The facts about nuclear power

Why it is: Dangerous - Bad For The Environment - Unaffordable

 

 

Join the fight against the proposed nuclear power station at Oldbury now

 

Sign up to our newsletter

Phone 01291 689327 or email barbara@standagainstoldbury.org

 

Click here

 

Our new questions and answers fact sheet will put at your fingertips the arguments and facts and figures you need to counter the nuclear industry's lies, half-truths and evasions.

 

(To download a pdf of our printed brochure, which is a shortened version of the fact sheet, click here)


RECENT EVENTS

Click on a recent event to see a report and photos

 

BENEFIT GIG 9th March 2013

 

DEMO AT HORIZON/HITACHI OFFICES, GLOUCESTER

11th March 2013

 

Nuclear News

Click a headline to see full details

Sellafield nuclear clean-up bill rises over £70bn

Private consortium accused of spending cash 'like confetti'.

 

Sellafield is regarded as the most dangerous and polluted industrial site in western Europe. It houses 120 tonnes of plutonium, the largest civilian stockpile in the world.

 

STAND says: This is why the government has been forced into the incredibly dangerous practice of storing all future high level plutonium waste on the sites of nuclear power stations, including the proposed Oldbury plant. But who will look after the stockpiles of lethal waste when the power station operators have packed up and gone home? The UK taxpayer, that's who. But instead of one centralised plant to deal with the waste there will be several, with all the extra cost - and extra danger - that will bring.

 

Those engaged in the clean-up are still some way from knowing exactly what is in the storage facilities. "Record-keeping in the past was clearly not what it should have been," said a source.

 

Senior nuclear executives will be asked by Public Accounts Committee to comment on how £6m of bonuses came to be shared out among NMP bosses over three years and why the consortium paid back £100,000 in expenses that had been wrongly claimed.

 

Read the full article in the Guardian here

Fukushima meltdown is warning to the world, says nuclear plant operator

In a shock article published in major UK newspapers today, Naomi Hirose, president of the company that runs Fukushima, said Britian’s nuclear industry must be 'prepared for the worst'

 

He said that despite what the nuclear industry and the public wanted to believe, nuclear power was not 100 per cent safe.

 

The full story can be read here on the Guardian's web site or here on the Telegraph's web site.

 

French and Chinese Governments handed huge subsidy to build new Nuclear Power Station in UK

The spectre of a new nuclear power station at Oldbury came a step nearer today as the UK Government announced it has given the go-ahead for a new nuclear power station at Hinkeley Point in Somerset.

 

Although the government has always said it will not offer extra subsidies to the nuclear industry, that is just what it has done. It has offered a ridiculously high price for the future production and has made no stipulations about disposal of waste. And all this not to British companies but to to two foreign governments, the French and the Chinese!

 

The plan now is to store waste on site. This will mean that tons of highly dangerous radioactive waste will be stored on the same site as nuclear power stations. Althought the staions themselves have a life of only 35 years, the waste will remain toxic for thousands of years. Who will look after this? And who will paye for it? The UK taxpayer and energy bill payer , that's who!

 

There is an excellent article about the crazy economics of nuclear power by Jonathon Prritt and others from Friends of the Earth here

 

Satistician says chances of Fukushima style accident at new Oldbury power station a staggering 200-1

STAND believes the ongoing and seemingly unresolvable emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi plant serves as a stark warning to the UK and any other country thinking of embarking on the lunacy of nuclear power.

 

Eminent statistician and epedimioligist, John Urquart, has told STAND that the chances of an accident of the severity of Fukushima happening to the proposed Oldbury Nuclear Power Station are a staggering 1 in 200 in its lifetime.

 

Do you think these are good enough odds, given the utter devastation and loss of life - not to mention the loss of millions of homes - that would ensue? And remember, nuclear acidents are specifically excluded from home insurance policies.

 

 

There is a great article from the BBC correspondent Rupert Wingfield-Hayes about the state of Fukushima today, in which he quotes influencial sources in Japan saying that the disaster was avoidable and could happen anywhere. Read it here

 

(See our new Q and A facts page for further details)

 

Nuclear Industry Committed Act of Treason say Japanese Fishermen

2 years on, Fukushima still leaking 300 tons of highly radioactive water per day. Public to pick up the bill. Tepco said to have lied to public about leaks.

