Raft Of US-UK Nuclear Deals Ahead Of Trump Visit
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on World Nuclear News.The article is a good summary of all the deals done between the US and UK governments concerning next-generation nuclear power.
This is the introduction.
Several agreements have been signed between UK and US companies to advance the deployment of small modular reactors and advanced reactors in both countries. The deals were signed ahead of the state visit of President Donald Trump to the UK later this week.
The whole article is a must-read.
These are my posts, that are related to the main agreement.
- Centrica And X-energy Agree To Deploy UK’s First Advanced Modular Reactors
- Nuclear Plan For Decommissioned Coal Power Station
- Rolls-Royce Welcomes Action From UK And US Governments To Usher In New ‘Golden Age’ Of Nuclear Energy
I shall finish it later.
Rolls-Royce Welcomes Action From UK And US Governments To Usher In New ‘Golden Age’ Of Nuclear Energy
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Rolls-Royce.
These three paragraphs introduce the press release.
The agreement between the UK and US Governments to deepen cooperation in advanced nuclear technologies and make it quicker for companies to build new nuclear power stations sets the stage for a significant step forward in the energy security and resilience of the two nations. The Atlantic Partnership for Advanced Nuclear Energy will help ensure the accelerated development and deployment of advanced nuclear reactor technologies in the US and UK. Building a bridge between the world’s first and world’s largest civil nuclear power markets.
The global market for advanced nuclear technologies is estimated to be worth many trillions up to 2050. Secure, scalable and reliable power across civil, defence, industrial and maritime sectors is needed to meet growing demands in digital and AI. In the US alone, demand for nuclear power is forecast to grow from 100GWe to 400GWe by 2050.
Rolls-Royce stands ready to seize the opportunity to further innovate and partner in the development of advanced nuclear technologies which will deliver thousands of skilled jobs, attract investment and support the economic growth of both the US and the UK.
Note.
- Rolls-Royce have several partners for the SMR, who include Siemens and a couple of American companies.
- Rolls-Royce are involved with US company; BWXT, in one of the consortia developing a micro-reactor for the US Department of Defense, which I wrote about in Rolls-Royce To Play Key Role In US Department Of Defense Nuclear Microreactor Program.
- Rolls-Royce also has a large design, development and manufacturing presence in the United States.
- The new engines for the B-52s are from Rolls-Royce.
Rolls-Royce has a very strong footprint in the United States.
Gwynt Glas And South Wales Ports Combine Strength In Preparation For Multi-Billion Floating Wind Industry
The title of this post, is the same as that of this news item from the Gwynt Glas wind farm.
The news item starts with a spectacular image of a port, that is assembling floating wind turbines and these three paragraphs.
Gwynt Glas Offshore Wind Farm has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the UK’s largest port operator, Associated British Ports, and Wales’ largest energy port, the Port of Milford Haven, to ready the ports for the future needs of floating offshore wind in the Celtic Sea.
Gwynt Glas is a joint venture partnership between EDF Renewables UK and DP Energy. The proposed floating offshore wind farm would generate 1GW of low carbon green energy in the Celtic Sea.
Under the MoU, information and industry knowledge will be shared to investigate the potential opportunities for manufacture, assembly, load-out and servicing for the Gwynt Glas project from the key South Wales Ports of Port Talbot and Milford Haven. This collaborative approach demonstrates a major commitment to supporting economic growth, investment and maximising social value in the region.
UK Port Unveils GBP 150 Million Offshore Wind Expansion Plan
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
The Port of Tyne, located in the northeast of England, has unveiled its plans to add 400 metres of deep-water quayside to support offshore renewables, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing.
These two paragraphs add details.
The Port of Tyne is investing GBP 150 million (approximately EUR 173 million) to transform 230 acres into the Tyne Clean Energy Park, a move that could create up to 12,000 jobs, deliver GBP 5.6 billion (about EUR 6.5 billion) to the economy, and establish the North East as a hub for the UK’s green energy revolution, according to an independent study by WSP.
