Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima

Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima
We feel very sad for the people of Japan who want to end nuclear energy whilst a potential new government and big business are desperate for it

No Fukushima at Oldbury

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

Saturday, 30 January 2010

Greenpeace Project KAPOW on to Oldbury Power Station!!!!

Can anybody remember this incident of a few years ago? In fact in March 2006!

If plans go ahead for the new breed of Nuclear Power Megaliths then ,according to DECC , high grade nuclear waste will be stored above ground for up to 150 years.

This will give the opportunity for extreme terrorists to either steal the waste or fire a missile into the store and release radiation into the atmosphere for many eons to come.

Would the additional security required be supplied by Horizon? or would they have to pay for the additional nuclear civil police required?

People of the South West, in fact all of humanity, need to know:-

Greenpeace Anti-Nuclear Action Hits Oldbury

Greenpeace projected a huge 'Kapow' onto the Oldbury nuclear site to highlight the risk of a terrorist attack on Britain's nuclear power stations
An enormous 'KAPOW!' was projected onto Oldbury nuclear site earlier this morning by Greenpeace volunteers - to highlight the risk of a terrorist attack on Britain's nuclear power stations.
The Greenpeace projection comes at a time when the Government is conducting an Energy Review to decide whether or not a new generation of nuclear reactors should be built in the UK. Yet just last month Greenpeace released a dossier of expert evidence which outlined the vulnerability of the UK's current nuclear sites to terrorist attack. It details:
- How UK nuclear power stations are not built to withstand a deliberate crash by a jumbo jet full of highly explosive aviation fuel.
- How terrorist groups are known to be targeting nuclear sites. For instance detailed plans of UK nuclear sites were found in a car linked to the July 2005 London bombings.
- How the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission sent a confidential memo to all US nuclear power plants warning of plans for a terrorist attack in which hijackers 'fly a commercial aircraft into a nuclear power plant'.
Greenpeace has also recently released a film via the internet highlighting the risks of nuclear power. The short film shows a family enjoying a day on a beach, filmed for posterity by the father. An ever-louder roar breaks the tranquility, and the hand-held camera pans to the sky to track a jumbo jet heading directly towards a nuclear facility just a few hundred metres away.
Sarah North, head of Greenpeace's nuclear campaign, said: "Millions of people could die as a result of a terrorist attack on a nuclear plant. Yet Tony Blair has put the prospect of building these extremely dangerous facilities back on the agenda, seemingly without a thought for the safety of the public. Nuclear power is simply the wrong answer to climate change."
The image was projected in the early morning from outside the fences surrounding the site.

For more information contact Nathan Argent on 07799 790542 07799 790542 or call the Greenpeace press office on 020 7865 8255 020 7865 8255.

For photos please call 0207 865 8294

Friday, 29 January 2010

Help with Content Management on New Website in Severn Vale

A group concerned about the redevelopment of oldbury Power Station is looking for help to administer their new website on a voluntary basis.

It is an exciting project that would be ideal for somebody with some spare time, you could be learning with the U3A, you could be a student wanting to add this to your CV, you could be at home getting bored with Jeremy Kyle....In fact it would suit a lot of people.

You could be anywhere in the world!

Please contact and I will forward the details on

Environmental Law Foundation Meeting in Bridgwater

Draft National Policy Statements on energy infrastructure – New Nuclear Build
Urgent – public consultation ends on the 22nd February 2010
The Environmental Law Foundation will hold a free event aimed at local people to look at the legal aspects raised by the draft NPS – come and have your questions answered
Saturday the 13th February 2010, 1pm to 5pm at the British Legion, New Legion Club, 15 Castle Street, Bridgwater, TA6 3DD.
Chaired by Debbie Tripley, CEO of the Environmental Law Foundation
Speakers confirmed:
Richard Turney of Landmark Chambers
Flooding and habitats
Steven Andrews of the Centre for Sustainable Energy
Real carbon emissions associated with nuclear power and the opportunity cost
Sarah Sackman of Francis Taylor Building
The new Planning Regime and the IPC
Speakers to be confirmed
Waste including and public health

There will be a question and answer panel session to conclude

Places are limited, so book early to avoid disappointment

To book a place, please contact Emma Montlake at the E.L.F.

