Thursday, 4 January 2018

Cost of Nuclear Power Accidents - versus - Savings in Cost of Healthcare from Nuclear Power Use.

Chernobyl Accident
For Belarus, there is a 15 national estimate of $235B for 1986-2015 attributed to “aggregate damage” and for Ukraine, there is a 25-year estimate for “total economic loss” of $198B. Scaled to 30 years, the Ukraine estimate of around $240B is quite comparable to that for Belarus. In our 2013 report, we identified a population of 10,000,000 as “exposed” in a relatively broad sense to radiation and the disaster, approximately one-third each from Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

Thus, tripling either the Ukraine or Belarus 30-year estimates to cover the full exposed population leads to a total of around $700B in costs for the 30 years, assuming the same cost figures apply to Russia. This estimate involves a number of assumptions and must be considered as uncertain, but it is based on governmental figures.

However, regardless of the inherent uncertainty the figure is high and existing estimates would support overall costs of hundreds of billions.
Chernobyl - Say: US$750 billion
Fukushima Accident

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan’s government on Friday nearly doubled its projections for costs related to the Fukushima nuclear disaster to 21.5 trillion yen ($188 billion), increasing pressure on Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) to step up reform and improve its performance.

Fukushima - Say: US$200 billion
Other Accidents
Cost of Nuclear Accidents in France, Germany, India, UK and USA [Including TMI] = [2006] US$9,753 million. Note: Japan and South Korea accidents are not costed.
Add in, Say: US$1,000 million = US$10,753 million.
Then + 19.05% inflation to 2016: US$12,800 million

Everything Else - Say US$46 billion

Total [All Nuclear Accidents]: US$0.996 trillion

Healthcare Savings

Economic value of U.S. fossil fuel electricity health impacts

“…For coal…… associated economic values of health impacts are [2012] $0.19–$0.45/kWh…”. Average = $0.32/kWh

Add 3.11% for 2014 value:   Average = $0.33/kWh

But the USA did not burn all of the coal to generate 76,560 TWh of electricity – and US healthcare costs are much higher than most other nations.

A % of 76,560 TWh needs to be apportioned to significant nuclear power nations and their healthcare costs, as a % of USA healthcare costs, applied to that figure:
Cost of Nuclear Power Accidents:
US$0.996 trillion
Nuclear Power Healthcare Savings:
US$14.95 trillion
ACCIDENTS 1     :     SAVINGS 15


Thursday, 20 July 2017

We [the UK] are going back to the Top Table as far as Nuclear is concerned !

Now this is how to deliver a presentation - without hesitation, repetition or deviation - plus a little bit of irony and humour - and with hardly a glance at any notes. 

Professor Paul Howarth, Chief Executive of the National Nuclear Laboratory [NNL] implying deals on the future of nuclear have already been done in the Corridors of Power.

It's [at least] 75 GW of Nuclear, and more probably 
100 GW, by 2080, to have any chance of meeting 
our mandatory carbon targets.

"…the Government is now looking at what industry is it going to rely on in terms of manufacturing.
Nuclear represents that nice, warm comfort-blanket that the Government is going to need in a Post–Brexit world, of a long-term, sustainable, engineering, science and technology-based industry sector..." 

And that’s written into our industry strategy now !

Thursday, 8 June 2017

930,277 Lancastrians reject 299 sq km of Offshore Wind in Favour of a Single Sellafield Reactor.

