Thanks very much anyway we're off and
running the situation that we want to
talk about is mainly the surprise that
everyone's had not really knowing about
Bradwell B. In the Eastern Region, East
Anglia, there are three licensed nuclear
sites in the top corner there's Bradwell this is what it looks like now, you
may wonder why the reactor buildings and
the other buildings are there and we're
going to talk about that in a minute. Moving along in 1966, another 4 years, the
Sizewell what is now called Sizewell A and then underneath is Sizewell B.
Now Sizewell B is interesting
because it is the same style of reactor
it is a pressurised water reactor that
they propose for the three sites at the
moment Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C
and Bradwell B. A lot more powerful
that was just a single reactor with two
turbine legs.
Interestingly it is just 45 miles as the
crow flies from Sizewell to Bradwell
and then another 45 miles directly west
to London from the Bradwell site and
interestingly it is 55 miles to the next
nearest nuclear site which is at
Dungeness in Kent. I mentioned why are
the buildings here well this building
was built around 2013-2014 it is called
an intermediate storage facility and it
is to house the intermediate level waste
that ILW from the decommissioning
of Bradwell. Essex County Council
changed the planning restriction for
only Bradwell's ILW waste to also
receive waste from Dungeness and in the
future it will receive waste from Sizewell A. Next to the reactor buildings
there's this long building and
that is a cover over the spent fuel
store. Now what happened with that is that
they planned in the decommissioning they
said "oh it's not a problem it'll be
levelled" but when they actually got up
close and personal they found it was
intensely radioactive so therefore they
had to build another case over at which
they'd rather erroneously called Safe
Stores and then we have the two reactor
buildings. Well, within the reactor
buildings is what they call the graphite
cores which is part of the system to
stimulate the activity in a fission
nuclear reactor and this is a cocktail
of all the isotopes that have been left
within the reactor building and it will
take 80 years until the graph this is a
general summation graph of the dose rate
to get down to roughly a level where
humans can go in and decommission. So
what that means is that we're pretty
much if we allow 15 years for the final
dismantling then it takes us really
realistically to the end of the century
they have never dismantled in full one
of this type of reactors so what are we
looking at for the future
well there is sighs we'll see now the
top picture starting from the left
you've got Sizewell A then one with
the dome and the middle is Sizewell B
and then the light coloured one is the
proposed Sizewell C and underneath
we have got the twin reactor proposal
for Bradwell B. This is the way the
site looks this was taken from a drone
in the distance slightly to the right
you can see the reactor buildings that
are clad and this whole plot and the Dengie,
the tip of the north east tip of the
Dengie Peninsula will be taken up with
the building site and the site itself.
This is how it looks from the air again
and you can see in the foreground there
the old Bradwell Power Station and you
can make out the runways of the former
RAF
Bradwell Bay and this is what they
propose it is an absolutely massive
industrial complex and the things that
are really surprising are these two
cooling towers that are 500 feet wide
and 200 feet high which will dwarf the
former reactor buildings and and this is
a specification and it is really
critical at this time that people
respond to the consultation closing date
midnight on the 1st of July in a
couple of weeks time. It uses a
Chinese reactor design it's never been
fired up anywhere in the world there are
some being built this would be the 15th
there's quite a few being built in China
Karachi and one in Argentina it has the
two reactors as I mentioned totalling 2.3
gigawatts so that is nearly it's
nine times nearly ten times the size of
the former Bradwell which we're now
calling Bradwell A there are huge
impacts on the environmental designation
including the Ramsar site and also on
the marine ecology in the Blackwater
estuary. And you can see if I put the
footprint of the former, or they call it
the existing Bradwell power station, if
we just look at that footprint you can
see how vast the new footprint is going
to be and this is what the site would
look like this is one from Hinkley Point
C the building work there where it has
completely devastated that area. And the
Ramsar site of the wetland site are of
that northeast part of the Dengie peninsula as precious and will never be the
same again. So this is a little look at
the cooling towers as you can see
they've handily provided a picture
underneath of what it would look like
but actually this is taken from the same
point and in reality that's the sort of
size that the cooling towers are going
to look like on a view from
West Mersea. They will be seen from miles
around because as I say they're taller
than the existing buildings and they'll
be on the plinth that they're supposed
to be there to prevent the ingress of
tide. So safe, clean, reliable and works
whatever the weather this is the sort of
guff that the nuclear industry puts out
but we know that France suffered quite a
lot from reactors having to shut down
both last year and 2018 when the weather
got hot and it produces algae the
temperature differentiation of the water
is not sufficient so they have to shut
them down. And now we're going to look at
the the national policy statement (NPS).
