By Paul McGill from NICVA
Published on 22 Aug 2007
NICVA has recently sent out a small survey to members on the issue of nuclear power. We are very keen to have the views of our members on this issue, so please try to respond. In the meantime, read some of the relevant information here.
The Sustainable Development Commission has produced a report on the nuclear option for the UK, based on eight different research papers and taking account of all the most recent evidence.
Nuclear power – green alternative or a diversion filled with danger?
Its research recognizes that nuclear is a low carbon technology, with an impressive safety record in the UK. Nuclear could generate large quantities of electricity, contribute to stabilising CO2 emissions and add to the diversity of the UK's energy supply.
However, the research establishes that even if the UK's existing nuclear capacity was doubled, it would only give an 8% cut on CO2 emissions by 2035 (and nothing before 2010).
Five major disadvantages to nuclear power
This must be set five major disadvantages to nuclear power:
1. Long-term waste - no long term solutions are yet available, let alone acceptable to the general public; it is impossible to guarantee safety over the long-term disposal of waste.
2. Cost - the economics of nuclear new-build are highly uncertain. There is little, if any, justification for public subsidy, but if estimated costs escalate, there's a clear risk that the taxpayer will be have to pick up the tab.
3. Inflexibility - nuclear would lock the UK into a centralised distribution system for the next 50 years, at exactly the time when opportunities for microgeneration and local distribution network are stronger than ever.
4. Undermining energy efficiency - a new nuclear programme would give out the wrong signal to consumers and businesses, implying that a major technological fix is all that's required, weakening the urgent action needed on energy efficiency.
5. International security - if the UK brings forward a new nuclear power programme, we cannot deny other countries the same technology*. With lower safety standards, they run higher risks of accidents, radiation exposure, proliferation and terrorist attacks.
On balance, the SDC finds that these problems outweigh the advantages of nuclear. However, the SDC does not rule out further research into new nuclear technologies and pursuing answers to the waste problem, as future technological developments may justify a re-examination of the issue.
The government’s case
The Government is considering afresh the potential contribution of new nuclear power stations.
A government White Paper in 2003 noted that the economics of nuclear power were unattractive and that issues of dealing with waste had still to be resolved.
Its latest consultation report in May 2007, The future of nuclear power, says that things have changed in the last four years which have led the Government to consider afresh the potential contribution of new nuclear power stations.
Legacy waste issue
Firstly, there has been significant progress in tackling the legacy waste issue. There are technical solutions for waste disposal that scientific consensus and experience from abroad suggest could accommodate all types of wastes from existing and new nuclear power stations.
There is also an expert body in operation, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and government is ensuring continued independent scrutiny and advice.
Under these proposals, private sector developers would meet the full decommissioning costs and full share of waste management costs. The proposals would be implemented in the event that we conclude that energy companies should be allowed to invest in new nuclear power stations. They would need to be in place before proposals for new power stations could go ahead.
Economic benefits of nuclear
Secondly, the high-level economic analysis of nuclear power, prepared for the Energy Review, concluded that under likely scenarios for gas and carbon prices and taking prudent estimates of nuclear costs, nuclear power would offer general economic benefit to the UK in terms of reduced carbon emissions and security of supply benefits. Therefore, the government believes that it has a potential contribution to make, alongside other low-carbon generating technologies.
Interest from energy companies
Thirdly, some energy companies have expressed a strong interest in investing in new nuclear power stations. They assess that new nuclear power stations could be an economically attractive low-carbon investment, which could help diversify their generation portfolios.
Their renewed interest reflects assessments that with carbon being priced to reflect its impacts and gas prices likely to be higher than previously expected, the economics of new nuclear power stations are becoming more favourable.
Decisions need to be taken now
Nuclear power stations have long lead times. If they are to be an option to replace the capacity closing over the next two decades, and in particular after 2020, a decision on whether allowing energy companies the option of investing in new nuclear power stations would be in the public interest, needs to be taken now.
Energy companies would need to begin their initial preparations in the near future in order to have a reasonable prospect of building new generation in this period. Not taking the public interest decision now would foreclose the option of new nuclear being one of our options for tackling climate change and achieving energy security.
Is your mind made up?
Have the opinions put forward swayed you one way or the other? We want to know what you think. Keep an eye out for a short survey NICVA we have just sent out to all our members and please take the time to respond.
In the meantime, why not answer the poll on the CommunityNI homepage to let us know what you think.
This page has been viewed 4845 times since it was published.
