The Alvin Weinberg Foundation is a charity promoting safe, secure and sustainable advanced nuclear energy.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

Whilst nuclear power progress is struggling in South Africa, other African nations are keen to exploit the technology. World Nuclear News has reported that Uganda has sent a delegation to China to learn about nuclear technology and begin talks on cooperation.

Uganda has an electrification rate of 20% since June 2016, meaning there is a need for more power than expanding hydroelectric sites can provide. Uganda’s Vision 2040 roadmap includes the development of 40,000 MW of nuclear energy as part of the future energy mix. Prisca Boonabantu, undersecretary in the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development and leader of the delegation to China, said “Plans have been made in Uganda to have clean and safe energy generation sources with nuclear being one of them.” She added that Uganda welcomes partners to help construct, train and develop nuclear energy in line with International Atomic Energy Agency standards.

Uganda has already signed a Memorandum of Understanding on nuclear energy cooperation with China Central Plains Foreign Engineering Company and China Nuclear Manufacturing Group. This follows a previous Memorandum of Understanding signed between the Ugandan ministry and Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear.

Uganda has local uranium deposits that it plans to exploit with help from Russia and China. The country is one of many on the African continent recognising the benefits of nuclear power with Kenya, Ghana, Nigeria, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria all engaging with Russia’s Rosatom. As these countries develop, safe, secure and sustainable power provision is key. Nuclear power can help provide the energy needs of Africa and advanced reactors can ensure that the reactors are as safe and cost efficient as possible.

 

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP-Uganda-seeks-Chinese-cooperation-in-nuclear-energy-1205174.html

 

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

Following the recent publication of the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Select Committee’s report on the nuclear industry post-Brexit, the Institution for Mechanical Engineers have echoed their findings. In a report published last week (Leaving the EU, the Euratom Treaty Part 2: A Framework for the Future) the Institution argues that small modular reactors could be the key to securing the UK’s nuclear future post-Brexit.

The risks to the UK nuclear industry post-Brexit are well known, with leaving Euratom a particular concern that could damage nuclear innovation, as well as risk fuel supply and confuse regulation. The Institution’s report suggests some paths the UK Government could take to tackle this key issue Brexit poses. For instance, they recommend developing a UK Safeguarding Office to conform to international rules, as there is no fall back to Euratom in a no-deal scenario. This would cover regulation of safety and non-proliferation. In the Institution’s (and in Weinberg’s) view, the UK would ideally seek associate membership of Euratom to continue research and development cooperation.

This research and development commitment is key, with the Institution’s argument in this report being that Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) could be the sector that secures the nuclear industry’s success post-Brexit. As such they recommend pursuing the currently delayed SMR competition, opportunities for demonstration and commercialisation, and collaboration with devolved and local government to ensure sites are developed. The report mentions Trawsfynydd in Wales as one such option for development.

Jenifer Baxter, the Institution’s head of energy and environment and lead author of the report, said “The UK’s departure from the EU and Euratom is likely to be complicated and difficult, but it also presents the country with an opportunity to reshape its nuclear industry and once again become a world-leading innovator in nuclear technology.”

Weinberg Next Nuclear believe the Government should take very seriously the reports from the BEIS Select Committee and the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, and make the production of a nuclear strategy plan a priority. Brexit poses many risks to the UK nuclear industry and it is essential that these be managed to allow the UK’s nuclear sector to thrive again.

https://www.imeche.org/news/news-article/small-modular-reactors-could-provide-uk-with-key-opportunities-post-brexit

 

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

This week the House of Lord’s Science and Technology Committee published its report “ Nuclear research and technology: Breaking the cycle of indecision”. Weinberg Next Nuclear welcomes the report and agrees with many of its conclusions.

Nuclear has undoubted potential in the UK, but indecision for many years, through successive governments, has impaired progress. Continual delays have damaged both short and long term opportunities, as well as tarnishing the reputation for nuclear in the UK and limiting investor confidence.

Instead, the report argues that the Government “must act now to provide underpinning strategic support to the nuclear industry”. This action can and should be chosen strategically, and the Government can decide to either be a designer, manufacturer and operator of nuclear power itself, or be a destination to operate nuclear reactors designed and potentially manufactured overseas.