 

In a furious letter to Tepco's president, Naomi Hirose, Japan's national fisheries federation said the water leakages were an "act of treason to all fishing industry workers and to all members of the public in Japan".

 

Read the full article here (Guardian) and here (BBC News)

 

STAND believes the ongoing and seemingly unresolvable emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi plant serves as a stark warning to the UK and any other country thinking of embarking on the lunacy of nuclear power.

 

Eminent statistician and epedimioligist, John Urquart, has told STAND that the chances of an accident of the severity of Fukushima happening to the proposed Oldbury Nuclear Power Station are a staggering 1 in 200 in its lifetime.

 

Do you think these are good enough odds, given the utter devastation and loss of life - not to mention the loss of millions of homes - that would ensue? And remember, nuclear acidents are specifically excluded from home insurance policies.

 

(See our new Q and A facts page for further details)

 

British taxpayers must fund EDF's Hinckley nuclear power station to tune of £10bn + double subsidy

As well as being given £10 bn, EDF, who are half owned by the French state and have already prepared the Hinckley site, are blackmailing the British government to give a guaranteed minimum price for the electricity the new reactor would produce that is much higher than for other forms of new electricity generation.

 

Lib/Dems are reported unhappy at renege on promises of fair subsidies for all new power generation.

 

See article here.

30th June 2013

UK's nuclear clean-up programme to cost billions more than expected

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority declines to predict final lifetime clean-up cost amid fears total bill could exceed £100bn

The public body charged with overseeing the dismantling of Britain's network of atomic power and research stations has revealed that its estimates for the lifetime cost of the programme has risen by billions of pounds.

 

See article here.

23rd June 2013

Nuclear Waste could be dumped at Berkeley says Nuclear decommissioning Agency

The NDA, desperate to find a home for dangerous nuclear waste after their last hope, Cumbria County Council, refused permission, has proposed that around 280 yellow boxes of intermediate level waste could be brought from other sites to be stored at Bradwell in Essex

But, significantly, it also mentioned as potential sites for storage, Berkeley, in Gloucestershire, Trawsfynydd, in Gwynedd, and Hinkley Point, in Somerset. It is interesting to note that these are all old decommissioned nuclear power stations, where presumably the local councils cannot object, as they have elsewhere in the UK.

 

See article here

 

16th June 2013

Subsidies to nuclear power are enormous and unfair say experts

An explosive and unmissable memorandum published by Energy Fair will open your eyes to the massive subsidies that you, the tax and bill payer, have to bear to make nuclear power possible. Click here.

24th May 2013

Government tries to put brave face on it as EDF delays Hinkley C, and China "loses interest"

In spite of government reassurances that their nuclear plan is on track, it is clear that it is falling apart at the seams.

 

EDF are still holding out for double the price guarantees to build Hinkley C that other energy projects will receive and China is now getting cold feet as it feels the pressure of hard economics and the growing tide of oppositon in the UK to new nuclear build.

 

The full article can be read here: http://gu.com/p/3gvck

 

20/05/2013

"Nuclear industry conducting war against humanity"

Dennis Hayden, nuclear test veteran and Lydney resident, told a public meeting at the Annexe, Lydney last Thursday, that routine and allowable releases of radioactivity from our nuclear power stations were causing untold genetic damage, cancers and serious health problems.

Quoting Dr John Gofman, former advisor to the Atomic Energy Commission, he said, "Nuclear Industry is conducting a war against humanity".

The meeting was called by STAND (Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development), a group of local people concerned at Horizon/Hitachi's plans to build a large nuclear power station on the banks of the Severn at Oldbury, just over the river from Lydney.

Dennis went on to say that if they build the new nuclear plant at Oldbury, radioactive water used to cool the reactors will be pumped back into the estuary. Deadly radioisotopes will become trapped locally in river sediment and on estuary mud banks. At low tide, during warmer weather, these radioactive particles - invisible to the eye, that cannot be felt, smelt or tasted - will become re-suspended in the air we breathe and therefore will gain easy access inside your body and those of your family.

He said that while these particles cannot easily be measured by geiger counters, as they only emit radiation for a very short distance - typically a millionth of an inch. Once inside the body they act as internal emitters, harming and destroying our life sustaining blood, tissue, organs and bone.

Dennis is a co-founder of the Combined Veterans Forum International, which was formed in 2002 to gather information and fight for compensation for the service men who participated in Britain's nuclear test programme in the 50's and 60's. Between 1952 and 1967 over 20,000 servicemen participated in British nuclear weapons tests. Dennis himself, while a member of the armed forces, took part in the testing of nuclear weapons in Maralinga in Australia.

Although Britain and Australia refuse to test the health of the veterans, Dennis showed the meeting a short film about research that had been carried out, part funded by the New Zealand government, into Chromosomal Translocation. This occurs when radiation particles trapped inside a person's body mutate the chromosomes and cause permanent genetic damage, damage that can lead to cancers and other health effects, and can be passed on to to the person's children. The research showed unequivocally that the nuclear test veterans had three times as much genetic damage compared with a test group.

The meeting also heard from Cheryl Mayo, who reported on her and other STAND members meeting with Horizon, the company who will licence and run the proposed Oldbury nuclear development when Hitachi have built it.

She said that the company was formed in 2009 by EON and RWE, but was sold to Hitachi in 2012 when the German power companies, along with every other major power company, decided that they would pull out entirely of nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster.

She said she found it disturbing that they had no track record, never having built a nuclear power station, or indeed, anything!

They told her they were planning to build the nuclear plant in Wylfa, on Anglesey first, as "…practice, because there are a lot of problems with the Oldbury site".

The meeting then had a presentation from Carl Spiby and John French who looked in detail at every paragraph of a letter that Horizon had sent to members of the public in response to their concerns.

They said that Horizon placed a lot of emphasis on the Weightman Report, which was formed to look at the safety of nuclear power in the UK post-Fukushima. However, they pointed out that the report made no recommendations, and in essence said they would leave the nuclear industry to police themselves.

Quoting Wikipedia, they said that the type of nuclear reactor Horizon wished to build was virtually unproven. There were only four in the world, all of them had had considerable technical difficulties, and they had a lifetime operating factor of less than 50%

Among other points that the presenters contested were the assurances from Horizon that the plant would be Tsunami and storm-surge safe - which is impossible to guarantee, it would require a crystal ball; that the plant was needed to fill the "energy gap" - it could not come on stream until 2028 at the earliest, too late to help; and that the idea of "consultation" was a sham, as the decision rested solely with the Secretary of State.

This was followed by an entertaining presentation from James Greenway, who graphically illustrated that the Forest of Dean could become energy self-sufficient in a short time by adopting various renewable strategies such as anaerobic digesters, tidal turbines, wind and solar energy, ground and air source heat pumps, Severn tidal lagoons and better home insulation. He said this would create 7,250 permanent jobs in the Forest, and bring in £400 million. Contrast this with the 1000 jobs Horizon say they will create in the future.

 

16/05/2013

Renewable energy firms must foot bill for nuclear power says government

 

It is STAND's belief that EDF(majority owned by the French state) are blackmailing the government into giving them better subsidies to build Hinkley C than any other form of power generation. Read the Guardian article and the previous Nuclear News item about subsidies, and make up your own mind.

 

Renewable energy providers to help bear cost of new UK nuclear reactors

 

Experts say decision to share cost of accommodating Hinkley Point reactors among providers amounts to subsidy for nuclear

 

The row over subsidies for the UK's new nuclear power stations has deepened after it emerged that the £160m-a-year cost of accommodating the giant reactors on the national electricity grid will be borne by all generators, including renewable energy providers.

 

The new reactors planned by EDF for Hinkley Point are significantly larger than any existing power stations, meaning the national grid has to pay for extra standby electricity to stop the grid crashing if one of the reactors unexpectedly goes offline. National Grid said its decision to charge all generators for the cost was because "increasing costs on larger users could delay the commissioning of large nuclear plants by a number of years".

