Hislop denies Wales exists

A copyright infringement if I ever saw one

Now I know that Ian Hislop; the most English of educated gents, denies he is in fact welsh, although he is really...though we the welsh are happy he denies it......

But as editor of Private Eye he is taking it a bit far by denying the very existence of Wales.

As in the lack of Wylfa B in the above article, unless that is he thinks it acceptable to dump on Wales....oh hold on by his very denial you could say he's done that already.

I don't want to be foreboding...but....

Centrica have had cold feet over UK nuclear power, another firm that's decided  nuclear is too expensive to develop - do you think they maybe have a point? - See Centrica pulls out of new UK nuclear projects

And as we know Cumbria have had cold feet over burial of nuclear waste, and it seems we could have a bit of a problem...if we don't find somewhere we can keep the radioactive waste safe for a very long time. See: No nuclear storage = no Wylfa B?

So I think there's a possibility that Wylfa B might not be built, you know the thing that was going to transform the island...put us on a firmer footing, all them jobs etc etc

I hope therefore someone is actually thinking of a Plan B.. C.. D ....E just in case Wylfa B never happens... if Hitachi cant find the investors, or anyone in fact to run Horizon after they have built the power station - 'cause they've already said they don't want to run it in the long term.

 You know if Wylfa B doesn't get built what happens then?

Wylfa B and the welsh language

Listening to BBC Wales news last night about  the visit by Hitachi to Wylfa, was struck by a closing disclaimer made by hobnobbing politicians and directors from Hitachi...that there was no guarantees that the 'new' jobs would be local.

Which I think most of us knew anyway, especially during the construction phase. Building a nuclear power station requires a skilled workforce and they tend to travel round the world from job to job. And with fewer countries now building new nuclear plants there's not likely to be a shortage.

Of course there will be some jobs for locals, well someone has to make the tea, and clean the construction offices etc..etc..

Then there are the permanent jobs, which somehow will dissuade the youngsters of the island from crossing the bridge in search of further education and a well paid career.

This assuming that they want to work in the nuclear industry in the first place, want to be engineers and technicians....and not forgetting the skilled workforce that already works at Wylfa, and those who worked at Trawsfynydd.

Whilst reading the Daily Post this morning and showing my age I had a 'I can't believe it' moment or as I said it 'what the fuck'.....

Apparently David Jones MP, Welsh Secretary said and I quote "This is also very important for the Welsh Language, I remember the saying "Heb waith dim gwaith" and am delighted that the young people from the island will not have to leave if they want to live here, work here and raise a family"

Which on one level is true, without jobs you won't have a community no matter what the native language is.....but really as we know during the construction phase the majority of the workers will be from elsewhere, some traveling daily, some renting accommodation during the week etc...so not sure how such an influx of migrant workers will help the welsh language.

Especially as rental cost are likely to go up, as to house prices, most probably pricing many young local families out of the market completely, forcing them to move off the island to find a home.

As Tatsuro Issizuka, Vice-president of Hitachi said he expected the majority of the workers to be from the UK.....so no guarantees about local jobs and only an expectation that the majority of the jobs will be from the UK.

To try to link Wylfa B and the welsh language, in some rather pathetic attempt I think to discredit Leanne Wood and Plaid Cymru and their anti nuclear policy is in my opinion rather stupid. Simple message for David Jones MP 'shut the fuck up' and stop treating us like morons.  

A new grid connection across the island.

The National Grid is consulting about proposed routes for a new grid connection to serve Wylfa B (if built) and the offshore Celtic Array.  The consultation can be seen on their website.  The preferred option is a  overhead line along one the following corridors:

There was a subsea HVDC option, but that would have cost more. I'm always surprised when those who support the construction of Wylfa B and associated infrastructure, then turn round and oppose wind turbines on land, normally on the grounds it may keep the tourist away. Or those who oppose wind turbines on land but think that the more expensive off shore wind farms are better, forgetting that a grid connection would also be needed for them.

As for Wylfa B, whilst I have no problems with nuclear power, it seems it's now too expensive as a viable option if we want to keep the cost of electricity down, and not forgetting the line of new pylons buzzing away as they cross the landscape.

The Chinese walk away from Wylfa B?

The talk was, especially amongst local politicians,  there would be at least 3 strong bids to take over Horizon and build Wylfa B.

And according to this weeks Holyhead and Anglesey Mail that would indeed seem to be the case. "Plans for Wylfa B have taken a major step forward as bids have been submitted for Horizon....bids have been received by three consortiums" they say.

