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.
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.
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.
Centrica Secures Investment Stake In Gasrec Helping Boost UK Bio-LNG Ambitions
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Centrica.
This is the sub-heading.
Centrica has secured a minority stake in Gasrec, the UK’s largest dual provider of bio-LNG (bio-Liquified Natural Gas) and bio-CNG (bio-Compressed Natural Gas) to the road transport sector,
These first two paragraphs give more details.
Gasrec says the investment will drive the next phase of its infrastructure ambitions, with plans to open a UK wide network of open-access refuelling stations supplying renewable bio-LNG for the decarbonisation of heavy goods vehicles.
Centrica is taking a 16% stake and becomes one of three major shareholders in Gasrec, alongside global integrated energy company bp and private family office 44 North.
I have some thoughts.
Does Running A Truck On bio-LNG or bio-CNG. Reduce Carbon Emissions?
This paragraph from the press release, gives the thoughts of Chris O’Shea, who is Group Chief Executive, Centrica.
Chris O’Shea, Group Chief Executive, Centrica plc, said: “Demand for bio-LNG for transport is growing fast as more HGV operators make the switch – drawn by a clean, ready-to-use fuel which slashes CO2 emissions by up to 85 per cent in comparison to diesel*. This investment in Gasrec enhances our collaboration with the leading company in the sector, and puts us in a strong position to energise a vital sector of the industry on its journey to net zero.”
As Centrica is a public company, with shareholders, who would take a dim view of Mr. O’Shea telling porkies, I suspect we can assume that the following is true.
Drawn by a clean, ready-to-use fuel which slashes CO2 emissions by up to 85 per cent in comparison to diesel.
The asterisk in the full quote, refers to this note.
Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, Innovate UK and Office for Low Emission Vehicles, Low Emission Freight & Logistics Trial (LEFT), Key Findings, November 2020. Using specific feedstocks CO2 reductions of 200% are achievable.
Centrica could be being conservative with their claims.
Decarbonising Buses, Locomotives And Trucks
Despite what Elon Musk, would have us believe, electric trucks will not dominate the future of freight transport.
An electric truck would be the vehicle equivalent of asking Usain Bolt to run a hundred metres with a large refrigerator on his back.
Trucks are going to need a fuel without a weight penalty and with a long range.
I asked Google for information about Cummins diesel, natural gas and hydrogen engines and received this AI Overview.
Cummins offers engines powered by diesel, natural gas, and hydrogen. While diesel engines are well-established, Cummins is also developing both natural gas and hydrogen engines, particularly focusing on hydrogen as a pathway to zero-carbon solutions for various applications. Cummins utilizes a fuel-agnostic platform, meaning a common base engine can be adapted for different fuel types, including diesel, natural gas, and hydrogen.
Recently, GB Railfreight purchased thirty Class 99 locomotives from Stadler.
- They can use electrification, where it exists.
- Where electrification doesn’t exist, they can use an onboard Cummins diesel engine, which is built in Darlington.
- In electric-mode, they have 6.2 MW of power, and are the most powerful locomotives ever to run on UK railways.
- In diesel-mode, they have 1.8 MW of power, which is more than enough to haul a large container train in and out of Felixstowe.
I had thought that at some future date, Cummins would convert these locomotives to electro-hydrogen.
But now that Gasrec is providing bio-LNG and bio-CNG, GB Railfreight, have the option of converting both hydrogen and biomethane.
Similar logic can be applied to Wrightbus’s Streetdeck Ultroliner, one version of which is fitted with a Cummins engine, that can be converted to electric, hydrogen or natural gas, which of course includes biomethane. This page on the Wrightbus web site describes the bus.
Wrightbus are also going back into coach manufacture, as I wrote about in Wrightbus Goes Back To The Future As It Relaunches The Contour Coach. As with the Streetdeck Ultroliner, Cummins seem to be providing one of the power units.
It seems to me, that the zero- and low-carbon revolution in transport will generate a need for the availability of biomethane, hydrogen and natural gas fuel for transport all over the country.
Gasrec with around twenty biomethane fuelling points around the country, seem well-placed to supply the biomethane in bio-LNG or bio-CNG form.
Could Gasrec Deliver Hydrogen?
Various bus companies in the UK, have had difficulty getting the fuel for their hydrogen buses.
I believe that delivering hydrogen would be very similar to delivering LNG and if Gasrec can deliver LNG successfully and safely, they probably have the technology to do the same for hydrogen.
Centrica Seem To Be Assembling An Interesting Consortium
These are some deals, that I have reported on this blog, that involve Centrica.
- Centrica, along with Hyundai, Kia, Siemens and others have backed Hull-based hydrogen start-up; HiiROC, who can produce affordable hydrogen from any hydrocarbon gas including natural gas, where it is needed.
- Centrica have invested in Sizewell C. Will they be using their share of the electricity to make affordable pink hydrogen using HiiROC?
- In Centrica And Ryze Agree To Develop Hydrogen Pathway, I talked about how Centrica and Ryse were aiming to bring hydrogen to the masses.
- In Recurrent Energy’s Middle Road Project Sold To Centrica, I talked about a Centrica investment in solar power.
- In Aberdeen’s Exceed Secures Centrica Rough Contract, I talked about how Centrica were redeveloping the Rough gas storage site for hydrogen.
- In Lhyfe And Centrica To Develop Offshore Renewable Green Hydrogen In The UK, I talked about developing offshore hydrogen.
- In Centrica Announces Hydrogen Ready Combined Heat And Power Partnership With 2G, the title says it all.
- In Centrica Signs UK Biomethane Agreement With Yorkshire Water And SGN Commercial Services, Centrica appear to be sourcing biomethane from Yorkshire Water.
- In Centrica Invests In Renewable Energy Storage Capabilities To Boost UK’s Energy Security And Accelerate Transition To Net Zero, I talk about Centrica, Goldman Sachs and others, investment in liquid-air energy storage company; Highview Power.
- In British Gas Owner Mulls Mini-Nuke Challenge To Rolls-Royce, I talk about rumours that Centrica might invest in SMRs.
Note.
- A lot of these deals are are about hydrogen production.
- Some of these deals are about biomethane production.
- None of these deals talk about getting hydrogen and biomethane to customers.
It appears to me, that Gasrec have a model that works to get hydrogen, methane and biomethane from production and storage to the end customers.
Developing A Rural Hydrogen Network
In Developing A Rural Hydrogen Network, I talked about supplying all those millions of off-gas grid properties with hydrogen for heating, agricultural and industrial purposes, in the countryside of the UK.
Gasrec have the technology to decarbonise the countryside.
Conclusion
Gasrec would appear to be a very useful partner for Centrica.
Does Nuclear Power Not Sell Newspapers?
Five days ago, In Rolls-Royce SMR Advances To Final Stage In Swedish Nuclear Competition, I wrote about Rolls-Royce being one of two successful bids to advance to the ext stage to build Small Modular Reactors for Vatenfall in Sweden.
Since then, Rolls-Royce’s Swedish success has not featured in any newspaper in the UK, not even the Financial Times.
I can only assume, that good news stories about nuclear power, don’t sell newspapers.
British Gas Owner Mulls Mini-Nuke Challenge To Rolls-Royce
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in The Telegraph.
This is the sub-heading.
Centrica is looking to follow Rolls-Royce in developing small modular reactors
These are the first three paragraphs.
The owner of British Gas is considering investing in mini nuclear power plants in the UK as it seeks to cash in on burgeoning demand for the technology.
Centrica is in early talks with the Government about a potential future deal that could see the energy giant participate in the development of so-called small modular reactors (SMRs).
It comes after Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, last month announced billions of pounds in funding for SMRs, which will form part of a new “golden age” for atomic energy.
In Centrica Really Can’t Lose At Sizewell, I looked at Centrica’s involvement in Sizewell C and in particular the financing of the nuke and what Centrica would do with their share of the electricity, that the nuke will produce.
I listed these uses for hydrogen in the East of England.
- Transport – Buses, Coaches and Trucks
- Large Construction Projects
- Rail
- Ports
- Airports
- Agriculture And The Rural Economy
- Exports
I do wonder, if Centrica made the investment in Sizewell C, when they realised that there were a lot of uses for hydrogen and producing hydrogen using the electricity from a nuclear power station was a good way to generate hydrogen.
- Sizewell B is a 1.2 GW nuclear powerstation.
- Sizewell C is a 3.2 GW nuclear powerstation.
- Their investment in HiiROC surely gives them access to the technology to generate hydrogen.
- Centrica have a lot of experience of selling natural gas to customers, who need energy.
- There were also substantial government guarantees involved.
- Hydrogen made by a nuclear reaxtor is generally referred to as pink hydrogen.
- In Westinghouse And Bloom Energy To Team Up For Pink Hydrogen, I describe how two American companies have formed a partnership to make pink hydrogen.
Before they invested in Sizewell C, they would have done detailed financial and technical due diligence.
Did Centrica then scale the calculations to see if funding a Small Modular Reactor (SMR) to make hydrogen was a viable deal?
- SMRs are typically around 400-500 MW.
- The article mentions Rolls-Royce, but other companies are developing SMRs.
- Centrica use Rolls-Royce mtu generators for some of their installations.
- Some SMR/HiiROC systems could be built close to steelworks or other high energy users.
This is a very interesting development in taking the UK to net-zero.
SNP Ban On ‘Munitions’ Funds Puts Scottish Shipbuilding On The Line
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
The president of Rolls-Royce submarines says plans for a world-class welding centre on the Clyde are at risk of being cancelled within days
These three paragraphs add more details to the story.
Ambitious plans to reverse a historic decline in Scottish shipbuilding are at risk after a £2.5 million taxpayer grant was axed due to an SNP ban on “munitions” funding.
A plan to build a specialist welding centre on the banks of the Clyde is now in grave doubt after Scottish Enterprise, the national economic development agency, was accused of reneging on a pledge to fund a building for the world-class facility.
Rolls-Royce, which is ready to support the project by providing £11 million worth of specialist equipment, expressed “dismay” at the news, saying the project had been classified as a “munitions” scheme solely on the basis that it would “support the construction of naval vessels”.
Given the experience of the Scottish Government in building ferries is documented in this Wikipedia entry, which is entitled Scottish Ferry Fiasco, the SNP must know something about how not to build ships.
The comments from readers of the Times Article are scathing, with many coming from those with Scottish names.
Welding And Nuclear Power
It doesn’t mention the other big use for welding in this article and that is in the manufacture of nuclear reactors. In fact one of the members of the Rolls-Royce consortium, that will build their small modular nuclear reactors is The Welding Institute – No prizes for guessing what they do!
Does that mean that Scotland won’t have anything to do with small modular nuclear reactors? Either in their manufacture or use.
This article in New Civil Engineer is entitled UK Plans New Nuclear Plant In Scotland Despite Scottish Government Opposition.
So if the Scottish Government wants nothing to do with making expensive, quality vessels for the nuclear industry, Rolls-Royce would surely be better building the welding centre in an area of the UK that would appreciate it.
Scots In High Positions Of Power
I like Scotland and the Scots and possibly, at one time, with all the North Sea Oil and Gas, I could have thought about relocating North of the Border. But I’m very glad I didn’t!
It does seem to me though, that when some Scots get to high positions of power, that they lose all sense of reason.
I would nominate.
- Fred the Shred
- The SNP
- That half-Scot, who was lucky enough to be elected US President twice.
There must be a few others.
Chinese firm ‘Will Not Bid’ To Run Essex Nuclear Plant
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
Sources no longer expect planning applications to be submitted by China General Nuclear Power Group for Bradwell B
These three paragraphs give brief details of the current situation.
Plans for China’s state-run nuclear company to develop and operate a proposed nuclear site in Essex will no longer go ahead, The Times can reveal amid renewed focus on Chinese involvement in Britain’s critical infrastructure.
Bradwell B, the proposed nuclear power station, was earmarked for investment by China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) in 2015. CGN is the majority investor in the proposed development alongside French energy company EDF.
But government and industry sources told The Times and Times Radio they no longer expected planning applications to be submitted by CGN for the site, and EDF will look to take back the lease from the Chinese firm at the earliest opportunity.
So what will happen to the Bradwell Site?
This Google Map shows the Blackwater Estuary to the North of Southend.
Note.
- The Blackwater Estuary is at the top of the map.
- Bradwell Marina and Bradwell-on-Sea can be seen on the map to the South of the Blackwater Estuary.
- Southminster has a rail connection, which was used to handle the nuclear fuel and now has a passenger service to Wickford on the Southend Victoria to London Liverpool Street Line.
This second Google Map shows Bradwell-on-Sea and the North of the peninsular in greater detail.
Note.
- The remains of the three runways of the Second World War RAF Bradwell Bay can be picked out.
- The remains of Bradwell A nuclear power station are towards the coast to the North-West of the former runways.
- It is large site.
I wonder, if the site could be used for backup to all the offshore wind farms in the area.
This is a list of all the wind farms, that are planned in the sea to the North and East of the Bradwell site.
- The East Anglia Array is partly operational, but could grow to as much as 7.2 GW.
- Greater Gabbard is 504 MW
- Gunfleet Sands is 172 MW
- London Array is 630 MW
- North Falls is 504 MW
Note.
- That is a total of roughly 9 GW.
- There’s also plenty of space in the sea for more turbines.
All these wind turbines will need backup for when the wind goes on strike.
These are possibilities for backup.
Another Hinckley Point C Or Sizewell C
You can see why the government wants to build a big nuke on the Bradwell site.
The 3.26 GW of a power station, which would be the size of Hinckley Point C would provide more than adequate backup.
But the builders of these power stations haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory!
- Construction of Hinckley Point C started in the late 2010s and first power is expected in 2031.
- Hinckley Point C power station has all the stink of bad project management.
- The Nimbbies would also be out in force at Bradwell.
There are also all the financial problems and those with the Chinese, indicated in The Times article.
A Fleet Of Small Modular Reactors
Hinckley Point C will hopefully be a 3260 MW nuclear power station and Rolls-Royce are saying that their small modular reactors will have a capacity of 470 MW.
Simple mathematics indicate that seven Rolls-Royce SMRs could do the same job as Hinckley Point C.
The advantages of providing this capacity with a fleet of SMRs are as follows.
- Each reactor can be built separately.
- They don’t all have to be of the same type.
- The total 3260 MW capacity could also be built at a pace, that matched the need of the wind farms.
- Building could even start with one of each of the chosen two initial types, the Government has said it will order.
- I also believe that there could be advantages in the sharing of resources.
- The rail link to Southminster would enable the bringing in of the smaller components needed for SMRs by rail.
Hopefully, the power of a big nuke could be added to the grid in a shorter time.
A Number of Long Duration Energy Stores
Highview Power is building 4 x 200 MW/2.5 GWh liquid air batteries for Orsted in the UK ; 2 in Scotland and 2 in England. They are backed by the likes of Centrica, Goldman Sachs, Rio Tinto, the Lego family trust and others.
Each GWh of liquid air needs a tank about the largest size of those used to store LNG. I suspect like LNG tanks they could be partly underground to reduce the bulk.
A Hybrid System
Bradwell is a large site and could easily accommodate a pair of Highview Power batteries, two SMRs, and all the other electrical gubbins, which would total to around 1.5 GW/5 GWh. This should be sufficient backup, but there would be space to add more batteries or SMRs as needed.
Europe’s Biggest Battery Storage Project Goes Live In Scotland
The title of this post, is the same, as this article in The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
Zenobe’s site at Blackhillock can store surplus generation for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine
These are the first two paragraphs.
Europe’s biggest battery storage project has entered commercial operation in Scotland, promising to soak up surplus wind power and prevent turbines being paid to switch off.
Zenobe said the first phase of its project at Blackhillock, between Inverness and Aberdeen, was now live with capacity to store enough power to supply 200 megawatts of electricity for two hours. It is due to be expanded to 300 megawatts by next year.
I believe we can do better, than install large lithium-ion batteries.
We need to get the pumped storage like Coire Glas, the liquid air like Highview Power and the gravity batteries like Gravitricity going as fast as we can.
They are more environmentally friendly than Tesla’s lithium ion tiddlers and a second generation liquid air battery appears to be 200 MW and 2.5 MWh, so they can supply 200 MW for 12.5 hours.
The Blackhillock battery can do just two hours.
Two of them working as a pair, with a 1 GW wind farm, are as big as a small modular nuclear reactor, so could do the same job, with respect to power supply, using machinery and tank designs, that have been used for decades.
I suspect, that like 1960s coal-fired power stations, they would keep running for fifty years and be simply recycled as steel, copper and other scrap.
Highview Power could make Bishops Stortford famous!
Ministers Will Relax Rules To Build Small Nuclear Reactors
The title of this post is the same as that of this article in The Times.
This is the sub-heading.
Britain’s five nuclear power stations, which generate about 6GW in total, powering 13 million homes, are all nearing the end of their lives
These first three paragraphs indicate the reasons why, the government wants to relax the rules.
Ministers are preparing to relax planning rules to make it easier to build mini nuclear power plants in more parts of the country in order to hit green energy targets and boost the industry.
They are also examining whether it is possible to streamline the process for approving the safety of new nuclear power plants as a way to reduce construction delays.
At present rules state that only the government may designate sites for potential nuclear power stations, of which there are eight, severely limiting where they can be built.
The article includes a vote and surprisingly to me, the vote embedded in the article, shows 92 % in favour of relaxing the rules and only 8 % against.
I must admit these figures surprise me, as I’d have thought more would have been against.
Certain Words Frighten The Public
It is because nuclear is one of those words, that I felt that the vote in favour would have been much lower.
Regular readers of this blog will know, that in the 1960s,, I worked for ICI doing itinerant computing and instrumentation tasks, in my first job after leaving Liverpool University with a degree in Control Engineering.
I can now classify the experience as a superb apprenticeship, where I learned a lot that has been useful to me in later life.
For a time, I was working on nuclear magnefic resonance or NMR scans. ICI Mond Division in Runcorn had one of the best installations for analysing chemicals using this technique, which is described in this Wikipedia entry, which starts with these sentences.
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is a physical phenomenon in which nuclei in a strong constant magnetic field are disturbed by a weak oscillating magnetic field (in the near field) and respond by producing an electromagnetic signal with a frequency characteristic of the magnetic field at the nucleus. This process occurs near resonance, when the oscillation frequency matches the intrinsic frequency of the nuclei, which depends on the strength of the static magnetic field, the chemical environment, and the magnetic properties of the isotope involved; in practical applications with static magnetic fields up to ca. 20 tesla, the frequency is similar to VHF and UHF television broadcasts (60–1000 MHz).
One day, the Senior Scientist, who ran the machine came in to work and announced that the property of nuclear magnetic resonance would be replacing X-rays, as the technology had just been used to give a three-dimensional image of something like the tail of a mouse.
Now fifty-five years later, many if not most of us have had MRi scans.
The Wikipedia entry for Magnetic Resonance Imaging or MRi, explains, what happened to the dreaded N-word.
MRI was originally called NMRI (nuclear magnetic resonance imaging), but “nuclear” was dropped to avoid negative associations.
Perhaps, it would be easier to build nuclear power stations, if the level of science teaching in the UK was better.
The Three Paragraphs In Detail
Earlier, I copied three paragraphs from The Times, into this post.
I shall now look at each in detail.
Paragraph 1
Ministers are preparing to relax planning rules to make it easier to build mini nuclear power plants in more parts of the country in order to hit green energy targets and boost the industry.
I was in Suffolk, when the planning of Sizewell B was undertaken.
There appeared to be little strong opposition, but the general feeling was what there was from second home owners, who were worried that the value of their holiday home would decline.
Employment and commerce created by Sizewell B was certainly good for the area in lots of ways.
At the time, my late wife; C was practicing as a family barrister in chambers in Ipswich. She believed that the building of Sizewell B had had a good effect on the area, as it had injected work and money, which had created the finance to allow a couple to end a marriage, that had long since died. She stated a couple of times, that Sizewell B was good for her practice.
Paragraph 2
They are also examining whether it is possible to streamline the process for approving the safety of new nuclear power plants as a way to reduce construction delays.
My worry about streamlining the process for approving safety, is that we approve nuclear power stations so rarely, do we have the qualified personnel to replace elapsed time with people. I would suggest that we don’t.
But we could have.
- We have some excellent universities, where Nuclear Engineering can be studied.
- How many personnel leave the Royal Navy each year, who could be trained as nuclear safety inspectors?
- If say Rolls-Royce and/or Hitachi are building several small modular nuclear reactors a year in the UK, then nuclear engineering will become fashionable, as electronics was for my generation of engineers and it will attract the brightest students.
Perhaps an established university, with access to the needed skills should be funded to set up a Nuclear Safety Institute
Paragraph 3
At present rules state that only the government may designate sites for potential nuclear power stations, of which there are eight, severely limiting where they can be built.
I can envisage new small modular nuclear reactors being built in the UK, where there is a need for lots of electricity to support developments like.
- Offshore wind farms
- Data centres
- Green steelmaking
- Metal refining
- Hydrogen production.
Rolls-Royce have said that their small reactors will be around 470 MW, so I could imagine power stations of this size being placed on disused coal-fired power station sites to boost power in an area. I have already suggested building some on Drax in The Future Of Drax Power Station.
In some locations, the choice could be between a small modular nuclear reactor and some form of energy storage.
Powering Germany
But there is one controversial area, where we can take advantage.
- The Germans are very short of electricity because of their reliance on coal and Russian gas that needs to be replaced.
- The 1.4 GW NeuConnect interconnector is being built by European and Japanese money between the Isle of Grain and Wilhelmshaven.
- The AquaVentus hydrogen system could be extended to Humberside to link with UK hydrogen production and storage.
- A couple of small modular nuclear reactors could be built on Humberside to back up hydrogen production, when the wind isn’t blowing.
But Rolls-Royce and other companies have been putting small nuclear reactors close to the sea bed safely for decades, so why no design an offshore reactor that can be placed at a safe distance offshore?
We would need to solve the Putin and friends problem first, but I can see the UK exporting a lot of electricity and hydrogen produced by nuclear energy.
The Anonymous Widower 