste which could not have been recovered without the new operation.
In just 18 months, the project team retrieved 564 skips from the dry skip store and processed almost half for the metal smelting project, with the remainder kept in temporary storage before decontamination.
A further 110 tonnes of low level rubble and debris was also removed from the dry skip store and packed into more than 500 drums.
A spokesman for Magnox South Ltd, which owns Hinkley A, said: “This will allow the continuation of a metal melt process, with up to 400 tons of LLW metal authorised to be shipped to the US for smelting and reuse within the industry.
“To gain approval, the site had to provide various facts and figures including the types of materials the site would be shipping and activity levels.”
However, the movement abroad of waste from Hinkley Point has been criticised by the anti-nuclear group Stop Hinkley.
Group co-ordinator Jim Duffy said: “This radioactive metal should be isolated from the environment.
“Magnox might save money from the long-term management of this waste by sending it for use in US nuclear power stations, but those who handle it during smelting and nuclear construction may inhale dangerous radioactive particles.”
Mr Duffy said safety issues were raised by the recycling process and there were fears that the by-products could be used for household goods.
He said: “The nuclear industry has lobbied hard to loosen the regulations on radioactive waste metal to the point where, if they succeeded, we would be cooking with slightly contaminated pots and pans made from recycled radioactive metal.
“The UK scrap metal industry has voiced its concerns at handling it, but this move takes us a step further in a process where the public may unknowingly get contaminated.
“This adds to the new risk from allowing low level radioactive waste being dumped in local council landfill sites.
“The Government has run out of options for securing this waste, mainly concrete, which is accruing in huge volumes from cleaning up nuclear sites like Hinkley A.
“So, the Environment Agency has appallingly caved in and granted licenses to dump the waste in our municipal landfills."
“Shipping contaminated waste thousands of miles might be one of the reasons the Environment Agency says the nuclear industry’s carbon footprint increased by five percent last year.”
More than 950 skips were sent from Hinkley A to Bear Creek in the first phase of the LLW recycling initiative.

Our photograph shows work on the decommissioning of Hinkley Point A. Photo by Maxnox South Ltd.

TWO new nuclear stations for Hinkley Point

NOT one, but two, new nuclear power stations are likely to be built in West Somerset following the Government’s decision this week to give the go-ahead for a new generation of power plants.
Hinkley Points C and D could be constructed and generating electricity in just 10 years’ time.
Meanwhile, the existing Hinkley B station could see its operating lifespan extended by a further two years to 2018, which would bridge the gap to the opening of the new stations.
Hinkley B owner British Energy still also owns sufficient land next to the now-closed Hinkley A station for the new power plants to be built.
Nearly two years ago, a Government-commissioned report made the Hinkley site a favourite for any new build.
Since then, British Energy has been undertaking detailed assessments of the location, including environmental, geological, and marine studies, and it now knows what work is needed to ensure the site is completely suitable.
In addition, the company has recently brokered a deal with the National Grid for new power plants to be connected from 2016 onwards.
It all adds up to the West Somerset site being progressed at ‘full speed ahead’ as the Government seeks to equip Britain with secure and cheap energy supplies.
Hinkley B station director Nigel Cann (pictured) told The Post: “We have done what we can to prepare ourselves for a positive outcome from the Government consultation process.”
Mr Cann said there was potential for a double unit to be built at Hinkley and it would make sense economically for any such decision to be taken from the outset of planning the new build.
Such a design would virtually double the amount of electricity generated at the site, which was important for the Westcountry as a whole because the region was one of the most vulnerable grid areas in the country.
Mr Cann said: “The Westcountry is very fragile from a grid point of view as regards supply of electricity.
“We are in a position where our (Hinkley B’s) connection to the grid is very valuable because if we were to close, then there is a risk of people losing their supplies in a cold winter.”
Hinkley B currently has capacity to produce enough electricity to power one million homes - just about every domestic property in the Westcountry - but has been running at only 70 per cent following two shutdowns for repairs last year.
Mr Cann said Hinkley B was also important to the local economy of West Somerset and the wider area because of the 700 skilled jobs available on the site and £30-£40 million of revenue which went into local communities.
The new station would create a similar number of jobs and provide the same kind of economic boost.
It is not yet known which companies would be commissioned to build the new nuclear stations, but French firm EDF Energy, which now owns the former South Western Electricity Board, has the experience and expertise and has already said it plans to build four in Britain.
British Energy said it was currently consulting on possible partnerships it might want to set up for new build schemes.
A small group of about 16 anti-nuclear protesters staged a peaceful roadside demonstration outside the Hinkley site on Thursday after the Government announcement and pledged to oppose any new build there.
Mr Cann said: “We have said nuclear is only part of the equation and we should still pursue energy efficiency and other solutions to close the energy gap.”
The largest union in the nuclear industry, Prospect, welcomed the Government’s decision to allow the construction of a new generation of nuclear power stations.
Assistant general secretary Mike Clancy said: “Nuclear energy is green energy, essential in the race to tackle climate change.
“New nuclear build is an essential part of a balanced energy policy that must embrace a wide range of low carbon options.
“It is crucial for the UK to meet the urgent priorities of climate change and security of energy supply.
“New build will yield major economic benefits by creating many thousands of new jobs - not only for those involved in operation, but also within the manufacturing and construction supply chain.”

An extra five years for Hinkley B while wait goes on for Hinkley C

HINKLEY Point B nuclear power station is to be given an extra five years’ of life with part of a £90 million investment by owners British Energy.
The news comes hard on the heels of the company’s announcement that the site had been earmarked for a new build Hinkley C station.
The twin advanced gas-cooled reactors in the B station were due to be decommissioned in 2011, but now they will continue generating electricity at least until 2016.
Hinkley B is currently running at reduced capacity due to boiler repairs following a closure earlier this year.
British Energy said it had completed the necessary technical and economic evaluation for the station, one of West Somerset’s largest employers, to continue operating beyond 2011.
Station director Nigel Cann said: “This is great news for all of us at Hinkley Point B and for everybody in the local Somerset community.
“The decision means we can continue to provide highly skilled jobs and bring major investment to the area.
“It also shows that British Energy recognises the professionalism and commitment of our staff in safely supplying low carbon electricity for more than 30 years.”
The station employs around 535 full-time staff, as well as 150 full-time staff from contract partners, and puts an estimated £30 million a year into the local economy.
Hinkley B has produced some 215 terrawatt hours (TWh) of generation since first supplying the National Grid in 1976.
During its working life so far, the station has saved around 140 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere.
To achieve the same annual carbon-avoided benefit would require the entire population of Bristol to reduce their carbon emissions to zero.
Hinkley trades union representative Tom Armstrong said staff were delighted with the news.
Mr Armstrong said: “This life extension is a major bonus for the station.
“It is the result of a tremendous amount of hard work by everybody involved, both on and off site, to secure a further five years of safe, reliable generation - an achievement of which we are all very proud.”
British Energy chief executive Bill Coley said the extension of Hinkley B’s operating lifespan would help combat global warming by supporting the UK’s climate change goals for the reduction of CO2 emissions.
The Government is expected to announce next month if it will give the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear reactors to be built in Britain.

• Our photograph shows Hinkley Point B (right) with the neighbouring Hinkley Point A station which is currently being decommissioned. Photo submitted.

Hinkley C on the cards after nuclear firm names West Somerset on new build list

A NEW nuclear power station is now almost certain to be built at Hinkley Point – and there could even be two or more new stations as Britain moves to adopt energy sources which will not add to global warming.
British Energy, which owns the Hinkley Point B station, announced on Tuesday, November 27, the West Somerset site was listed as one of eight locations across England and Scotland which could house the country’s next generation of nuclear plants.
It follows a review of every site owned by the company to determine if they could withstand the effects of global warming.
There had been concern that coastal sites such as Hinkley Point could be under threat from rising sea levels and increasingly heavy rainfall.
Research by engineering consultants Halcrow showed flood defence and coast protection measures could be deployed on all sites to make replacement build a feasible option.
Halcrow said the work needed to secure Hinkley Point would involve an extension to the existing constructed cliff protection measures in order to prevent erosion, and the new power station structures should be set back from the cliff line.
It did not predict any flood risks for the elevated site.
Halcrow’s report said: “Relying solely on current engineering methods and knowledge, the sites can be made robust against climate change impacts for the expected lifetimes of the replacement stations.”
Access to the National Grid was likely to be an important constraining factor in selecting sites.
But British Energy said it had already entered into agreements with National Grid for each of the key sites it owns in the South of England, including Hinkley, for grid access in the period from 2016 onwards.
Chief executive Bill Coley said: “Our existing sites all have potential for replacement nuclear, and, indeed we have suitable land at all locations.
“But it is about much more than land. We are building the foundations for replacement nuclear by continuing and strengthening our excellent relationships and dialogue with local communities.
“Our skilled and experienced staff also live locally and provide a healthy flow of skills and talent into the business.
“Our good relationships with our regulators and experience in UK regulation are also key factors, and we continue to work closely with the full range of nuclear industry regulators to meet some of the most stringent standards in the global nuclear industry.”
The Government is expected to decide on the future of nuclear power early in 2008 and if, as expected, the decision is ‘positive’, British Energy will carry out a strategic assessment of siting during the year.
Studies to assess the different locations would vary, but would include examinations of flora and fauna, fisheries and other marine ecology, landscape, geology, noise, and air quality.
Mr Coley said the firm would continue to invest prudently to maintain its sites as strong candidates for replacement builds and ensure any development could proceed as quickly and efficiently as possible if the Government made a positive decision.
Paul Spence, British Energy’s head of strategy and business development, said the company would be in extensive dialogue with local stakeholders and statutory consultees as it developed its proposals and identified the scope of future studies.
Mr Spence said Hinkley Point B had an active local community group which met regularly and was briefed on all topics of interest, including a possible replacement nuclear plant.
British Energy said it remained ‘flexible’ about how its sites would be developed and on the choice of reactor design.
Experts believe any new generation of nuclear power stations are likely to be designs bought in from foreign countries which have continued with nuclear builds, such as Japan.
It is also thought that the capital costs involved would mean new builds would only be viable if at least two plants were constructed at the same time.
For Hinkley Point, that would mean building twin C and D stations.

• Hinkley B has been running at reduced power after being off-line earlier this year to repair cracks found in its boilers.
  
• The neighbouring Hinkley Point A nuclear power station was shut down in May, 2000, and is currently being decommissioned by Magnox Electric Ltd. Halcrow has designed an Intermediate Level Waste Store on the site which will be used to hold intermediate level waste arising from the operation and decommissioning of the station.


• Our photo shows Hinkley Point B. Photo by Robin Somes.