No place for nuclear power in Wales

A leading environmental organisation has urged the Welsh Assembly to reject nuclear power as an energy option for Wales. It has also criticised the CBI and the TUC for being too pro-nuclear in their response to an Assembly Government consultation on energy.

In a letter to all Assembly Members, Friends of the Earth Cymru claim that nuclear power is unnecessary, unsafe and uneconomic, and that there are much better options available for reducing the gases that are causing climate change.

Friends of the Earth Cymru's Assembly Campaigner, Gordon James, said:

"Nuclear power has had fifty years to prove itself but has failed to deliver economic, safe or clean energy and has left a legacy of hazardous waste and financial costs for future generations. It is once again being promoted as a quick fix solution to an energy challenge but, in reality, amounts to no more than an expensive fig leaf to cover the embarrassment of failed attempts to make adequate reductions in carbon dioxide emissions."

Both the TUC and the CBI come in for strong criticism for, it is claimed, making factually inaccurate and flawed statements in their submissions to the Welsh Assembly Government.

Gordon James continued:

"We are surprised that both organisations should make the mistaken claim that nuclear power provides 30% of Wales' energy. Wylfa nuclear power station has contributed, on average, around 30% of Wales's electricity, but, as electricity provides only 17% of the UK's total energy requirement, the contribution of nuclear power to energy supplies in the Wales amounts to less than 6%. This is a very basic error that considerably overstates the ability of nuclear power to play a meaningful role in achieving energy security or in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Nuclear power, for instance, would not replace gas for heating nor petrol and diesel for transport purposes.

"This mistaken "30% of energy" claim undermines the credibility of both submissions. If the CBI and TUC in Wales are unable to distinguish between 'energy' and 'electricity' one has to doubt their ability to provide valid comments on energy issues."

Friends of the Earth Cymru argues that, within Wales, nuclear power could not fill the gap left by the closure of Wylfa nuclear power station in five years time as it would take at least ten years to build a new nuclear power station. They believe, though, that this so-called 'electricity gap' could be filled by renewable energy sources.

Gordon James continued:

"Existing and proposed onshore and offshore wind farms could generate over twenty five per cent of Wales' electricity demand within six years [1]. Tidal lagoons in Swansea Bay and the Severn Estuary, if environmentally acceptable, could double this contribution from clean renewable sources within the time it would take to build a new nuclear power station in Wales [2]. Large lagoons could also generate or store power at any time. Smaller contributions to our electricity needs could also be obtained from energy crops and wave, solar and other tidal power schemes."

The environmental organisation stresses that many other options are also available for cost-effectively filling this gap while reducing emissions of the main gas causing climate change, carbon dioxide.

Gordon James continued:

"New gas-fired power stations, which could be constructed within 30 months, are likely to make an increasing contribution while displacing dirtier coal-fired generation elsewhere on the grid.

"The coal-fired power stations at Aberthaw and Uskmouth could be retrofitted with super-critical boilers and other efficiency improving equipment, which can reduce carbon dioxide emissions per unit of electricity generated by almost forty per cent, while further emission reductions could be achieved by co-firing with biomass.

"The huge potential of the very efficient combined heat and power (CHP) systems, which use the heat that is normally wasted in electricity generation, is largely untapped in Wales. By comparison, the bulk of electricity in Denmark comes from CHP units.

"Micro CHP for domestic and commercial use is now being developed. Similarly, small-scale renewable energy systems also have a huge potential.

"In addition to filling this 'electricity gap' with other forms of generation, a great deal more should be done to reduce our dependence on energy by improving energy efficiency. According to a recent article in the Scientific American, delivering a kilowatt-hour from a nuclear plant costs at least three times as much as saving one through energy efficiency [3]."

As well as pointing to cleaner, safer and more cost-effective solutions, the letter from Friends of the Earth Cymru also lists arguments against nuclear power.

Gordon James continued:

"No solution has been found to safely dispose of this hazardous material, and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has estimated that dealing with the existing waste from civil nuclear power is likely to cost the UK taxpayer almost £60bn. This material will remain hazardous and have to be safeguarded for tens of thousands of years.

"Nuclear power is also unlikely to meet the CBI's requirement of providing a secure and competitive energy supply. The security of supply of electricity from nuclear power has always been undermined by technical problems resulting often in lengthy and costly shutdowns. The Wylfa power station, for instance, has only operated at around 56% of its full capacity since it opened.

"To this must be added a further threat to security in the form of terrorism attacks against nuclear facilities and transports. It is worth noting that the 9/11 Commission in the United States found that the masterminds of the terrorist attacks of Sept 11th, 2001, had considered flying planes into nuclear power stations.

"Should the UK embark on a new build nuclear programme, supposedly to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, it would prompt other countries to follow suit. Iran and North Korea demonstrate the dangers posed by the short and tempting step that exists between civil and military nuclear programmes

"The possibility of nuclear proliferation also increases both the problems of routine radioactive discharges to the atmosphere and seas and the likelihood of nuclear accidents. Radioactive contamination from Sellafield can be found throughout the Irish Sea and restrictions resulting from the radioactive fallout from Chernobyl in 1986 still affect 359 farms covering 53,000 hectares of land in North Wales.

"It is also incorrect to state that nuclear power is a 'carbon free' source of power. The whole process of mining, processing and transportation of the uranium ore and other materials, the construction and decommissioning of nuclear power stations and the storing of waste involves a significant level of activity that releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. It is estimated that nuclear power produces fifty per cent more greenhouse gases than wind energy"

The TUC is further criticised for appearing to ignore the major job creating opportunities of renewable energy developments and improvements in energy efficiency, while the letter states that "it is mystifying to see the CBI, an organisation that champions free enterprise, lobby for an energy source that has always been costlier than promised, has failed to attract private investment and has always had to rely on state subsidies".

The letter concludes:

"We welcome the fact that the Welsh Assembly Government has, to date, resisted the call for new nuclear power stations to be considered in Wales. We urge the Welsh Assembly to pursue a rational evidence-based approach that will deliver energy solutions that will indeed make Wales a 'global showcase for clean energy' and demonstrate that nuclear power is unnecessary, unsafe and uneconomic."

Notes

1. Overall, the electricity needs of up to one million people in Wales could be generated by renewables, mostly wind energy within ten years. The Assembly Government's target for renewable energy generation is about 20% of Welsh electricity demand by 2010 (figures based on UK per capita electricity demand). Onshore windfarm would be likely to supply about 14% of this demand or the needs of around 400,000 people in Wales. Offshore windfarms (North Hoyle, Scarweather and Gwynt-y-Mor) either built, approved or proposed would supply another 400,000 people or 14% of demand by about 2011.

2. The Swansea Bay tidal lagoon would generate 60MW of electricity while several large tidal lagoons in the Severn estuary could generate around 25% (5TWhrs per year) of Welsh demand by 2015. The Swansea Bay proposal has been independently reviewed by leading engineering consultants W.S.Atkins who concluded that tidal lagoons could make a sizeable and cost effective contribution to renewable energy in the UK

3. 'More Profit With Less Carbon' by Amory B. Lovins in the Scientific American special issue, September 2005, p.82.