Axe Hinkley C Call After Cumbria Decision

Southwest Against Nuclear

news - nuclear015.jpg.gallery
http://www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk/photos/january_2013/nuclear_waste_demonstrators/view/gallery_319816.Nuclear_waste_demonstrators/

Below is a press release from Stop Hinkley who have been opposing the plans for new nuclear build in Somerset. Members of Southwest Against Nuclear attended the demo in Cumbria to show solidarity in our determination to stop dangerous new nuclear build and dangerous new nuclear waste.

PRESS RELEASE, 31/1/13

Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision

Southwest campaigners are calling for the planned nuclear development
at Hinkley Point to be axed, following Cumbria County councils
decision not to accept a future underground waste dump in the Lake
District. Anti-nuclear activists say that without a long term
destination for it’s radioactive waste, EDF’s Hinkley C project can
only mean a permanent nuclear dump staying in West Somerset – for many
thousands of years.

The proposed “Geological Disposal Facility” (GDF) was intended to
safely store all the UK’s radioactive waste – including Somersets –
deep underground for the next 10 thousand years. Yesterday (30/1/13)
Cumbrian councillors decided by a vote of 7 to 3 to reject the
governments search for a suitable site in their county.

Cumbria had already been considered – and rejected – for a similar
project in the 1980s, but experts then pronounced the lakelands too
geologically unstable for storing the immensely hazardous radioactive
waste, which is the end-product of nuclear power. So far no other
counties have volunteered to host the permanent deep waste store,
despite offers of cash incentives from the government.

“In order to claim that the future waste from new nuclear plants can
be disposed of safely, the government and the nuclear lobby needed the
Stage 4 exploratory work to go ahead in Cumbria,” said Theo Simon, a
spokesperson for the local Stop Hinkley campaign. “In fact, David
Cameron said in 2007 that investment in new nuclear would not be
possible unless the nuclear waste issue had been dealt with.

“EDF’s planning application for Hinkley C has rested on geological
storage for its toxic spent fuel rods being available later this
century, but Cumbria was the only county in Britain that would even
consider hosting such a facility. Now the fig-leaf of the Cumbrian
promise has dropped away. The emperor has no clothes – and the EDF
has no GDF.”

Campaigners believe that the collapse of the plan will open the way to
legal challenges if EDF gets the go-ahead for Hinkley C from the
government in March this year.

“Even fish-and-chip shops in Somerset have to have a credible plan
for dealing with their waste,” said Mr Simon. “You can’t build
something as hazardous as a nuclear power station just on wishful
thinking.”

And he rejected statements from EDF that they will continue on the
assumption that a GDF will eventually exist. “Just because EDF
executives will be long dead when Hinkley C becomes no more than a
radioactive tip doesn’t mean that they are absolved from all personal
responsibility,” he said.

ENDS


Notes:

David Cameron interview extract:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnycGD-7SFo&feature=youtu.be

http://stophinkley.org/Contact.htm

Letter from Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment to Cumbria County Council

28/1/13 CORE letter to Cumbria County Council Leader & Cabinet on nuclear waste process
[ 28 January 2013]

We write to you in your capacity as Leader of Cumbria County Council (CCC) and in relation to the impending decision by your Cabinet whether or not the County should proceed to Stage 4 of the Government’s MRWS programme. We raise the following points with you and ask that you and your Cabinet, as an MRWS Decision Making Body, afford them the fullest consideration in coming to a decision.

We accept that the Council must also consider an extensive range of issues thrown up by the work of the West Cumbria MRWS Partnership – including the high level of opposition from parish councils and others to moving to Stage 4, and the more recent strong concerns raised by other local organisations such as the National Park Authority, the Cumbria Tourist Board and the Friends of the Lake District.. Whilst these concerns may well dominate your Cabinet’s deliberations and indeed are likely to feature as major topics in the County Council elections later this year, we nevertheless believe the points we raise below have an equal relevance to your decision making.

Your letter of 1st October 2012 to DECC informs Baroness Verma that the County feels that ‘alternative radioactive waste management solutions should be considered in parallel with the MRWS programme, in case that process ultimately fails to secure a positive outcome’.

The County Council will be aware that CORE and other NGO’s (who oppose the underground disposal of higher activity nuclear wastes) declined several invitations to participate in the West Cumbria MRWS Partnership because alternatives were not to be discussed If it is now your Council’s intention to pursue such alternatives for the prudent reasons suggested to Baroness Verma, we contend it would be unsafe and indeed illogical for the Council to decide to move to Stage 4 until the use of alternatives has been pursued to a satisfactory conclusion.

For your information, CORE has consistently advocated the disposal of nuclear wastes in above-ground custom-built stores at the site of origin. This has the specific and quantifiable benefits of disposal sites being self-selecting rather than being reliant on volunteer communities, of placing responsibility where it belongs – on the nuclear industry, and of reducing the cross-country transport of nuclear wastes to the barest minimum. As such, this formed the basis of CORE’s evidence to the NIREX Inquiry of 1995/96.

Many of your County Councillors will recall the very robust stance taken by the Council at that Public Inquiry into the proposed Rock Characterisation Facility (RCF). The stance, widely supported by the general public, highlighted the issues of (i) the absence of alternative sites; (ii) the need for a site to show ‘good promise’ and (iii) the dangers of pursuing a process to a point from which ‘there is no return’. Whilst these issues were raised against the specific backdrop of the proposed RCF at Longlands Farm, Gosforth, they retain a generic value equally applicable to today’s MRWS situation

Alternative sites

In evidence to the NIREX RCF Inquiry, CCC repeatedly brought to the Inquiry’s attention the Government’s recognition ‘that there must be consideration of alternative sites ……’.

That West Cumbria today officially represents the only area of the UK earmarked for potential investigation (on the sole basis of expressions of interest from local authorities and not on any form of geological merit) has turned what was, at the outset, a national MRWS programme into a local process for Cumbria despite the evidence of superior areas/sites existing elsewhere in the UK. We believe that, in recognising the weakness of a system that puts volunteerism before geological suitability, the County Council has a duty to declare its dissatisfaction with the current status and accordingly decide against moving to Stage 4 whilst the national imbalance remains.

The need to show good promise

CCC raised with the inquiry ‘whether there are good prospects of making a safety case’ and that, in geological terms, the site should be ruled out ‘given the likely availability of alternatives offering significantly lower potentials of risk and more readily determinable geologies’. Such a view is clearly relevant today given the strength of evidence – both within and outside the findings of the MRWS Partnership) – showing the ‘poor prospect’ of finding suitable geology and, by definition, the attendant difficulties of making a safety case for any West Cumbrian site.

On this basis, and with safety as the guiding principle, any decision by the County Council to move to Stage 4 would not only be wholly unsafe but also lead inevitably to the costly and time-consuming investigation of sites which, affording inferior geology to other UK sites and, by implication, higher potential risks, face eventual disqualification and rejection.

Pursuing a process to a point from which ‘there is no return’

Given the uncertainties that currently surround the prospect of the legal underpinning of the right of withdrawal from the MRWS process, the County Council must address public concerns of the very real risk in moving to Stage 4 of launching the County down a cul-de-sac of no return. For once work on selected West Cumbrian sites has started – and in the continuing absence of expressions of interest from other UK local authorities – the urgent needs of a Government-supported nuclear industry to dispose of its wastes will rule the day, outweighing any local authority and public opposition to the subsequent investigation and selection of sites which, for expediency, will be made to fit the bill.

By taking the decision now not to move to Stage 4, the Council will pre-empt the prospect of such an intractable situation arising and, at the same time, demonstrate to Cumbrian communities that their County Council has acted on their concerns and in their long-term interests.

You may recall that in 2008, in response to your Council’s invitation to comment on whether or not the Council should ‘express an interest’, we commented that it was neither in the public nor the Council’s interest to pursue an MRWS programme designed specifically to locate, investigate and progress an underground dump site within the County’s borders. With foreign wastes requiring disposal, an international facility covering an area of some 25 square kilometres underground would be detrimental to West Cumbria’s future prosperity, undermine plans to diversify the local economy and add to the nuclear blight already evident in West Cumbria.

The subsequent work of the West Cumbria MRWS Partnership and its final report have revealed, in CORE’s view, no evidence that would overturn or modify the view we took in 2008. To initiate the widely accepted need for diversification, the County Council must now withdraw from any further involvement in the MRWS process.

We have no doubt that Cabinet members will be only too aware that some 50 years of both overt and covert searching by successive Governments and the nuclear industry has failed to produce a nuclear waste disposal site – at the same time engendering deep mistrust among the general public. We contend that such mistrust will be exacerbated by a Council decision to move to Stage 4 of the current process, particularly as the focus will be on areas within the County that not only hosts geology of questionable potential but also local communities that are increasingly hostile. The likely failure to secure the tandem MRWS requirement of suitable geology and a willing host community will simply extend half a century of failure by a further few decades.