Email: Tel: 020 7404 1030

Thursday, 28 January 2010

Anti-Nuclear Groups Give Evidence at ECC Select Committee at Parliament

Wednesday, 27 January 2010 Anti-Nuclear Activists Disrupt Parliamentary Committee to Expose "Dumping" of Local Democracy

Please see link to parlimentary tv at the bottom of article to listen to other groups from around the country---Unfortunately, we did not have the time to attend

A Select Committee meeting in the House of Commons was disrupted this morning by a small group of anti-nuclear activists. The incident took place during a packed session of the Department of Energy and Climate Change Parliamentary Select Committee on the proposed nuclear and other energy National Policy Statements, as representatives from pro-nuclear energy giants EDF, E.ON and RWE npower and the Association of Electricity Producers gave evidence.

Around half an hour into proceedings, two of the activists rose from their seats, stepped into the centre of the room and unfurled a six-foot banner they had smuggled in that read: "Local Democracy Dumped!", featuring radiation symbols and images of pyramids of radioactive waste drums. Meanwhile, a third activist handed out detailed briefings to committee members and the energy industry representatives explaining why they believed nuclear power was an unacceptable and inappropriate technology for tackling climate change.

The three activists were swiftly dragged away by police officers and detained at another location within the Palace of Westminster, along with a fourth man who had been photographing the incident. The four were held for over two hours for alleged breaches of "House regulations," before being released without charge and informed they were banned from the Parliamentary estate for the remainder of the day, thus missing the afternoon session in which anti-nuclear groups were to present their evidence before the Select Committee. They also had two banners confiscated.

The protesters were seeking to highlight the lack of local democracy associated with the new fast-track planning process, introduced under the new Planning Act, which it is thought will be used to silence dissenting local voices on major infrastructure projects, from nuclear and coal-fired power stations and nuclear waste dumps through to airport runways and motorways. Major decisions on such projects will in future be made by an unelected body known as the Infrastructure Planning Commission. Environmental groups such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have threatened to bring judicial reviews of the new planning laws.

Mell Harrison, 38, Eastern Region CND co-ordinator from Suffolk, recently acquitted following a 2008 blockade at Sizewell nuclear power station, said:

“This consultation is a scam. I have attended the public meetings and exhibitions, which pay lip service to our concerns but nothing more. The new fast track planning system takes the decisions out of the hands of local communities, burdening them with a legacy of radioactive waste and a history of lies. The local people will be able to decide what colour the power stations are painted and where to plant the trees but will have no input on the fate of at least a hundred years of waste sitting on their doorstep. The nuclear industry tells us the issue of waste is all sorted, which it is not.”

She added: “Nuclear power is not the answer to climate chaos, and the building of new nuclear power stations is a distraction from the real solutions."

Ian Mills, 44, a veteran anti-nuclear campaigner from Chippenham, Wiltshire added: “The 'CON' in consultation says it all! We are being conned into believing we need nuclear power and conned into believing this consultation is democratic. Day by day our democracy is disappearing, and this time it’s the turn of the local planning process.”

Today's protest follows another yesterday, during the morning rush hour, outside Charing Cross Hotel in central London, where the Nuclear New Build Conference was taking place.

Daniel Viesnik, 35, from London said: “There are many groups and individuals around the country who feel as strongly as we do.

He warned: "If the Government and the nuclear industry choose to push ahead with their undemocratic plans for unnecessary, uneconomic and unsafe nuclear reactors, they can expect the protests and actions to gather momentum.”

All images are Copyright (c) 2010 D. Viesnik but may be reproduced free of charge for non-commercial purposes if credited. For high resolution versions or commercial use, e-mail vd2012-npp [at]

More images here

Footage of the two Parliamentary Select Committee evidence sessions of 27 January on the nuclear and other energy National Policy Statements proposals can be viewed here:

Morning session, with energy companies giving evidence:

(Footage suspended just before banner unfurled at 26:19, resumes at 26:40.)

Afternoon session, with anti-nuclear campaigners giving evidence:

National Audit Office Warns of EDFs Influence In Nuclear---At least its not EON/Horizon

We should rest assured that Eon/Horizon hav "potentially signifcant influence", or should we? I dont think so!

French energy giant EDF holds a “potentially significant influence” over the success of the Government’s nuclear new-build programme, the National Audit Office has warned.

Construction News 28th Jan 2010

Tories will screp the IPC--- The Times---Gizz a job!!

Gizz a job........ I can do that!--I could work 4 and a half days!

Infrastructure Planning Commission will never work if Tories win

Sir Michael Pitt, the chairman, is paid £184,000 a year for a four-day week

Robin Pagnamenta, Energy Editor 29 Comments

Recommend? (3) Taxpayers are spending nearly £1 million a month on a quango that is unable to do the job for which it was created and will be scrapped if the Tories win the general election.

The Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC), formed in October, has a chairman, Sir Michael Pitt, who is being paid £184,000 a year for a four-day working week. It has well-appointed new offices in Bristol and has hired dozens of staff, including seven commissioners on salaries equivalent to £100,000 per year.

But the organisation is unable to perform the task it was set, approving planning decisions for big energy and infrastructure projects such as nuclear power stations and high-voltage transmission lines, because the Government has yet to define the legal guidelines it should apply. Insiders say those criteria are unlikely to be approved before the general election and now the Tories have pledged to scrap the agency.

A spokesman for the commission agreed that there was no date for when it would start its formal work programme but the group rejected claims that it had only a light workload. A statement said it was currently “providing advice to a range of stakeholders” and added that its staff were preparing to start receiving applications and ensuring that the right processes were in place.

Related Links

Quango Tango

Planning chief gets £184k for passing the buck

New body 'will fast-track energy projects'

The commission, whose budget is £9.3 million, has 40 employees and plans to recruit more in roles such as “Welsh-speaking case officers”.

The IPC was due to start considering applications originally on March 1 but that is now impossible because the guidelines will not be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny until at least May, after which an election is likely to herald the group’s break-up.

Bob Neill, the Tory planning spokesman, said that the IPC appeared to be “sitting on its hands”. He dismissed the organisation as the “most unaccountable and distant quango in existence” and said that a Conservative government would abolish it. “At the stroke of a pen, it will able to wipe whole communities off the map or blight their lives,” he said.

The Government had originally planned to set out the IPC’s final guidelines last November in “national policy statements” on energy, transport and other areas. The documents were published, but only in draft form because of a continuing public consultation that is essential if the Government is to avoid a legal challenge from groups opposed to the 18 projects earmarked for IPC scrutiny. They include new nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point in Somerset and Sizewell in Suffolk as well as a 37-mile (60km) national grid overhead high voltage transmission line running from Bridgwater to Seabank near Avonmouth.

Jean McSorley, nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace, said: “It looks like these decisions will be put off until well after the general election, meaning more delays and uncertainty.”

The commission was created as part of a move to strip local authorities of the ability to block or delay projects considered to be of high national priority. An important part of the policy was to separate national decisions from individual planning concerns.

The Communities and Local Government Department said that until the national policy statements were fixed, the IPC would “make recommendations” to ministers.

Wednesday, 27 January 2010

Tim Proudler of Eon/Horizon letter to Ms Janke---Leader of Bristol City Council

Tim Proudler sent a letter to Barbara Janke , Council Leader, offering to speak to Councillors in Bristol about the Nuclear Power Station at Oldbury.

Well done to Mark Wright for stimulating their interest.

Thanks to all of our supporters who turned up to The Council House---The next venue will be Thornbury on the 6th.

Dear Ms Janke

Development of a potential new nuclear power station at Oldbury on

Severn, South Gloucestershire

We understand that the development of new nuclear power stations will be

debated at Bristol City Council’s meeting tomorrow. In advance of this

meeting we thought it would be useful for us to provide an update on our

project at Oldbury along with an overview of the public engagement

activity we have carried out in addition to that by the Department for

Energy & Climate Change.

Although our project is in the early stages, we would like to assure you

that we are committed to developing an open, honest relationship with

the local communities and local councils near to Oldbury. To this end

weare keen to meet with Bristol City councillors to discuss the scheme

and answer questions on the project and are liaising with the Democratic

Services Office to set this up.

In the meantime, I hope you find the information set out below of use.

Horizon Nuclear Power

Horizon Nuclear Power Ltd, the joint venture established by E.ON UK and

RWE npower, is developing proposals for a new nuclear power station at

Oldbury. The company is working to deliver around 6,000 MW of new

nuclear capacity in the UK by 2025 and, in addition to Oldbury, it has

also secured land at Wylfa on Anglesey, North Wales.

Providing sufficient electrical output to power a city the size of

Greater London, Horizon Nuclear Power’s £15bn investment programme in

new nuclear build could create up to 11,000 jobs across both sites,

including up to 800 permanent jobs at each site. Our shareholders have

interests in 23 nuclear power stations in Germany and Sweden and jointly

own three stations in Germany.

Government’s Strategic Siting Assessment and Draft Nuclear National

Policy Statement

In March last year we wrote to advise Ms Ormondroyd, Chief Executive of

Bristol City Council that landadjacent to the existing power station at

Oldbury was to be nominated into a process called Strategic Siting

Assessment (SSA). Through this process, the Government aimed to identify

strategically suitable locations for new nuclear power stations.

Following receipt of 11 site nominations, the Government published its

draft Nuclear National Policy Statement (NPS) in November 2009. Of the

11 sites nominated, 10 sites, including Oldbury, made it through and are

listed in the draft Nuclear NPS.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is currently carrying

out a series of local and national events consulting on the draft

Nuclear NPS. As part of this process it is holding a three day

exhibition in Thornbury between Thursday 4th and Saturday 6th February.

The closing date for responses on the draft NPS is 22nd February 2010

and the Government is expected to publish its final NPS later this year.

Local Engagement Activity

Whilst our development proposals are still in the early stages, we are

keen to engage with local people from the earliest point in the

project’s development. Therefore, during 2009 Horizon Nuclear Power

initiated a number of informal activities to begin engagement with the

local communities close to the site at Oldbury.

We will continue these activities as the project progresses, which to

date have included public exhibitions; a drop-in surgery session;

newsletters, (copies of which have been sent to Ms Ormondroyd); a

are also planning activity across a wider geographical area surrounding

the site at Oldbury. This will include, among other areas, the City of


Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report

In November last year we submitted a request for an Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) ‘Scoping Opinion’ to the newly formed Infrastructure

Planning Commission (IPC). The request was accompanied by an EIA Scoping

Report, a high level document that sets out the environmental studies

and surveys we propose to carry out in order to assess the potential

impacts of a new nuclear power station at Oldbury. The report is

available to view at

The local exhibitions we held around the Oldbury area last November and

December included an overview of the issues covered in the EIA Scoping


The IPC consulted with various statutory bodies on our Scoping Report

and provided us with a Scoping Opinion which can be downloaded from

their website –

Future Public Consultation

Any future planning application for a new nuclear power station at

Oldbury would be submitted to the Infrastructure Planning Commission


Before an application can be submitted, the developer must consult

widely with statutory and non-statutory groups, as well as local

communities, in order to refine theproposal and resolve as many issues

as possible.This means that as more information becomes available, our

normal engagement activities will be supplemented by more formal

processes in which we will be seeking input and feedback on our plans.

Whilst we would always commit to engaging regularly with local

communities, this new planning regime for nationally significant

projects formalises this requirement.

The first stage in pre-application is to agree with relevant local

authorities how the consultation will be carried out. This will be set

out in a Statement of Community Consultation (SOCC), which will be

developed and agreed with relevant local authorities before it is


A SOCC has already been produced for the proposed new station at Hinkley

Point in Somerset, which is at a more advanced stage in the development

process than our scheme at Oldbury.

The new Infrastructure Planning Regime

We appreciate that the new planning regime is unfamiliar to many, so

we’ve developed a document which outlines in very broad terms the

different stages in the process and includes a diagram showing where

individuals and local communities have the opportunity to have their say

on our proposals. This document was circulated to Oldbury Parish Council

and South Gloucestershire Council recently and I attach a copy now for

your information.

As the diagram’s timeline shows, there are a number of potential

milestones scheduled for 2010. As mentioned above, we are liaising with

boththe Democratic Services Manager, and Ms Ormondroyd’soffice to

further our discussions with Bristol City Council as part of our overall

engagement. In closing, I would like to reiterate that our plans are

still in the early stages and no formal pre-application public

consultation has yet taken place.

We look forward to meeting with you soon. In the meantime if you have

any queries please contact our freephone number 0800 130 3125 0800 130 3125 or email

us at

Yours sincerely

Tim Proudler

Planning and Consents Manager


Cllr H Holland

Cllr R Eddy

Cllr M Wright

Ms Ormondroyd


People from The Severn Vale Not Happy with IPC ---Gazette Article

I attach the link to an article featured in the Thornbury Gazette this week.

Please make sure we are informing as many people about the DECC meeting as it appears that still only a small proportion of people appear aware of the oreocess involved.

May I remind you that there will be a "Silent Protest" at the Thornbury DECC meeting on the 6th February. It will signify the way the public are being heard but not listened to.

Even if the DECC meeting is fully booked please make the effort to attend the protest.


visit the following URL:

Matthew Riddle Slams The IPC in Recent South Gloucs Council Meeting

Matthew realises how stupid this planning procedure is! 

