New nukes
Rejecting nuclear power will contribute to climate change, the boss of energy giant EDF has warned MPs. But Vincent De Rivaz said building new nuclear plants meant burying nuclear waste for 400 years in the hope technology emerged to deal with it. . He was giving evidence to the Trade and Industry Committee. Paul Golbey, chief executive of E. ON UK – better known as Powergen – warned there was “no silver bullet” – demand would only be met by deploying a variety of different energies. Both witnesses to the inquiry agreed that if new nuclear power stations were built, it would be wise to consider placing them on current sites where there was existing infrastructure and often public acceptance because of the employment provided locally.
BBC 6th June 2006
A decision on whether to allow the construction of new nuclear plants in the UK is needed now to combat climate change given any expansion will not come on stream until the middle of the next decade, said Vincent de Rivaz chief executive of Electricte de France (EDF) unit EDF Energy.
Interactive Investor 6th June 2006
Daily Mail 7th June 2006
High financing costs could jeopardise the viability of a new generation of nuclear power stations unless the government takes steps to remove uncertainty about planning, a group of nuclear scientists said yesterday.
FT 7th June 2006
The Irish Government has vowed to oppose any expansion of nuclear power provision on the British mainland. And it has again reiterated its concerns over Sellafield, which Dublin insists must be closed. The warnings came at the latest meeting of the British-Irish Council in London, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott.
Belfast Telegraph 6th June 2006
Australia
Australia is to study whether it should develop nuclear power, John Howard, the Prime Minister, said yesterday. Until now it has relied largely on coal for its energy, despite possessing 40 per cent of known uranium reserves.
Times 7th June 2006
FT 7th June 2006
BBC 6th June 2006
Iraq
7th June 1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor.
BBC 7th June 2006
Iran
Iran said on Tuesday it would study a package of incentives delivered by Javier Solana, European Union foreign policy chief, designed to entice Tehran to curb its nuclear programme.
FT 7th June 2006
Scotsman 7th June 2006
Independent 7th June 2006
Guardian 7th June 2006
Telegraph 7th June 2006
Daily Mail 7th June 2006
Nuclear Waste
Douglas Alexander has criticised the use of “scare tactics” in the debate over where nuclear waste is stored. The Scotland secretary also confirmed that responsibility for dealing with nuclear waste north of the border had now been devolved.
ePolitix 6th June 2006
Uranium
Michael Meacher says: One of the most serious reasons for opposing Tony Blair’s premature go-ahead for nuclear power has so far not been mentioned. It’s not the impasse over where to dispose of the radioactive waste that will remain highly toxic for 100,000 years, nor the terrorism risk, nor the dangers of building new reactors without containment and near to population centres as is proposed, nor even the cost which makes nuclear utterly uncompetitive once decommissioning is taken into account. The key issue is whether adequate supplies of uranium are available. They are not.
Guardian 7th June 2006
CoRWM
PR company Luther Pendragon has been hired by the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), a publicly-funded body investigating the disposal of UK nuclear waste, to help it get its message across. Fair enough, but the company seems to have an inflated idea of what it can charge the taxpayer. An email exchange obtained by the NuclearSpin website shows that the firm tried to charge CoRWM £200 an hour to process a Freedom of Information request about CoRWM’s activities. Luther said it would take seven hours, so the total bill would be £1,400. “Ridiculously expensive,” riposted a Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman. Under government guidelines, civil servants working on FOI requests “cost” £25 an hour.
Guardian 7th June 2006