Remember that the old Bradwell Station may have just been cleared away in
time but this is the site where they are
proposing the new Bradwell B will go
in flood level 2 & flood level 3.
Environmentally it's also in the marine
conservation zone and we can see this is
a vast area directly south from West
Mersea is the Bradwell site. This is
another image a two circles 20 kilometre
and 30 kilometre around site for Bradwell B those of you will remember um
Chernobyl that the 30 kilometre was the
evacuation zone. This is another one of
the fallacies that is put out more
nuclear power is needed to keep the
lights on well it is a bit of an irony
that they had to shut down
Sizewell B's second turbine leg during
the really sunny and really windy
weather. This is the simple solution for
the energy trilemma reduction that is
more insulation better insulation in
houses users of LED bulbs, more efficient
goods; localisation:
let's have community energy projects and
solar on people's roofs and then we will
also move to battery storage and larger
storage systems such as Pumped water
storage. Another one claim is more new
your power is needed for electrical car
charging. Well I can show you the figures
on this. This again is incorrect. The top
line in here is the government's
prediction of the increase in demand for
electricity and it was from 2011 to 2020.
These are actual figures. It is the second
graph which is sloping down and if we
look up at the top here you can see that
the actual decrease over this period of
seven years was seventeen and a half
percent. By the time we get to the end of
the year it's gonna be a thirty two / 
thirty three percent difference from
what the government predicted. If we roll
forward to the year 2030 and we make an
assumption that half the number of cars
on the road are electric cars and need
to charge and the rest of the cars
remain fossil fuel then this is the
point at which you would see the
increase in electricity so it is nowhere
near a nuclear power station and if
every car well we just move it up. The
biggest point about this is that you no
longer need the electricity to refine
fuel for the fossil fuel cars that have
come off the road. Nuclear power is the
answer to reduce carbon dioxide levels?
And this is somewhat bizarre because
there have been a number of times when
the carbon and you can see here the
carbon level is 103 grams equivalent of
co2 per generation and that was at 9
o'clock on the sixth of June and as we
go forward and the wind is increasing
slightly and the Solar comes up and
generally we have a pretty low carbon
the point about the figure below 100
that's the target is between 50 grams of
equivalent co2 per kilowatt hour of
generation to a hundred
that is the target parameter that the energy
mix is trying to achieve for electricity.
And and here we can see the different
types of generation there the
color-coded areas and this is the carbon
along the bottom if we look at it right
now that's two hundred and sixty-seven
so it's higher it's not as good and the
gas that's because the gas is up high
the nuclear is pretty much the same so
the three point one but wind is is very
low. And it's that variability that an
energy mix and electrical energy mix
needs to match not with something
constant it needs to have something
variable at the moment the problem is
that is natural gas which is the one on
the top left and the electricity is the
18.1 in the bottom left hand corner. And
we have a problem because natural gas is
a fossil fuel. Ecotricity, for example,
proposes using green gas now green gas
is from grass using anaerobic digestion
and they can remove the co2 and then
there's a bio methane that can go
directly into the national gas grid. Now
Ecotricity reckon about 97 percent of
domestic gas could be converted to green
gas by 2035 even the National Grid and
that's a little bit on the bottom here
suggests 50 percent that renewable gas
could meet the UK residential gas demand.
What I mentioned about the petroleum
fuel that would shrink but of course we
still have air travel which is using a
lot of petroleum products and here we
can see what the Zero Carbon Britain
I do recommend going looking cat.org.uk
This is the breakdown where they're
trying to reduce the amount of carbon on
transport and industry and massively
reduce the building's by insulation and
appliances. Let's talk about the elephant
in the room and that is the radioactive
waste. We're going to look at
this quote that was on BBC Radio 4 in
2015 by Phil Harrington the head of
operations and development at Sellafield
which is the main nuclear waste
processing plant. He said that if you
placed a teacup sized piece of
high-level waste derived from spent
nuclear fuel in the middle of a football
pitch you and everyone in the stadium
would be dead before you left the centre
circle. That's how toxic radioactive
waste is. And that's what they want to
have on the coastline at Sizewell and
Bradwell for 100 years or more. Super
nasty waste that comes from the new
design of nuclear reactors. What can we
do? What can you do to stop this taking
over? Well really it's about joining a
group such as the Japanese against
nuclear group, BANNG, BAN - it doesn't matter
if you join more than one group. You can
sign petitions and support campaigns
it's far more important to support than
just sign the two things go hand in hand.
You can respond to the consultation that
needs to be done right now. You can write
to the developers EDF and Chinese
general nuclear you can write to your
local councillors your local MP you can
contribute to legal challenge costs both
Sizewell and Bradwell groups will be
challenging and you can keep spreading
the news so that's me thank you for
bearing with me
