atw 2017-07

More documents

Recommendations

Info

atw Vol. 62 (2017) | Issue 7 ı July 442 INSIDE NUCLEAR WITH NUCNET Nuclear Industry Calls on UK to Avoid Disruption of ‘Disorderly’ Withdrawal from Euratom NucNet The UK will need to set priorities for Brexit talks if it is to avoid disruption in the nuclear sector and the possibility of a disorderly withdrawal from the Euratom Treaty affecting ambitious plans to build new nuclear reactors, Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the London-based Nuclear Industry Association (NIA), said. In an interview with NucNet, Mr Greatrex, a former Labour MP and shadow energy minister, warned that a lack of prioritisation in Brexit talks could lead to problems related to moving nuclear-purpose components and difficulties collaborating with counties in nuclear R&D projects with significant economic, industrial and scientific impact. “Any disruption to Euratom arrangements is undesirable and could have a significant impact on the movement of people and goods, scientific collaboration, nuclear technology and reactor designs, and construction and decommissioning”, he said. The UK has confirmed that it will leave the Euratom Treaty at the same time as it withdraws from the EU, by 29 March 2019. This means there are agreements which will need to be put in place for areas that impact on nuclear activities in the UK. It would be a mistake to think of ‘ Brexatom’ impacting just one particular area related to nuclear in the UK, Mr Greatrex said. The 1957 Euratom Treaty governs the peaceful use of nuclear energy within the EU. Mr Greatrex said there might be an argument for alternative agreements to be put in place during the negotiation process. This might mean Euratom inspectors would continue inspections on UK installations whilst the transition happens. “This is a sensible and pragmatic approach,” he said. Mr Greatrex’s warning comes at the same time a report by the House of Lords, Britain’s upper house of parliament, warned that the government had left the UK nuclear industry at risk and must act urgently to ensure its continued operation post-Brexit. The report says withdrawal from Euratom is an unfortunate, and perhaps unforeseen, consequence of the prime minister's objective of ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK. Ministers must end the uncertainty and resolve the matter by securing alternative arrangements as urgently as possible, the report adds. In its official response to that report, the NIA said the UK nuclear industry has made it crystal clear to the government that it needs to be working on replacement arrangements for Euratom and discussing a transitional period now. Mr Greatrex said the NIA has been saying for some time that two years is a short period given the scope of the agreements that need to be agreed between the UK and the EU. This will be further complicated by external political factors, such as elections in various EU countries. Mr Greatrex said “a reality test” should be applied to guarantee that procedures and agreements are finalised rather than having hard-and-fast dates and then “nothing to be there beyond those dates”. He said: “Think about the components for existing nuclear sites which need to be replaced or for new-build projects. Most of those don’t come from the UK, but from the EU, or will at least have to travel through the EU. All these sectors in the UK will be impacted if we don’t have a rational, logical and sensible conclusion to the Brexit process.” Mr Greatrex warned of the possible impact of a “ disorderly” departure from Euratom on the UK’s plans to build up to 16 GW of new nuclear capacity in the UK with the first reactors online in the mid-2020s. This new generation of nuclear power stations will require total investment of at least £ 60 bn. The sites for new build are Hinkley Point, Sizewell, Bradwell, Moorside, Wylffa Newydd and Oldbury. Construction at Hinkley Point C has begun with the other projects at much earlier stages. But all of these will be affected by any disorderly leaving of Euratom’ Mr Greatrex said. “As much as 64 % of the content for Hinkley Point C is coming from the UK by value. That means there is 36 % which isn’t. And some of that will come from within the EU, some of it from outside the EU, but all through cooperation agreements which partly refer to Euratom.” If, for example, some forgings come from Japan Steelworks, there is an existing nuclear cooperation agreement between Japan and the UK, but the agreement references the safeguarding regime under Euratom. So the UK will have to make sure it has something else in place to enable that cooperation and trade to happen after Brexit. Horizon’s project at Wylffa Newydd in north Wales will be using US-designed GE Hitachi technology. Under US law, there needs to be a nuclear cooperation agreement in place before any trade or commercial activity can happen in any US nuclear technology. “Having a nuclear cooperation agreement between the US and UK will be pretty important for that project,” Mr Greatrex said. “None of this is impossible, but everything becomes more complicated. Companies might have to go through a process of export licence control regimes, or tariffs. And there is no point in this, no benefit.” Mr Greatrex’s comments echo those from the Brusselsbased nuclear industry body Foratom, which said the UK and the EU will need to agree transitional arrangements that will apply if the two-year Brexit negotiation period is not enough to prepare for the UK’s departure from Euratom. “Being part of the Euratom community enables new-build, decommissioning, R&D and other programmes of work to continue without any disruption,” said Foratom director-general Jean-Pol Poncelet. Mr Greatrex also urged the UK government to find “a nuanced approach” to making sure the free movement of people with particular skills – including those needed by the nuclear industry – is not affected by the withdrawal Inside Nuclear with NucNet Nuclear Industry Calls on UK to Avoid Disruption of ‘Disorderly’ Withdrawal from Euratom ı NucNet
