Talking about fracking
just before Christmas, I noted that it was dishonest for anyone who supports
greater use of gas in generating electricity to then oppose fracking. If we use gas, we need supplies of gas; assuming
that we can get them elsewhere is simply dumping our environmental problems on
someone else. The total availability of
gas – and therefore the world price – has been transformed by fracking in the United States;
and energy policy based on gas thus depends explicitly on fracking, either at home or
abroad.
There’s a similar
problem with nuclear power. Building new
nuclear power stations depends on there being facilities available for storing,
processing, and disposing of nuclear waste.
It’s equally dishonest for proponents of Wylfa B to make – as many seem
to – the implicit assumption that those facilities will be available “somewhere
else”. Supporters of Wylfa B would sound
much more honest to me if they were also lobbying to have nuclear waste stored
and dumped in Ynys Môn. I won’t hold my
breath on that.
Those of us
supporting renewables can’t escape a similar problem either, although some seem
to believe that they can. Building wind
turbines means we need infrastructure – power lines and substations – to get
the electricity into the grid. Whilst
there’s always scope for debate about the detail, such infrastructure has to go
somewhere. Arguing for wind power and
then opposing the infrastructure would again be dishonest. So as someone who accepts the need for that
wind energy, I also have to accept the need for that infrastructure as a
consequence of my preferred energy strategy, and I’m prepared to argue for
that.
Politicians arguing
for any of those three approaches to energy policy and then opposing the
inevitable concomitants are not simply dishonest; they are in a sense promising
something which they know to be impossible. So let’s hear the argument
for nuclear waste storage on Ynys Môn.
3 comments:
As I understand it the spent nuclear rods from Wylfa B will have to be stored on site for at least twenty years if not more. And as we know storage of spent fuel rods was a major factor in the Fukushima disaster.
As you say the implicit assumption is that storage will be available 'somewhere else' you should have also added at 'some other time'....and they talk of not burdening our children with our debts.
In cumbria:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18144720
As I understand it, Geology is the only issue regarding Nuclear Waste storage. If the Geology was correct in Ynys Mon, I would have no problem with waste on the island.
I think the biggest problem with Wylfa B is the amount of power it would Generate - 3000MW, compared with Wylfa A's 2x490MW (and Rhyl Flats' 90MW).
North Wales does not need that amount of power, and this is were your post is relevant - if you are in favor of Wylfa B you have to be in favor of the new set of pylons across the whole of North Wales.
Somewhere like Point of Ayr would by a much better site!!
Time to start Tweeting? More effective than politics?
Post a Comment