The report recommends investment in nuclear research and development, including allocating the £250 million announced by former chancellor George Osborne in 2015 and giving core funding to the National Nuclear Laboratory (see our recommendations for investment in this report). Small modular reactors (SMRs) are one of the areas that have particular potential, with the report recognising they are likely to be “globally important for the future of nuclear energy”. The UK’s experience in this sector, through defence application expertise, gives it the potential to be a world leader. Despite the potential both for the technology globally and the UK specifically, the SMR competition is still delayed. The report recommends the results should be published without delay, and joint ventures with foreign partners to develop the resulting technologies should be considered. Finally the report expresses caution (as we ourselves have done in this blog) on the risks of leaving Euratom as part of the Brexit process without a suitable replacement. Convening a group to plan to preserve the essential benefits of Euratom membership is a matter of urgency as the UK risks losing access to markets, skills and even fuel.

Unless the cycle of indecision is broken, the UK not only risks losing its status as a global leader in the nuclear sector, it also risks development of a secure and sustainable power supply for the future, and even the continued operation of its existing nuclear power plants. Weinberg Next Nuclear hope the Government heed this report, and its recommendations. Following the General Election in June, nuclear power policy should come off of hold and onto fast track.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

Weinberg Next Nuclear are delighted to recommend this event to our followers.

 

Rushlight Summer Showcase – 20 June 2017, London

 

The Rushlight Summer Showcase takes place on Tuesday 20 June 2017 at the Royal Geographical Society, 1 Kensington Gore, London.  It is THE marketplace that brings together cleantech developers and sustainable solution providers, with investors & financiers and businesses looking to source suppliers and partners for an improved level of sustainability in their supply chain and operations. Kindly sponsored and supported by Innovate UK, BEIS and Enterprise Ireland, it is a new event, following on from the highly successful Rushlight Show which has just had its 8th year and attracted 500 cleantech CEOs and entrepreneurs, investors and financiers, advisers, corporate customers and others involved in the sector.

 

TO REGISTER, and for more details of the event please go to http://www.rushlightevents.com/rushlight-summer-showcase/.

 

Cleantech companies can apply for one of the remaining presentation slots in the Conference Showcase to panels of investors, corporate venturers, partners and corporate customers. There are also a very limited number of stands available in the Exhibition area.

 

The highlights include:

1.       Conference, opened by the Department of Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, where 40 cleantech companies will be presenting to a large audience looking to learn about the latest sustainable innovations and clean technologies.

2.       The latest announcements from BEIS on funding for cleantech businesses.

3.       Announcements about a range of new funding rounds by Innovate UK,  which will be of direct interest to cleantech companies.

4.       The Exhibition incorporating the Innovate UK Energy Catalyst Round 3 Showcase.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

The Government are currently undertaking a consultation on their Industrial Strategy Green Paper. Our response is below.

Response to Industrial Strategy Green Paper – submitted by Weinberg Next Nuclear

  1. Introduction

Weinberg Next Nuclear is a UK-based think tank promoting clean energy, including advanced nuclear power.

Weinberg Next Nuclear welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy’s (BEIS) Green Paper on Industrial Strategy. We welcome the Government’s commitment to an Industrial Strategy and agree with BEIS that industrial strategy is needed to “build on our strengths and extend excellence into the future”.

The Green Paper has a significant focus on productivity. Energy productivity – including end use, production and distribution – must be a part of that. As such we welcome the commitment to “delivering affordable energy and clean growth” as one of the Government’s 10 pillars. Success in delivering this strategic pillar will require clarity in policy and diversity in approach. Below, we set out our recommendations for progress on energy in the Industrial Strategy.

  1. Delivering Secure and Sustainable UK Power

Investing in clean power not only tackles policy issues such as decarbonisation and air quality, it is also highly important to increasing energy security and rejuvenating industry around the UK.

