APPENDIX 1
Memorandum submitted by Professor Bill
Lee, Immobilisation Science Laboratory, University of Sheffield
I am writing in response to the request for
evidence to be put before the inquiry "Towards a Non-carbon
Fuel Economy: Research, Development and Demonstration". I
am a Professor of Engineering Materials at the University of Sheffield
and Director of the Immobilisation Science Laboratory, which is
performing extensive research on immobilising toxic and radioactive
waste in cement, glass and ceramics. I will address points one
to three, five and six of the committees' terms of reference.
Achieving the Governments target of 20% renewable
generation by 2020 will simply keep CO2 emissions steady
at today's levels if current carbon-free nuclear capacity is closed
and not replaced. Nuclear power generation makes a major contribution
to CO2 abatement. As an active researcher in the field
I am aware that the level of R&D expenditure in the nuclear
area is miniscule compared to the position 20 years ago when centres
such as those at AEA Harwell were funded from the public purse.
The current lack of a national strategy for nuclear R&D has
undoubtedly hindered the UK's competitiveness in the nuclear field.
We still excel in nuclear research but this excellence will diminish
without significant additional R&D funds as staff retire.
It is also closely linked eg to BNFL who (for commercial reasons)
may hold back publication of important results; this was not the
position when funds for nuclear research came from the Government.
In general nuclear R&D is under-funded and UK plc will lose
its current international competitiveness without significant
increases in research funding.
The five* RAE-rated Department of Engineering
Materials at the University of Sheffield (assisted by a £2
million award from BNFL plc) is developing an Immobilisation Science
Laboratory (ISL) at the University. The centre is focused on the
containment of toxic and radioactive waste in inorganic media;
predominantly glass and cement. Studies examine the basic science
underpinning the processing and storage of waste both experimentally
using simulated waste streams and theoretically using a range
of modelling techniques. Professor W E Lee is the director of
the ISL and already a team of researchers has been assembled including
seven PhD students, two senior research fellows and a technical
manager. Three academic positions have been filled (Dr Michael
Ojovan and Dr Neil Milestone as Senior Lecturers in glass and
cement chemistry and Dr Guenter Moebus as Lecturer in microstructural
characterisation), one in modelling techniques is being advertised
and one is to be filled. Along with the involvement of current
academic staff (Professor John Sharp, Professor Tony West and
Dr Russell Hand) it is hoped to have 40 researchers working in
this area within five years and to develop extensive links with
other waste immobilisation research centres worldwide. We already
are collaborating with several centres in the USA and EC. More
information can be found at our web site (http//www.shef.ac.uk/isl/).
A plethora of recent reports and meetings including
those of the House of Lords, Royal Society, the Foundation for
Science and Technology, DEFRA, the NERC and EPSRC have highlighted
the depletion of the science base for nuclear research in general
and for nuclear waste management in particular. The demise and
fragmentation of public research establishments such as AEA Harwell
and AWE Aldermarston means that those still researching in the
nuclear field are often employed by companies who do not encourage
frank and full discussion of the fundamental scientific and technological
difficulties of their work. More worrying the privatisation of
the nuclear industry and separation into companies, such as BNFL
and British Energy, means there is a potential (and strongly denied)
conflict between commercial interest and the best long term plans
for disposal of active waste. The UK now has a number of small
groups, some based in universities and others in the private sector,
working in a range of nuclear-related areas often with limited
collaboration or open communication amongst them. This is an unhealthy
situation for an industry where openness, communication and public
perception are all important if it is to continue to supply a
significant proportion of the energy to the UK market. The key
driver for the publications listed is the need to maintain nuclear
production in the medium term (most of the current generation
of nuclear power stations will close by 2020 and they supply nearly
one third of the UK's power). While improved energy conservation
and alternative energy sources must be pursued they are unlikely
to fill the energy gap that closing these stations will cause.
The funding mechanisms must be modified to encourage all carbon-free
power generation including nuclear.
11 August 2002
|
