News Archive – September 2005

NEWS EXTRA
New nuclear build

A round up of all September’s news about the new nuclear build debate.

More>>

Ingham rides to the rescue to save us from fanatics

Sir Bernard Ingham, Margaret Thatcher’s former Press Secretary, asks in an article for the Tory think tank – the Centre for Policy Studies – whether Blair’s failure to act on nuclear power is inspired by political cowardice.

He says the Government disingenuously excuses itself on the grounds that investors are not seeking approval to build nuclear power stations and we need to find a more permanent store for higher level nuclear waste. But neither of these will happen unless the Government stirs itself.

“ Few other than those imbued with an environmental fervour akin to religious fanaticism or idle dreamers think this is remotely possible” that the Government will achieve its renewable energy targets. He says this is just as well because wind could bankrupt business – companies are not so much harvesting wind as harvesting government subsidies. He is dismissive of energy efficiency saying that despite gains consumption still rises.

A failure to act inspired by political cowardice? Perspective, Centre for Policy Studies, September 2005

In a companion opinion piece in the Daily Telegraph, Ingham says: “Even though the Green Party polled little more than one per cent of the vote at the last election, Labour's energy policy has been dominated by obeisance to an environmentalism that irrationally regards nuclear as deadly poison. Indeed, it can hardly be said that we have an energy policy”.
Has Blair got the guts to take the nuclear option?

Daily Telegraph 29th September 2005

 

Yes or No; with or without British Energy by end 2006

The government will give a "yes or no" to nuclear power by the end of next year following a decision by Tony Blair to inject "greater urgency" into the nuclear debate. Malcolm Wicks, energy minister, said yesterday a government review of energy policy next year would "have to include a proposal about nuclear". He added: "The proposal could be no - it could be yes."

But if more nuclear power stations are built, they will have to do without direct government subsidy, Malcolm Wicks, the energy minister, has suggested. "Don't think this government's in the business of saying we're going to become heavy subsidisers of nuclear energy, because we aren't".

The Financial Times asks how much faith should the nuclear industry put in Mr Blair's encouraging words? The answer depends on how long he stays in Downing Street, and how much unpopularity he is ready to risk in promoting the nuclear cause. There is one key economic obstacle: "nowhere in the world have new nuclear stations yet been financed within a liberalised electricity market". It is hard to resist the conclusion that funding new nuclear plants in the UK will require partial reversal of earlier liberalisation, or at least some government intervention. Would he dare to rig the market in the same way he has for renewables?

Decision on nuclear power by end of 2006, FT 29th September 2005
A nuclear future fuelled by direct subsidy ruled out, FT 29th September 2005
FT Editorial 29th September 2005

British Energy Chief Executive, Bill Coley, says Blair must give the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations by the end of next year if the Government is to meet its climate-change targets. Coley said the Company wants to earn the right to be involved in building a new generation of nuclear power stations: “We have no birthright to be involved. I want us to be so good that no one would conceive of beginning a new build programme without us.”
This is despite the fact that he said in July he was trying "not to be distracted" by possible government plans for new nuclear power stations, and would instead focus on extending the lifespan of existing plants. Coley insisted he was not even lobbying the government to make a decision on the highly controversial issue.

The Scotsman 28th July 2005
The Independent 29th September 2005
The Times 29th September 2005

 

Nuclear Power is No Solution

Following the Prime Minister's announcement at the Labour Party Conference that nuclear power must be considered as a way of tackling climate change, Friends of the Earth spelt out why it is not the solution. There are more cost effective and far safer ways to reduce UK greenhouse gas emissions and nuclear power does not necessarily offer substantial reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. Indeed doubling nuclear power generation in the UK would cut our carbon dioxide emissions by no more than eight per cent.

Friends of the Earth (England Wales and Northern Ireland) Press Release 28th September 2005

Green Party Principal Speaker Keith Taylor agrees that "Nuclear power is not a viable option." He says. "The astronomical costs of a new nuclear power programme would divert money away from creating a low-carbon economy, the real solution to global warming."

Green Party Press Release 28th September 2005

Why nuclear power is not an achievable and safe answer to climate change, FoE Briefing (November 2004):
Nuclear power undermines solutions to climate change Greenpeace Briefing (June 2005)