The plan for Tyne Clean Energy Park includes a kilometre of both new and redeveloped deep-water, heavy-lift quay to facilitate the use of a 230-acre footprint located within an Industrial Strategy Zone.
The Wikipedia entry for the Port of Tyne has this opening paragraph.
The Port of Tyne comprises the commercial docks on and around the River Tyne in Tyne and Wear in the northeast of England.
This Google Map shows the River Tyne Through Newcastle.
I estimate that this map is around twenty kilometres from East to West.
This news item from the Port of Tyne is entitled Port of Tyne Unviels 230 Acre Green Development Terminal and gives full details.
This summary is given.
The Port of Tyne is investing £150 million to transform 230 acres into the Tyne Clean Energy Park, adding 400 metres of deep-water quayside to support offshore renewables, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. The redevelopment could create up to 12,000 jobs, deliver £5.6 billion to the economy, and establish the North East as a hub for the UK’s green energy revolution.
This is not a small development.
In future I shall tag developments like this with a tag of UK Port Development.
.
Nuclear Plan For Decommissioned Coal Power Station
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the sub-heading.
Nuclear power could be generated on the site of a former coal power station in Nottinghamshire.
These first four paragraphs add details.
Cottam Power Station was decommissioned in 2019, and in August its eight 114m (375ft) cooling towers were demolished.
Three businesses – American energy firm Holtec International, EDF UK, and real estate manager Tritax – have now signed an agreement to set up a small modular reactor (SMR) to power “advanced” data centres at the 900-acre site.
Holtec said the project could create “thousands of high-skilled manufacturing and construction jobs”, as well as “long-term roles”.
The SMR at Cottam would be the second of its kind, following the creation of a plant at Palisades in Michigan, in the US.
Note.
- Cottam was a 2,000 MW power station, that could run on coal, oil and biomass.
- If a nuclear power station is built at Cottam, it will be one of the first nuclear stations not close to the coast.
I asked Google AI for details of the plant at Palisades in Michigan and received this reply.
The Palisades SMR project at the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan will feature two Holtec SMR-300 units, each producing at least 300 megawatts of power, for a combined total of at least 600-640 megawatts of net power. This project aims to have the first US dual-unit SMR 300 system operational by 2030, and the SMRs are designed to produce electricity and provide steam for other industrial purposes.
It does appear that the new generation of reactors from Holtec, Rolls-Royce and X-energy are smaller than many nuclear reactors built in the last twenty years.
This Google Map shows the Cottam site.
Note.
- The River Trent surrounds the site.
- Could the Trent be used for cooling water?
- The cooling towers are still in place, so the image must have been taken before August.
- The sub-station is in the South-West corner of the site.
- The railway over Torksey viaduct is disused.
It would appear that there is generous space for the SMRs and a few data centres.
The Cottam Solar Project
In DCO Decision On 480MW West Burton Solar NSIP Delayed Until 2025, I wrote about three large solar projects in Eastern England.
The Cottam Solar Project was one of the projects and wants to use the Cottam site.
- The Cottam Solar Project has a web site.
- It will have a capacity of 600 MW, with a battery, with a battery with a 600 MW output and a 600 MWh capacity.
- The solar farm will use the grid connection of the former coal-powered Cottam power station.
- The project is massive and will cover 1270 hectares.
Will this solar project lease space for the SMR, so they can co-exist?
Conclusion
It does appear that there are more than one use for old coal-fired power station sites.
Consultation Opens For Ferrybridge Next Generation Power Station
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from SSE.
These three bullet points act as sub-headings.
- Ferrybridge Next Generation sets out plans for continuing the legacy of power generation at the site, with the potential to bring significant investment to the region.
- Statutory consultation phase launched, inviting communities and stakeholders to have their say on project proposals.
- Hydrogen-enabled project could support the security of supply and offer a clear route to decarbonisation.
These three paragraphs add more detail.
Members of the public are being invited to have their say on plans for a proposed new power station in development, Ferrybridge Next Generation Power Station.
The station is being designed so that it can run on hydrogen, as a lower-carbon alternative to natural gas. It would also be able to operate using natural gas or a blend of hydrogen and natural gas until a technically and commercially viable hydrogen supply becomes available to the site.
With a proposed capacity of up to 1.2GW, Ferrybridge Next Generation Power Station could play an important role in supporting the UK’s energy system in the short term – providing reliable flexible back-up power during periods of peak demand and balancing the system when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine, while delivering a route to decarbonised power generation in the longer term.
Note.
- A 150 MW/300 MWh Battery Electric Storage System is being developed on the site, which I wrote about in SSE Renewables Announces Construction Of Second Utility-Scale Battery Storage System.
- The last Ferrybridge power station; C had a capacity of just over 2 GW.
- This will be SSE Renewable’s second hydrogen-fired power station after Keadby, which I wrote about in Consultation On Plans For Keadby Hydrogen Power Station To Begin.
- As the press releases says, Ferrybridge Hydrogen-Fired Power Station will be West Yorkshire’s backup for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.
How similar will the two hydrogen-fired power stations be?
Will SSE Be Building Any More In The First Wave Of Hydrogen-Fired Power Station?
This is a paragraph from SSE’s press release.
The station is being designed so that it can run on hydrogen, as a lower-carbon alternative to natural gas. It would also be able to operate using natural gas or a blend of hydrogen and natural gas until a technically and commercially viable hydrogen supply becomes available to the site.
It would appear that the availability of the hydrogen fuel may be a problem.
But places like Aberdeen, Bradford, Brighton, Humberside and Merseyside, do seem to be planning for hydrogen, so all is not lost.
Hydrogen Milestone: UK’s First Hydrogen-to-Power Trial At Brigg Energy Park
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Centrica.
This is the sub-heading.
Centrica and HiiROC, supported by the Net Zero Technology Centre (NZTC), have successfully demonstrated the injection of hydrogen into a gas-fired peak power plant at Centrica’s Brigg Energy Park, North Lincolnshire. The trial that took place last Thursday (11 September) marks a UK first in using hydrogen to decarbonise peak power generation supplying power directly to the electricity grid.
These three opening paragraphs add detail.
HiiROC’s modular hydrogen production technology, using Thermal Plasma Electrolysis (TPE), produced hydrogen on site which was then blended at a 3% ratio for the purposes of a one-hour trial.
The trial marks a further step forward in Centrica’s ongoing efforts to advance innovative solutions for the decarbonisation of its portfolio of gas plants, demonstrating that existing gas infrastructure can operate on a hydrogen blend to provide reliable, low carbon electricity to UK homes and businesses. More broadly, the trial shows a viable route for delivering on decarbonisation readiness obligations for peaker generation as part of the UK’s journey to net zero.
It is also a key milestone in HiiROC’s journey, demonstrating the effectiveness and affordability of HiiROC’s TPE process, which produces hydrogen without CO2 emissions, making it compliant with the UK’s Low Carbon Hydrogen Standard (LCHS). By leveraging the existing gas network and co-locating hydrogen production where it is needed, operators can decarbonise without costly new infrastructure.
Note.
- This test was only at a low level of hydrogen.
- Brigg power station is a 240 MW power station, which is fuelled by natural gas.
A long journey starts with a single step.
Centrica And X-energy Agree To Deploy UK’s First Advanced Modular Reactors
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Centrica.
This is the sub-heading.
Centrica and X-Energy, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of X-Energy Reactor Company, LLC, today announced their entry into a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) to deploy X-energy’s Xe-100 Advanced Modular Reactors (“AMR”) in the United Kingdom.
These three paragraphs add more details.
The companies have identified EDF and Centrica’s Hartlepool site as the preferred first site for a planned U.K. fleet of up to 6 gigawatts.
The agreement represents the first stage in a new trans-Atlantic alliance which could ultimately mobilise at least £40 billion in economic value to bring clean, safe and affordable power to thousands of homes and industries across the country and substantive work for the domestic and global supply chain.
A 12-unit Xe-100 deployment at Hartlepool could add up to 960 megawatts (“MW”) of new capacity, enough clean power for 1.5 million homes and over £12 billion in lifetime economic value. It would be developed at a site adjacent to Hartlepool’s existing nuclear power station which is currently scheduled to cease generating electricity in 2028. Following its decommissioning, new reactors would accelerate opportunities for the site and its skilled workforce. The site is already designated for new nuclear under the Government’s National Policy Statement and a new plant would also play a critical role in generating high-temperature heat that could support Teesside’s heavy industries.
This is no toe-in-the-water project, but a bold deployment of a fleet of small modular reactors to provide the power for the North-East of England for the foreseeable future.
These are my thoughts.
The Reactor Design
The Wikipedia entry for X-energy has a section called Reactor Design, where this is said.
The Xe-100 is a proposed pebble bed high-temperature gas-cooled nuclear reactor design that is planned to be smaller, simpler and safer when compared to conventional nuclear designs. Pebble bed high temperature gas-cooled reactors were first proposed in 1944. Each reactor is planned to generate 200 MWt and approximately 76 MWe. The fuel for the Xe-100 is a spherical fuel element, or pebble, that utilizes the tristructural isotropic (TRISO) particle nuclear fuel design, with high-assay LEU (HALEU) uranium fuel enriched to 20%, to allow for longer periods between refueling. X-energy claims that TRISO fuel will make nuclear meltdowns virtually impossible.
Note.
- It is not a conventional design.
- Each reactor is only about 76 MW.
- This fits with “12-unit Xe-100 deployment at Hartlepool could add up to 960 megawatts (“MW”) of new capacity” in the Centrica press release.
- The 960 MW proposed for Hartlepool is roughly twice the size of the Rolls-Rpoyce SMR, which is 470 MW .
- Safety seems to be at the forefront of the design.
- I would assume, that the modular nature of the design, makes expansion easier.
I have no reason to believe that it is not a well-designed reactor.
Will Hartlepool Be The First Site?
No!
This page on the X-energy web site, describes their site in Texas, which appears will be a 320 MW power station providing power for Dow’s large site.
There appear to be similarities between the Texas and Hartlepool sites.
- Both are supporting industry clustered close to the power station.
- Both power stations appear to be supplying heat as well as electricity, which is common practice on large industrial sites.
- Both use a fleet of small modular reactors.
But Hartlepool will use twelve reactors, as opposed to the four in Texas.
How Will The New Power Station Compare With The Current Hartlepool Nuclear Power Station?
Consider.
- The current Hartlepool nuclear power station has two units with a total capacity of 1,185 MW.
- The proposed Hartlepool nuclear power station will have twelve units with a total capacity of 960 MW.
- My instinct as a Control Engineer gives me the feeling, that more units means higher reliability.
- I suspect that offshore wind will make up the difference between the power output of the current and proposed power stations.
As the current Hartlepool nuclear power station is effectively being replaced with a slightly smaller station new station, if they get the project management right, it could be a painless exercise.
Will This Be The First Of Several Projects?
The press release has this paragraph.
Centrica will provide initial project capital for development with the goal of initiating full-scale activities in 2026. Subject to regulatory approval, the first electricity generation would be expected in the mid-2030s. Centrica and X-energy are already in discussions with additional potential equity partners, as well as leading global engineering and construction companies, with the goal of establishing a UK-based development company to develop this first and subsequent projects.
This approach is very similar to the approach being taken by Rolls-Royce for their small modular reactors.
Will Centrica Use An X-energy Fleet Of Advanced Modular Reactors At The Grain LNG Terminal?
This press release from Centrica is entitled Investment In Grain LNG Terminal.
This is one of the key highlights of the press release.
Opportunities for efficiencies to create additional near-term value, and future development options including a combined heat and power plant, bunkering, hydrogen and ammonia.
Note.
- Bunkering would be provided for ships powered by LNG, hydrogen or ammonia.
- Heat would be needed from the combined heat and power plant to gasify the LNG.
- Power would be needed from the combined heat and power plant to generate the hydrogen and ammonia and compress and/or liquify gases.
Currently, the heat and power is provided by the 1,275 MW Grain CHP gas-fired power station, but a new nuclear power station would help to decarbonise the terminal.
Replacement Of Heysham 1 Nuclear Power Station
Heysham 1 nuclear power station is part-owned by Centrica and EdF, as is Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Heysham 1 nuclear power station is a 3,000 MW nuclear power station, which is due to be decommissioned in 2028.
I don’t see why this power station can’t be replaced in the same manner as Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Replacement Of Heysham 2 Nuclear Power Station
Heysham 2 nuclear power station is part-owned by Centrica and EdF, as is Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Heysham 2 nuclear power station is a 3,100 MW nuclear power station, which is due to be decommissioned in 2030.
I don’t see why this power station can’t be replaced in the same manner as Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Replacement Of Torness Nuclear Power Station
Torness nuclear power station is part-owned by Centrica and EdF, as is Hartlepool nuclear power station.
Torness nuclear power station is a 1,290 MW nuclear power station, which is due to be decommissioned in 2030.
I don’t see why this power station can’t be replaced in the same manner as Hartlepool nuclear power station.
But the Scottish Nationalist Party may have other ideas?
What Would Be The Size Of Centrica’s And X-energy’s Fleet Of Advanced Modular Reactors?
Suppose.
- Hartlepool, Grain CHP and Torness power stations were to be replaced by identical 960 MW ADRs.
- Heysham 1 and Heysham 2 power stations were to be replaced by identical 1,500 MW ADRs.
This would give a total fleet size of 5,880 MW.
A paragraph in Centrica’s press release says this.
The companies have identified EDF and Centrica’s Hartlepool site as the preferred first site for a planned U.K. fleet of up to 6 gigawatts.
This fleet is only 120 MW short.
Yesterday In Whitehall And The Battle Of Cable Street Compared
I asked Google AI “How many Tommy Robinson supporters were in Whitehall yesterday and received this answer.
London’s Metropolitan Police said the march, organised by anti-immigrant activist Tommy Robinson, drew an estimated 110,000 to 150,000 people, far surpassing expectations.
The Times has a similar figure.
Sky News says this about the counter protest.
An anti-racism counter-protest, attended by about 5,000 campaigners, also took place.
This is backed by other reports.
The Times also said this paragraph about the Police.
More than 1,600 officers were deployed to deal with the demonstrations as well as several football fixtures in the capital. At least 500 police had been drafted in from forces outside London, including the Merseyside, Humberside and Avon & Somerset forces.
So what was it like in the 1930s, when Oswald Mosley and his Blackshirts tried to march through the East End of London?
Google AI gives this account of the numbers.
At the Battle of Cable Street in 1936, there were approximately 3,000-5,000 fascists attempting to march, protected by 6,000-7,000 police officers, who were met by a larger, determined counter-protest of tens of thousands of locals, with estimates for the anti-fascist crowd ranging from over 100,000 to as many as 300,000 people.
My father, who was proud of his part-Jewish heritage and very much an anti-Fascist was there.
It looks like numbers were more the other way yesterday. I don’t think that’s a good thing.
US Interior Secretary: ‘No Future For Offshore Wind Under This Administration’
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
US Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said at a press conference on 10 September that offshore wind has no future in the US under the Trump administration and that the government was reviewing five offshore wind projects that are now under construction.
There is also this quote from Burgum.
Offshore wind was too expensive and not reliable enough.
Many of those projects weren’t really about electricity, they were about tax subsidies
I think the fact that the subsidies have been either cut back or limited means that it is likely that there will not be future offshore wind built in America.
He also added that there were concerns that wind turbines interfered with whales and radar systems.
I asked Google AI a few questions.
Is Offshore Wind Extremely Expensive?
Google AI replied.
No, offshore wind is not considered extremely expensive when compared to other energy sources, particularly gas-fired power stations, and its costs are projected to fall further. While initially more expensive to construct than onshore wind due to the marine environment, the higher and more consistent wind speeds offshore generate more power, leading to a competitive or lower overall levelised cost of energy (LCOE) in many regions. Recent economic challenges like inflation and supply chain disruptions have increased costs temporarily, but the sector’s financial position is recovering, and cost reductions are expected to continue.
That looks pretty fair to me.
Is Offshore Wind Reliable?
Google AI replied.
Yes, offshore wind is a reliable energy source because it generates power more consistently than onshore wind due to higher, more dependable wind speeds at sea, and can be integrated with other renewables and energy storage to provide continuous power. Offshore wind turbines operate almost all the time, and the power can be backed up by grid-level storage to ensure a steady electricity supply, even when the wind isn’t blowing.
That looks pretty fair to me.
Are Subsididies And Tax Breaks Important For Offshore Wind?
Google AI replied.
Yes, subsidies and tax breaks are important for the offshore wind industry, which faces high upfront costs and inflationary pressures, to make it more cost-competitive with fossil fuels and secure financing for projects. These incentives help reduce costs for developers, de-risk investments, and ensure the technology can meet climate targets by fostering investment and ensuring long-term viability.
That looks pretty fair to me, but if you were in the oil and gas industry you might think differently.
On the other hand some countries like Norway and the UK, are encouraging the linking of offshore wind farms to offshore oil and gas production to decarbonise offshore operations.
Does Offshore Wind Kill Whales?
This article on the BBC is entitled Fact-Checking Donald Trump’s Claim That Wind Turbines Kill Whales.
It goes into detail about Trump’s claims about wind turbines and marine life.
These are four paragraphs.
“We know what the main threats are to humpback whales: it’s very much the impact from things like fishing and ship strikes,” says Rob Deaville from the Zoological Society of London’s Cetacean Strandings Investigation Programme.
“To talk about wind farms being a problem takes away discussion around the very real threats that are a problem for those species.”
Many other areas with high numbers of wind farms have not seen an increase in whale mortality.
For example, the UK is home to the world’s four largest wind farms, but no humpback whale strandings there have been conclusively linked to the impact of those farms.
That looks pretty fair to me.
But because of our massive portfolio of offshore wind farms and top universities, who research the marine environment, the UK is in a unique position to expose fake science, that was made up on the back of a used envelope.
Does Offshore Interfere With Radar?
Google AI replied.
Yes, offshore wind farms can interfere with radar by reflecting radar signals, causing “radar clutter” or false echoes that can obscure real targets, like aircraft or ships, or create phantom images on a radar display. This interference, also known as a “blade flash,” can negatively impact air defense, air traffic control, and maritime navigation, leading to reduced accuracy and potential safety risks.
That looks pretty fair to me.
Have Wind Turbines Caused Any Air Accidents?
Google AI replied.
Yes, wind farms have caused air accidents, though they are rare. These incidents primarily involve light aircraft colliding with wind turbines or experiencing loss of control due to turbulence from turbine wakes. Examples include a pilot crashing near a wind farm due to turbulence and another fatal crash involving an aircraft hitting a turbine blade.
That looks pretty fair to me.
I learned to fly light aircraft in the 1970s and I remember being told about wake turbulence from airliners, which has been strong enough in some cases to flip an aircraft like a Cessna 150 upside down or into a spin.
What Are The CAA’s Rules For Flying Near Wind Turbines?
Google AI replied.
The primary CAA rule for flying near wind turbines is related to their visibility and safety, focusing on lighting requirements and potential hazards like turbulence. Structures 150 meters or higher require medium-intensity red lights. Pilots must avoid dazzling lights with their own, and wind turbine developers must assess and mitigate risks such as turbulence, radar interference, and impact on Instrument Flight Procedures (IFPs).
That looks like what I would have expected.
Conclusion
I have tried not to be selective with my evidence, but if you are there are reasons that could be used to ban wind turbines.
I am also happy to add any other questions.
The Anonymous Widower 