At precisely noon on Friday, Paul Forrest, station director at Hunterston B in North Ayrshire, will walk into the control room of Reactor 4 and press a button to end the life of Scotland’s oldest working nuclear facility.
The button controls the plant’s neutron-absorbing control rods. Once pushed, it will drive the rods into the reactor’s core, halting the nuclear chain reaction that produces Hunterston’s energy, and shutting the plant down in a matter of seconds.
The most visible sign of shutdown outside the plant will be a huge burst of steam, a by-product of the intense heat generated by the chain reaction and which would have been used to drive the electricity turbines. Instead, it will be released into the skies in a billowing cloud of dense mist. Thus will end almost half a century of nuclear power generation at the facility six miles south of Largs.
“It’ll be a sad day,” says Forrest. “But it’s a celebration as well as a shutdown and we will look back with a lot of pride on Friday.” In its lifetime Hunterston has produced enough energy to power every home in Scotland for 31 years, or every home in the plant’s Ayrshire backyard for four centuries.
It is closing earlier than originally planned because of cracks in its graphite cores, which forced its temporary shutdown between 2018 and 2019. It will leave just Torness, in East Lothian, as Scotland’s only operational nuclear power plant, where once there were four. Torness, like Hunterston and all the UK’s nuclear power stations, is owned by the French state-owned energy giant EDF.
Torness will also cease operation within the decade, and since the Scottish government is opposed to new nuclear plants, there are no replacements for either facility — despite a recent Panelbase poll for The Times finding 59 per cent of voters in Scotland believe nuclear power is vital to replace fossil fuels, while 27 per cent disagree. More voters than not also back the construction of new nuclear plants in Scotland.
The closure of Hunterston B, which like Torness accounts for more than 500 full-time jobs, is the latest development to raise questions about the SNP’s energy policy. While the UK government has been accused of offering lacklustre support to the North Sea oil and gas sector that once buoyed the British economy, the nationalists who once based their Scottish independence case upon it have become hostile, campaigning against the development of the Cambo oilfield off Shetland, and getting their way.
The gap in energy generation will be filled in large part with imported gas from Norway, Russia and the Middle East. Many believe increasing imports threatens energy security and could lead to a rise in fuel poverty, but there are also concerns that a Scotland without nuclear energy will fail to reach its ambitious emission reduction targets.
Nuclear is one of the most reliable low-carbon sources of energy. EDF says Hunterston has avoided more than 100 million tonnes of CO2 compared with gas generation — the equivalent of taking all the cars off Scotland’s roads for 19 years.
“What Hunterston’s closure means is that after the end of the first week in January, the amount of firm low-carbon power in Scotland will be halved,” Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association, says. “Emissions in Scotland will go up, and ironically, given the politics of the ruling party at Holyrood, Scotland will be more reliant on power coming from other parts of the UK when it isn’t windy.”
The Scottish government begs to differ. In a statement it said: “We believe that significant growth in renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture provides the best pathway to net zero by 2045, and will deliver the decarbonisation we need to see.”
Right now, however, Scotland relies on nuclear power more than anywhere else in the UK. Figures from the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy show nuclear generation in Scotland rose 9.2 per cent in 2020, with the atomic proportion of electricity generation growing to 26 per cent, the highest share in the UK. During the Cop26 climate conference, nuclear provided 70 per cent of host city Glasgow’s electricity when the wind wasn’t blowing.
The International Energy Agency says nuclear energy is essential to achieve net zero. France, where EDF is headquartered, generates 71 per cent of its power from nuclear energy and has the lowest per capita emissions of any advanced economy. Meanwhile, Germany’s decision to close its atomic plants after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led to a sharp rise in its coal production. Germany’s emissions per person were, on av
erage, 43 per cent higher than those of countries with nuclear power in 2019.
Of course, public opinion and the perception of nuclear — primarily its safety in the wake of Fukushima, where an earthquake and tsunami caused a meltdown — is critical. There is also the dilemma of storing radioactive nuclear waste. However, the Fukushima disaster resulted in just one radiation-related death, that of a plant worker. A study by the World Health Organisation into the incident, released in 2020, stated that “future radiation-associated health effects are unlikely to be discernible”.
The issue of cost is harder to gloss over. Nuclear plants are incredibly expensive and take years to build. The bill for EDF’s Hinkley Point C power station, under construction in southwest England and due to open in 2026, is running at £23 billion, about £5 billion above its original 2016 price tag. The plant is expected to provide electricity for six million homes.
The solution for supporters of nuclear is to construct multiple plants, based on a standard design, that achieve cost reductions through replication. France, which is considering six new plants, and China, the world’s biggest polluter but building 18 reactors to curb its emissions, are using this cut and paste model.
Along with Hinkley, Westminster is also backing new small modular reactors (SMRs). Rolls-Royce is developing SMRs, which have far lower upfront costs as the components are largely prefabricated. The engineering giant — a big employer in Scotland — is going through regulatory hurdles but is investing £195 million in the technology, backed by a further £210 million from the UK government. It hopes to establish three factories within the decade. A single SMR could generate enough power for one million homes.
“Rolls-Royce’s SMR work is a huge opportunity,” says Gary Smith, the GMB trade union boss. “With Hunterston’s closure it will be a disaster if the SNP’s political dogma continues to rule out the jobs SMRs could bring to Scotland. Bluntly, there will be no net zero in Scotland by 2045 without new nuclear capacity.”
disclaimer: I do not agree with the view that this will cut down emissions.
The title makes zero sense, they’re shutting it down because it’s too old?
3 comments
At precisely noon on Friday, Paul Forrest, station director at Hunterston B in North Ayrshire, will walk into the control room of Reactor 4 and press a button to end the life of Scotland’s oldest working nuclear facility.
The button controls the plant’s neutron-absorbing control rods. Once pushed, it will drive the rods into the reactor’s core, halting the nuclear chain reaction that produces Hunterston’s energy, and shutting the plant down in a matter of seconds.
The most visible sign of shutdown outside the plant will be a huge burst of steam, a by-product of the intense heat generated by the chain reaction and which would have been used to drive the electricity turbines. Instead, it will be released into the skies in a billowing cloud of dense mist. Thus will end almost half a century of nuclear power generation at the facility six miles south of Largs.
“It’ll be a sad day,” says Forrest. “But it’s a celebration as well as a shutdown and we will look back with a lot of pride on Friday.” In its lifetime Hunterston has produced enough energy to power every home in Scotland for 31 years, or every home in the plant’s Ayrshire backyard for four centuries.
It is closing earlier than originally planned because of cracks in its graphite cores, which forced its temporary shutdown between 2018 and 2019. It will leave just Torness, in East Lothian, as Scotland’s only operational nuclear power plant, where once there were four. Torness, like Hunterston and all the UK’s nuclear power stations, is owned by the French state-owned energy giant EDF.
Torness will also cease operation within the decade, and since the Scottish government is opposed to new nuclear plants, there are no replacements for either facility — despite a recent Panelbase poll for The Times finding 59 per cent of voters in Scotland believe nuclear power is vital to replace fossil fuels, while 27 per cent disagree. More voters than not also back the construction of new nuclear plants in Scotland.
The closure of Hunterston B, which like Torness accounts for more than 500 full-time jobs, is the latest development to raise questions about the SNP’s energy policy. While the UK government has been accused of offering lacklustre support to the North Sea oil and gas sector that once buoyed the British economy, the nationalists who once based their Scottish independence case upon it have become hostile, campaigning against the development of the Cambo oilfield off Shetland, and getting their way.
The gap in energy generation will be filled in large part with imported gas from Norway, Russia and the Middle East. Many believe increasing imports threatens energy security and could lead to a rise in fuel poverty, but there are also concerns that a Scotland without nuclear energy will fail to reach its ambitious emission reduction targets.
Nuclear is one of the most reliable low-carbon sources of energy. EDF says Hunterston has avoided more than 100 million tonnes of CO2 compared with gas generation — the equivalent of taking all the cars off Scotland’s roads for 19 years.
“What Hunterston’s closure means is that after the end of the first week in January, the amount of firm low-carbon power in Scotland will be halved,” Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association, says. “Emissions in Scotland will go up, and ironically, given the politics of the ruling party at Holyrood, Scotland will be more reliant on power coming from other parts of the UK when it isn’t windy.”
The Scottish government begs to differ. In a statement it said: “We believe that significant growth in renewables, storage, hydrogen and carbon capture provides the best pathway to net zero by 2045, and will deliver the decarbonisation we need to see.”
Right now, however, Scotland relies on nuclear power more than anywhere else in the UK. Figures from the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy show nuclear generation in Scotland rose 9.2 per cent in 2020, with the atomic proportion of electricity generation growing to 26 per cent, the highest share in the UK. During the Cop26 climate conference, nuclear provided 70 per cent of host city Glasgow’s electricity when the wind wasn’t blowing.
The International Energy Agency says nuclear energy is essential to achieve net zero. France, where EDF is headquartered, generates 71 per cent of its power from nuclear energy and has the lowest per capita emissions of any advanced economy. Meanwhile, Germany’s decision to close its atomic plants after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led to a sharp rise in its coal production. Germany’s emissions per person were, on av
erage, 43 per cent higher than those of countries with nuclear power in 2019.
Of course, public opinion and the perception of nuclear — primarily its safety in the wake of Fukushima, where an earthquake and tsunami caused a meltdown — is critical. There is also the dilemma of storing radioactive nuclear waste. However, the Fukushima disaster resulted in just one radiation-related death, that of a plant worker. A study by the World Health Organisation into the incident, released in 2020, stated that “future radiation-associated health effects are unlikely to be discernible”.
The issue of cost is harder to gloss over. Nuclear plants are incredibly expensive and take years to build. The bill for EDF’s Hinkley Point C power station, under construction in southwest England and due to open in 2026, is running at £23 billion, about £5 billion above its original 2016 price tag. The plant is expected to provide electricity for six million homes.
The solution for supporters of nuclear is to construct multiple plants, based on a standard design, that achieve cost reductions through replication. France, which is considering six new plants, and China, the world’s biggest polluter but building 18 reactors to curb its emissions, are using this cut and paste model.
Along with Hinkley, Westminster is also backing new small modular reactors (SMRs). Rolls-Royce is developing SMRs, which have far lower upfront costs as the components are largely prefabricated. The engineering giant — a big employer in Scotland — is going through regulatory hurdles but is investing £195 million in the technology, backed by a further £210 million from the UK government. It hopes to establish three factories within the decade. A single SMR could generate enough power for one million homes.
“Rolls-Royce’s SMR work is a huge opportunity,” says Gary Smith, the GMB trade union boss. “With Hunterston’s closure it will be a disaster if the SNP’s political dogma continues to rule out the jobs SMRs could bring to Scotland. Bluntly, there will be no net zero in Scotland by 2045 without new nuclear capacity.”
disclaimer: I do not agree with the view that this will cut down emissions.
The title makes zero sense, they’re shutting it down because it’s too old?