Mini nuclear plants to be built almost anywhere in UK

Mini nuclear plants to be built almost anywhere in UK

Mini-nuclear power plants will be allowed almost anywhere outside built-up areas, as ministers relax planning rules to allow a “reawakening” of atomic electricity.

Under plans to quadruple capacity in the next quarter of a century, ministers want a fleet of “small modular reactors” to be built across Britain alongside large power plants. Unlike conventional plants, small modular reactors do not need to be built on the coast and the government wants to open up far more areas as potential sites, in a developer-led approach that will replace rules that allow nuclear power stations only in eight named locations.

.....

A consultation on overhauling planning rules published on Thursday says that rather than ministers specifying sites, developers will be asked to identify locations for such reactors based on a new list of safety and environmental criteria. Only “population density” and “proximity to military activities” will rule out nuclear plants, meaning they cannot be built in areas with more than 5,000 people per square kilometre. This would rule out cities and most towns, and is designed to “minimise the risk to the public” in the event of a radioactive spill.

All other criteria will be discretionary, including size, flood risk, proximity to civil airports, the natural beauty, ecological importance or cultural heritage of the site. “Sites may still be considered suitable for nuclear deployment even where they fail to fully meet individual discretionary criteria, although not fully addressing multiple discretionary criteria may cumulatively lead to a site being considered unsuitable,”

(My emphasis above)

https://nuclear-news.net/2024/01/13/1-b1-mini-nuclear-plants-to-be-built-almost-anywhere-in-uk/

My take on this; They are revving the incompetence engine right to the red line with this. It seems to be the way of the world these days. Do now, worry about it later - there is mulah to be made! (<-- This is why. It is always why. They are in the money making business, not the power making business. They use power as a vehicle to money.) As far as I can tell, there have been no SMRs put into production as yet. Loads and loads of hot air on the internet about them (they will be our saviour!) but still to this day, not one in production. Reading between the lines it seems they want to roll these out en masse when, as far as I am concerned, the technology hasn't been proven yet. More so, the safety of them. These aren't the Thorium salt SMRs we have heard about, these are Uranium or MOX reactors. Just like Fukushima, Chernobyl, Windscale etc etc, only much smaller. ~100MW (SMR) vs 1000MW (regular sized reactor) - 10 times less output = 10 times safer? No, actually much more dangerous. Spread out nuclear reactors around a country could be a disaster of monumental proportions should a terrorist attack take place. They will be less safeguarded by the authorities than large reactors and are an ideal target for terrorist attacks. Not only attacks, but on fuel theft too. 10 extra reactors means 10 times more fuel deliveries. In other words, the more reactors a country has, whether large or small, means the risk increases. More activity = higher risk. It's really that simple. The law of averages mixed with greed, speed and incompetence..... Yeah, sure, everything will be good.... Rite?

And sure, I'm cynical. But my cynicism is merely based on the fact I have never in 50 years, heard a good story about nuclear reactors, but many, many, many, many, many bad, tragic stories. It is still happening all the time. Every week/month I learn of some kind 'issue' with some nuclear reactor, or the ancillary equipment for the reactor, failing, leaks, people injured, contaminated, and so on. If they STILL CAN NOT GET IT RIGHT with what they have now, and have had for years and years, how am I supposed to have a positive opinion on a new technology that hasn't been tested in production yet? Put 10 people around a camp fire, how many will get accidentally burned? Put 100 people around 10 camp fires, how many then? Bearing in mind that most people these days are idiots.  (And here , here and here if you need more proof people are idiots. And there is no shortage of videos and stories like these on the internet these days.)

A few other stories about SMRs:

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/small-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx  - Small Nuclear Power Reactors
https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/small-modular-reactors-last-chance-saloon-nuclear-industry - Small Modular Reactors: the last-chance saloon for the nuclear industry?
https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/02/08/1067992/smaller-nuclear-reactors/  - We were promised smaller nuclear reactors. Where are they?
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2023/11/03/news/bad-guys-bombs-nuclear-risks-small-modular-reactors  - Bad guys and bombs: The nuclear risks of small modular reactors
https://www.wins.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2019-20-3-REPORT-WS-on-Security-of-SMRs-1-1.pdf  - Security Of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

We never have had, nor will have the same scale of events happen with coal or gas fired power stations, or hydro, or solar, or wind (although these are falling apart at an unprecedented rate!) They said 'Solar and wind will make energy cheaper.' Why are my power bills more than ever, even after I have reduced the power consumption in my home to half of what it was 2 years ago. Liars maybe? The whole industry is as bent as a nine-bob-note. It will never change until either another disaster of magnificent proportions, or the people change.

Meh... [/rant]

FSM19 wrote:

They can´t even ensure that the software to run the Post Office works, how the hell can we expect dozens of nuclear plants to work safely. They will go to the cheapest source for equipment and software, hey I might even develp software to run on an Arduino Nano.

I chuckled when I read you might develop software on an Arduino! I find it funny because it is probably true! I suspect a bunch of people here could do an equally as bad job as them, or better. I very much doubt worse! 

With regards to the Post Office, it wasn't just the fact the software was flawed, the Post Office hid all sorts of error logs, keystroke logs and completely covered them up (which would have exonerated the wrongly convicted, had they been seen back then.) They even told their own barrister they didn't have the logs when they did, and the barrister had to write to the judge and apologise! They hid them from the people that had been wrongly convicted for over a year! Lies and corruption and saving one's own face lead to the wrong convictions of many postmasters and postmistresses. Some went to jail, and some are still there, and some committed suicide. My wife has worked in a post office for many years so we are both following the story very closely. I won't be happy until the people (all of them) that had any involvement in wrong doing are sent to prison and convicted of murder by proxy or at the very least, manslaughter.

It has taken me a good 20 years or so of research and learning, reading news articles and going down rabbit holes, and I have come to the conclusion that there are very few companies and/or company people (managers, directors, owners etc) that are moral and ethical. The world is FULL of corruption and scandal and it has made it's way to the top of some very big companies. As you say, FSM19, if the Post Office can't get it right, how on Earth do they get nuclear right?