| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Jul 2003 : Column 512W—continued
Nuclear Industry
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many nuclear stations there are; and how many will continue beyond 2020. [125586]
Mr. Timms: From the last published company information on expected station lifetimes, three of the UK's 19 stations are expected to operate beyond 2020, with six already closed. These are:
Post Office Card Account
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will set out the steps taken once an application for a Post Office Card Account has been received. [125835]
Mr. Timms: This is an operational matter for Post Office Ltd. I have therefore asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.
Post Offices
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many post offices have fee-charging ATMs. [125270]
Mr. Timms: Decisions relating to ATMs are a commercial matter for Post Office Ltd. who tell me that of the 2,100 ATMs currently installed in post office branches, around 1,500 are fee charging.
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will arrange for the Chief Executive of Post Office Ltd. to meet the hon. Member for Leicester, East to discuss post office closures. [125274]
Mr. Timms: I shall forward my hon. Friend's request to the Chief Executive of Post Office Ltd.
Print Cartridges
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) if she will make a statement on the use of practices in the print cartridge manufacturing industry aimed at preventing the recycling of products; and what plans she has to regulate such practices; [126855]
(2) what estimate her Department has made of the proportion of toner cartridges which are remanufactured in the UK; what assessment she has made of the benefit this represents (a) to the environment and (b) in terms of lower imports; and if she will make a statement; 126856]
(3) what representations she has received from (a) printer cartridge manufacturers and importers and (b) printer cartridge remanufacturers on the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive; and what response she has made to these; [126857]
(4) what plans she has to require print cartridge manufacturers to remanufacture toner cartridges returned to them by consumers after use; [126929]
(5) what her policy is on the use of prebate schemes by the print cartridge manufacturing industry intended to discourage consumers from passing on cartridges to a third party. [126930]
Mr. Timms: The Department has received over 50 letters from the printer cartridge refilling industry, following a recent press article about the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive. They have written raising concerns that their operations might be put at risk if the WEEE Directive scope does not include these goods.
We have made clear in our replies that we take these concerns seriously and we are keen to see the cartridge refilling sector flourish. Officials are due to meet
17 Jul 2003 : Column 514W
representatives from the UK Cartridge Recyclers Association to discuss these matters. They will also be seeing the original cartridge manufacturers shortly. So far the Department have received no written representations from manufacturers of printer cartridges on these issues.
Business estimates that, at the moment, around 30–40 per cent. of toner and inkjet cartridges are re-used or recycled. The Department has made no specific assessment of the environmental benefits of this activity or of its impact on imports.
The refill industry has raised concerns related to existing technology applied to some of the goods currently sold, which prevents re-use. However, the WEEE Directive does not affect this.
The European Commission has made clear that printer cartridges do not fall within the scope of the WEEE Directive, but considers that forthcoming EU legislation on eco-design may address the issues. The Government agrees with this assessment. In the meantime, if the spread of new technology in cartridges specifically to prevent their re-use beings to impinge significantly on the independent refill market, we would want to consider what additional action might be warranted. However the Department has no present plans to intervene in the market, either in relation to manufacturers' use of prebate schemes or to force them to remanufacture their own cartridges returned by consumers.
Any evidence of anti-competitive practices in the cartridge manufacturing industry would be a matter for the Office of Fair Trading.
Renewable Energy
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much subsidy was paid by the Government to electricity generators as a result of their renewable energy policy (a) in total and (b) to generators using wood-fired power stations in (i) 2001 and (ii) 2002; what the payments are estimated to be in 2005; and if she will make a statement. [125112]
Mr. Timms: For 2001–02 and 2002–03, the Government paid the following amounts in support for research and development into renewable energy through the DTI's Renewable Energy Programme and through the Research Councils:
| (a) All renewables | (b) Biomass | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTI R&D programme | Research Councils | DTI R&D programme | Research Councils | |
| 2001–02 | 11.32 | 8.30 | 1.33 | 0.73 |
| 2002–03 | 16.69 | (6)9.00 | 1.59 | (6)0.79 |
(6) Estimates
Estimates for 2005 are not available. The figures show payments to all recipients: figures for payments to electricity generators are not readily available.