However, according to the Financial Times this Wednesday (in an article by Guy Chazan, Anousha Sakoui and Jim Pickard) "A Franco-Chinese consortium has walked away from the race to build Britain’s new generation of reactors in a setback to the government’s hopes of ushering in a revival of nuclear power."

Also the Westinghouse consortium had failed to secure Chinese state backing and the Finacial Times says "Some industry experts believe only Chinese companies have the financial firepower to shoulder the immense cost of building new reactors."

So it seems on Friday that only two bids were received from Westinghouse and Hitachi, and we may know who is the preferred bidder in about three weeks,  but even then there is still uncertainty as to whether Wylfa B will ever be built.  

At what cost do we build Wylfa B?

In the Daily Post today there is a letter from our very own MP (Albert Owen, just in case you had forgotten) about 'mixed messages on future of nuclear'.

In the letter he says "What future investors in nuclear technology and the supply chain want is clarity and certainty. Strong commitments."

But at what cost? - we know that nuclear power is not cheap, but surely there must be a point when you say sorry this is far too expensive.

OK, in the short term there would be benefits for the island if a new power station was built. But if this means even more expensive electricity bills, surely one needs to question whether in the long term its a viable solution for our electricity needs.

Anglesey without Wylfa B?

In my humble opinion nuclear power does have a role to play as part of a mix of electricity supply. However, it seems that nuclear power does not make commercial sense, something I have  posted about before.

Direct subsidy from the UK Government for nuclear power would be against EU laws, which means you have to find a back-door way of providing nuclear subsidy - which is by getting the consumer to pay more, estimates vary as to how much.

But then again what are the alternatives? - especially if we are to meet our legal requirement for reducing carbon emissions.

Putting the above to one side, another argument for Wylfa B has been the number of jobs it would retain and create, especially in one of the poorer regions of the UK. It has been seen by many local politicians as a 'golden cow' that would somehow deliver great prosperity to the island. And doubtless in many respects it would, but with the world heading for recession and a period of stagnation (worse case scenario a depression), what realistic hopes are there of investors coming forward to fund a project knowing that other similar schemes have not been completed on time and are well over budget.

In other words do we have a 'Plan B' should Wylfa B not go ahead? - after all Wylfa B forms a fundamental part of the Energy Island concept.

The protest group PAWB does have such a plan, and they have published a  Manifesto for Môn.

They claim the Manifesto outlines how 2,500-3,000 jobs could be created on the island if a realistic strategy was adopted.

And it has strong support from Sir Roger Jones, the former chairman of the Welsh Development Authority whom said to PAWB “Congratulations on the Manifesto document. I strongly support your vision. Thank you for putting so much thought in to what we can do.”

I haven't read the PAWB manifesto and will do so soon. Their website says the manifesto acknowledges the other important industries based on the island, notably tourism and agriculture, and recognises the importance of safeguarding a clean and unpolluted environment for their further development and promotion -  which I think most of us would agree with.

UK to subsidize nuclear power via EU?

In August 2010, Chris Huhne the then Energy Secretary told BBC News

"My position and my party's position was always one of scepticism about the economics of nuclear power, but what we did in the coalition agreement is recognise the differences between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

"We responded with an agreement which will say very clearly there will be no public subsidy for nuclear because it is an old technology... But at the same time, if investors come forward with proposals it is absolutely clear they will go through. "We believe that will happen. We believe there are investors who will be investing in new nuclear,"

But since then, there has been the nuclear disaster at Japan, the decision of Germany to close all of their nuclear plants by 2022, a world wide slow down and jittery investors as shown by E.ON UK and RWE npower decision to abandon their plans to build nuclear plants at Wylfa and Olbury.

All of this begs the question - will nuclear power ever be viable without subsidy from the public purse?

A post in the blog Zerohedge "Suddenly A Nasty Fight over Subsidies for Nukes in Europe" brought to my attention allegations that the UK was trying to get a subsidy for nuclear power from the EU.

The French newspaper lexpress.fr also ran this story.

According to the German press, four countries among which France and Britain have demanded that nuclear power is subsidized by the European Union, as well as renewable energy. The France denies such an initiative....

...An article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung on Friday, France, Britain, Poland and the Czech Republic have sent letters to Brussels in order to subsidize the EU nuclear energy such as wind or Solar, in preparation for a meeting of energy ministers next week.

Meanwhile on Friday Reuters had the headline "EU states say renewable goal not fair on other fuels"

"Renewable energy does not have more right to an EU target than other fuels, according to pro-nuclear states and coal-intensive Poland, as debate heats up over updating a 2020 goal to have a 20 percent share of green fuel in the energy mix.

The comments from Britain and France, as well as Poland, have been made as part of consultations on the Energy 2050 Roadmap....

The British government in a position paper said "any targets set should be neutral with respect to different low carbon technologies."

All of which is based on leaked documents, but what seems clear is that there are moves afoot lead by the UK, France and Poland to include nuclear power and other 'neutral technology' as green fuel in the energy mix.

Whether this would lead to the EU funding nuclear power in the UK is unlikely, as Germany which pays 20% of the EU bill is most likely to veto such move.

All of which means that if the Conservatives cannot get the Liberal Democrats to change the coalition agreement to allow subsidy of the nuclear sector, then it seems there is little chance of investors coming forward.

Wylfa B - now far too costly to make commercial sense?

With hindsight maybe we should have foreseen the announcement; that RWE Npower and E.On, would not proceed with the building of nuclear plants in the UK.

After the tragic accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan, Germany decided to abandon nuclear power, and their electricity companies faced massive decommissioning costs. See Reuters - Nuclear shutdown costs mount in Germany.

In the UK it was recently re-confirmed by the UK government that new nuclear operators will have to cover their waste and decommissioning costs - see DECC.

Then are the concerns about the new build costs of the third generation nuclear plants. In July 2011, Damian Carrington in his Guardian environmental blog said:

"Time is money, they say, and the new nuclear power plant being built by EDF at Flamanville in France is now at least four years behind time and €2.7bn over budget. EDF blamed the delay on two fatal construction accidents and dealing with safety analyses prompted by the Fukushima disaster."

Maybe some other investors will invest in Wylfa B, but with the world and the UK seeing very low growth; according to the OECD the UK is in recession (see BBC News) - the uncertain costs, the likely project overrun and problems raising the necessary finance what realistic chance is there of that happening?

As an aside, I'm sure there is no truth in the rumours, that the Conservative led Coalition Government talked up a possible strike by delivery drivers, to boost sales of fuel to boost the GDP and tax revenue?

But let me return to the islands problems - the plans of Leanne Wood, leader of Plaid Cymru for a clean energy revolution for Wales with Ynys Môn at it's heart; which was heavily criticised by the islands Tories, may now be worth looking at seriously?

After all with the prospect of a Wylfa B if not dead in the water, its delay will mean many years of waiting, in the meantime we need to find ways of stimulating growth on the island and hopefully some meaningful jobs.

Improvements to A5025 between Valley and Amlwch

This week residents whom may be affected by proposed improvements to the A5025, as part of Wylfa B have been written to by Alan Smith, Head of Site Development at Horizon. The text of the letter is self explanatory and is as below:

"Dear Sir/Madam

Potential route improvements to the A5025 between Valley and the proposed site for a new nuclear power station at Wylfa

In November 2011 we wrote to landowners along the route of the A5025 between Valley and Amlwch to outline our approach to considering what road improvements may be needed to support the construction and operation of a new nuclear power station at Wylfa.

I am now writing to all residents living between Valley and our proposed development site to provide our early thoughts on where we believe route improvements may be needed in these areas, ahead of us presenting more detailed options formally to you as part of our first phase of community consultation in the next few months.

Through our work with the Isle of Anglesey County Council Highways Authority and our environmental consultants. Mott MacDonald we're looking at the following areas for possible route improvements:

• The Valley crossroad - where the crossroads may need to be bypassed
• Llanfachraeth - where a bypass to the east of the village is being considered
• Llanfaethlu - where the bends at the Black Lion Inn and Llanfaethlu may need to be straightened
• Cefn Coch - where the existing route between Bod-Hedd and Cefn Coch may need to be straightened
• Tregele - where modifications to the site access at Tregele as well as potential changes to the access to Cemlyn may need to be considered.

We have started talking privately to landowners that may be directly affected by any potential changes to the A5025 in those areas prior to developing our options further. These are early stage discussions and we have not developed any firm proposals at this stage.

Its our intention to talk to everyone who we believe may be directly affected by any potential road improvements as part of our project and, in the coming months, will present draft proposals to the public as part of our first phase of formal consultation. We will hold public exhibitions across Anglesey and North Wales where you will be able to view our proposals and give us your feedback. Additionally, we may hold mini consultations specifically on proposals relating to the A5025 as we want to give local people every opportunity to have a say on our proposals.

While dates and locations of our consultation events have yet to be announced, but we will advertise them widely in the media, through our newsletter to every home on the island, and via the Isle of Anglesey County Council.

You can also register for updates on our consultation process at consultation.horizonnuclearpower.com

While we tried to ensure this letter is sent to all residents along the route of the A5025 from Valley to the proposed construction site, if you are aware of anyone that has not received this letter, please let us know.

You can contact us via our freephone hotline on 0800 954 9516 or email address at wylfaenquiries@horizonnuclearpower.com

The next stage of our work will be to consider what road improvements may be needed along the A5025 from the proposed construction site to Amlwch and we will keep residents in those areas up to date on our early proposals."

Further information about Horizon Nuclear Power can be found on their website horizonnuclearpower.com/wylfa

(Note: letter from Horizon scanned using text recognition software, and may not reflect the layout of the original letter. Any spelling mistakes most likely to be mine and my typing skills. A letter in welsh was also sent by Horizon.)

My perspective on wind farms and why we need them.

There is it seems a growing concern about wind farms on Ynys Môn,  the island of whom most visitors I know comment on how windy it is.

A related concern is the apparent lack of debate around the issue of wind farms - well let me contribute some of my thoughts.

First all you need to think about the wider picture - One day we shall have used most of the planet's natural resources be they oil, coal or gas.

And in their burning we produce carbon dioxide, which evidence suggest is causing global warming.

Much is made about future generations - i.e the need for austerity now, so that we don't burden them with our debt.

I for one believe we are very lucky, that we (if a small percentage of the world population) live in the golden age of mankind. The future if we continue on the same irresponsible consumer driven madness is a bit bleak to say the least.

However, we should at least try and make the future better for those yet born.  One big step we can take is to reduce our dependency on carbon fuels.

Climate change is real, is accepted by most countries of the world, and is something we need to tackle as a matter of urgency. You may say what's the point of the UK cutting our carbon emission if China emits more - a bit like saying it's OK I only smoke 20 a day, the bloke next door smokes 40, then dying of cancer.

We need to consume less and reduce our reliance on carbon based fuels. Think about the electricity we use, we need a balanced mix of electricity generation.  Now, one day there may be new means of generating electricity such as thorium power, but until then we have to use what we have.

That would be nuclear power in the first place, then gas (the most 'friendly' of carbon based fuels) and then renewable sources.

I don't think the Conservative led Coalition Government is under any impression that renewable power can provide a majority of our electricity, although some might disagree. The latest government policy aims for 15% of our electricity to be supplied from renewable sources, a major component of which is wind power.

That means 85% of our electricity needs has to produced from either nuclear, gas or coal. One day soon we might develop a commercially viable carbon capture system, which would make gas or coal more environmentally friendly. But even then that's still burning it, and gas and coal wont last for ever - sorry kids we used it all, at least we've made it warmer for you!

Let's be realistic whatever we do has an impact on the planet, but we are not talking about the planet's future; its destiny is already mapped out in the stars - we need to STOP, and think about the future of HUMANITY.

If we didn't have wind farms, then we would have to build more nuclear, gas or coal power stations. Offshore wind farms being more expensive, whereas wind farms on land provide a relatively cheap and short term solution to our need to reduce our dependency on carbon based fuels.

A major part of the government's policy for reducing carbon emission is a switch to electric cars. That's going to be a lot of batteries, and the next major breakthrough is likely to come in battery technology. In theory electric cars could be a source of storage, after all not going out for the day, battery full why not sell it to the national grid.

We could also build more hydro power station like the one at Llanberis, which is a storage unit. It was build to utilise spare capacity from Wylfa and Trawsfynydd, to pump the water to the top reservoir, and then quite quickly give a boost to the national grid when the nation say had a cup of tea during a commercial break in Coronation Street.

I finish by saying that in my opinion onshore wind farms are the short term answer to our urgent need to reduce our dependency on carbon based electricity albeit as part of a mix of generating sources. Who knows in 20 years time we might have new means of generating clean and green electricity, but until then we would be foolish to totally rule out onshore wind farms as part of the solution.

See also

Does wind power reduce carbon emissions?

Select Committee on Economic Affairs - The Economics of Renewable Energy