Archives
environmentalblogs.org

Nuclear Apologists Are Wrong

Monbiot and Lynas Don’t Get It

The Death of Nuclear Power?This morning’s news:

UN nuclear monitors have advised Japan to consider expanding the evacuation zone around the stricken reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. An exclusion zone with a radius of 20km (12 miles) is currently in place but the UN says safe radiation limits have been exceeded 40km away. Meanwhile, radioactive iodine levels in seawater near the plant reached a new record – 4,385 times the legal limit. 

What do the apologists  reckon the total cost of the first evacuation, a second evacuation and the eventual clean-up is going to be? Certainly many many billions. And who will pay for that?  Not TEPCO – it looks like they are going to be nationalised. When it comes to climate change mitigation  there is no such thing as a cheap lunch – and nuclear power is once again proving to be very expensive and more than a bit indigestable.

This is the first nuclear accident in a densely populated area in a ‘civilised’ country with a top engineering reputation . . . and it has exposed the true potential cost of nuclear power, far beyond the ability of a private energy company to deal with. Why should the Japanese taxpayer put up with the disruption and cost?  Where now ‘unsubsidised’ nuclear power in the UK?

No, this does not prove how wonderful nuclear power is – and every day TEPCO and the government fail to get on top of it and the situation worsens another nail is driven into the nuclear industry’s coffin.  Monbiot and Lynas are going to look like utter idiots when this is over – Monbiot more so because at least Lynas is not a recent convert.

LINKS

Monbiot:  Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power

Lynas: The dangers of nuclear power in light of Fukushima

BBC News Website article 31st March 2011

3 Responses to “Nuclear Apologists Are Wrong”

  • The prize is energy this time as well – clean, green energy in vast quantities that could make Scotland the renewables powerhouse of Europe…

    What a load of spin ! Check out Iberdrolas (owner of SPR’s) nuke angle. Currently they are building the new sellafield station…which will provide the base load for windfarms….green my a—.

    Karl

  • admin:

    Karl,

    There is no consent at all yet for any nuclear new build in this country, only a statement of intent which Chris Huhne now seems to be wavering over. Iberdrola will not be starting construction at Sellafield for a long time, if ever.

    It would appear from your comments that you are against both wind energy and nuclear power, and believe that because Iberdrola is involved in constructing nuclear plant that in some way disqualifies it from installing renewable generation. I find this attitude irrational and inconsistent and wonder what you think will keep the lights on in ten or twelve years time.

    Of course energy companies – whether oil industry dinosaurs or new kids on the block like Iberdrola – cannot be trusted to look after our environment as they are primarily motivated by profit. The last five decades are littered with environmental disasters caused by energy companies behaving badly, but I have no evidence that Iberdrola are any worse in this respect than any other big energy company. The fact that they are involved in nuclear new build is irrelevant in grown-up economic terms. If it was BP building offshore windfarms would you condemn them out of hand because of the Deepwater Horizon incident, or is that somehow different?

    I know you are particularly concerned with the proposed windfarm off the coast of Tiree, but why you should worry whether it is Iberdrola or another company that is building it is puzzling. To me it seems completely irelevant to the discussion. However, if you object to Iberdrola’s involvement in nuclear energy then surely the best thing we can do is give our wholehearted support to the expansion of the company’s renewables sector in the hope that the nuclear option will become less attractive.

  • A consortium of GDF SUEZ SA (‘GDF SUEZ’), IBERDROLA SA (‘IBERDROLA’) and Scottish and Southern Energy Plc (‘SSE’) has been successful in securing an option to purchase land for the development of a new nuclear power station at Sellafield on the Cumbrian Coast from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (‘NDA’) for a total cash consideration of £70m in the process which concluded today 28th October 2009.The consortium now intends to prepare detailed plans for developing a new nuclear power station at the site with a capacity up to 3.6 GW. These plans should be submitted for consideration by the relevant planning authorities , with the aim of being able to begin construction of a new power station around 2015. The consortium will also complete the preparation of a plan for maximising the contribution of UK-based suppliers and UK-based employees to the new development at Sellafield.
    Commenting on the acquisition, Alistair Phillips-Davies, Energy Supply Director of SSE, said: Nuclear power is a tried and tested way of generating power that can help meet energy security and climate change objectives which we support. In line with our commitment to a diverse generation portfolio, we believe that some participation in new nuclear power stations makes sense and complements our core investment in renewable energy.

    I am pointing out the absurdity of flouting green credentials, which are easily swallowed by respected NGO’s… when in fact base load and £/$ is the driver.
    You had best check out the Turkey/Spanish nuclear power stations that are been built or have been built by Iberdrola.
    WWF/GP align themselves with the Renewables sector yet remain blinkered to the Nuke option…this is my objection.

    Let me again reiterate that I am pro renewable/green power at community level and anti our overbearing reliance hydrocarbons…

    To this point:

    I know you are particularly concerned with the proposed windfarm off the coast of Tiree, but why you should worry whether it is Iberdrola or another company that is building it is puzzling. To me it seems completely irelevant to the discussion. However, if you object to Iberdrola’s involvement in nuclear energy then surely the best thing we can do is give our wholehearted support to the expansion of the company’s renewables sector in the hope that the nuclear option will become less attractive.

    The above facts show that the involvement of Iberdrola in the renewables sector is to some level supported and maintained by NGO’s who are blinkered to the larger picture. There is so much smoke and mirrors involved in specifically, large scale wind power station development that Joe Public doesn’t realize the support they give financially to antiquated and poor technology, that is in turn supported by handouts…that in turn is destroying our land and seascape…etc, etc, etc…

    Q;If you do away with nukes, do away with coal & oil…how do you intend to ‘keep the lights on’ when the wind stops blowing ?

    OSV

Leave a Reply