Post by warriorwitch on May 24, 2007 15:03:45 GMT
Likely nuclear sites need flood defences
By Daniel Fineren Reuters - 1 hour 27 minutes agoLONDON (Reuters) - The prime sites for nuclear power plants the government is keen to see built are on the southern coasts, where the flood risk is higher than elsewhere in the country, a government-commissioned report said.
(Advertisement)
The report by energy analysts Jackson Consulting for the Department of Trade and Industry identified Hinkley Point, together with Sizewell and Dungeness, as the best sites for large nuclear power stations.
But it warned that any company planning to build there would probably have to bolster existing flood defences against sea level rises as the effects of climate change take hold.
"There remains a drawback that most nuclear power stations are sited in low lying coastal locations, which may be at risk from coastal erosion and serious flooding as a result of climate change," the report, released along with the government's nuclear energy consultation, says.
"For new nuclear build, consideration would need to be given to flood protection over the expected 100-year lifecycle of the power station, spanning construction, operation and final decommissioning. This would need to take into account predicted sea level rise including credible extreme weather scenarios and events."
The government aired an energy policy overhaul on Wednesday, aimed at cutting emissions of greenhouse gas carbon dioxide -- through support of nuclear and renewable technologies -- while trying to improve energy efficiency.
Officials are still consulting on whether to allow a new fleet of nuclear power reactors, but the government made clear it sees atomic energy as a key tool in reducing emissions and boosting security of supply.
Apart from safety concerns, environmental groups say the huge costs involved in building and later decommissioning nuclear power plants would be better spent on cleaner and safer forms of power production like wind and wave power.
Industry leaders and the energy sector argue that a looming gap in power generation must be filled with more than just gas-fired and renewable power plants.
Jackson Consulting points to a 2005 report by radioactive waste agency Nirex warning that many coastal nuclear sites are vulnerable to the effects of sea level rise from climate change, particularly storm surges.
Nirex also said those sites at most risk are generally located in low lying parts of southern England, where forecast energy demand is highest.
INCREASED COST
The report, released along with Wednesday's energy white paper, says the need to adapt current sites to the impacts of climate change does not rule out new nuclear build in coastal locations, but warns that it will probably increase the already large capital cost of constructing them.
If the government does decide to allow companies to build a new wave of reactors, it would be up to the private sector to propose what sites they want to use, a DTI spokesman said.
Only nine of the country's 19 existing nuclear power stations are suitable for building a new generation of nuclear power plants, the report says.
So the government may have to look inland at older civil nuclear sites and military installations if it embarks on a large plant building plan, using huge, unsightly concrete cooling towers and river water instead of sea water to keep the plants cool.
Experience in France shows river-cooled nuclear plants sometimes have to close as they cannot run safely in heatwaves.
Other possible sites identified by the report include existing coal and gas fired power stations, which already have connections to the electricity grid, a key factor in determining site suitability.
By Daniel Fineren Reuters - 1 hour 27 minutes agoLONDON (Reuters) - The prime sites for nuclear power plants the government is keen to see built are on the southern coasts, where the flood risk is higher than elsewhere in the country, a government-commissioned report said.
(Advertisement)
The report by energy analysts Jackson Consulting for the Department of Trade and Industry identified Hinkley Point, together with Sizewell and Dungeness, as the best sites for large nuclear power stations.
But it warned that any company planning to build there would probably have to bolster existing flood defences against sea level rises as the effects of climate change take hold.
"There remains a drawback that most nuclear power stations are sited in low lying coastal locations, which may be at risk from coastal erosion and serious flooding as a result of climate change," the report, released along with the government's nuclear energy consultation, says.
"For new nuclear build, consideration would need to be given to flood protection over the expected 100-year lifecycle of the power station, spanning construction, operation and final decommissioning. This would need to take into account predicted sea level rise including credible extreme weather scenarios and events."
The government aired an energy policy overhaul on Wednesday, aimed at cutting emissions of greenhouse gas carbon dioxide -- through support of nuclear and renewable technologies -- while trying to improve energy efficiency.
Officials are still consulting on whether to allow a new fleet of nuclear power reactors, but the government made clear it sees atomic energy as a key tool in reducing emissions and boosting security of supply.
Apart from safety concerns, environmental groups say the huge costs involved in building and later decommissioning nuclear power plants would be better spent on cleaner and safer forms of power production like wind and wave power.
Industry leaders and the energy sector argue that a looming gap in power generation must be filled with more than just gas-fired and renewable power plants.
Jackson Consulting points to a 2005 report by radioactive waste agency Nirex warning that many coastal nuclear sites are vulnerable to the effects of sea level rise from climate change, particularly storm surges.
Nirex also said those sites at most risk are generally located in low lying parts of southern England, where forecast energy demand is highest.
INCREASED COST
The report, released along with Wednesday's energy white paper, says the need to adapt current sites to the impacts of climate change does not rule out new nuclear build in coastal locations, but warns that it will probably increase the already large capital cost of constructing them.
If the government does decide to allow companies to build a new wave of reactors, it would be up to the private sector to propose what sites they want to use, a DTI spokesman said.
Only nine of the country's 19 existing nuclear power stations are suitable for building a new generation of nuclear power plants, the report says.
So the government may have to look inland at older civil nuclear sites and military installations if it embarks on a large plant building plan, using huge, unsightly concrete cooling towers and river water instead of sea water to keep the plants cool.
Experience in France shows river-cooled nuclear plants sometimes have to close as they cannot run safely in heatwaves.
Other possible sites identified by the report include existing coal and gas fired power stations, which already have connections to the electricity grid, a key factor in determining site suitability.