Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Nuclear is right
9:47am Friday 23rd August 2013 in Letters
I WISH to correct Brian Ledger on a few points (Letters, August 16). He wrote about my willingness to have a nuclear power-station in Stamford Bridge, in preference to a forest of ugly wind-powered generators.
With regards to the “tons of lethal radioactive waste produced in such a plant” and my (possible) objection to having such waste buried at Stamford Bridge, it wouldn’t happen.
Any radioactive waste produced which, by experience, I know would be of low magnitude anyway (contaminated tools, clothing, etc), would be removed from the power station and buried in stainless-steel drums in a deep repository many miles away.
The “lethal waste” from a nuclear power-station would, in fact, be the reactor itself. After many, years of steam-production it would be decommissioned, encased in concrete until such time when the radiation levels would have decayed to the extent where the reactor could be demolished.
This process would take many hundreds of years but the appearance of a few monolithic-type mausoleums would still be preferable to thousands of eyesore wind-powered generators or the “fields and fields of photovoltaic-panels” idea advanced by Mr Ledger.
Britain is too small to have forests of wind-powered generators or acres of voltaic-cells producing electricity in a hit-and-miss way.
A relatively small number of nuclear power stations would provide unlimited guaranteed power.
Philip Roe, Roman Avenue South, Stamford Bridge, York.
Comments are closed on this article.