Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Questions for the Nuclear industry

Do you understand that the rich uranium ores required by a new phase of nuclear power are so limited that if the entire present world electricity demand were to be provided by nuclear power, these ores would be exhausted within five years?

How can it be OK for us to develop nuclear power, and not OK for Iran and North Korea? Yes, they are using it to make weapons, but that is precisely what we have done in the past, and may still be doing for all we know?

Is it right and fair that wind turbines have to carry fully comprehensive insurance for risks such as a blade flying off and going through someone's windscreen, yet nuclear power is insured to only less than 1% of the full cost of a Maximum Credible Accident?

Can you guarantee that terrorists will not attack one of our nuclear facilities, causing a loss of coolant and consequent Maximum Credible Accident?

Can we believe that the huge costs of a nuclear comeback will not suck funding away from energy conservation and renewables, which are, after all the only truly sustainable options on the table?

Most nuclear power stations are by the sea. How will sea level rises affect your plans for decommissioning? At the moment the plan is to leave the radioactive cores in place, on the assumption that they will be dry. Does not sea level rise mean that you will have to move the core material up to higher ground?

How can you defend the ethics of our generation enjoying electricity for a few years, and committing our descendants to guarding our waste for thousands of years?

No comments: