Campaign news

 

PAWB campaigners picket council meeting

 

Tuesday, 11 May: A dozen PAWB supporters picketed the enterence of Ynys Môn / Anglesey Council's offices as councillors arrived for their monthly meeting. True to form the Council has never given anyone a chance to have any say about their support for a new nuke. A damning audit report has condemned councilors' years of failure and bad behavior.

 

 

 

Nick Clegg's message of support

Wednesday, 5 May: Many thanks for contacting Nick Clegg. I'm replying to letters and emails on Nick's behalf.

Liberal Democrats entirely agree with you that nuclear power isn’t the answer to Britain’s energy needs or the best way to tackle climate change. Labour’s own energy review in 2003 and the report of a Royal Commission in 2000 confirmed that it would be possible to have a low carbon, non-nuclear energy strategy, if energy policy was to focus on energy efficiency, renewables and new technologies.

Sadly, the UK’s record on renewable energy is lamentable – currently accounting for less than 5% of UK electricity production. We believe that new nuclear power stations would be a costly distraction, wasting resources (both in terms of money and policy minds) which could be better directed towards renewables and efficiency.

We’ve outlined plans to create a low-carbon electricity generation system, without recourse to nuclear power. Instead of nuclear re-builds, the paper proposes conserving energy, using renewables and encouraging the use of alternatives such as hydrogen fuels as technology develops. Crucially, we would set a target of 40% of the UK’s electricity to come from clean, non-carbon emitting sources by 2020, rising to 100% by 2050.

Thanks again for your email.
Best wishes,

Bess Mayhew
Office of Nick Clegg, Leader of the Liberal Democrats

 

PAWB Bridge Protest

Wednesday, 31 March: Despite rain, sleet and strong winds, several dozen people come to show their opposition to a new atomic power plant on Anglesey. The banners and placards were seen by hundreds of drivers as they crossed the Menai Bridge many of whom honked their horns in support. The protest received considerable coverage in the press, radio and TV with members of PAWB giving several interviews.

 

 

Nuclear Subsidies report sent to all 646 MPs

January 2010; PAWB members sent out hundreds of copies of a detailed report on how the tax payer picks up the tab for profit making corporations. The report by the Energy Fair group shows that without those subsidies, nuclear power would be hopelessly uncompetitive. And nuclear power stations are notoriously slow to build: the nuclear station being built at Olkiluoto in Finland is unlikely to be finished in less than seven years. No nuclear power station in the UK has ever been built on time. PDF versions of the report are available from www.nonukes.org.uk/

 

 

Welsh Government oppose new nukes

Jane Davidson AM, the Environment Minister in the Welsh Assembly stated: Wales would have no need for new nuclear build in its energy future.

On behalf of PAWB, Dr. Carl Clowes wrote to Jane Davidson calling for the Welsh Assembly Government to invoke its powers as a Justifying Authority under the terms of a 2005 Concordat also signed by the Department of Energy and Climate Change in England, and the devolved administrations in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Secondly he called for a clear statement on the Assembly government’s position on the hot and intensely radioactive waste that would be produced from high burn-up fuel in possible new nuclear reactors.

In response, Jane Davidson confirmed the view expressed by Rhodri Morgan in June 2007 that there is no need for new nuclear power stations in Wales, as we will be more than self-sufficient in electricity generation within a few years. Jane Davidson also indicated she had written to the Department of Energy and Climate Change calling for “a public inquiry into the request for justification into the request for the proposed new nuclear reactors, on the grounds of concern over the safety and security of the management of future nuclear waste”.

Dr.Clowes commented:
“Here is an example of a Minister carrying out her work diligently and thoroughly on behalf of the people of Wales. This collision between the Welsh Assembly Government and the Department of Energy and Climate Change as the relevant Justifying Authorities for new nuclear build is highly significant, and makes it very unlikely that we will see any further development of nuclear power stations in Wales”.

Jane Davidson’s statement creates an opportunity for politicians at all levels of government on Ynys Môn to focus their energies on making the island Europe’s leading eco-island with all the exciting possibilities of creating employment in renewable energy and energy conservation”.

 

Major concerns about new nuclear reactor designs

The UK’s safety regulators, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), have just released the third stage of their assessment for the designs of AREVA’s EPR and Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactors. It’s grim reading.
There are a significant number of issues with the safety features of both designs. The regulators still don't have a complete design yet from either Areva or Westinghouse. The HSE will not approve the designs unless this is addressed.
The EPR design has a long list of problems. There are "significant concerns" about the lack of separation between the safety protection and control systems. The HSE says "you could have the same fault occurring on both, so your protection system won't do what it's supposed to do. The company has proposed a way to fix the problem, but has yet to provide details". Concrete reactor shielding may not meet UK standards (the question is whether it meets any standards at all). There are problems with the structural integrity of the reactor but it’s "too early to say whether they can be resolved solely with additional safety case changes or whether they may result in design modifications being necessary". Unbelievably, even simple, fundamental things such as fire doors and alarms are not properly sited.

(You can take a look at some of the many safety failings of the EPR reactor being built at Olkiluoto here.)
Things with the AP1000 are little better. According to the HSE, Westinghouse has significant additional work to prove its reactor is safe across "the majority of the technical topic areas.". The safety case on internal hazards has "significant shortfalls." The regulator criticises Westinghouse for a "lack of detailed claims and arguments". There are major concerns about the reactor design’s new cooling valve but there has been, says the HSE, "minimal progress in addressing our concerns. There is a significant risk that the depth of the issue and the resources and effort that are needed to address it have been underestimated.". On top of all that aspects of the civil and mechanical engineering plans are being questioned, as well as the structural integrity and "human factors".
Wow. That’s quite a list. If the EPR was a car with a list of concerns like that, would you drive it? If the AP1000 was a plane, would you fly in it?

 

PAWB People Against 'Wylfa-B' a threatened new nuclear power station at Wylfa, Anglesey, Wales