 

Read the full Guardian article here

 

 

Public to foot bill for huge new subsidies for nuclear power says energy minister

 

The Government yesterday announced they would be renaging on their promise, made in 2010, not to subsidise the nuclear power industry.

 

New nuclear build - plagued by setbacks as most major energy companies desert nuclear power because of cost and safety issues - is to be given special subsidies over and above those given to renewable projects, the energy minister Ed Davey announced yesterday.

 

Tom Burke, visiting professor at Imperial and University colleges, London, estimates that EDF - the company threatening to withdraw from its planned nuclear power station at Hinkley - would receive at least an extra £50 billion over 40 years for Hinckley alone under the new plan as an incentive to stay on. This money would come from a surcharge on consumers electricity bills.

 

STAND has always argued that there is no economic justification for nuclear power, that the huge sums wasted on this outdated technolgy would be better spent on research and development into ever better ways of generating electricity through renewable sources. We are being proved right yet again.

 

Read a full article in The Guardian here

 

Floods kill, wreak havoc and cost billions. And we know they're coming. So why aren't we doing anything about them?

 

This chilling article makes the folly of building nuclear power stations on flood plains all too clear

 

British Gas owner's exit is blamed on rising costs and construction delays. Clears way for Chinese investors

 

Energy company Centrica has abandoned its plans for building new nuclear reactors in the UK, blaming rising costs and construction delays.

The move is a blow to the government's aspirations to build the most ambitious fleet of new reactors in Europe, and comes on the day MPs severely criticised the management of nuclear waste at Sellafield and after Cumbria county council rejected proposals for a deep burial site to permanently dispose of the waste.

 

Click here to see the full article

 

Damning report casts doubt on future of nuclear power in UK .

 

The total lifetime cost of dealing with nuclear waste reaches £67.5bn - and rising.

 

The reputation of the nuclear industry faces further damage this week with the publication of a highly critical report on Monday on the management of the Sellafield plant in Cumbria, days before a court action over the illegal dumping of nuclear waste.

 

The moves follow Cumbria county council's refusal last week to pursue plans to build a storage facility for radioactive materials needed, many believe, if Britain is to build new atomic power stations.

 

Margaret Hodge MP, the committee's chair, said: "Taxpayers are not getting a good deal from the [Nuclear Decommissioning] Authority [NDA] arrangement with Nuclear Management Partners.

"Last year the consortium was rewarded with £54m in fees despite only two out of 14 major projects being on track.

 

Read the full article here

 

Plans to expand the UK's nuclear industry are in disarray after the only area to show interest in hosting an underground radioactive waste storage centre rejected the idea.

Cumbria county council's cabinet voted by more than 2-1 to pull out following expert critiques of the fractured local geology and an international outcry over the threat to the Lake District.

 

Read the full article here

 

SANE (Sheperdine Against Nuclear Energy) have produced artist's impressions, showing how the proposed plant would dominate the Severn estuary. Click here

Hitachi said it plans to spend only approximately 60pc of the build cost in the UK.

Daily Telegraph article

Click here to go to Horizon's website where you can see the scale of the development. See figures 2, 3a, 3b and 4 in particular.

The 220-megawatt Oldbury 2 nuclear reactor in Britain shut down on Thursday after an electrical problem in the site's turbine hall, a spokeswoman for operator Magnox said...

Reuters 17th March 2011

Even the most ardent defenders of nuclear power are starting to admit the situation in Japan looks bad...

Reuters, 17th March 2011

Former Government advisor says Chernobyl legacy shows dangers of atomic power.

The Guardian, May 14th 2009

Nuclear Plants too complex to check says Inspectorate chief.

The Guardian, Feb 2nd 2009

French nuclear companies are hoping to play a central role in the government's plan to build a new generation of reactors.

At home, however, the industry has been buffeted by a series of mishaps.