The Green Paper suggests as one of the pillars of the Industrial Strategy, the aim of “driving growth across the whole country”. Energy is a key sector that could deliver this. Nuclear power for example, only has one site in the southeast, the rest being distributed around the Midlands, North and Wales. New power stations on these sites would secure jobs for many decades to come, which is why many of the communities around existing sites are so in favour of new development. The Government should tell the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to more actively release sites and pursue the options of using nuclear reactors to burn nuclear waste (our forthcoming report will be on this issue). The Government should also tell the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) to begin more Generic Design Assessments, especially now the AP1000 is complete, so that regulation is less of a barrier to progress. If necessary the ONR capacity should be increased (as we argued in our 2016 report Next Steps for Nuclear Innovation in the UK). The Government should accelerate the progress of its Small Modular Reactor Competition, to quell uncertainty in the industry and prevent further reactor companies seeking development elsewhere rather than the UK. Achieving a fleet of new nuclear power stations would allow the UK a long term supply of low carbon, secure energy whilst rejuvenating Britain’s leadership status within the sector.

Other technologies can also improve economic development around the UK. Offshore wind expansion will be good for the economies of Wales, Scotland, North West England, North East England and East Anglia. Offshore wind technology, which is rapidly getting cheaper, exerts to the best advantage our natural resources of wind and sea. As turbines get higher and floating potential is explored, the power they produce is increasing and the issues of intermittency are decreasing. It is essential the UK Government continues its work in encouraging the development of this technology and the entire industry that supports it (see section 6 below).

There are significant, simple and inexpensive policy changes that could encourage decarbonised energy. Removing the local veto and subsidy block for onshore wind, the cheapest renewable technology, would allow sensible developments to go ahead. Providing an exemption for solar panels within the new, higher business rates would avoid discouraging schools, hospitals and other businesses from pursuing the technology. This would not necessarily require new legislation, only an exemption similar to that of combined heat and power.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) also has great potential for rejuvenating industry in our industrial areas. The 2016 report of the Parliamentary Advisory Group on Carbon Capture and Storage Lowest Cost Decarbonisation for the UK: The Critical Role of CCS cited potential locations for clusters, including Merseyside and Humberside, where CCS should be pursued due to the ability to capitalise on existing gas infrastructure and skills. Many organisations, from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the UK’s Committee on Climate Change have said CCS is essential in order to meet carbon budgets cost-effectively. The UK Government should heed this advice and re-start a UK CCS programme.

There are also areas where the UK could achieve regional development and cultivate world-leading skills and export potential. For example, the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon, recently backed by the Hendry review, addresses many pillars of the Green Paper. The Government should move quickly to agree a Contract for Difference.

In combination with cultivating and supporting new industries, the industrial strategy should ensure that the UK is not supporting out-dated industries. Removing coal and diesel from the capacity market would be a key step in ensuring our future energy mix is sustainable and that the UK is only supporting future-proof industries. In addition, to support the proposed phase out of coal, the UK should legislate that by the end of 2025 the Emissions Performance Standard will be applied to existing as well as new power stations.

  1. Delivering Secure and Sustainable UK Heat and Transport

We welcome the proposed sector deals in the Green Paper for electric transport vehicles. Because of air pollution and climate change, it is vital that the car industry is a focus for change in the future. Therefore the £390 million for electric transport is much needed. The focus should be on forming the bridge between innovation and realisation. In addition to developing the electric vehicle industry, barriers to commercialisation should be addressed. A scrappage scheme for polluting diesel cars to enable more consumers to buy electric vehicles and more infrastructure, including charging points, would support commercialisation of the industry. These could be rolled out in public areas such as supermarkets and train stations.

Heat is the biggest source of demand for energy in the UK, and the biggest source of energy-related emissions. As such we hope to hear ambitious, long term plans to decarbonise heat in the forthcoming Clean Growth Plan. Heat policy can be combined with industrial strategy to serve both heat decarbonisation and industrial rejuvenation. Nuclear reactors and CCS plants should be used to provide combined heat and power, greatly increasing the efficiency of energy production. Additionally new industries, such as hydrogen, could act to balance the grid by using excess renewable electricity to produce hydrogen via electrolysis. The hydrogen could then be used as sustainable heat sources with little infrastructure change required. Methane steam reforming should also be used to produce hydrogen at scale – though this would only be low-carbon if combined with CCS. We recommend that the Government gives more priority to options to decarbonise heat, rejuvenate industry and increase the efficiency of energy production.