A Sellafield based Nuclear Reactor 
can generate all of the electricity [domestic; commercial; industrial] used by a population of 942,424 people for 60 years.  That's more than what is required for the Cities of Lancaster, Preston and Liverpool.
Population Supplied: 930,277
6 Offshore Wind Farms
Off the North West Coast of England are : 
West of Duddon Sands; Walney; Robin Rigg; Ormonde; Barrow; Burbo Bank.          
4C Offshore

A total of 363 x 3.47 MW [average] turbines occupy 188 sq km, have an Installed Capacity of 1,260 MW, have an Average Lifespan of 22.5 years and cost £3,655 million 
[£2.9 million/MW Installed]

'Homes powered annually': 762,507.
BEIS figure: 3,994 kWh/home per year.
So - Electricity generated per hour: 347,654,447 W
 @594 W/person
Population Supplied: 585,277
To supply 930,277 would:
Require 577 x 3.47 MW Turbines
Occupy an Area of 299 sq km
Have an Installed Capacity of 2,002 MW
Cost £5,806 million
To supply for 60 years, all of this Offshore Wind Farm Capacity has to be built a 2nd Time and then Generate for 2/3 of the life of the 3rd Build - That's a factor of X2.66' !
That would cost: £15,487 million.
[The output from 1,539 x 3.47 MW turbines]
The most expensive form of Pressurised Water Reactor, the the 3,200 MW EPR at Hinkley Point, has a capital cost of £18 Billion + a 'delayed' cost of £7.2 billion for decommissioning and waste handling and storage. That works out at £7,875 million/MW.
At the same rate in £/MW for capital cost, decommissioning, waste handling and storage, a 620 MW SMR would cost:                    £4,883 million.

Offshore Wind Turbines cost 3.17X more than SMRs !

Tuesday, 6 June 2017

Sellafield 24/7 Electricity to supply 930,277 Lancastrians and Save 94,153,882 tonne of CO2 Emissions.

In 2016, 338.6 TWh of electricity were generated in the UK

In 2016, the population of the UK was 65,111,143

That means every hour of every day, every man, woman and child in the UK 'used' 594 Watts - that includes the electricity used domestically and by industry, commerce, schools, hospitals - and everything that, 
for each and everyone of us, provides our 
wonderful way of life.
On a site the size of a large supermarket, the GE-Hitachi PRISM Reactor has an installed capacity of 622 MW. It will operate at 90% capacity factor for 60 years

Every hour it will generate 559,800,000 Watts of 24/7, low-carbon electricity.

So it is capable of supplying: 
942,424 people, every year for 60 years !

100 miles of National Grid, serving:
City of Lancaster: Population 138,375
Preston Built Up Area: Population 313,322
City of Liverpool: Population 478,580
Grand Total: 930,277
List of Towns and Cities in Lancashire by Population

With coal disappearing from the electricity generating scene, a conservative estimation of emissions saved would be to consider displacing gas-fired generation:
"...electricity supplied by gas (320 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh)..."
P. 15 - Electricity Generation. CO2 Emissions by Fuel Type

From a tiny supermarket-sized site, this single PRISM installation will generate 4,904 GWh of 24/7 electricity and save 1,569,231 t CO2 emissions, every year for 60 years.


Sunday, 26 February 2017

Wind and Solar Power Drain the Lifeblood Out Of The Economy !

Hot off the press:     All in the one Government document - both employment data and TWh generated in 2016, for Solar, Wind and Nuclear Power:

From the enlarged view it's possible measure the bar-lengths and accurately estimate the TWh generated for Nuclear - Solar - Wind, using the 1000 TWh line as a datum. TWh generated for the whole of 2016 taken to be the estimate for 'Sept 2016 YTD' x 4/3. 

"...Energy is the lifeblood of the economy.  
The primary 
objective of the 
energy sector 
is to supply 
energy to the 
broader economy, 
allowing it to 
grow and increase the standard of living of its citizens. 

Artificially pumping up employment in the energy sector per se - and thereby driving down productivity, 
while driving up costs to the broader economy - is counterproductive to overall net job creation and economic growth. It is a sign of increased efficiency if more energy can be produced and delivered with fewer workers, because this expands the overall output potential of the economy..."

Nuclear Power - 1 Job = 100% UEL (a)
Wind Power ----- 1 Job = 27% UEL
Solar Power ----- 1 Job = 1.25% UEL
Note (a): 'Use of Economic Lifeblood'

Tuesday, 7 February 2017

Secrets Revealed About The UK's Biggest Onshore Wind Farm - Criminal Levels Of Environmental Impact!

