Nuclear costs (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Nuclear costs
11:23am Monday 11th February 2013 in Letters By Reader's letter
IT IS hard to see how the UK’s projected future electricity demand and energy security can be met without an element of new nuclear power to replace some of the existing nuclear stations as they come to the end of their lives.
In considering the recently published figures for the Sellafield clean-up, it is worth remembering that a large proportion of the costs have arisen as a result of the early military programmes which were conceived and undertaken under considerable time pressure and under the dark shadow of the nuclear arms race – and at a time when facilities were designed without decommissioning in mind and when future waste management was not accorded the priority it now is.
If new civil nuclear electricity generating capacity is commissioned in the UK, waste management and end-of-life decommissioning will be taken properly into account from the start, and so will be proportionately less expensive to deal with than the historic legacy of the early days of the UK’s military programmes.
Dr Simon Harrison, Institution of Engineering and Technology, Savoy Place, London.
Comments(4)
Fat Harry
says...
3:26pm Mon 11 Feb 13
NoMorePlease
says...
7:44pm Mon 11 Feb 13
Really?
ColdAsChristmas
says...
12:37am Tue 12 Feb 13
Nobody killed in Japan after the Tsunami, the cause of the incident.
Don't forget that 73% of French electricity is nuclear generated.
Agreed that if it does go wrong the consequences are dire but that is if.
ColdAsChristmas says...
2:59pm Mon 11 Feb 13
The needless shutting down next Month of five Coal power stations will leave the UK with no spare capacity for next winter.
New nuclear plants take years to build, so certainly our governments have been caught dithering over a vital energy need while they can spend an estimated £33 Billion on HS2 we don't need and can't afford, just because France has one.
The good news is that a Geological survey in its latest report estimates that we will have enough shale gas reserves to heat our homes for 1,500 years. (One assumes that is at current numbers and not with a population explosion and millions of new homes with nowhere to grow food)
So if we are really all living longer there is at least no need to be cold. This will also give us plenty of time to reinvent efficient renewable energy such as hydro. Wind turbines could be recycled in the coal power stations while we re-open a few mines. Sorted!
BTW, did you know that 20% of the massive EU budget we pay for is for climate related projects? Pure madness!