In summary we reiterate that, in placing volunteerism ahead of geological potential, the current MRWS process has isolated West Cumbria from the rest of the UK as a site for further investigation. This has resulted in localising what, at the outset, was heralded by Government as a national process to deal with a national problem. A vote by the County Council against move to Stage 4 of the faulted MRWS process would redress this national imbalance and, in so doing, create ‘a level playing field’ in which the investigation of superior geological potential elsewhere in the UK must be the driver of any future programme.

Finally, we believe there exists sufficient expertise within your Cabinet to see through the claims that a decision to move to Stage 4 is necessary as ‘the whole of our (West Cumbria’s) economic future depends on this’ and ‘if there is no waste depository in Cumbria, there will no new-build in Cumbria’ The evidence to support such claims exists neither in the final report of the West Cumbria MRWS Partnership nor elsewhere in the public domain. We trust therefore that the Cabinet will concentrate its deliberations on the established facts and not on such unsubstantiated and vested interest threats.

Martin Forwood. CORE Campaign Coordinator.

http://www.corecumbria.co.uk/newsapp/pressreleases/pressmain.asp?StrNewsID=311

Tomorrow – Ditch the Dump !

Nuclear Waste - is this what you want under the rainbow
Nuclear Waste – is this what you want under the rainbow

DITCH THE DUMP – DEMO outside The Courts, Carlisle Tomorrow 30th at 9am – let the County Councillors know we support their STRONG OPPOSITION to the DUMP!

We Support a NO to going any further along this toxic plan.

Bring banners – make a noise – make our presence felt – we are not a willing community!!

The Courts, English St, Carlisle (nr the station)

The meeting begins at 10am we will be there early at 9am to demonstrate our support for the Cabinet’s NO !

http://www.facebook.com/events/492035200846560/?ref=22

Also meetings at Copeland 10am and Allerdale 3pm Meetings were supposed to be on the same day at the same time so as not to influence each other. It seems Allerdale Councillors have changed the time in order to hedge their bets – if Cumbria says Yes they will go ahead and say Yes – if CUmbria says NO they will say NO : why commit political suicide if you cannot point and say “well they said yes as well” ?? A horse trading deal given to Allerdale councillors by Baroness Verma?

more info here
https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/make-30th-jan-ditch-the-dump-day/

Rising Dump – a letter to the Leader of Cumbria County Council

Serious Assault –
Nuclear Dump

A letter to the leader of Cumbria County Council

Dear Councillor Martin,

GOVERNMENT’S NUKE DUMP CASE DOES NOT HOLD WATER

At last Friday’s seminar in Carlisle organised by the Sellafield Workers Campaign,
delegates including yourself were told that “a NO vote would have to have
extremely good scientific backup in order to justify itself”. The same
is even more true of a YES vote. This is underlined by the work of Dr
Rachel Western.

Presentation to be made to the Cabinet by Dr Rachel Western on 30th January

“In some ways the question of geology and nuclear waste burial is a red
herring. The nuclear industry concede that a nuclear burial site would
definitely leak radioactive atoms that would get back up to the surface
and into people’s drinking water and food – and so put them at risk of
cancer. The numbers involved are mind blowing – for example: when the
nuclear industry tested their leak rate calculations at a Uranium mine in
Brazil,
they underestimated the leak rate by 200 million.
Question
Would you agree that Cumbria County Council should not even consider
hosting a disposal facility for radioactive waste until the fundamental
research needs identified by the Government’s Advisory Committee, ‘CoRWM’
have been met?”

Please remember that if you vote yes on Wednesday you will be overturning
the findings of the Nirex Inquiry. Scientific evidence used at the Nirex
inquiry will not be able to be used as justification to withdraw later
down the line. Should you vote yes on Wednesday, Cumbria will be trapped
in a snare set by government and your name, along with the other DMB
councillors will go down in history.

yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby
on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland

http://www.cumberlandnews.co.uk/news/protests-at-nuclear-waste-dump-meeting-in-carlisle-1.1030422?referrerPath=home

Nirex Case Didn’t Hold Water by Dr Rachel Western

Presentation to be made to Cumbria County Council’s Cabinet Meeting
30th January 2013
30th Jan 2013