  1. Delivering Skills for the Future

Many of the Green Paper’s proposed sector deals are vertically focused on specific areas. Horizontal policy, that crosscuts and benefits multiple sectors, is also key. Skills is one of these beneficial, horizontal areas. As well as preparing for the future in general, we must address areas where gaps are appearing. Nuclear is one of the areas where a gap is imminent and skills investment needs to take place. Investment in engineering skills could deliver excellent returns for the UK.

  1. Creating Long-term Certainty and Consistency

Industry needs security, but in the uncertainty wrought by the Brexit vote it also needs consistency. Blocking low cost, green solutions such as onshore wind, is unwise. A consistent approach should be used between energy sources. For example, if local communities are not allowed a veto vote over shale gas developments, they should also not be allowed a veto on wind farms. Whatever is decided on veto policy, it should be consistent across technologies.

Similarly, industry needs consistency over time. Regulatory stability and long-term agendas help investor confidence. One of the key mechanisms for delivering regulatory stability was EU membership. In the Brexit scenario that the UK now finds itself in, it is essential that a stable, consistent and long-term approach to policy is developed, to maintain confidence and ensure industrial progress.

One area where consistency and certainty must now be cultivated is the Levy Control Framework replacement. Having removed the framework in the Spring Budget but not providing replacement details until the autumn budget, the Government has created uncertainty. A new framework should be developed and announced as soon as possible.

  1. Cooperation with Europe

Significant portions of our energy infrastructure are imported: for example, parts for wind turbines. Tariffs on these imports would increase the cost of energy infrastructure, and so damage British industry. The Government should therefore give priority to energy in the Brexit negotiations.

In addition to securing imports that do not damage industry, the UK should cultivate more home grown industry by producing more of its infrastructure needs within the UK.

The UK must also ensure it stays competitive and open to EU and global markets, whilst also maintaining its leadership in certain fields. One of these fields is emissions. The Industrial Emissions Directive is a key policy that keep relationships with Europe strong whilst protecting our local and global environment. It is essential that that this, and other environmental initiatives are maintained and strengthened to allow the UK to continue to be a key part of Europe’s sustainable industrial future.

Another key treaty with Europe that will impact the UK’s infrastructure plans and energy security is Euratom. The Government has said that it intends to leave this treaty, but not what the desired future relationship with Euratom will be. As Euratom manages the movement of nuclear fuel, and nuclear fuel is essential to UK energy security, it is by extension essential that the UK achieves a good deal and a form of associate membership with Euratom. This could also potentially mean the continuation of research projects in the UK funded by Euratom, such as the Culham centre in Oxford.

  1. Cooperation with the rest of the world

As well as working closely with Europe, in a post-Brexit scenario the UK will be looking more at closer relationships with the rest of the world. One area in which this will benefit our industrial strategy is through cooperation on regulation. In the nuclear sector, high standards of regulation are crucial, but lack of co-operation with other countries pursuing nuclear, such as Canada and the USA, is slowing progress. The UK should work more closely with these countries to smooth the regulation process and allow maximum benefit of nuclear power to the UK.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

Toshiba may still be struggling with financial difficulties but other nuclear developers are pushing ahead with progress. This month GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) and Advanced Reactor Concepts LLC (ARC) have signed a memorandum of understanding to collaborate on progress a joint SMR design.

Both GE Hitachi and ARC have extensive experience with advanced nuclear, specifically sodium-cooled fast reactors. Both of their reactor designs are based on the same prototype, the EBR-II at Argonne National Laboratory Idaho, which ran successfully for more than 30 years. Despite the similarity between their reactors, they have been designed for very different purposes. The ARC-100 is for efficient and flexible electricity generation, while operating for up to 20 years without the need for refuelling. On the other hand, PRISM has primarily been focused on closing the fuel cycle by using spent fuel and other “waste” and therefore is designed to refuel every 12 to 24 months.

Their collaboration will initially be aimed for deployment in Canada. The companies will pursue a preliminary regulatory review through Canada’s Vendor Design Review process, building on earlier technology licensing success in the USA. Sodium cooled reactors are one of the most advanced technologies so most likely to be able to replace the current, ageing, outdated fleet of reactors.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

The Science and Technology Committee of the House of Lords are undertaking an inquiry on the priorities for nuclear research and technologies.

