Alan
Simpson’s excellent article on the progressive transformative economy plan to
deliver a sustainable energy and resource use future unveiled by John McDonnell
and Jeremy Corbyn at the Labour Conference in Liverpool overlooked one great
dinosaur in the room: the industrial
unions’ support for nuclear power (“Labour’s vision for a smarter,
cleaner future,” Morning Star, 6-7 October; https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/labour%E2%80%99s-vision-smarter-cleaner-future
)
An
earlier fascinating feature by Nicolas Laguna (“The nuclear debate is a cover
for sustaining exploitation,” 28 September; https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/nuclear-debate-cover-sustaining-exploitation-0
) pointed out how some senior Labour figures still hang onto support of new
nuclear as a way to combat climate change.
In
between these two articles the GMB published a press release headed “Go Ahead
With Sizewell ( 1st October; http://www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/go-ahead-sizewell)
arguing that “Starting with Sizewell C
Britain needs at least five new very low carbon nuclear power stations if we
are to meet our energy needs and reduce our dependency on foreign imports of
power says GMB Union,” whilst hailing the “excellent progress” on Hinkley
Point C (HPC), a dual reactor complex in north Somerset that is much delayed
and vastly ( several £billion) over cost
They then
claim the costs of building Sizewell C (SZC) are expected to be up to 30%
cheaper than HPC as it would largely be a replication of HPC. The lower risk
from a ‘repeat project’ would lead to savings from the design and development
and lower equipment qualification costs
Yet actual experience from HPC’s builder, Electricite de
France (EDF Energy) demonstrates that, uniquely, EDF has a record of a ‘negative
learning curve’ ie the more experience it has in building and operating reactors,
the more expensive they become ( see Energy Policy journal, September 2010,
Pages 5174-5188, “The costs of the French
nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing” ; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421510003526#!)
Jude Brimble, GMB National Secretary for
Manufacturing, still extraordinarily insisted: “Hinkley Point C
has been a triumph for UK Construction and Engineering Construction and added “HPC
will provide 7% of the UK’s energy needs when completed.”
In
asserting this, Jude misleadingly conflated
‘energy’ with ‘electricity’ Even if its output met 100% of its
generating capacity this would be less
than 2% of national energy output.
The GMB also
asserted in a second press release next day (“Hinkley Point Legal Case Withdrawn, 2
October 2018; http://www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/hinkley-legal-case)
that it was “satisfied that the licence granting conditions” for the dumping of radioactively contaminated
mud dredged from off the HPC site to enable construction by opening up a
channel for barges to deliver components
“were very strict in relation to sediment testing.” GMB’s Regional Secretary
for GMB Wales and South West, John Phillips, also asserted “the
radioactivity levels from the dredged deposits do not pose any hazard to the
environment or human health” concluding “As there is currently no evidence
demonstrating that the mud contains radioactive materials above the specified
threshold, GMB believes that the marine sediment is suitable for disposal at
the designated site, based on both current legislation and internationally
accepted standards."
To believe this, GMB must have deliberately ignored
extensive evidence provided to the Welsh Assembly Government by Professor
Emeritus of Physics at Imperial College, London, Keith Barnham; radiation risk professional
Dr Richard Bramhall, national secretary of the Welsh Ant Nuclear Alliance, and
the detailed report commissioned from
expert biologist, Tim Deere–Jones, presented to an earlier hearing of the Welsh Assembly Petitions Committee. (National Assembly for
Wales, Petitions Committee Summary of evidence Petition P-05-785 Suspend Marine
Licence 12/45/ML to dump radioactive marine sediments from the Hinkley Point
nuclear site into Wales coastal waters off Cardiff, May 2018; https://www.assembly.wales/laid%20documents/cr-ld11548/cr-ld11548-e.pdf:
The Welsh
Assembly is due to debate the whole issue again on 10 October.
I
recommend GMB officials to attend, and listen! As should Labour Assembly members. They do those they represent no
favours by ignoring the evidence
No comments:
Post a Comment