No need for nuclear

Any new nuclear power stations would be a costly irrelevance that could hamper the battle against climate change, says Friends of the Earth Cymru.

With the UK Government announcing its decision to give the go-ahead to a new generation of nuclear power stations, the environmental group has come out strongly against any new nuclear build.

According to independent reports [1], future energy needs can be met sooner by safer and cheaper options, such as improved energy efficiency, combined heat and power (CHP) and renewable energy systems.

Friends of the Earth Cymru Director, Gordon James, said:

"There's no need for nuclear. New nuclear power stations are simply not the answer to meeting energy demand or tackling climate change. In fact, they could actually hamper efforts at meeting these challenges by diverting resources from other more viable solutions [2].

"The so-called generating gap [3] does not stand up to scrutiny. The energy shortfall can be made up by other options, such as the planned gas-fired power stations, offshore wind farms and combined heat and power systems.

"The proposed nuclear expansion programme will only ever cut the UK's carbon dioxide emissions by 4 per cent. The cost of achieving this reduction would be yet more nuclear waste that will be dangerous for tens of thousands of years, and enhanced risks of terrorism attack, accidents and nuclear proliferation to less stable countries.

"Nuclear power has already gobbled up billions of pounds in grants and subsidies, and UK taxpayers now face a bill of over £70 billion to decommission existing nuclear power stations.

"We have to make major cuts in carbon dioxide emissions very soon if we're to avoid the worst effects of climate change, yet it would take at least thirteen years for any new nuclear power stations to be up and running. It's not soon enough to make the emissions cuts we need, nor is it soon enough to provide electricity for Anglesey Aluminium when Wylfa closes in 2010. Other sources of power have to be prioritised - nuclear is not the answer."

Notes

1. In November 2007, the leading think tank, the Institute of Public Policy Research, showed in its report, '80% Challenge: Delivering a Low Carbon UK', that the UK could cut its CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050 without building any new nuclear power stations. The renowned Tyndall Centre for Climate Change at Manchester University came to a similar conclusion in its 2006 report, 'Living Within a Carbon Budget'.

2. Dr Catherine Mitchell, an energy economist at the University of Warwick Business School, has warned in her report, 'New Nuclear Power: Implications for a Sustainable Energy System', that, "The scale of financial, political and institutional commitments required to build new nuclear power plants will undermine support for new technologies (such as renewable generation) and demand reduction measures, which are vital to achieving a low carbon economy"

3. See the attached Friends of the Earth paper - 'Filling New Labour's 'generating gap', Jan 2008' by Neil Crumpton, Energy and Nuclear Campaigner, Friends of the Earth. This demonstrates that the predicted shortfall in generating capacity of 20GW by 2020 can be met by Combined Heat and Power, consented or under-construction gas-fired power stations and renewable energy.