Pages above:
Tony Blair tries to save nuclear industry, ignores climate solutions
12 July 2006
Tony Blair's legacy to future generations is more nuclear waste and inaction on real global warming solutions.
Enlarge Image
Back in 2003 the UK government rejected nuclear power in an energy
review, correctly stating that the massive investments required to build
new nuclear power plants would mean no money to invest in renewables and
energy efficiency.
But the powerful, well-connected nuclear industry wasn't going to take that lying down. They threw huge amounts of money into a PR campaign claiming that nuclear energy was going to save the world from climate change and provide energy security. And right on cue, Tony Blair started talking like a nuclear energy lobbyist.
Blair started to make public speeches in favour of more nuclear power and announced another government energy review only two years after the last one. Not surprisingly the latest energy review was stacked in favour of proving Blair is right about the need for more nuclear power and it did just that.
But Blair's obsession with nuclear power wasn't only a pre-emptive strike on the energy review process; it has also undermined the review's own commitments to renewables and efficiency.
"Tony Blair is fixated with getting new nuclear power stations built," said Stephen Tindale, Greenpeace UK executive director, "and that means anything substantial in this review that supports clean green energy will be fatally undermined as long as Blair remains Prime Minister. You can't roll out new nuclear power stations and build widespread sustainable energy projects. The reality is that nuclear sucks up all the money. There is an enormous radioactive cloud hanging over this energy review which threatens to drown any positive moves on decentralised energy, renewables and energy efficiency."
Blair claims that the UK needs nuclear power. He claims it will help to cut UK carbon emissions and ensure energy security. But building 10 new nuclear reactors would only deliver a four percent cut in CO2 emissions by 2024: far too little, too late to combat climate change. And nuclear power's overall contribution to total UK energy demand is so tiny (only 3.6 percent) that it can only marginally affect energy security.
This UK government policy puts it at odds with other European nations who have ditched nuclear power. In May 2006 Spain joined Sweden, Germany, Italy and Belgium as the fifth European country to abandon nuclear power. Maybe Tony Blair should listen more to these countries and less to the nuclear industry lobby?
The only reactor under construction in western Europe, in Finland, is already 12 months behind schedule after just one year of building, with significant cost over-runs and serious quality control problems.
Building new nuclear plants ignores the fact that there is no solution what to do with waste current ones are producing. Every child knows you should clean up your current mess before making a new one. Tony Blair is not the only one conveniently forgetting this lesson. The US is talking to Russia about a deal to allow it to dump nuclear waste from US reactors in Russia.
Generating nuclear waste is bad enough, shipping it half way around the world to Russia that has a terrible record on nuclear safety is clearly a desperate attempt to put the waste 'out of sight, out of mind'. Unless of course you are unlucky enough to live near a transport route or nuclear waste dump.
The challenge of global warming demands real leadership; those who chose the expensive, dangerous distraction represented by nuclear power will not be remembered kindly by future generations dealing with dangerous climate change and our nuclear waste.
But the powerful, well-connected nuclear industry wasn't going to take that lying down. They threw huge amounts of money into a PR campaign claiming that nuclear energy was going to save the world from climate change and provide energy security. And right on cue, Tony Blair started talking like a nuclear energy lobbyist.
Rubber stamp nuclear review
Blair started to make public speeches in favour of more nuclear power and announced another government energy review only two years after the last one. Not surprisingly the latest energy review was stacked in favour of proving Blair is right about the need for more nuclear power and it did just that.
But Blair's obsession with nuclear power wasn't only a pre-emptive strike on the energy review process; it has also undermined the review's own commitments to renewables and efficiency.
"Tony Blair is fixated with getting new nuclear power stations built," said Stephen Tindale, Greenpeace UK executive director, "and that means anything substantial in this review that supports clean green energy will be fatally undermined as long as Blair remains Prime Minister. You can't roll out new nuclear power stations and build widespread sustainable energy projects. The reality is that nuclear sucks up all the money. There is an enormous radioactive cloud hanging over this energy review which threatens to drown any positive moves on decentralised energy, renewables and energy efficiency."
Nuclear is a climate red herring
Blair claims that the UK needs nuclear power. He claims it will help to cut UK carbon emissions and ensure energy security. But building 10 new nuclear reactors would only deliver a four percent cut in CO2 emissions by 2024: far too little, too late to combat climate change. And nuclear power's overall contribution to total UK energy demand is so tiny (only 3.6 percent) that it can only marginally affect energy security.
This UK government policy puts it at odds with other European nations who have ditched nuclear power. In May 2006 Spain joined Sweden, Germany, Italy and Belgium as the fifth European country to abandon nuclear power. Maybe Tony Blair should listen more to these countries and less to the nuclear industry lobby?
The only reactor under construction in western Europe, in Finland, is already 12 months behind schedule after just one year of building, with significant cost over-runs and serious quality control problems.
Making a million year nuclear mess
Building new nuclear plants ignores the fact that there is no solution what to do with waste current ones are producing. Every child knows you should clean up your current mess before making a new one. Tony Blair is not the only one conveniently forgetting this lesson. The US is talking to Russia about a deal to allow it to dump nuclear waste from US reactors in Russia.
Generating nuclear waste is bad enough, shipping it half way around the world to Russia that has a terrible record on nuclear safety is clearly a desperate attempt to put the waste 'out of sight, out of mind'. Unless of course you are unlucky enough to live near a transport route or nuclear waste dump.
The challenge of global warming demands real leadership; those who chose the expensive, dangerous distraction represented by nuclear power will not be remembered kindly by future generations dealing with dangerous climate change and our nuclear waste.
Support us
GREENPEACE EMAIL
