I hope they do netter than they did back in the 1970s. I worked on a Bridgeport mill next to someone who was making telescopic arms for Windfrith nuclear establishment in Dorset. They were large stainless tubes about 5 inches diameter. Every so often you heard “shit” followed by a bit of riveting where he had drilled a hole wrong and had to fill it.

I knew this was wrong but did not know why or even what nuclear energy was back in those days.

any system is only as safe as the weakest link.

And the weakest link is “Boris”.

It took 5 years from thinking a power producing reactor would be a good idea to Calder Hall going on line. It then ran fit about 40 years. Why does it take so long now? . Modern reactors produce far less radioactive waste. Despite the scaremongers, nuclear is one of the safest means of making electricity. Today's statement is that 'up to' 8 reactors will be approved within 8 years. Meaningless polito jargon.

Governments love big vanity projects and infrastructure plans. I bet a huge order for brown envelopes is imminent.

If only coal was carbon free.

Where did the 'off-the-shelf ' small modular reactors go ?

No where. This is what RR is considering, essentially a factory built reactor. They have been trying to sell the idea for years.

JA

Don't worry, nuclear fusion will solve all our problems, the day after tomorrow.

Edited By JA on 07/04/2022 20:03:01

Civil SMRs are very different to submarine reactors, but Roderick is right, the world has been building power reactors for 70 years now, we know how to do it

There is plenty of coal below the UK, see  UK coal. How much of it is economically recoverable depends on what people are prepared to pay for it, and whether we can persuade anyone to work in dangerous conditions underground. However, burning it would contribute to the ruination of the planet, so apart from where there is no alternative (Heritage railways being a case in point) its best left where it is. Converting iron ore to iron metal is another major use of coal. Injecting hydrogen as well as using coke can reduce CO2 emissions by 21% (as long as you use green hydrogen). This process is well established. There is another process which doesn't use coke, but only one plant in Europe. Again it needs green hydrogen to eliminate CO2. All this boils down to a need for a lot more electricity to produce green hydrogen, which can be stored, thus reducing the problem of intermittent wind/solar. For more info see pt1 and pt 2. This second method sounds good, but it will be more expensive. Unless we persuade everyone to adopt it we can only go it alone by taxing imports, and that sets off trade wars which we would lose.

Edited By duncan webster on 07/04/2022 23:17:25

Having worked in various prodjects and parts for RR ie sealing rings heat transfer tubes and doors for nuclear reactors which were stainless steel and a refuelling rig for submarines so long ago 1970s i dont know why we don't have the knowhow sooner, perhaps it's the power generation side which is taking the time to sort out. Also there was a project to make coal mining autonamus machinery which was looked at by Dowty and Dosco which was to remove human from underground mining. Also there was loads of money spent on carbon dioxide capture at power stations what hapened to that.

David

The announcement of 8 reactors is just a pr exercise to appease the voters so that our masters can be seen to be doing something, by the time the public expect results those who made the promises will be long gone from office. We have to get away from short term decisions that are made to curry favour with the public and have proper long term binding planning decisions that mean something and are followed through with positive outcomes. I won’t hold my breath waiting. Dave W