![]() |
||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Dave Rickard some facts the pro-nuclear lobby ignore
Currently
nuclear accounts for about 20% of our power, but government figures show that
we could save up to 30% of our usage by energy saving methods which would be a
far more cost effective way of dealing with reducing our carbon emissions and
it could start today instead of the estimated 10 - 15 years required to plan,
commission and build a new generation of nuclear stations. We need to cut
Carbon Emissions now, which means we need to cut usage and rapidly deploy all
the available Green Technology and fast track new technology.
The
decision of this government to U-turn on nuclear had the immediate effect of
slashing the investment in renewables by over 50%, and renewable energy stocks
plunged on the markets by a similar percentage.
The
process of mining is also one of the most environmentally damaging industrial
processes and around the world there is a backlash against uranium mining on
health, safety and environmental grounds.
The whole process releases a whole cocktail of other toxic metals into
the environment, not to mention radioactivity.
Building
a Nuclear Power Station is not Carbon Neutral, the amount of concrete and steel
needed to build the station and all the processing and storage facilities is
enormous. The decommissioning and securing the waste also has a high energy
demand.
There
are too many health risks. Existing power stations have a poor record on site safety
and pollution. Many incidents and accidents have been covered up both by the
industry and successive governments.
A
significant percentage of the radioactivity measured in
We
haven't successfully worked out what to do with the waste accumulated from the
first 50 years of nuclear - why do we think a solution will magically appear
now?
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||