Leak Rate Calculations

1. In some ways the question of geology and nuclear waste burial is a red
herring. The geological issues are only concerned with whether or not
water from the repository will flow to the surface and reach crops and
drinking water supplies. A more critical question is the leak rate of the
radioactive atoms – ie. how many radioactive atoms are in the water that
leaks.
2. The nuclear industry concede that a nuclear burial site would
definitely leak radioactive atoms that would get back up to the surface
and into people’s drinking water and food – and so put them at risk of
cancer.
3. The critical point is that they have no idea at all just how many
radioactive atoms will escape the dump and so no idea at all how many
people will get cancer.
4. The numbers involved are mind blowing – for example: when the nuclear
industry tested their leak rate calculations at a Uranium mine in Brazil,
they underestimated the leak rate by 200 million .
5. Such big mistakes hardly seem credible, but they are easy to understand
when you look at the way the nuclear industry do their leak rate
calculations. What they try to do is put a figure on how much of a
particular element – for example Uranium, Plutonium or Carbon – will
dissolve. But atoms generally don’t travel solo – they almost always
link up with other atoms – for example: water, H2O is made up of two
hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom – three atoms altogether.
6. There are about ninety different types of chemical element and they
link up with each other in millions and millions of different ways to form
the vast complexity of the stuff that makes up our world.
7. These different chemical compounds behave differently and an important
difference in this context is the differences in how much they will
dissolve – and so how poisonous the underground water supplies will
become.
8. As an example of how important it is to know what type of chemical an
element is found in, diamonds and sugar may be compared. Diamonds are
pure carbon and don’t dissolve at all – sugar is carbon linked up with
hydrogen and oxygen and is extremely soluble. There is no sensible answer
to the question – how soluble is carbon. Similarly there is no sensible
answer to the question how soluble is uranium – or plutonium.

Need for More Research

1. The nuclear industry and the Government have argued that the
difficulties associated with calculating the leak rate of the proposed
repository can be solved by further research into disposal. However, such
research would take many years to carry out.

2. In 2011, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee suggested
that the NDA develops a long term research programme outlining how they
will ensure that there are adequate R&D capabilities and associated
expertise to meet their future needs for geological disposal.

3. In response the Government Radioactive Waste Management Advisory
Committee ‘CoRWM’ stated in June 2012 that they strongly supported the
Select Committee suggestion that the Research Councils, working with NDA,
should ensure that sufficient fundamental research is carried out on
geological disposal.
Question
Would you agree that Cumbria County Council should not even consider
hosting a disposal facility for radioactive waste until the fundamental
research needs identified by the Government’s Advisory Committee, ‘CoRWM’
have been met?

Dr Rachel E J Western BA (Oxon) PhD MRSC
Consultant to Radiation Free Lakeland
[ MRSC – Member of the Royal Society of Chemistry ]

referenced article available on request

PRINCE CHARLES URGED TO “MEDDLE” IN LAKES NUKE DUMP PLAN

THE PRINCE OF WALES CONDUCTS A SNIFF TEST ON UNTREATED WATER DURING HIS VISIT TO ENNERDALE IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, WHERE HE OPENED A TREATMENT WORKS.
THE PRINCE OF WALES CONDUCTS A SNIFF TEST ON UNTREATED WATER DURING HIS VISIT TO ENNERDALE IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, WHERE HE OPENED A TREATMENT WORKS.

Prince Charles has been sent a 1020 signature petition by Radiation Free
Lakeland. The petition says:
*The world is being told that the UK has a solution to the nuclear waste problem.
The proposal is to bury hot radioactive waste in Lakeland’s leaky geology in a hole(s) 1000m deep by 25km square. This is called Managing Radioactive Waste Safely and there is a timetable for first burial of waste deep under Lakeland by 2029. The world is being told that a telephone poll shows Cumbrians are willing volunteers for this “solution” to the nuclear waste problem. A majority of Cumbrian Parish and Town Councils have voted NO to the Dump. We the undersigned agree and say end this process now*.

The letter goes on to urge Prince Charles to : please please “meddle”. If ever there was an issue that needed meddling in – this is it! The councils are due to make a decision on the 30th Jan as to whether to continue, if they say yes they will overturn the findings of the Nirex Inquiry and Cumbria will be stitched up into “steps towards geological disposal” like a radioactive kipper.

Full Letter and selected comments from the petition below

RAdiation Free Lakeland

The Prince of Wales
Clarence House,
London,
SW1A 1BA 11th January 2013

Dear Prince Charles,

Geological Dumping of Nuclear Waste: Cumbria’s Poisoned Chalice?

People love the Lake District and know that your affection for this Land
of the Lakes runs deep. As Lakelanders we feel the same and that is why
in 2008 we set up a voluntary, non funded, non political group to protect
the Lake District from nuclear developments: Radiation Free Lakeland. You
may have heard about the government plan to sweep the high level nuclear
waste problem deep under the complex geology of Ennerdale, Eskdale or the
Solway or any other “most promising site” in Cumbria. The Nirex inquiry
of 16 years ago found that Cumbria’s geology was too complex to dump
intermediate level nuclear waste, this time the plan is much bigger and
for high level nuclear waste!

Those who should be sending out a rallying call and jumping up and down
about this plan are either going along with it, like the Lake District
National Park or actively complicit, like the Chair of Cumbria Tourism,
Eric Robson. When asked: ‘How can you be chairman of Cumbria Tourism
when you support the geological disposal of nuclear waste?’ Eric Robson
replied: “Because I’m convinced by the scientific arguments that
geological disposal rather than burying our heads in the sand is the best
way forward. Nuclear waste is with us. We can’t wish it away despite the
best efforts of some so-called environmentalists”.
This is bad enough but Eric is also partner in the PR company which has
blasted the local media with advertorials promoting the government plan to
dump nuclear waste within Lakeland’s geology.

Despite the government’s furious spinning to underplay the plan
increasing numbers of people from all communities and all with different
shades of nuclear tolerance from pro-nuclear to anti-nuclear are angry.
We are angry that the government is pushing ahead with the nuclear waste
geological disposal agenda despite the absence of a “willing community” or
“promising geology.” We have turned that anger into positive action to
campaign and raise awareness despite an almost universal national media
blackout, playing down and muffling of this dangerous threat to Cumbria
and its neighbours from Ireland to Norway. The more that people find out
about the plan to mine an area of Cumbria 1000 metres deep X 25km square
to be filled with high level nuclear waste, the more opposed they are to
the plan. We are saying NO and urging Sellafield to stop banking on
getting the waste out of sight and out of mind but to get their house in
order, immobilise and encapsulate the wastes and build good storage on the
6km Sellafield site as advised by the National Audit Office.
Please read some of the comments on the petition enclosed and please
please “meddle”. If ever there was an issue that needed meddling in –
this is it! The councils are due to make a decision on the 30th Jan as to
whether to continue, if they say yes they will overturn the findings of
the Nirex Inquiry and Cumbria will be stitched up into “steps towards
geological disposal” like a radioactive kipper.

There is more information and links to an increasing number of community
groups opposing the plan here: http://nuclearlakes.moonfruit.com/

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby
On behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland

Selected Comments from the online signatures:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/save-lakeland-no-nukiller-dump/
…Signatures in total including hard copy : 1020

5. Name: Sue Mathieson on Jun 22, 2012
Comments: The plan to dump nuclear waste under the Lake District is
dangerous and short sighted – more and more people are beginning to learn
about this plan, despite government attempts to normalise and underplay
it. Both local people and the many who enjoy the Lakes will become
increasingly vociferous in their rejection of this plan – stop it now
before more money is wasted on something that people will never allow to
happen. Geologically the Lake District is unsuitable for such a dump,
while the huge importance of the Lake District as an internationally
recognised beauty spot and tourist destination will be irrevocably
tarnished.

14 Name: Pat Sanchez on Jun 22, 2012
Comments: This would not be safe and I would not want to visit the Lake
District. We must keep the waste where it can be monitored until we know
how to store it safely. And the leaky Lake District will not be the safest
place to store it even then!

41 Name: Mary And Andrew Stokes on Jun 22, 2012
Comments: We do not want nuclear waste to be buried in Lakeland

57 Name: Yvonne Miller on Jun 23, 2012
Comments: Fifteen years ago the Inspector at the Nirex Inquiry said that
the geology is unsuitable. in March this year the same inspector and
technical advisor presented the geological findings to the Managing
Radioactive Waste Safely Partnership. We owe it to all those at present in
tourist related industries, farming and food related industries and those
relying on the Cumbria or Lake District Brand, plus future generations to
withdraw from any scheme to bury radioactive waste in Cumbria.

71 Name: Caroline Westgate on Jun 24, 2012
Comments: There is no such thing as the ‘safe management of radioactive
waste.’ It is fraught with risks and certainly burying it in unstable
geology adds to the danger.

126 Name: June Terry on Jul 2, 2012
Comments: you owe it to the people who live here to listen to themdo not
believe the manipulated figures by those who receive backhanders,they dont
care,inc this government clearly, and are no better than fly tippers!
cumbrian residents do not want and should not be forced to have nuclear
waste.if you have been sent this petition you will be in a position to
stop cumbria being used to dump nuclear waste.it will be the most
important thing you do in your life.please use your voice to help stop
nuclear waste being dumped on cumbrians please!!

132 Name: Bev Park on Jul 2, 2012
Comments: This beautiful part of the Country is NOT the place to build
this , and has been proven by the results from the boreholes at Longlands
Farm , Gosforth !! What about the future generations ? Or do they not
count ?, jobs over safety ! Who are these people phoning ? Perhaps they
all work in the nuclear industry !! There are many,many people that do not
work there , have any of them been phoned ? Doubt it .

145 Name: Rob Edwards on Jul 6, 2012
Comments: MRWS has proven since their appearance here in Cumbria, to be
nothing other than a mouthpiece for a desperate government in need of a
quick fix to solve a dodgy problem. If they are allowed to continue with
this warped concept that Cumbria should house this repository they will,
at some future date reap the devastating results of their mismanagement
when our landscape turns toxic. We can only hope that Cumbrians come to
their senses, and together, stop this before it reaches a point of no
return.

151 Name: Dr.Noel G. Charlton on Jul 12, 2012
Comments: This nuclear waste ‘disposal’ proposal is evil, mad, very
dangerous and should be resisted in every way possible.

156 Name: Mrs Lynne Jones on Jul 14, 2012
Comments: This plan is a disgrace, how could anyone think of doing it to
an area of such outstanding beauty and where so many rely on tourisdm for
their livlihood? In future many may rely on the water supply from Cumbria
as weather patterns change and droughts become more common. Polluted
ground water could become a reality, we’ve seen enough nuclear accidents
already.

168 Name: Carol And Roy Smith on Jul 15, 2012
Comments: Absolute madness, something like this had no business being
anywhere near, in or under the Lake District National Park. Hardly the
venue for a place aspiring to the status of a World Heritage Site!

194 Name: Rachel Fulcher on Jul 20, 2012
Comments: I was raised in Cumbria and went to sleep on Peter Rabbit
stories. It is appalling that our beautiful Lake District could be a
traget for such desecration. This must be stopped.

212 Name: Frances Bell on Aug 12, 2012
Comments: The rocks chosen for the landfill, volcanic ash and lavas
geologically known as the Borrowdale Volcanics, are unstable and full of
fissures and holes. The Lake District’s largest cave – “Dove’s Nest” in
southern Borrowdale- is one such, where a 90m x 30 m hole has resulted
after local Borrowdale volcanic rocks fell apart. The other notable
Lakeland hole in these strata is “Deer Bield” in Far Easedale, where
climbers and walkers have been warned to avoid it due to rock falls and
loose slabs.
216 Name: Janice Murray on Aug 20, 2012
Comments: My parents live at ParkHouse which is one of the properties
cited as being a suitable location for this dump and until Friday 15th
August they had no idea this was being planned. A relative called them to
tell them they had read it in a free local paper. Most local residents
have no idea this is going on. It is quite shocking.

240 Name: Dr Jennifer Parker on Aug 26, 2012
Comments: This is shocking and I absolutely do not want the UK to be a
dumping ground for nuclear waste, or nuclear energy.

302 Name: Edd Newcombe on Sep 8, 2012
Comments: Even though I’m in Australia, I have to disagree with this idea…

359 Name: John Birch on Sep 14, 2012
Comments: As a retired local authority Director of the Environment I am
appalled that Cumbria CC, Allerdale DC and Copeland DC are ignoring both
local feeling and scientific evidence and are even considering this
ludicrous proposal. The telephone poll is not representative and I for one
am NOT a willing volunteer.

552 Name: Sheila Sherwen on Nov 24, 2012
Comments: I live in Ennerdale, one of the favoured sites for the nuclear
waste dump. it is the most beautiful, wild and peaceful place in Britain,
part of the National Park and the National Trust. The proposal is obscene.
Our Parish Council tried to oppose the plan but was told it could not be
involved in ‘political acts’, nor could it raise or provide money. So it
is left to ordinary residents, without funds or experience, to try to
organise opposition. We are a very small community, and deprived of our
natural leaders, we feel helpless and hopeless. However we are starting a
campaign group, and need whatever help anyone can give, in expertise and
advice. This is breaking our hearts.

651 Name: Mark Ranshaw on Jan 9, 2013
Comments: This dump would be a completely inappropriate (and extremely
costly) scheme in a National Park which the British public feels very much
belongs to them. Whatever they may feel about the nuclear industry, few
would be very comfortable visiting and walking over a landscape which they
rightly or wrongly believe is polluted with an extremely dangerous
substance that will blight it for thousands of years to come.

Ditch the Dump Demo in Bowness

Ditch the Dump Demo 19th Jan..

Ditch the Dump Demo 19th Jan

Ditch the Dump Demo...

Ditch the Dump Demo- Bowness 19th Jan

Ditch the Nuke Dump! Demo -19th Jan at Bowness Bay

Today despite the freezing cold conditions campaigners from Bowness, Keswick and Silloth in
Cumbria to Bridgwater in Somerset will ramp up opposition to the
government plan for a nuke dump under Cumbria.

In Bowness this morning over 100 people turned up to show their support for Cumbria County Council voting NO on the 30th January. Over 100 letters were signed to put on a giant postcard to the Leader of Cumbria County Council. There was life affirming music provided by Handbrake Shirley and a great atmosphere of camaraderie in our determination to stop the government’s insane plan to turn Cumbria into a nuclear sacrifice zone.

Dear Eddie Martin,
Geological Dumping of Nuclear Waste
On 30th January you are going to take the most important decision of any
Cumbria County Council Leader before you. Your decision will speak for the
whole of Cumbria, which has been misrepresented as a “willing community.”
To say ‘yes’ would mean unquantifiable damage to the ‘brand’ of Cumbria.
The real cost, however, would be psychological and physical trauma through
countless generations, as Cumbria would be increasingly and irreversibly
blighted.
Say NO – end this mad plan now. Then all money and expertise can go into
ensuring the existing wastes are looked after safely on the 6km Sellafield
site rather than expanding and increasing the danger to ever more waste
over a much increased area.

DITCH THE DUMP, Bowness, Cumbria
http://www.facebook.com/events/475165439214892/

KESWICK, Cumbria – campaigners will be out and about leafleting, and
collecting
signatures for the giant postcard

SILLOTH, Cumbria on the evening of 19th Jan a gig organised by Solway Plain
Against the Nuclear Dump featuring the brilliant song featured on Radio 4
: ‘Other Road to Hell’
http://www.spand.org.uk/

BRIDGWATER, Somerset
Solidarity demo will be held on 19th Jan outside the railway station in
Bridgwater where highly dangerous radwaste is transferred on its way to
Sellafield in the middle of Bridgwater town right next to Eastover Primary
School.
http://www.facebook.com/events/381612195268541/?ref=3

Handbrake Shirley
http://www.facebook.com/handbrakeshirley

Friends of the Lake District join the gang: “lets make the right noises but keep the nuke dump on track”

557418_10150636779332218_1777030236_n

Friends of the Lake District have joined the Lake District National Park and Cumbria Tourism in making the right noises and playing to the increasingly angry gallery but not doing the right thing and OPPOSING the nuke dump.

Jack Ellerby Policy Officer of FoLD has just sent a letter to the Decision Making Bodies of the councils saying “Friends of the Lake District, and a growing number of other bodies and local communities, feel that you should not proceed to Stage 4.” So far so good but the letter then goes on to Recommendation 1: FLD strongly recommends further geological desk-based analysis.

WHY?


FoLD did not strongly recommend further analysis of the zip wire proposal – they opposed and campaigned against the zip wire from the off.

The zip wire is a flea bite compared to even the above ground sprawl necessary for what would be a mega mine filled with high level waste.

WHY THE RELUCTANCE TO OPPOSE THE NUKE DUMP?

What FoLD have recommended is to keep the door open on this insane plan while seeming to say the right thing. Nuke dump by stealth.

Honister Zip Wire Update – The Most Controversial Planning Application In Years
http://www.fld.org.uk/honister-zip-wire-update-the-most-controversial-planning-application-in-years.html

Letter to DMB Councillors – 18.1.13

Weak Kneed Acquiescence of Cumbria Tourism

Eric-Robson-meeting-Princ-007-1
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/23/gardeners-question-time-conflict-interests

Nirex Map- Sellafield Geological Investigation Area Definition
Nirex Map- Sellafield Geological Investigation Area Definition

Eric Robson’s heart and bankbook are on message with the government agenda for geological dumping of nuclear wastes. His company Osprey Communications has provided the propaganda to underplay and normalise the plan. A recent letter to Baroness Verma sets out Cumbria Tourism’s weak kneed acquiescent ‘neutrality’ until a “most promising site” at Stage 4 is chosen and then they will “strongly object”

This is meaningless. At stage 4 the councils will have overturned the Nirex inquiry which found that West Cumbria had been searched and the most promising site found to be unsuitable. Having overturned the findings of the Nirex Inquiry the councils would be unable to provide “credible justification” to withdraw from a project too big to fail.

Eric Robson’s support for the dump and monetary gain through his PR company promoting the dump is at odds with the protective remit of Cumbria Tourism, he has even said to campaigners:
“I am convinced by the scientific arguments that geological disposal
rather than burying our heads in the sand is the best way forward”

Eric Robson and Cumbria Tourism have not only failed to step up to the mark but are complicit in the plan for most damaging proposal since the nuclear bomb making factory was installed at Windscale.