My Department and the New Opportunities Fund have set up a £66 million Bioenergy Capital Grants Programme. While grants from this programme have been announced, no payments relating to these have been made to date.
17 Jul 2003 : Column 515W
Other forms of support for renewable energy, such as the Renewables Obligation and the Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation, are not subsidies paid by Government.
Sellafield
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when she expects the remediation of Sellafield building B30 to commence. [124834]
Mr. Timms [holding answer 11 July 2003]: BNFL has advised me that remediation within building B30 at Sellafield has been in progress since the pond ceased operations early in the last decade. Work to prepare for the acceleration of these operations is in progress. The Health and Safety Executive has given BNFL the requirement to retrieve and treat 90 per cent. of the sludges in B30 by 2010.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what volume of dried radioactive waste sludges she expects to be removed from building B30 at Sellafield in the post-operation clean-out process. [124835]
Mr. Timms [holding answer 11 July 2003]: BNFL has advised me that, because the amount of de-watering which will be needed to facilitate removal and treatment of these sludges has not yet been established, this volume cannot yet be accurately determined. However, BNFL currently expects it to amount to several hundred cubic metres.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on the safety of the Magnox storage and decommissioning B30 facility at Sellafield. [124886]
Mr. Timms [holding answer 10 July 2003]: The B30 pond contains many tonnes of Magnox fuel and sludge from corrosion of the Magnox fuel cladding and the fuel. These must be removed and converted into forms suitable for long-term passively safe storage and eventual disposal, while minimising radiation doses to the work force and risk to the public. This decommissioning poses significant technical challenges.
I have been informed that as a result of the increased concern of the Health and Safety Executive's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) over the state of the plant and lack of progress in decommissioning, it served an Improvement Notice in July 2001 requiring BNFL to produce a decommissioning plan, programme and a project specification. NII further required BNFL to prepare a risk assessment of the failure of B30 structure and equipment. Following assessment of this report by NII, BNFL has now committed to a full structural analysis of the whole B30 facility, to be completed by June 2004. Additionally, NII requires BNFL to retrieve and treat 90 per cent. of the sludge from B30 by 2010. NII will be continually monitoring the programme and the technical work.
Copies of a report prepared by BNFL on the B30 facility were recently placed in the Libraries of the House.
Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what facility attachments and safeguards provisions apply to the B30 spent fuel and waste store at Sellafield; when Euratom safeguards inspectors last
17 Jul 2003 : Column 516W
visited the B30 plant; what discussions her Department has had with the (a) Euratom Safeguards Directorate and (b) European Commission authorities on B30; and if she will make a statement on the application of safeguards at B30. [126522]
Mr. Timms: The B30 store at Sellafield is subject to regular Euratom safeguards inspections, the last one being in March of this year. Particular Safeguards Provisions (PSP) have been prepared by the European Commission for this part of the Sellafield facility but have yet to enter into force. A facility attachment would only be negotiated in the event the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) decided to designate B30 for inspection under the UK's safeguards agreement with the IAEA and Euratom.
The Department maintains close contact with both the European Commission's safeguards authorities and also BNFL across the range of issues that relate to safeguards arrangements at Sellafield. Definitive statements on such Euratom safeguards implementation as a whole are contained in recent reports on Euratom Safeguards operations as published by the European Commission. The Executive Summary to the most recent of these (on activities during 2001, published in October 2002) notes that
'verification activities conducted by Commission inspection staff led to the conclusion that, apart from some discrepancies between evaluations carried out by operators and Commission inspectors, which are in the process of being solved, no diversion of nuclear material from its intended use was established'.
This follows a similar conclusion, that the Commission
'did not find any indication that nuclear material had been diverted from its intended peaceful use'
in the corresponding report for 1999–2000.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |