100 signatures reached
To: The UK Government
Rethink Hinkley Point
It is still not too late to think again.
1) Abandon Hinkley for a better alternative and in compensation offer the Chinese and French Governments partnerships in implementing it;
2) Maximise the benefits to UKplc
1) Abandon Hinkley for a better alternative and in compensation offer the Chinese and French Governments partnerships in implementing it;
2) Maximise the benefits to UKplc
Why is this important?
Because
1. Buying Hinkley Point is a colossal mistake
2. Mrs May inherited the project from Osborne & Cameron, keen to develop Chinese trade,
3. but now finds it politically embarrassing to back out of this very bad deal
Consequently, we need to inform the public
1. why the deal is bad
2. that there are better alternatives and
3. the Chinese and French can be placated while serving British interests
Why is Hinkley Point such a bad deal?
1. It is far too expensive
2. There are undeclared costs associated with the nuclear legacy which make nonsense of published costs – we will have to look after the abandoned reactors and radioactive waste for centuries and nobody knows how to do it or cares how much it will cost
3. There is a huge risk of failure – no such reactor has yet been completed and the ones started (Finland 2005, France 2007) are unfinished, in deep technical trouble and seriously (by billions each) over budget
4. The risks are ultimately borne by us, not the French contractors or Chinese financiers – the project is too big to be allowed to fail by the Government of the day (not Mrs May)
5. Nuclear technology is in any case the wrong choice for filling our anticipated supply gap: nuclear energy gets more expensive as new ideas to improve safety are incorporated in the design; in contrast other well established methods of electricity generation such as gas or coal-fired turbines and particularly offshore wind and solar energy get cheaper by the day owing to accumulating experience and rapid technical development
6.IF it has to be nuclear, the Hinkley Point reactors are too big (small modular reactors can be built instead as needed, at a fraction of the cost and in much less time) and probably also the wrong technology (a debatable, but only secondary, point)
Why is the Government pursuing it?
The above problems with the Hinkley project are well known to Mrs May and her advisers, but
1. Mrs May inherited it from Messrs Cameron & Osborne, who promoted it mainly in order to develop tempting business relations with China.
2. Brexit makes such relations even more important as proof of GBplc's viability outside the EU
Are there any alternatives?
Technical alternatives are set out above, but how to meet the political and commercial imperatives?
We must persuade the public, and thus influence the Government, to
1. Abandon Hinkley even at this late stage and with possible compensation costs and offer the Chinese and French Governments partnerships in implementing the chosen technical alternative (the Chinese are leaders in solar cell development and production and both the French and Chinese may be interested in offshore developments, small reactors and advanced research).
2. Maximise the benefits to UKplc by ensuring that a good share of work is retained (for example involving UK contractors and Rolls-Royce if small modular nuclear plants form part of the chosen technical mix).
Balint Bodroghy BASC DIC (nuclear engineering)
5 Palmeira Avenue Mansions
17-19 Church Road, Hove, BN3 2FA
REFERENCES
Why Hinkley Point is a nuclear folly of Titanic proportions New Scientist 28.07.16
Michael Le Page
Forget the economics of Hinkley Point, the politics are convincing Daily Telegraph
Matthew Lynn 15 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 6:21PM
If there’s one sure-fire way to irritate de Rivaz of EDF, it’s to mention Christmas turkeys.
Emily Gosden, energy editor, Daily Telegraph 17 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 8:00PM
Let's ditch Hinkley Point and HS2 to get more bang for our bucks, Daily Telegraph
Liam Halligan 17 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 12:59PM
Hinkley Point fires up Britain's nuclear ambitions Daily Telegraph
17 September 2016, 8:00pm
Rolls submitted designs to the Government for Small Modular Reactors capable of generating 220MW, that could be doubled up to 440, a 10th of the size of a traditional nuclear power station.
Rolls Royce Publicity: For some 50 years, Rolls-Royce has been helping Naval and utility customers maximise plant operation and safely extend plant lifetimes. Britain is “ideally placed” to take a global lead in the SMR market, which could be worth £400bn,
1. Buying Hinkley Point is a colossal mistake
2. Mrs May inherited the project from Osborne & Cameron, keen to develop Chinese trade,
3. but now finds it politically embarrassing to back out of this very bad deal
Consequently, we need to inform the public
1. why the deal is bad
2. that there are better alternatives and
3. the Chinese and French can be placated while serving British interests
Why is Hinkley Point such a bad deal?
1. It is far too expensive
2. There are undeclared costs associated with the nuclear legacy which make nonsense of published costs – we will have to look after the abandoned reactors and radioactive waste for centuries and nobody knows how to do it or cares how much it will cost
3. There is a huge risk of failure – no such reactor has yet been completed and the ones started (Finland 2005, France 2007) are unfinished, in deep technical trouble and seriously (by billions each) over budget
4. The risks are ultimately borne by us, not the French contractors or Chinese financiers – the project is too big to be allowed to fail by the Government of the day (not Mrs May)
5. Nuclear technology is in any case the wrong choice for filling our anticipated supply gap: nuclear energy gets more expensive as new ideas to improve safety are incorporated in the design; in contrast other well established methods of electricity generation such as gas or coal-fired turbines and particularly offshore wind and solar energy get cheaper by the day owing to accumulating experience and rapid technical development
6.IF it has to be nuclear, the Hinkley Point reactors are too big (small modular reactors can be built instead as needed, at a fraction of the cost and in much less time) and probably also the wrong technology (a debatable, but only secondary, point)
Why is the Government pursuing it?
The above problems with the Hinkley project are well known to Mrs May and her advisers, but
1. Mrs May inherited it from Messrs Cameron & Osborne, who promoted it mainly in order to develop tempting business relations with China.
2. Brexit makes such relations even more important as proof of GBplc's viability outside the EU
Are there any alternatives?
Technical alternatives are set out above, but how to meet the political and commercial imperatives?
We must persuade the public, and thus influence the Government, to
1. Abandon Hinkley even at this late stage and with possible compensation costs and offer the Chinese and French Governments partnerships in implementing the chosen technical alternative (the Chinese are leaders in solar cell development and production and both the French and Chinese may be interested in offshore developments, small reactors and advanced research).
2. Maximise the benefits to UKplc by ensuring that a good share of work is retained (for example involving UK contractors and Rolls-Royce if small modular nuclear plants form part of the chosen technical mix).
Balint Bodroghy BASC DIC (nuclear engineering)
5 Palmeira Avenue Mansions
17-19 Church Road, Hove, BN3 2FA
REFERENCES
Why Hinkley Point is a nuclear folly of Titanic proportions New Scientist 28.07.16
Michael Le Page
Forget the economics of Hinkley Point, the politics are convincing Daily Telegraph
Matthew Lynn 15 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 6:21PM
If there’s one sure-fire way to irritate de Rivaz of EDF, it’s to mention Christmas turkeys.
Emily Gosden, energy editor, Daily Telegraph 17 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 8:00PM
Let's ditch Hinkley Point and HS2 to get more bang for our bucks, Daily Telegraph
Liam Halligan 17 SEPTEMBER 2016 • 12:59PM
Hinkley Point fires up Britain's nuclear ambitions Daily Telegraph
17 September 2016, 8:00pm
Rolls submitted designs to the Government for Small Modular Reactors capable of generating 220MW, that could be doubled up to 440, a 10th of the size of a traditional nuclear power station.
Rolls Royce Publicity: For some 50 years, Rolls-Royce has been helping Naval and utility customers maximise plant operation and safely extend plant lifetimes. Britain is “ideally placed” to take a global lead in the SMR market, which could be worth £400bn,
How it will be delivered
Depending on the response - by e-mail and/or by hand