LETTER TO CAMPAIGNERS 2011
RE: Deep Disposal Implications for the Cumbrian Economy
From: “Ian Stephens”
Date: Fri, April 8, 2011 3:21 pm
To: mariannebirkby

Dear Marianne

I’ve contacted Eric Robson and he’s replied to the question ‘How can ER
be chairman of CT when he supports the geological disposal of nuclear
waste?’ as follows:
“Because I’m convinced by the scientific arguments that geological
disposal rather than burying our heads in the sand is the best way
forward. Nuclear waste is with us. We can’t wish it away despite the
best efforts of some so-called environmentalists. My views are well
known and I’m elected as chairman of CT, rather than being self
appointed’.

Yours sincerely

Ian Stephens
***************************************************************************************************

LETTER TO BARONESS VERMA
8th January 2013

Baroness Verma of Leicester
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State
DECC
3 Whitehall Place
London
SW1A 2AW

Dear Baroness Verma
It is widely known that the storage of nuclear waste is a major challenge and a problem which needs to be addressed. Cumbria Tourism has engaged fully in the MRWS consultation exercise and continues to take a neutral stance on whether a nuclear waste repository should be based in Cumbria. It has taken this position because there is inconclusive evidence that such a repository would have a detrimental impact on the economy and the environment. A range of research and monitoring processes are now in place or are planned in future to determine the extent of such impacts.
The Executive Board of Cumbria Tourism wishes to make clear that taking a neutral stance does not imply tacit support for a nuclear waste repository. The Board has always strongly objected to any major developments that would have an adverse impact on the enjoyment of visitors, tourism business viability and on the special qualities of the National Park or other protected environmental areas. The Board understands that, despite rumours to the contrary, there are no site specific proposals at this stage and that there are no plans at present to site a nuclear waste repository in the Lake District National Park or within the Solway AONB. The Board is also mindful that if there is a decision to proceed to the next ‘desktop’ phase of research, this will not result in any ‘new infrastructure, traffic or noise’ which could cause disruption to visitors or businesses.
However, it is inevitable that Cumbria Tourism would object strongly should further research lead to any suggestion that a nuclear waste repository could be considered in either the National Park or the AONB.
Yours sincerely

Eric Robson
Cumbria Tourism Chairman

cc: Bill Jefferson, Chairman of the Lake District National Park Authority
Rory Stewart MP for Penrith & the Borders
John Stevenson MP for Carlisle
Tim Farron MP for Westmorland & Lonsdale
Jamie Reed MP for Copeland
Tony Cunningham MP for Workington
John Woodcock MP for Barrow & Furness

DEMONSTRATION 19th JANUARY: BOWNESS TO SILLOTH AND BEYOND

DEMONSTRATION

Next Saturday 19th Jan campaigners from Bowness to Silloth will ramp up
opposition to the government plan for a nuke dump under Cumbria.
Government are trying to bribe with “huge opportunities” communities
willing to live above the world’s most dangerous and largest high level
nuclear waste dump. Cumbrians are asking: where is the 25km+ square “willing community” ?

Cumbrians and those who love the Lakes are invited to come along and join
in the Demonstration! Bring banners, homemade are good! Dress to show
opposition (Peter Rabbit is welcome) or just bring yourselves to show that
we are NOT A WILLING COMMUNITY.

There will be street theatre and art events. Help make a giant postcard to
present to the Cabinet of Cumbria County Council and come along to make
your voice heard.

To the Leader of Cumbria County Council
Dear Eddie Martin,
Geological Dumping of Nuclear Waste
On 30th January you are going to take the most important decision of any
Cumbria County Council Leader before you. Your decision will speak for the
whole of Cumbria, which has been misrepresented as a “willing community.”
To say ‘yes’ would mean unquantifiable damage to the ‘brand’ of Cumbria.
The real cost, however, would be psychological and physical trauma through
countless generations, as Cumbria would be increasingly and irreversibly
blighted.
Say NO – end this mad plan now. Then all money and expertise can go into
ensuring the existing wastes are looked after safely on the 6km Sellafield
site rather than expanding and increasing the danger to ever more waste
over a much increased area.

JOIN THE DEMO IN BOWNESS 10am till 12 …meet at Bowness Bay
http://www.facebook.com/events/475165439214892/

KESWICK – campaigners will be out and about leafleting, and collecting
signatures for the giant postcard

SILLOTH on the evening of 19th Jan a gig organised by Solway Plain
Against the Nuclear Dump featuring the brilliant song featured on Radio 4
: ‘Other Road to Hell’
http://www.spand.org.uk/

IF you cannot get to these events, stage your own event to show opposition to the government plan to dump nuclear waste under Cumbria, there is no monopoly on campaigning….just do it!!

MORE EVENTS POSTED SOON>>>>