Picture by Greenpeace Nordic's Virpi Oinonen

Well, the preliminary findings of STUK’s extraordinary inspection of the construction of the Olkiluoto 3. The Finland’s nuclear watchdog conducted the inspection after it was revealed by Greenpeace published evidence that basic construction and safety standards had been violated in welding of the reactor building by Areva’s sub-contractor Bouygues. So, how do the findings look?

STUK have today admitted that the mandatory welding guidelines that Bouygues were supposed to supply were not finalised until after construction on the reactor building had started. This means that STUK cannot guarantee the safety and quality of the welding in Olkiluoto 3’s steel structure.

This admission comes after previous assurances from STUK and Bouygues that there were no problems at the construction site. STUK’s method of investigation was merely to ask Bouygues if there were any problems at the site. Bouygues said no and STUK proclaimed itself satisfied. In the meantime Bouygues had been warning its employees not to speak out about safety issues. Today STUK had finally admitted that contractor has on some occasions told workers not to report on the quality problems to the inspectors.

These problems with the construction at Olkiluoto 3 only came to light when they were revealed by Greenpeace. STUK said today that welding, guidelines should be available for welders and they should know how to use them. Also workers should be allowed to voice concern without fear of punishment. With much of the welding now complete, however, and it now sealed in concrete, this is far too little and far too late. It’s clear that STUK’s inspection and scrutiny processes are not adequate to detect failings in procedures at the site.

With its inability to detect failings, its willingness to take contractors at their word, and its cosy relationship with Olkiluoto 3’s builder Areva, STUK’s judgement can no longer be trusted. An independent inspection to ensure the safety of the reactor building and conducted by outside experts is now urgently needed.

Posted by Justin at 4:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Just when the French and Italians seemed to be uniting, things started to go wrong.
The car market in these countries is based around smaller cars that are better at meeting emissions targets. The car makers here were willing to accept tighter targets and the footprint, not weight-based parameter. In March 2008 it looked like France was willing to do the right thing by the environment.

“It is difficult to maintain that the heaviest and most powerful cars have an international right to emit more than others,” French Environment Minister, Jean-Louis Borloo said in a Ministerial debate.

But though Germany has a reputation for being one of the leading countries in Europe in the fight against climate change Angela Merkel soon stepped in and announced the setting up of a diplomatic working group to get a bilateral deal between France and Germany. No prizes for guessing who the winners and losers would be in that deal. That’s right, the German car makers win the right to carry on making big fast cars for as long as they can, meanwhile the climate loses.

The Merkozy (Merkel/Sarkozy) deal means that targets will be pushed back even further and car makers won’t have to achieve full compliance until 2015.

It weakens the existing targets even more, by insisting that 6-8 g of the target could be achieved using technologies that the EU has no testing procedures for. That means that cars could meet the emissions target with emissions level of 138g per km, which doesn’t sound like much of a reduction to me.

And if that wasn’t enough, the Merkozy deal is sufficiently vague about future targets that the 2020 target would be non-binding, and could be postponed or weakened.

France has the EU rotating presidency, so an agreement between the French and German politicians over car emissions which they’ve previously been at odds with couldn’t have come at a worse time.

And his keenness to accommodate the demands of German carmakers doesn’t give much hope for the rest of the EU’s legislation under the climate and energy package. The door would be left wide open to further undermining the EU’s climate ambition in order to cater for a string of special interests. We need to find a way to close that door now.

Posted by Debra at 4:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The leak at Belgium’s Fleurus nuclear reactor this week followed the same old familiar and disgraceful pattern we see after leaks all over the world: cover up and denial followed by admission that things are worse than first admitted.

The accident at Fleurus took place when liquid radioactive waste was transferred from one tank to another releasing the isotope iodine-131. The public was told there was no health risk . As is usual in these cases, it was soon revealed that this was not true.

Today we find that the Belgian authorities have restricted the consumption of vegetables and milk produced within five kilometres Fleurus. The announcement was made an incredible five days after the leak took place. The incident has been graded as 3 (serious incident) on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES) scale. Production of medical radioisotopes at the facility, run by Institut des Radioelements (IRE) has now been halted.

Unbelievably, Belgium’s nuclear watchdog Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) has been complicit in the cover-up and hiding the danger from the public. Even though it advised the public that there was ‘no risk to the population’ it knew even as it made the statement that this was not true and communicated this to the IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Read more »

Posted by Justin at 2:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Claims that Areva sub-contractor Bouygues are responsible for safety violations at the construction site of the Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor in Finland seem to have touched a nerve:

‘Claims of substandard welding at the construction site of Finland's third commercial nuclear reactor have led to a request for a police investigation. An engineer serving as deputy project chief for the construction company Bouygues feels that a current affairs programme on YLE TV-2 libelled his company with claims of substandard welding at the site.’

Given that Finnish nuclear watchdog STUK are due to report back later today after an extraordinary three-day inspection of the site, and in the light of further revelations this week, this ain’t an open and shut case. Watch this space.

Posted by Justin at 12:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Some other stories from the nuclear industry you may have missed:

The Economist: There should be no exemption for India from the world’s nuclear rules
‘IN A dangerous and unstable world, isn’t cementing friendship with an up-and-coming power such as India worth breaking a few rules for? That is the reasoning behind the Bush administration’s championing of a controversial civilian nuclear deal with India, which George Bush and India’s Manmohan Singh struck in 2005. To take effect it now needs only an India-sized hole to be punched next week in the global rules on nuclear trade and then a final nod from America’s Congress.‘

International Herald Tribune: France and Jordan sign civilian nuclear deal
‘The office of French President Nicolas Sarkozy says France and Jordan have signed an accord on civilian nuclear cooperation. Sarkozy's office says the deal will "reinforce and institutionalize" nuclear cooperation between the two countries. In a parallel agreement, French nuclear giant Areva says it has signed a uranium mining deal with Jordan's Atomic Energy Commission.’

Reuters: Iran offers nuclear help to Nigeria's power sector
‘Delegates from the two countries promised to cooperate on nuclear energy, but provided few details on the agreement reached after a four-day meeting in Nigeria's capital Abuja. "We not only consider it (nuclear energy) an Iranian inalienable right, but also Nigeria's right to use this clean source of energy," said Mohammadali Zeyghami, deputy head of trade relations in Iran's Ministry of Commerce’

The Guardian: China's lead in race for new nuclear plants could create UK skills famine
‘Britain's plans for a new generation of nuclear power stations will face a fierce challenge for skills and resources from countries keen to build their own, according to research published today. China has plans for 24 nuclear plants and outline proposals for another 76, according to the Economic Research Council, using figures from the International Energy Agency and the IAEA.‘

The Whitehaven News: Is Sellafield handover under threat?
‘SELLAFIELD has been thrown into turmoil by the effects of the strike threat hanging over the UK’s biggest nuclear site. On top of the split between the industrial and staff unions over the management’s pay offer, speculation has swept the site that the planned hand-over to the new parent body (Nuclear Management Partners) will not take place on time if the site is hit by a strike.’

The Guardian: Generators accused of putting profit before safety
‘Iberdrola and Endesa, two of Spain's leading electricity companies, have been accused of cutting costs at nuclear power stations at the expense of safety. The Catalan regional government said that failure to invest had caused several incidents at two nuclear stations including a leak which led to thousands of people having to undergo radiation tests.’

Interactive Investor: US mulls scrapping nuclear pact with Russia
‘The White House said Thursday that it was considering scrapping a US-Russia civilian nuclear cooperation pact in response to Moscow's actions in Georgia. "I don't think there's anything to announce yet, but I know that that is under discussion," spokeswoman Dana Perino said when asked whether Washington might drop the May 6 accord over the conflict in the former Soviet republic.’

(Additional links courtesy of No 2 Nuclear Power)

Posted by Justin at 11:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In December 2007 the European Commission adopted a proposal to reduce the average emissions of CO2 from new passenger cars in the EU to 130 grams per kilometre by 2012, with additional measures bringing the reduction down to 120g. They have also decided on using weight as a parameter, so that heavier cars can have more generous emissions targets, instead of footprint (track width multiplied by wheelbase). Footprint was put forward in the past as a way to ensure that car makers don’t just make bigger cars to take advantage of the higher allowance. It would be much cheaper to make a car a bit heavier, if you were minded to, than to increase its footprint.

But though the legislation has been put forward by the Commission, it has to go be considered by a number of European Parliament committees before it is put to the vote in the parliament. A lot of hoops to jump through, but these are crucial hoops – the parliament is expected to go along with the opinion of the committees. That’s if they can agree about what action to take. The legislation also has to be agreed by the Environment, made up of national government Environment Ministers.

This stage is where the horse trading will take place with each committee able to put forward a series of amendments. I read through one of the proposed sets of changes and it’s a pretty confusing affair, with some amendments appearing to cancel others out. And at this stage I can’t really blame anyone who says that the EU is full of bureaucracy and boredom. Except that behind all the talk about article 7 paragraph 3, what is actually at stake here is the future of our planet. How much more important can it get?

The state of play so far:

the climate committee has given an opinion,

the transport committee has declined.

Still to vote at the next session are industry and environment.

You won’t be surprised to learn that industry is championing the car makers. Werner Langen, a German MEP and Christian Democrat, is responsible for the industry committee’s contribution. He want even more delays, to give the car makers until 2015 to implement the rules, a sliding scale that gives more generous allowances for big heavy cars, and much lower penalties for non-compliance. The committee is due to vote on 1st September.

And that just leaves us with environment, who will take into account the other opinions. Led by Guido Sacconi, the committees seems keen on setting targets post 2012, which is a good start. The threat of climate change is not suddenly going to disappear with the medals at the London Olympics.

Sacconi is not so keen on putting forward an amendment that would mean that cars would be assessed on footprint (track width multiplied by wheelbase). It might sound harmless, but footprint is a really important issue, and I’ll explain more about that next time.

Posted by Martin Lloyd at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

And the bad news just keeps on coming for Areva and its construction of the Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor in Finland.

Firstly and most critical, a former welding coordinator for Areva sub-contractor Bouygues told Finnish TV yesterday that load-bearing welding in the reactor’s steel structure have not been done properly. The international EN ISO 17660-1 standards require a 120mm weld seam on both sides of such welding. Alternative welding guidelines used at Olkiluoto 3 stipulated only a 20mm seam on one side - a huge difference.

How the welding should have been done (click to enlarge)

...and...

How the welding was acturally done (click to enlarge)

Outrageously, Bouygues have two different sets of welding guidelines which have been seen by Greenpeace: a proper one to given to the authorities for approval and a corner-cutting one for the welders in the reactor. Both sets of guidelines were only drawn up after work had started and hundred of safety-critical welds made. Basically, Bouygues lied and as a result these vital welds have not been inspected by Finland’s nuclear watchdog STUK.

These weld seams connect piping and other safety critical components to the steel reinforced concrete of the Olkiluoto 3 reactor building. Therefore it’s vital the structure is built to the strictest and highest standards as possible. The reactor has been built without the proper safety provision and quality assurances. Employees also told Finnish TV of safety violations, the lack of language skills on such an international project and, shockingly, demands to forge documents.

Read more »

Posted by Justin at 11:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Some other stories from the nuclear industry you may have missed:

Prospect: The future will not be nuclear
‘Gordon Brown does not dither about nuclear power. His commitment to it is emphatic, advancing since the start of the year from a policy of simply replacing Britain's existing nuclear capacity to one of doubling it, and now to there being no upper limit to its share of electricity generation. Brown has undertaken a radical reform of the nuclear regulatory and planning processes, aimed at clearing the path for new reactors. It is therefore particularly poignant that this is a policy doomed to fail.’

Bernama: Asean Okays Plan By Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam To Build Nuclear Power Plant
‘Asean members expressed no objections to the plan by three of its members -- Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam -- to develop nuclear power plants, an official here said. Chairman of the Asean Technical Working Group on the Establishment of Nuclear Power Plants Ad Hoc committee, Prof Carunia Firdausy, said the nuclear power plant development for Indonesia was part of an effort to reduce the country's dependence on oil and coal.’

Bloomberg: Japan Plans 27% Increase in Budget to Cut Emissions
‘The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry plans to spend 433 billion yen ($4 billion) on measures to slow climate change in the year starting April 2009, compared with 342 billion yen for the current year, it said in a statement distributed in Tokyo today. Policies include the development of advanced nuclear plants, electric vehicles and a system to capture and store carbon dioxide, a gas blamed for global warming.’

Arms Control Work: What to do with British Pu?
‘Here’s an interesting factoid. The UK and US each possess about 100 MT of separated plutonium. However, the UK stockpile is largely civilian, whereas the US stockpile is almost entirely military. The UK is currently engaged in a debate about what to do with this plutonium. Last year the Royal Society published a report on the subject and last week the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (the UK public body charged with cleaning up Britain’s messy nuclear legacy) published draft options for public comment.’

Daily Dispatch Online: South Africa’s nuclear waste to be sent overseas
‘GOVERNMENT planned to send highly-radioactive spent fuel rods stored at the Koeberg nuclear power station overseas for reprocessing, Parliament’s minerals and energy portfolio committee heard yesterday. This was a short-term solution to disposing of it, in terms of policy approved by Cabinet “but not announced yet”, Minerals and Energy Department nuclear safety director Schalk de Waal told MPs. “In the longer term, Necsa (the Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa) will investigate the possibility of developing an indigenous reprocessing facility,” he said.’

Christian Science Monitor: Will lasers brighten nuclear’s future?
‘Inside a bland industrial building in Wilmington, N.C., an experiment is in the works that could vastly reduce the cost, time, and space needed to make fuel for nuclear power plants and, some nonproliferation experts say, for nuclear bombs as well. In that building, secret uranium-enrichment technology licensed by GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy is nearing a pilot test. If successful, the new technology will enable the company to supply low-cost nuclear fuel to power reactors worldwide, officials say. […] But it would not take much – just a signal from Wilmington of SILEX’s success in the months ahead – to unleash a global push by companies and nations to develop similar laser-based technology, nonproliferation experts, scientists, and US government studies warn.’

The Moscow Times: Surprise Nuclear Plant in Kaliningrad
‘Rosatom head Sergei Kiriyenko has signed a decree for the construction of a nuclear power plant in the Kaliningrad region, the country's atomic energy company announced Wednesday. Design of the two-reactor plant is to be completed by the end of 2009, and the first of the two 1,200-megawatt reactors is to come on line in 2015, Rosatom said in a statement.’

Posted by Justin at 11:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A new poll by TNS Opinion has found 87% of people in favour of reducing emissions from new cars by a quarter. The poll sample was 5000 people across France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. Full details of the poll available from Friends of the Earth here (PDF)

Posted by Martin Lloyd at 9:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

If through some quirk of evolution things had turned out differently and man lived at the north pole there wouldn't be much debate about global warming, just what to do about it.

Some leading scientists now fear the arctic has reached a tipping point, bad not just in itself, but one with knock on consequences for the pace of global warming.

Posted by Martin Lloyd at 9:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)