Have your say on new nuclear power stations

A consultation on new nuclear power stations is underway.

The potential sites for these are at Bradwell, Braystones, Hartlepool, Heysham, Hinkley Point, Kirksanton, Oldbury, Sellafield, Sizewell and Wylfa. Bradwell was nominated by EDF, who are currently seeking to sell the site to a credible nuclear operator.

Under new planning laws which make it harder for people to object, large infrastructure projects (like nuclear power stations, railways, large wind farms, power stations, reservoirs, harbours, airports and sewage treatment works) are subject to generic consultation periods conducted by the new Infrastructure Planning Commission, with individual instances having restricted subjects on which it's possible for locals to comment.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change's consultation on the Energy National Policy Statements ends on the 22nd February, followed by an opportunity for Parliament to comment.

Nuclear power is a step in the wrong direction, sucking capital and engineering know-how into a short-term technology with a terrible long-term legacy of nuclear waste.

Instead support energy efficiency to reduce the demand. Support renewable energy whose fuel is harmless and free and will never run out.

A map of potential sites for new nuclear is here.

Respond to the consultation here.

Health test for new nuclear power stations

A government consultation ending in March is asking whether we regard four designs put forward for new nuclear power stations in the UK meet health criteria, when balanced against their alleged benefits.

The criteria include the health detriment, defined as an estimate of the risk of reduction in length and quality of life occurring in a population following exposure to ionising radiations.

The Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) has put forward the proposals, which are being examined as stage one of a legal process on the road to the potential construction of a new generation of nuclear power stations.

They are being tested under the Justification of Practices Involving Ionising Radiation Regulations 2004, a piece of EU legislation transposed into UK law.

These stipulate that before any new type of practice involving ionising radiation can be introduced in the UK, it must first undergo a high-level, generic assessment to determine whether its overall benefit outweighs any associated health detriment.

The Minister for Energy and Climate Change Mike O'Brien will decide the result of the consultation, which ends in March. It will be followed by a further consultation between September and December 2009 on his draft decision.

The Low Carbon Kid says no health detriment is acceptable. And what about the health of future generations, and those in the nuclear fuel and decommissioning life cycle? But we're not allowed to comment on that, so narrow are the terms of this consultation.

> Consultation on whether new nuclear power stations in the UK meet health criteria

Nuclear Power Consultation Flawed - Report

Business Secretary John Hutton is due to announce a decision on an expansion of nuclear energy tomorrow. But an academic report has accused its public consultation last year of being flawed and misleading.

Greenpeace says it is considering dragging the Government back to court.

"The government was in error in asking the public for a decision 'in principle', when the core 'what if' issues were not consulted on in any meaningful way, or resolved in practice," the academics from universities including Oxford, Warwick, Sussex, Newcastle, Cardiff and Manchester conclude.

"These issues include nuclear fuel supply and manufacture, vulnerability to attack, security and nuclear proliferation, radiation waste, radiation risk and health effects, reactor decommissioning, reactor design and siting," they added.

Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said, "For such senior insiders to be so critical of the consultation process is a deeply troubling commentary on the Government’s approach to this issue, and as the report reveals, nuclear power could only reduce the UK’s CO2 emissions by 4% by 2025 - too little, too late.

"Our lawyers are looking at this report and will also examine the Government’s decision on new nuclear build with great interest. We won’t be rushed into a decision, but nothing has been ruled out at this stage."

The main issue for the group of academics is disposal of waste from the new nuclear plants.

"The government consultation documents said this issue had been resolved. That is simply not true," said Paul Dorfman of Warwick University, one of the report's authors.

CoRWM, the independent Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, said in 2006 nuclear waste, which remains toxic for centuries, should be kept forever in a specially built safe storage facility deep under ground.

But while the government pointed to this as the solution to waste from any new plants, CoRWM said it only meant this solution to apply to waste from Britain's old military nuclear programme dating back to the 1950s, so called legacy waste.

The academics also accused the government of glossing over security considerations, the true costs of nuclear and alternative renewable energy sources, the availability of uranium fuel and the siting of new nuclear plants given sea level rises due to global warming.

Of course, a government green light is not actually necessary -- there is no legal barrier to any utility now opting to build a nuclear plant, although there is a lot of planning red tape.

"Although the government has said no public money will be involved in any new nuclear plants, a positive declaration must indicate government commitment in the final event and that can only mean taxpayers' money," said Dorfman.

The report notes that the new nuclear plant being built in Finland, touted by pro-nuclear adherents as a model for the way forward, is not only two years behind schedule but already 50 percent over budget, a fate it suggests would be in store for new plants in Britain, to the detriment of alternative power sources.

The Business and Enterprise Department says the Government believed the consultation was an "open, fair and full" process.

A spokesman said, "We have received 2,700 responses from the extensive consultation, which included public meetings across the UK, a written consultation document and a website. Time is pressing. Consulting indefinitely is not an option."

In Wales the Assembly Government is also sceptical about the need for new nuclear power stations - but with major energy decisions reserved to Westminster, it is powerless to block them.

Ministers in Cardiff Bay nevertheless "strongly support" an extension to the life of the Wylfa site on Anglesey, due to be decommissioned in 2010.

The site in the constituency of Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones is of "economic importance", the WAG said.