Our response has now been published online here: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/science-and-technology-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/nuclear-research-and-technologies/nuclear-research-and-technologies-publications/ or can be read below.

 

Weinberg Next Nuclear – Written evidence (PNT0045)

 

Weinberg Next Nuclear[1] is a charity promoting advanced nuclear technologies: fast reactors, molten salt reactors, small modular reactors. We therefore very much welcome this Committee enquiry.

Since the Committee’s 2011 report on the UK’s nuclear R&D capacity, Weinberg Next Nuclear has published two short reports on the need for the UK government to support nuclear innovation – financially and through public policy.

Our 2015 report Why Nuclear Innovation is Needed  (http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/2015/11/23/why-nuclear-innovation-is-needed/) outlined the advantages of next-generation nuclear technology:

– They can use liquid fuel, so the core cannot melt down;

– They can re-use the spent fuel – which still contains over 90% of the energy that was in the original uranium;

– Advanced reactors could reduce the amount of nuclear waste which has to be managed by future generations (and which already exists so cannot be wished away) by around 95%;

– They can use plutonium as fuel. The UK has the largest stockpile of plutonium in the world;

– They can be built as small modules and then assembled on site to reach the scale desired. This could reduce construction costs. They could be installed where the heat could be used as well as the power.

We called on the then-Chancellor George Osborne to fund prototype demonstrations of advanced nuclear reactors. He did allocate £250 million to nuclear R&D in the 2015 Autumn Statement, and the Government launched the SMR competition.

In April 2016 we published a follow-up report Next Steps for Nuclear Innovation in the UK (http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/2016/04/27/report-launch-next-steps-for-nuclear-in-the-uk/) This report:

– outlines criteria which government should use in selecting reactor designs to support (but does not say which designs should be chosen);

– recommends that at least one of the reactors supported should be a Generation IV design, because this could re-use spent nuclear fuel, and also use plutonium as fuel. The UK has the largest plutonium stockpile in the world;

– suggests that SMRs and micro-reactors (less than 20 megawatts) will be cheaper to construct than large reactors because they can be made on production lines then transported to site. Generation IV reactors may also be considerably cheaper than existing nuclear designs due to less complex designs – though this will not be known until one has been constructed;

– supports the Office for Nuclear Regulation’s proposal to increase its capacity by expanding staff numbers. Lack of regulatory capacity is currently the major barrier to nuclear innovation in the UK;

– proposes that UK nuclear regulators should work closely with their Canadian and US counterparts, with the aim of developing a regulatory approval mechanism that would cover all three countries.

Weinberg Next Nuclear believes that responsibility for ensuring that the UK has a coherent and consistent long term policy for civil nuclear activities lies firmly with the Government. The Government is not doing enough to fund research and development on SMRs, or on motivating others to do so. The results of the SMR competition need to be announced as soon as possible. The Government then needs to do more to fund research, development and demonstration of fast reactors and molten salt reactors.

 

Author: Stephen Tindale, Director

24 February 2017

 

 


[1] This is the operating name of the Alvin Weinberg Foundation.

Posted by Suzanna Hinson

New nuclear power capacity in the UK is a challenge to construct. Hinkley Point C had been in the pipeline since 2008. It now has final approval, but will take many more years to build. The length and expense of getting new capacity from initial proposal, through the expensive regulatory assessment to construction is a daunting prospect for companies with new reactor designs and plans. 

The UK’s licencing and regulatory system needs to be better resourced and better connected. The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) undertakes a Generic Design Assessment, recognised globally as a leader in nuclear regulation. But ONR is limited in its capacity, able to do only two assessments at a time at present. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) manages the UK’s legacy of old reactors, spent fuel and – importantly – licensed nuclear sites.

The fact that regulation and siting are dealt with by different organisations lengthens delays, slows progress and increases costs, often with nuclear developers bounced between the two organisations. The disconnect between these two organisations and their separate priorities is also outdated. Increasingly, nuclear designs show potential to not only produce electricity and heat but also to recycle spend fuel as a resource rather than waste. To make progress on advanced reactors the two organisations need to work more closely together.

Both the ONR and NDA take their direction from the Government. With the Industrial Strategy highlighting that nuclear is a priority, the Government need to act. It should:

·      tell the NDA to release sites for demonstration of reactors;

·      tell ONR to begin Generic Design Assessment on two Generation IV designs.

The NDA has sufficient capacity to assess then release necessary sites. ONR’s lack of capacity has in the past been a block to nuclear innovation. Other countries’ nuclear regulators, notably the Canadian ones, have many more staff than ONR does (and are also more willing to begin dialogue with potential developers before the formal regulatory process begins). ONR now aims to increase its capacity, a welcome objective, that must now be delivered. Ministers must tell ONR to begin assessing advanced reactor designs to prevent them becoming a bottleneck for expansion. The increased capacity should also be used to allow greater cooperation between the two organisations.

With the exit from Euratom and competition from other countries, it is essential that the UK turns its policy support for nuclear into actual progress, or risk getting left behind in this key sector. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy must not use lack of ONR capacity as an excuse for inaction.

Posted by Stephen Tindale

Last week I went to Amsterdam to speak at a seminar on ‘nuclear: the elephant in the room’. The Netherlands has only one operating nuclear power station, Borssele, providing about 4% of the power generated in the country. The Netherlands is very flat (and much of it below sea level) so hydro is not an option. This explains why the Netherlands currently gets only around 6.5% of its energy from renewables. The Dutch target under the EU Renewable Energy Directive is to get 14% of total energy from renewables by 2020. Major expansions of on- and offshore wind are underway. But where should the other 86% come from?

The Netherlands has substantial gas resources, so a lot of gas power stations. Gas is less bad for the climate than coal is, and an effective way to back up intermittent renewables such as wind. But gas without carbon capture and storage is not low carbon enough to be regarded as clean (as we argued in http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/2017/01/23/new-report-the-case-for-a-clean-energy-alliance/).

The Dutch go to the polls on 15 March. None of the 28 parties standing in the general election is proposing a new nuclear power station. So the reference to the elephant in the room was appropriate.

The role that nuclear could play was well set out by Pier Stapersma of Clingendael, the Netherlands Institute for International Relations (https://www.clingendael.nl/). Pier pointed out that it is possible for nuclear reactors to ‘load follow’ – operate as back up to intermittent wind – and that smaller reactors can do this more efficiently than large reactors can.

Despite the lack of political engagement with nuclear issues, there is some important nuclear research underway in the Netherlands, notably into thorium molten salt reactors at the Delft University of Technology. The website states that “Sun and wind are intermittent energy sources, that require backup. Thorium MSR’s are excellent for providing this. MSR’s can ‘load follow’ automatically, by laws of nature. This means that if demand goes up, they produce more, if it goes down, they produce less.” (http://thmsr.nl/#/)

There is also research into thorium MSRs being done in Denmark, by Copenhagen Atomics (http://www.copenhagenatomics.com/). I met staff from Copenhagen Atomics at the seminar. Denmark has traditionally been anti-nuclear: the smiling sun Nuclear Power: no thanks logo was created in Denmark in 1975 (http://www.smilingsun.org/), and the country has no nuclear power stations.

Copenhagen Atomics aim to build a “waste burner”, using the legacy of past nuclear activities. Weinberg Next Nuclear’s next report will be on this subject. Advanced nuclear technology, including Molten Salt Reactors, have potential to engage previously anti-nuclear audiences. Alongside their energy security and cost reduction potential, this makes them worth investing in.


Endorsements:

I strongly support the Alvin Weinberg Foundation’s vital work to raise awareness of the urgent need for next-generation nuclear power to combat climate change and to provide clean energy for the future.

— Professor James Hansen

@aw_nextnuclear

Our latest blog on the nuclear report from the Science and Technology Committee of the House of Lords. We need... https://t.co/CPqKOPpyOg
- Wednesday May 3 - 2:36pm


Sign up for our Weinberg Next Nuclear Newsletter
* = required field

© The Alvin Weinberg Foundation 2014
The Alvin Weinberg Foundation is a registered UK charity. Charity number: 1155255
The Alvin Weinberg Foundation web site uses cookies to record visitor patterns.
Read our data protection policy

Design by Tauri-tec Ltd and the Alvin Weinberg Foundation