The Environ-mentals Attack New Nuclear Power Station Plans

This week British Energy published the list of potential sites for new nuclear power stations… it was a thoroughly unsurprising list... and a thoroughly unsurprising response from the environ-mentals…

The first four sites it plans to hook up to the national grid are Sizewell in Suffolk, Dungeness in Kent, Hinkley in Somerset and Bradwell in Essex. It is hoped that they will be in operation by 2016.

National Grid has agreed to connect up new nuclear power stations if they are built at those locations. Limitations of the grid had been one of the stumbling blocks that nuclear power’s detractors had put in the way. But this obstacle remains no more.

It is important to note that this was not the green light for these plans to be built; these are merely the identified construction site for the first phase of building which will hopefully get the official go-ahead early next year.

Gordon Brown told the CBI this week that: “New nuclear power stations potentially have a role to play in tackling climate change and improving energy security.”

This is a handy hint as to where Mr Brown believes our future lies. At least on this issue I am in agreement with the miserable-faced grump.

All of the first-phase power stations will be built in the South of England, close to where demand is greatest. The second phase of new reactor construction should see plants built in Hartlepool on Teeside, Heysham in Kent, with two plants built in Scotland at Hunterston and Torness.

Of course, the environ-mentals at Greenpeace don’t like it.

A few months ago they launched a pre-emptive attack on the site plans by commissioning a report from the Middlesex University (formerly Neasden Polytechnic) Flood Hazard Research Centre to look at flooding risk at the new sites.

Buy a gun and head for the hills

You will be astounded to know that the Greenpeace report concluded that building the power stations at these sites would mean that we are all totally doomed… Doomed I tell you...!

Greenpeace argued that all four of these sites would be in danger of catastrophe. It said that they would be in grave danger should the WORST-CASE SCENARIO happen and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet melt all four sites would be in serious trouble.

All this is well and good. But surely the worst-case scenario would be caused by continuing to pump CO2 into the atmosphere – something that nuclear power plants do not do. Surely, dear Greenpeace, a switch to nuclear power would eliminate these noxious gasses and slow down global warming?

In order to prevent the sea level rising we need to stop emitting CO2... Nuclear power plants do not emit CO2. If the world went nuclear, there would be less of a chance of sea levels rising to these levels. They are making the wrong argument; it would have served their purpose better if they talked about processing waste, at least there is a valid point to work through there.

Wisely, British Energy tackled the Neasden Polytechnic study head on. It also said this week that that new nuclear reactors in the UK could be protected from flooding and sea-level rise caused by climate change. Of course this is questionable if Greenpeace’s “worst-case scenario” occurred – but would it matter that much anyway?

It has been forecasted that a rise of six to seven metres in sea levels would drown the centre of London and leave cities and towns including Edinburgh, Newcastle, Scunthorpe, Bristol, Plymouth, Norwich, Peterborough and Bournemouth waterlogged.

In the highly populated London area, it would mean a massive relocation project, with much of the boroughs of Southwark, Lewisham, Greenwich, Tower Hamlets, Bexley and Barking under water, along with large areas of south Essex and north Kent.

We’re all going to die a horrible death

Quite frankly, should the Antarctic ice sheets melt we really will be doomed without any nuclear plants. The ocean will be full of chemicals from chemical plants… waste from landfills… oil from oil sump… and faecal material from sewers.

It will be a doomsday scenario without a nuclear power plant… and nuclear energy does not produce emissions that cause sea levels to rise...

Green MEPs have also got in on the story. They issued a statement this week that said the prospects of a nuclear power renaissance in Britain were zero and the global industry is in steep decline. Their arguments however, were much more intelligent than the sea-level argument favoured by Greenpeace – but they were still wrong.

The main thrust of the argument was that government plans were seriously jeopardised by an acute shortage of skilled engineers and manufacturing bottlenecks.

"You don't educate engineers in Britain any more, let alone nuclear engineers. The only perspective I can see is that EDF [the French state-owned power group] orders its own reactor and brings in people from elsewhere to build it."

So there you go… the Green MEPs have found a problem – but also a solution in the same report… Well done those verdant chaps… We’ll simply import French expertise... They know what they are doing as they get 80% of their electricity from nuclear.

We do have a shortage of engineers in this country and it is a real problem. We have issues with lazy young people who have had an easy, spoiled upbringing and want an easy, spoiled life at university. That’s why they study non-subjects like media studies or the history of art instead of proper subjects such as chemistry, engineering and maths. It’s easier to do a humanities degree and lie in bed for most of the day rather that work 40 hours a week in a lab.

This is a serious problem that the Green MEPs have identified, but it is not an insurmountable problem.

So, I think that the green lobby has itself given the answer to the problems it has itself raised. Sure, sea level rises could flood nuclear reactor sites… that’s why we should switch to nuclear because it does not emit CO2 which raises the temperature and melts the ice… As for the shortage of engineers, we’ll just steal them from France…

So thanks environ-mentals for giving us the solutions to these problems. It was a nice contribution to our nuclear future…

• LinkedIn
• Twitter
• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Google Bookmarks
• Livejournal
• StumbleUpon