atw Vol. 62 (2017) | Issue 7 ı July from the EU and Euratom. He said there will have to be administrative arrangements and a “work-permitting regime” to make sure free movement of workers can still happen in some limited areas “and the nuclear sector is one of those where this needs to be the case”. On Brexit’s possible impact on nuclear research in the UK, Mr Greatrex said people are “not yet leaving in droves” because they are engaged in work, but the uncertainty means there will be an impact on attracting people and this will have a short-term impact “even if we get the best possible outcome in two years’ time”. He highlighted the concern that the UK might end up imposing administrative barriers for people to be able to work there. “This will make it more unattractive as a destination for highly skilled labour. Why would you entertain the possibility of going to the UK when you could find work more easily elsewhere?” The UK’s new generation of nuclear plants is important because 21 % of the country’s electricity comes from nuclear – almost half of all low-carbon electricity. The target is to get rid of all coal generation by 2025, but by 2030 almost all of the UK’s nuclear power stations will have reached retirement age even when long-term operation is taken into account. This potential “energy gap” is where nuclear is vital, Mr Greatrex said. According to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, the government’s policy to close all coal-fired power stations, combined with the retirement of the majority of the UK’s ageing nuclear fleet and growing electricity demand, will leave the country facing a 40 to 55 percent electricity supply gap. “Government needs to take urgent action to work with industry to create a clear pathway with timeframes and milestones for new electricity infrastructure to be built including fossil fuel plants, nuclear power, energy storage and combined heat and power,” the institution said. There is another element to the problem of finding baseload power. UK gas production “has gone down massively” with imports coming from Norway, Qatar and the Netherlands and Belgium, but originating in Russia. The UK’s nuclear industry believes it does not make sense to be overly reliant on a commodity whose prices are volatile. Gas may have lower carbon emissions than coal, but it is still a fossil fuel. “All this points to needing nuclear as a significant part of the electricity generation mix,” Mr Greatrex said. Even with massive investment in advance storage technology, demand side management techniques and energy efficiency, the UK will still need to generate a lot of electricity and will need to do that before existing capacity goes offline. “This is the role for nuclear.” Author NucNet The Independent Global Nuclear News Agency Editor responsible for this story: David Dalton Editor in Chief, NucNet Avenue des Arts 56 1000 Brussels, Belgium www.nucnet.org INSIDE NUCLEAR WITH NUCNET 443 | | Editorial Advisory Board Frank Apel Erik Baumann Dr. Maarten Becker Dr. Erwin Fischer Eckehard Göring Iris Graffunder Dr. Ralf Güldner Carsten Haferkamp Dr. Petra-Britt Hoffmann Horst Kemmeter Prof. Dr. Marco K. Koch Dr. Guido Knott Ulf Kutscher Jörg Michels Roger Miesen Dr. Thomas Mull Dr. Ingo Neuhaus Dr. Joachim Ohnemus Prof. Dr. Winfried Petry Dr. Tatiana Salnikova Dr. Andreas Schaffrath Dr. Jens Schröder Dr. Wolfgang Steinwarz Prof. Dr. Bruno Thomauske Dr. Walter Tromm Dr. Hannes Wimmer Ernst Michael Züfle Imprint | | Editorial Christopher Weßelmann (Editor in Chief) Im Tal 121, 45529 Hattingen, Germany Phone: +49 2324 4397723 Fax: +49 2324 4397724 E-mail: editorial@nucmag.com | | Official Journal of Kerntechnische Gesellschaft e. V. (KTG) | | Publisher INFORUM Verlags- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH Robert-Koch-Platz 4, 10115 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49 30 498555-0, Fax: +49 30 498555-19 www.nucmag.com | | General Manager Christian Wößner, Berlin, Germany | | Advertising and Subscription Sibille Wingens Robert-Koch-Platz 4, 10115 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49 30 498555-10, Fax: +49 30 498555-19 E-mail: sibille.wingens@nucmag.com | | Prize List for Advertisement Valid as of 1 January 2017 Published monthly, 11 issues per year Germany: Per issue/copy (incl. VAT, excl. postage) 16.- € Annual subscription (incl. VAT and postage) 176.- € All EU member states without VAT number: Per issue/copy (incl. VAT, excl. postage) 16.- € Annual subscription (incl. VAT, excl. postage) 176.- € EU member states with VAT number and all other countries: Per issues/copy (no VAT, excl. postage) 14.95 € Annual subscription (no VAT, excl. postage) 164.49 € | | Copyright The journal and all papers and photos contained in it are protected by copyright. Any use made thereof outside the Copyright Act without the consent of the publisher, INFORUM Verlags- und Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH, is prohibited. This applies to reproductions, translations, microfilming and the input and incorporation into electronic systems. The individual author is held responsible for the contents of the respective paper. Please address letters and manuscripts only to the Editorial Staff and not to individual persons of the association´s staff. We do not assume any responsibility for unrequested contributions. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editorial. | | Layout zi.zero Kommunikation Berlin, Germany Antje Zimmermann | | Printing inpuncto:asmuth druck + medien gmbh Baunscheidtstraße 11 53113 Bonn ISSN 1431-5254 Inside Nuclear with NucNet Nuclear Industry Calls on UK to Avoid Disruption of ‘Disorderly’ Withdrawal from Euratom ı NucNet
Page 1 and 2: nucmag.com 2017 7 ISSN · 1431-5254
Page 3 and 4: atw Vol. 62 (2017) | Issue 7 ı Jul
Page 5 and 6: Kommunikation und Training für Ker
Page 9: atw Vol. 62 (2017) | Issue 7 ı Jul
Page 61 and 62:
atw Vol. 62 (2017) | Issue 7 ı Jul
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
nucmag.com 2016 edition now availab
show all

atw 2017-07

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?