business

Hitachi scraps UK nuclear power plant project

10 Comments
By Paul ELLIS

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2020 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

10 Comments
Login to comment

Of course, Boris Johnson breaking international law had no bearing whatsoever on Hitachi's decision.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Anything to do with Brexit?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Left unsaid are the problems with metallurgy in the end caps of the reactors, made in China.

Nuclear power always was a Faustian bargain.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The pound is sinking fast so the contracts are losing value.Theres no skin in the game for Hitachi now...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Not to worry, China will move right inn.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Mark, no they won't.

Archaic design we can do without. There are better newer, intrinsically safer designs and the concept of one huge plant is just so last century! Better to have a number of smaller plants so as not to put too many eggs in one basket.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Archaic design we can do without. There are better newer, intrinsically safer designs and the concept of one huge plant is just so last century! Better to have a number of smaller plants so as not to put too many eggs in one basket.

Siting is one major, possibly insurmountable, obstacle your idea of multiple small plants. Not too many locales are willing to be the home of a nuclear power plant. If one can only build a few such plants then the only way to take advantage of the benefits of nuclear power is to build large plants with large power production.

If you consider the necessities of a nuclear power plant that are beyond what are needed for other types of thermal power production, the heavy containment structures, redundant cooling, holding areas for spent fuel rods and the security required multiple small plants make little sense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Desert Tortoise, the problems you highlight are why the archaic designs are no longer valid. Modern designs are intrinsically safer, do not need the massive containment or the cooling pools as they don’t use rods and also burn over 95% of the fuel whereas the old types only burn 5%. Changing people’s perceptions will however take time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Modern designs are intrinsically safer, do not need the massive containment or the cooling pools as they don’t use rods and also burn over 95% of the fuel whereas the old types only burn 5%.

None of these so-called 4th Generation reactor designs are tested and proven yet. Some are only theoretical at this point. There is no ready to build design. If a nation needs power plant now or in the foreseeable future it will be a pressurized water cooled reactor. No smart electric authority is going to lay out big money on an unproven design.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Soviet and US Navy both tried sodium cooled reactors and both navies took them out and replaced them with water cooled reactors. As soon as you shut them down for maintenance the liquid metal solidifies and the whole cooling system is ruined. I think it was USS Halibut, the Navy had to rip the whole reactor out of the sub and replace it with a water cooled reactor. Waste of money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites