Another Nukiller CONsultation: WALES

NUCLEAR WALES?

 

Radiation Free Lakeland have just sent off this ‘submission’ (how we hate that word) to the Welsh Affairs Committee.

We urge others to write opposing plans for new nuclear in Wales (or anywhere!).  The “high burn” waste from new build would be many times hotter than from existing nuclear plants.

Please feel free to use any of the ideas in the letter below. The deadline is 6pm Friday March 4th.  No need to cover all the “Terms of Reference” the main thing is to object to the whole shebang and you can do that here:  http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/welsh-affairs-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/nuclear-power-15-16/

RADIATION FREE LAKELAND   27th February 2016

To the Welsh Affairs Committee: “Inquiry into the future of nuclear power in Wales. The inquiry will examine the decommissioning of nuclear plants at Wylfa and Trawsfynydd, and the development of a new plant, Wylfa Newydd”.

Radiation Free Lakeland does not recognize the terms of this inquiry as it rests upon the shoulders of previously unjust and predetermined consultations. These have led to the UKs National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power. The May 2007 Energy White Paper stated that ‘Nuclear power supplies 7.5% of total UK energy supplies.‘ When the reality is 3.6% energy contribution. Successive governments have bigged up of the ‘benefit’ of nuclear while at the same time downplaying the very real blight.

Your Terms of Reference

  1. Will Wylfa Newydd be built on schedule?

No

  1. What the cost of Wylfa Newydd will be and whether it represents value for money?

No nuclear power station has been built without the guarantee of public money. The real costs are externalized. For example:

  • Uranium mining is highly polluting and the push for new nuclear is threatening new mines in countries such as Peru where no uranium mining has previously taken place.
  • Enrichment of Uranium is highly polluting and in the UK takes place at Capenhurst, Near Chester. The fuel is manufactured at Springfields, Nr Preston. The solid and liquid waste from these processes goes to Drigg in Cumbria, to Clifton Marsh landfill and the River Ribble in Lancashire (as well as gaseous waste to the air).
  • The cost to the environment would be a sink for ongoing and cumulative radioactive gaseous and liquid emissions.
  • The cost to the NHS for cumulative radiation linked diseases both to workers and to the general public.
  • The cost of reprocessing spent fuel from ‘high burn’ reactors would be greater than for existing wastes requiring new reprocessing facilities. The reprocessing of spent fuel generates much more waste and the waste from new reactors would be 4x as radioactive as existing waste
  • The Dumping of waste is increasingly taking place in novel ways. From landfill (reclassified High Volume Very Low Level waste) to the ‘recycling’ of radioactive metal.
  1. What the strike price is likely to be and what impact will it have on energy prices?

David Cameron and Ed Davey announced a deal with EDF and Chinese Nuclear, which would fix the price, paid by UK consumers for new nuclear electricity – at double the current rate.

4. What impact will Wylfa have on the economy of Anglesey and Wales?

Boom and bust

  1. Environmental Impact?

See the answer to 2

  1. How the decommissioning of Wylfa and Trawsfynydd is being carried out?

Decommissioning means dispersal to the environment. Cumbria is bearing the brunt of this dispersal. We note that Welsh MP Albert Owen has suggested that Cumbria should be the national nuclear sacrifice zone as “the geology is suitable” (Daily Post Anglesey 27.7.2014)

  1. What the economic impact of the decommissioning of Trawsfynydd will be? Trawsfyndd should not be “decommissioned” the radioactive buildings and rubble and soil should remain there on site with the best containment possible with our present knowledge. The waste should be repackaged again and again with guards curating the waste site into eternity.
  1. What potential there is for small modular reactors to be built at Trawsfynydd and how that will impact decommissioning and future planning?

There is no potential. The government is promoting a dead market to extend the life of nuclear power. The nuclear propulsion reactors on submarines are dangerous for many thousands of times longer than their working life.

  1. Whether the Welsh Government and UK Government are co-ordinating their policy in this area.

It would seem so although Wales is rather shy about the association with Sellafield’s radioactive pants. The only nuclear laundry in Wales, Unitech is based in the Ebbw River
 valley at Crumlin, home to the potnoodle and they deny taking in
 Sellafield’s dirty washing despite having a contract with Sellafield and being licensed to receive radioactive laundry from anywhere in the UK.

 The only way to stop the endless nuclear laundry is to stop new nuclear build and to put all effort and expertise into containing existing waste.

References

National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power is flawed

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmenergy/231/231we93.htm

 

Nuclear UK Energy Supplies: Lies Damned Lies and Statistics

http://www.theecologist.org/campaigning/2884401/lies_damned_lies_and_energy_statistics_why_nuclear_is_so_much_less_than_it_claims_to_be.html

 

Sellafield’s Hot Pants

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/marianne-birkby/radioactive-y-fronts-and-limits-of-parliamentary-scrutiny

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Another Nukiller CONsultation: WALES

  1. […] February 28th 2016                                                                                                                                WYLFA CONSULTATION                                                                                                                     Radiation Free Lakeland object strongly to the plan for new nuclear in Wales and “We urge others to write opposing plans for new nuclear in Wales (or anywhere!).  The “high burn” waste from new build would be many times hotter than from existing nuclear plants.” […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s