The Guardian, July 26 2008

 

NEW! Buy STAND Bumper Stickers and STAND Badges securely on line now

 

    

 

STAND Badges 50p each or 3 for £1.00

 

STAND Bumper Stickers £1.00 each or 3 for £2.50

 

+ P&P £1.00 per package

 

Click here to buy now

WE ARE NOW ON FACEBOOK

Click here for the latest posts

 

Since the beginning of the nuclear power industry the British public has been lied to and misled about the safety and cost of Nuclear Power.

 

In the early fifties we were told nuclear power would be too cheap to meter. It proved to be the costliest of all after Michael Heseltine was forced to admit to parliament that it had been lied to for decades about the true cost of Nuclear Power.

 

For many years British Governments denied that our nuclear power industry was supplying weapons grade plutonium to the USA - until the US freedom of information act let the cat out of the bag

 

And still it goes on - in July 2008 a document supressed by the government but ordered by a judge to be released under the freedom of information act shows that the UK government is planning to replace all its nuclear warheads.

 

THE PRODUCTION OF NUCLEAR WARHEADS HAS ALWAYS GONE HAND IN HAND WITH NUCLEAR POWER.

 

Suddenly the Government's bulldozing through of Nuclear Power makes sense. It certainly doesn't make sense from a climate change or economic perspective.

11th March 2014

 

THANKS TO ALL WHO TURNED OUT FOR OUR FUKUSHIMA DAY EVENT on March 11th

We had a brilliant response, with nearly 100 of you remembering the people of Fukushima.

 

Below is the press release we sent to all the local papers

 

 

Philip Booth of Stroud Community TV has made an excellent video of the event which can be seen here

 

”The legacy of nuclear power terrifies me.” said Steve Parry-Hearn at a Fukushima day event organised by STAND (Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development) at Lydney docks.

 

Reflecting on the nuclear disaster at Fukushima, Japan, 3 years ago to the day, he continued, “We think of the people who lost their lives and we think of the children whose legacy is still unknown and that, for me, is not worth the price to be paid.”

 

Steve Parry-Hearn, the Labour party’s prospective parliamentary candidate for The Forest of Dean, was speaking to a crowd of nearly a hundred people, young and old, who had turned up to remember the plight of the displaced victims of one of the worst nuclear accidents the world has seen.

 

 

Molly Scott Cato, prospective member of the European parliament for the Green Party, then told the crowd of her fears that the plans to build a new nuclear power station at Oldbury would not just carry the risk of a catastrophic accident, but would add to the daily emissions of lethal radioactivity that are known to damage health.

 

She said “This is such a crucial issue, it really is a matter of life and death, because ionising radiation is precisely designed to cause damage to human cells. You only need to be attacked by one atom of radiation for it to start a mutation which can lead to cancer and for that reason it is far too dangerous for us to think that we can control and contain it.”

 

 

James Greenwood, representing STAND, read out a message from Jonathan Porritt who said he was very sorry he was unable to be with us today. In the message he said, ”The case for nuclear power is as weak today as it has ever been. But politicians are easily fooled by the industry's hype and lies. Which means that we all have to keep on campaigning, until such time as the threat of future nuclear developments (at Oldbury and elsewhere) has finally been lifted."

 

SCAR's heritage

James went on to say that he felt very privileged to be a member of STAND as it had a long heritage, having grown out of SCAR (Severnside Campaign Against Radiation) that was active in the 80s. He said that the members of SCAR discovered that the radioactive emissions at the perimeter of Berkeley were the highest of any nuclear power station in the United Kingdom. Low level emissions of ionising radiation are known to cause Leukaemia, especially in children, and it was the discovery of the unusually high numbers of this disease in children in Lydney that led to SCAR’s formation.

 

Storm surges

He said that he lived on the banks on the river Severn and had witnessed the storm surge that had led to the quay at Lydney being submerged. That was not a particularly high tide he said, but if the 1.5 metre surge had been on top of a very high spring tide the effects could have been disastrous.

 

Fukushima

Talking about Fukushima, he said there were about 300,000 evacuees there and about 100,000 people have still not returned to their homes. If such an accident were to happen on Severnside, There would be a lot more people displaced, as we have Bristol, Newport, Gloucester, South Gloucestershire, the Forest of Dean, all in the evacuation radius. “In Japan whole village communities have been lifted out of their locality and placed in gymnasiums in Tokyo”, he said. “They left behind everything, they left their animals their homes and were placed in"temporary" accommodation. Three years down the line, they are still there.”

 

He talked about the health problems they are experiencing in Fukushima, not just because of radiation but because of the effects that the stress has caused. Suicide rates have rocketed, as have stress related illnesses. Doctors in Japan say that already there are 700 times more thyroid cancers in the population around Fukushima in just three years than would be expected in the whole of their lifetimes.

 

He then revealed that 50 km from Fukushima there is a town in which for the last three years the children have not been allowed to spend more than 30 minutes a day outside - a fact that will surely bring a shudder to the hearts of parents, grandparents or great-grandparents of young children everywhere.

 

 

The crowd joined in some songs led by Peter Dunford, guitar, Roger Drury, banjo and Chezzie Dunford, accordion. They sang a special version of Woody Guthrie’s This Land is Your Land and Bob Dylan’s Blowing in the Wind.

 

Messages to be sent to Fukushima

The members of the crowd were asked to write messages of sympathy and support to the displaced victims of Fukushima, which were collected, and after translation, will be sent to the mayor of Fukushima.

 

 

Everyone present then walked to the quay side carrying flowers, which they threw into the river as a mark of respect and remembrance.

 

 

After the event, Barbara French of STAND said, “The day has been organised to remember the victims of the terrible meltdown of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors 3 years ago, which is still ongoing, and to highlight the dangers of expanding nuclear power in our crowded island.

 

“Horizon/Hitachi are planning to build an enormous new Nuclear power station just across the river from us here. It will dwarf the existing power station, and with its enormous cooling towers will be an eyesore that you will be able to see from Bristol, Stroud, Gloucester and Newport.

 

“But more importantly, they are planning to build the new reactors on a flood plain that two government reports, one in 2005 and one in 2012, have said is unsuitable, recommending the withdrawal of all nuclear material from the site over the next 50 years.

 

“Of course we accept that there is a need for new electricity generation, but nuclear is not the way forward. Germany, which, like most countries, abandoned nuclear power after Fukushima, is already generating 25% of its energy from renewable sources, a figure that is rising all the time as they invest in renewable build and research.

 

“We believe that to build a huge new nuclear power station - and to store highly radioactive waste at Berkeley, 1 mile away across the river, which is another of the Government’s proposals - is sheer folly and will leave a deadly legacy for future generations.

 

“We do not want any more Fukushima type catastrophes here, or anywhere in the world”, she said.

 

 

20th November 2013

Fukushima meltdown is warning to the world, says nuclear plant operator

 

 

In a shock article published in major UK newspapers today, Naomi Hirose, president of the company that runs Fukushima, said Britian’s nuclear industry must be 'prepared for the worst'

 

He said that despite what the nuclear industry and the public wanted to believe, nuclear power was not 100 per cent safe.

 

The full story can be read here on the Guardian's web site or here on the Telegraph's web site.

 

2nd December 2013

Sellafield nuclear clean-up bill rises over £70bn

 

 

Private consortium accused of spending cash 'like confetti'

 

Sellafield is regarded as the most dangerous and polluted industrial site in western Europe. It houses 120 tonnes of plutonium, the largest civilian stockpile in the world.

 

STAND says: This is why the government has been forced into the incredibly dangerous practice of storing all future high level plutonium waste on the sites of nuclear power stations, including the proposed Oldbury plant. But who will look after the stockpiles of lethal waste when the power station operators have packed up and gone home? The UK taxpayer, that's who. But instead of one centralised plant to deal with the waste there will be several, with all the extra cost - and extra danger - that will bring.

 

Those engaged in the clean-up are still some way from knowing exactly what is in the storage facilities. "Record-keeping in the past was clearly not what it should have been," said a source.

 

Senior nuclear executives will be asked by Public Accounts Committee to comment on how £6m of bonuses came to be shared out among NMP bosses over three years and why the consortium paid back £100,000 in expenses that had been wrongly claimed.