The topography of the area is of a relatively flat plateau with occasional hills rising above the flatter plateau landmass, all of which is overlain with deep peat, in some places reaching down past 8 meters. 

On top of this is found a mixture of plants that are specialised in living in the low nutrient peat environment and which give the area its distinctive appearance.

One further factor had to come into play for the peat to form of course - a high rainfall (oceanic) climate. This coupled with the underlying geology of Whitelee meant that blanket bog formed over the scarred hills.

No-one knows exactly when blanket bogs began to form but its accepted that it was somewhere between 6000 and 9000 years ago.

Whitelee Landscape

Utopia - Dystopia ???
Commenting on the official opening of Whitelee Wind Farm, Friends of the Earth's Executive Director Andy Atkins said it was " exciting step towards a greener future..."

3,200 MW Hinkley Point C [HPC] will operate at 90% capacity factor [cf]. 539 MW Whitelee has a cf of 27%. It needs 20 wind farms the size of Whitelee to generate the same amount of intermittent electricity in a year, as the 24/7 electricity delivered by HPC.

"...With the current windfarm covering 78 km²..."

20 x 78 km² = 1,560 km²

  • A windfarm constructed sympathetically on peat can produce a positive CO2 return within 3 years of operation. If however the windfarm is poorly built, the CO2 payback can take 30 years - longer than the lifespan of the windfarm
  • About 70% of the roads at Whitelee are built using floating road construction methods because of the deep and sometimes fluid peat
  • 900 hectares of non-native conifer plantation was removed as part of the development of Phase-1 of the windfarm - around 2.25 million trees
  • Deepest peat encountered was 7m. Average peat depth was 3.3m
  • Approximately 850,000m3 of peat excavated and spread
At 7:29, a walk through Whitelee Windfarm and a description of peat removal.
"...No-one knows exactly when blanket bogs began to form but its accepted that it was somewhere between A6000 and 9000 years ago..."

6,000 to 9,000 years of carbon storage - then it's all released in an instant. And for what? To cut an *unknowable* amount of greenhouse gas emissions 

*unknowable* - The calculation can only be modelled because of the impossibility of measuring the amount of methane released during construction, forest removal and peat bog excavation !
And that's not the end of the story. Whitelee's lifespan is stated as 20 years, but it will probably produce for 25 years, which is the norm [claimed by wind power bodies]. So the 20 wind farms would have to be built a 2nd and be 10 years into the 3rd build to deliver for 60 years. That's a factor of X2.4

That's 2.4 x 20 x 539 MW = 25,872 MW of installed capacity.
At £600 million for 539 MW:
25,872 MW Costs £28,800 million !!!!!!!

Monday, 19 December 2016

What do we Want - Wind Farms ----- Where do we want them - Nature Reserves !!

Hark ! - The cry of the Lesser Spotted Environmentalist.
Habitat:     Urban and Metropolitan Back Yards.
Distribution:     Worldwide.

Then along comes Aikengall II

Comprising of 22 x 3.6 MW turbines with a total of 79.2 MW installed capacity and occupying an area of 6.3 sq km, Aikengall II will deliver 208,138 MWh per year over its 25 year 'Operational Phase'. 

That's 5.2 TWh of [intermittent] electricity in total, at a cost of £120 million:     
Cost October 21 2016

But Hinkley point C nuclear power plant will deliver 1,513.7 TWh of [24/7] electricity over its 60 year design life, so we'd need to build 191 onshore wind farms of this capacity, occupying an area measuring 35 km x 35 km to deliver as much [intermittent] electricity as Hinkley - perched on its site measuring 830 m x 830 m.

And that would cost:     £34.92 billion
Costing 94% more than Hinkley !!

and just imagine what this does to the pristine ecosystems and rare species on that 1 site: