Renewables not nuclear power

Friends of the Earth Cymru has written to the Prime Minister on the eve of his visit to the Welsh Assembly advising him that the common thread to his vision of a safe, secure and fair world is renewable energy. The Prime Minister made a keynote speech about tackling global terrorism, African poverty and climate change at the Labour Party Annual Conference in Bournmouth earlier this month (1).

FOE Cymru (FOE Cymru) points out that the UK and the world has a relatively simple choice to make to tackle climate change. Either invest in renewable energy technologies that are clean and safe. Or, in direct contrast, fund a new round of nuclear power stations which are highly vulnerable to terrorist action or accident, and which generate dangerous radioactive waste for future generations to deal with.

The environmental campaigners have responded to the Prime Ministers Conference speech by writing to him highlighting the fact that much of the worlds abundant cost-effective renewable energy resources such as solar energy (2) can be found in hot, poverty-stricken desert regions such as Saharan Africa, possibly even Afghanistan.

Neil Crumpton, energy spokesperson at FOE Cymru said:

"Renewable energy technologies are key to building the global vision that the Prime Minister spoke of at his Partys Conference. Hot, poverty stricken desert areas in Saharan Africa for example have vast cost-competitive solar energy resources. Solar arrays covering just one percent of the area of Sahara could generate electricity and hydrogen equivalent to current global electricity consumption.

The export potential for European countries and the wealth created in many poor countries would be huge. Solar arrays and other renewables are also safe and clean in complete contrast to nuclear reactors and their associated activities.

Yet, during the current Energy Review, the Government has been making favourable noises towards the building of a future round of nuclear power stations in the UK. But existing nuclear facilities like Sellafield are already a gaping Achilles' heel in Britains national security in the face of today's terrorism (3). More reactors and nuclear fuel transports (4) would add a new and future dimension to the risk and send a very dangerous message especially to developing countries."

Many renewable energy companies are saying that the UK has lost significant export trade in renewable energy technologies by its historic investment focus on nuclear power development. FOE Cymru adds that the UK, if not the world, will lose much more if we repeat this nuclear choice at the start of the 21st Century.

Notes

1) PM's Conference Speech on Tuesday 2nd October 2001, Labour Party Conference, Bournmouth.

2) German Aerospace Centre Website has wealth of technological and financial research on solar thermal arrays in the Sahara. Electricity (on-site cost of 6 US cents/kWhour by 2010) could be transmitted to mid Europe along high voltage DC cables at loss of 1 US cent/kWh for every 1,000 km. Hydrogen could also be produced for export as transport fuel in Europe. District cooling and desalination schemes can also feature.

Energy payback time is 0.5 years !! about the same as windturbines

Obviously solar thermal schemes are not only limited to the Sahara region - The US already has a solar thermal station since 1985 and now EU and US projects supported by the Global Environmental Facility are funding new technology projects in Spain, India, Egypt, Morocco, Mexico and Greece.

DLR German Areospace Centre site is: www.dlr.de/tt/system

3) Sellafield holds in its waste storage ponds the equivalent of 44 times as much radioactivity as was released in the Chenobyl disaster. France has positioned anti aircraft defences around their reprocessing facility at La Hague. Institutions in the US, Germany and elsewhere are seriously concerned about the threats posed by terrorists to nuclear facilities. The fourth airflight hijacked on the 11th September, and brought down by passenger actions, was also possibly heading for the Three Mile Island reactor in the United States.

4) MOX fuel transports may well be part of any future nuclear development. MOX fuel (uranium/plutonium pellets) are considered by most experts to constitute a major terrorist risk in terms of bomb making materials. The UK Environment Agency says it is 'relatively easy' to seperate out the plutonium in a chemical process.