Nuclear Power

I am pleased that the Government is supporting a new generation of nuclear reactors for the UK. I realise that this is an opinion that is not universally held, to say the least, but I believe that in light of the challenges that we are going to face in regards to energy in the coming years, alongside our commitments to reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, nuclear is the option which presents us with the best chance of success, certainly when combined with other forms of energy production.

Nuclear power is an issue that raises very strong gut reactions in people, both positively and negatively. The implications of Chernobyl had a lasting impact on public opinion, and combined with the low price of oil and gas conspired to push nuclear power out of the scene. Even as recently as 2004, Tony Blair's review found that although they wouldn't rule out nuclear power for ever, it certainly wasn't being considered at that point, which caused some environmental groups to happily proclaim the death of nuclear.

Of course, while they were proclaiming its death, nuclear power was continuing to be used as an environmentally friendly power source elsewhere in the world, and indeed was continuing to contribute 20% of the power in the UK. Huge advances have been made in the safety of modern reactors so that an incident such as Chernobyl is learnt from and avoided. At the time of Chernobyl, the reactors had to be constantly monitored or they would overheat and cause problems - the modern reactors have to be constantly interacted with or they switch themselves off - a change in how the industry approaches the issue of safety.

Of course, the issue of waste is one of the most emotive, due to the length of time that it lasts for. However, the production of energy from coal produces huge amounts of heavy metals to be disposed of, along with the release of CO2 and SO2 into the atmosphere. In Switzerland, a country where over 40% of the national energy is produced from nuclear plants, 40 times as much toxic waste is produced by the fossil fuel sources as by the nuclear industry, all of which must be disposed of and which has seriously damaging effects on the environment.

Criticism is made of the huge cost of nuclear power, but in fact the cost is deceptive. It is true that the industry has large capital costs which dwarf those of other power production sources. However, the running costs of a plant are much smaller than other sources. Even factoring in the mining of uranium, the CO2 production from nuclear power is virtually non-existent, and we would see a large improvement in our emissions were we to increase the percentage of our power that we supplied in this manner.

The fashionable renewable sources (wind, solar, tide) all represent useful complementary forms of energy production, and combined with nuclear will allow us to move away from a dependency on fossil fuels, which in turn will reduce our vulnerability to pressure from foreign countries such as Russia over gas prices. However, the renewables are not going to be able to provide all of the energy that we require. Solar power is limited to the daylight (and living in Scotland we will run out very quickly if we only relied upon it!) and we have all witnessed the furore that the creation of wind farms can create. I think that the Government is to be commended for pursuing a multifaceted energy policy which involves different means of production.

Of course, this foresight doesn't extend to the SNP administration here in Scotland, who have refused to have any new plants built north of the border. This has serious economical implications for the communities in Scotland who are based around, and rely upon for jobs, the existing power plants. It also reflects the SNP's naive and potentially dangerous reliance upon oil in the North Sea. All of their financial justifications for independence are based upon a finite and heavily polluting resource. This worries me about the future of energy production in Scotland, should they somehow get their wish to destroy the UK. Admittedly Salmond produces enough hot air to power all of Scotland's cities, but I would be worried if that become the basis of our future energy security.

What do other people think about the nuclear decision? Are you pleased with it? If not, what are your objections and how would you suggest Britain can meet its energy needs in future?