Sustainable Technology Report

Introduction
Nuclear Power is again at the top of the UK governments political agenda. In January 2008 the go ahead was given for a new generation of nuclear power stations, an event which has sparked intense discussion and debate and the vast issues that surround this topic.

Nuclear energy provides the UK with approximately 20% of its electricity however all but one of its nuclear power stations were set to be closed .

This has led to some members of the public taking the same stance as the editor’s of the Daily Telegraph in posing the question “what other decision could cabinet members take on the issue of nuclear power?”.

The above however is only one section of opinion being made by the UK public. Accidents, spiralling construction costs and the worry about the disposal of nuclear waste have all contributed to a lack of enthusiasm by the public.

Despite the above doubts, there are facts that need to be faced head on by the powers that be, and they are: Oil and gas prices are soaring. Fossil fuels such as coal and oil are dwindling and I think everyone will agree that none of the above are sustainable fuel sources.

I will now analyse the main issues that surround this development in our nations new stance on nuclear power (such as cost, political/economic effects, opinion (including global perspective), alternatives to nuclear power and finally potential alternatives.

Cost
The actual cost of design, construction and running of a nuclear power plant is open to debate and is likely to be a large part of the argument for or against the governments recent decision. The estimated figures produced by such organisations as The Royal Academy Of Engineers and the Nuclear Suppliers Group vary considerably. During my research I was able to source a 2002 UK government report. In the report it stated that power from Sizewell B cost 6p/kWH. It is estimated that the cost of power will have dropped to 4p/kHW by 2020. The above information is disputed by anti nuclear agencies such as the New Economics Foundation who claim that such costs could double the above figures.
Reasons for such disagreements and varying cost estimates may lye in the potential additional factors such as decommissioning and insurance.

Having taken into consideration all of the above information I believe there is one vital feature that speaks strongly in favour of using a nuclear source as fuel. The fact is that a nuclear energy source such as uranium will not fluctuate in price like all fossil fuels. This alone will add to stability on the financial side of things as well as remaining a reliable source of energy for many years to come.

Example costs of power station construction costs.

Olkiluoto Nuclear power station.
Olkiluoto is currently under construction in Finland. The power station will cost approximately two billion pounds and will have power output of 1600Mw.

Gas Power Station set to be built in Newport.
This project is of particular interest to me because it is set to be built in my hometown! I believe it will be positive for the region because of the jobs in engineering it will bring. It will cost around four hundred million pounds and is being built by Severn Power. Its power output will be 800Mw.

Scroby Sands Offshore Wind farm Norfolk.
Scroby sands has a cost of seventy five million pounds and has a power output of 60Mw.

How do other possible technical solutions/alternatives compare to new build nuclear power stations?
In order to answer the above I will evaluate the technical solutions (such as wind farms). I will look at the pro’s and con’s of each and try to draw a conclusion as to whether any could be the better alternative to nuclear energy.

Gas: Current percentage of use 33.5%
Gas is a potential option to nuclear power. The positive features of gas are it has lower CO2 emissions than coal. The UK has its own gas reserves, thus would not have to rely on imports form such countries as Russia (with whom the UK’s relationship is unstable). Its is also quite cost effective, which has lead to its increase in popularity, especially in hydrogen powered cars.
However gas does have some negative points. Despite the fact that the UK has its own reserves, they are running out, and as I previously mentioned, electricity imports are not feasible because they could cause inflated prices. As the result of the above I believe the outlook on gas is as follows; Reliance on gas to continue, with UK now a net importer. Imports likely to account for 80% of total annual gas demand by 2020, based on existing policies, essentially making gas, as a fuel source unsustainable.

Hydro: Current percentage of use 2.1%
The positive aspects of Hydro power is that it has no CO2 emissions. This is a major factor because of the political implications of “greener energy” (every party is vying to be the most green party). Hydro has no vulnerability to fuel price or political instability that would effect such aspects as electricity imports. And finally Hydro would be a cheap option once the dam has been built.
The negative aspects of Hydro are as follows: Natural flow hydro is reliant on rainfall, and even in the UK this is a significant factor! It is also vulnerable to drought. Pump storage hydro also relies on electricity to pump water back uphill which is counter productive. And in addition to the above there are also environmental and social impacts of constructing large dams. Having carried out further research on the above, I have learned that the outlook on Hydro as a power source is bleak because much on the UK’s Hydro potential has already been exploited leaving little room for future development.

Wind. Current percentage of use 1.1%
Wind is a renewable source of energy and is not vulnerable to fuel price fluctuations. In addition to the about some experts gave claimed that the UK has the best wind resources in Europe. The wind turbine that convert wind to electricity are also easy and quick to build as well as being emission free.
A negative aspect of wind is where as the price will not fluctuate, wind levels will, and this is a factor that needs to be considered. Also when considering where to build the turbines it has for wind power there has been considerable local opposition which is again a difficult issue.
In my opinion the outlook for wind, as a power source is good. There is strong support from the government because of its target to increase renewable energy to 20% by 2020. The only real problem is that development faces serious local opposition
Solar. Current percentage of use 0.002%
Solar is a free and renewable energy source. Energy is generated from photovoltaic cells. They can be used to heat water directly and can be maximised by good building design. However there is one obvious downside to solar power within the UK and that is, UK sunshine is unreliable and limited. Solar power is also confined to daylight hours.
Given the above facts, I still believe the outlook on solar energy could be positive. Despite it being an expensive technology, if integrated into new building designs it could become more effective. This seems to be something that the UK government seems to agree with and estimates it will become economically competitive by 2025.

What implications does this have on the global community?
It is hard to tell exactly what the global implications of the UK’s decision to give the go ahead for a new generation of nuclear reactors will be. In my opinion it will not have a massive impact or change the direction in which any other country with nuclear power plants think, because we are all in the same situation. Every nation needs to power itself, while also cutting C02 emissions. Nuclear power stations do both of the above. Ideally every nation would use wind, solar or hydro methods to generate electricity whilst emitting almost no CO2 emissions, however the technology is not yet available to do so effectively.

Political and Social effects
In terms of political effects it is again a difficult to tell the implications of the governments decision build a new generation on nuclear reactors. The fact is that we need to supply the country with power, whilst meeting targets of reducing CO2 emissions. It is likely that each political party within the UK will have its own ideas on how this should be done, and there will always be debate as to which solution is the best. However in my opinion, nuclear power at the moment is the best solution.

Conclusion
I would like to conclude my report with my opinion on the issue of nuclear power. I believe that there are issues such as what is to be done with nuclear waste that needs to be addressed, and the nation needs to be informed in order to reassure everyone that the utmost is being done to find a correct solution. The fact is that technology is not yet sufficient to use hydro, wind and solar as reliable sources of energy. It is because of this that I think that at the very least nuclear power needs to be used as a bridge between fossil fuels and such energy sources as solar. I believe that we should go ahead with the new generation of nuclear reactors and aim to have sufficiently developed other technologies by the time there lifecycle is over.