 

Read the full article in the Guardian here

 

23rd October 2013

French and Chinese Governments handed huge subsidy to build new Nuclear Power Station in UK

 

 

The spectre of a new nuclear power station at Oldbury came a step nearer today as the UK Government announced it has given the go-ahead for a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset.

 

Although the government has always said it will not offer extra subsidies to the nuclear industry, that is just what it has done. It has offered a ridiculously high price for the future production and has made no stipulations about disposal of waste. And all this not to British companies but to to two foreign governments, the French and the Chinese!

 

The plan now is to store waste on site. This will mean that tons of highly dangerous radioactive waste will be stored on the same site as nuclear power stations. Althought the staions themselves have a life of only 35 years, the waste will remain toxic for thousands of years. Who will look after this? And who will paye for it? The UK taxpayer and energy bill payer, that's who!

 

There is an excellent article about the crazy economics of nuclear power by Jonathon Prritt and others from Friends of the Earth here

 

23rd October 2013

Satistician says chances of Fukushima style accident at new Oldbury power station a staggering 200-1

 

 

STAND believes the ongoing and seemingly unresolvable emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi plant serves as a stark warning to the UK and any other country thinking of embarking on the lunacy of nuclear power.

 

Eminent statistician and epedimioligist, John Urquart, has told STAND that the chances of an accident of the severity of Fukushima happening to the proposed Oldbury Nuclear Power Station are a staggering 1 in 200 in its lifetime.

 

Do you think these are good enough odds, given the utter devastation and loss of life - not to mention the loss of millions of homes - that would ensue? And remember, nuclear acidents are specifically excluded from home insurance policies.

 

There is a great article from the BBC correspondent Rupert Wingfield-Hayes about the state of Fukushima today, in which he quotes influencial sources in Japan saying that the disaster was avoidable and could happen anywhere. Read it here

 

(See our new Q and A facts page for further details)


20th January 2013

HITACHI/HORIZON HORROR PLAN FOR OLDBURY

 

 

Following the pull out of EDF who were originally planning to build a new nuclear power station next to the old Oldbury site, a consortium of Hitachi and Horizon are now putting forward proposals for a new, gigantic, nuclear development there.

 

The scale of the proposed development dwarfs any nuclear power station ever built in the UK before and will cast a blight over the Severn Estuary.

 

STAND oppose the building of any new nuclear power stations on grounds of health, safety and cost - but this proposal has caused consternation among local residents on both sides of the river at its sheer scale.

 

Two new groups have been formed:

 

Sheperdine Against Nuclear Energy (SANE). Sheperdine is close to Oldbury and the local residents are very concerned at the proposals (see box on right).

 

And STAND have started their own STAND AGAINST OLDBURY campaign following a very well attended public meeting held in Lydney on 17th January.

 

The 100 plus concerned people who attended the meeting heard that the new nuclear power station would be built on a flood plain which is below sea level at times of high springs tides and that a report published by the government 7 years ago identified the site as one of the areas most at danger from rising sea levels and storm surges. The report, published by NIREX, advised that a "managed withdrawal" of existing facilities should be undertaken from the site. SO WHY ON EARTH ARE THE GOVERNMENT NOW PROPOSING TO BUILD A NEW, MUCH LARGER, NUCLEAR PLANT THERE?

 

In the meantime, for more information or to offer your support and help, you can email contact@standagainstoldbury.org

 

(See our new Q and A facts page for further details)

 

On SANE's web site, they say:

 

The Government seems to think this site is suitable for this monstrous proposal, yet local councils and politicians agree with us... the site is simply unsuitable... please help us tell the Government this is just plain wrong!

 

..the massive new nuclear power station [is] 4 times the capacity of the old power station... The new site will have to have 3 or 4 massive cooling towers, each tower taller than and as wide as the existing power station. These are in addtion to the 2 or 3 reactor buildings they will need and a highly toxic waste store. All of this in a high level risk flood zone too

The Facts About Nuclear Power

Things the nuclear industry won't tell you