What will happen if there is a change of Government


Here is the motion I recently proposed at  the meeting of South Gloucestershire Council. It was approved, except that a majority of councillors actual voted to remove the two bullet points coloured red.
Also attached is my speech I made in proposing the motion. I will also update you in due course of what I else I have been doing on this important issue.
Kind Regards
Cllr Matthew Riddle 
South Gloucestershire Councillor for the Severn Ward

Councillor Matthew Riddle Proposed and Councillor Brian Allinson Seconded that:
This Council:
  • • Notes the Government’s major overhaul of the planning system for major
infrastructure projects introduced through the Planning Act 2008;
  • • Expresses specific concern at the creation of the new independent Infrastructure
Planning Commission (IPC), which will hear evidence about, as well as take the final
decision on, major infrastructure projects;
  • • Believes that decisions of such importance should not be taken by an unelected and
unaccountable new quango, but by elected officials, only after affected local
communities that had their voices heard and listened to;
  • • Notes the implications for potential major infrastructure projects in South
Gloucestershire, including projects to harness the tidal energy of the River Severn,
as well as a new nuclear power station at Oldbury;
  • • Requests that the Leader of the Council write to the Prime Minister calling for the
undemocratic IPC to be scrapped and for the approval process for major
infrastructure projects to be fair, transparent and democratic.
  • • Is committed to ensuring as far as possible that the approval process for any major
infrastructure projects affecting South Glos. is fair, transparent and democratic and
therefore takes very seriously the special status of Local Authorities in the process;
  • • Requests Officers to prepare, as a matter of urgency, for Cabinet approval and
publication, a plan of action:
1) for involving residents in responding to the consultation on the recently
published Nation Planning Statements, giving priority to proposals for a new
nuclear power station at Oldbury;
2) for working closely with the applicants for the Oldbury power station to ensure
full community involvement before the application is submitted;
3) for the preparation of the Scoping Report for the Environmental Impact
Assessment and the Local Impact Report;
  • • Requests officers to regard this action plan as a pilot for approaching other National
Planning Statements and applications to the IPC.
  • • Notes the planning fee for the application will all be allocated to the IPC and
therefore requests the Leader of Council to write to the Prime Minister calling upon
him to allocate the necessary funding to enable S.G.C. to fulfil these new
responsibilities without detriment to its other services.

 Cllr Riddle's speech : 'Our underlying preference should always be for democratic accountability. That means that wherever possible, Ministers should execute their responsibilities through their departments, and for decisions to be taken at the lowest appropriate level.

However, recent changes to the planning regime for major infrastructure projects, including the creation of the IPC is another example of the growing quango state.

Clearly, we need speedier outcomes than the current planning process produces, but we must at the same time ensure proper democratic accountability.

Far from speeding up the planning process, the IPC – made up on unaccountable commissioners - will quickly become bogged down in legal challenges and so Ministers’ sacrificing of proper democratic checks and balances will have been done for nothing.

The Government’s own Impact Assessment found that the IPC procedure will cost ten times more than current arrangements. This is the sort of exorbitant cost that we now expect from Government quangos.

There would need to be a transition period as the IPC is abolished - the consideration of pending planning applications should be transferred to the Secretary of State, using the Planning Inspectorate to run the inquiries. This would avoid the need for applicants to re-apply and start the process from scratch as the IPC is abolished.

The concerns about the Government’s planning changes that I raise today are not just mine – but are also shared by many independent organisations that make up the Better Planning coalition, which includes CPRE, The National Trust, Friends of the Earth, RSPB and Civic Trust, which between them have the support of more than 5 million people.

At a time when public trust in politics is so fragile, plans to eradicate proper democratic involvement in major planning applications will just fuel further public cynicism and disillusionment.

I am appealing to all South Gloucestershire councillors to unite on the need for the Government to scrap this IPC quango and ensure local people are central to the approval process for any major new infrastructure project, in South Gloucestershire and across the country.'

Silent Protest Planned For DECC Meeting at Thornbury on the 6th February

We are planning a silent protest for the 6th February at the Leisure Centre in Thornbury 30 minutes before the meeting with DECC to emphasise the point that we need to be listened to and not just heard.

The format will be very similar to Hinkley--- You are welcome to attend.

We are hoping that press and media will be attending the Protest.

Silent Protest over Hinkley illustrates fear of Being Stifled

With mouths symbolically gagged with tape, demonstrators opposing a new fast track planning process for the proposed new nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point showed how they believe that public involvement will be stifled.. . .

Stop Hinkley spokesman Jim Duffy said "The final decision about this major project - the largest nuclear power plant ever proposed in the UK - will be made by a government quango, the Infrastucture Planning Commission. the IPC is an unelected body whose members have been appointed by the government to implement its energy policy. This policy is in favour of new nuclear build.

When the last Hinkley C proposal was made in the late 1980s there was a public enquiry which lasted for many months and allowed local people a proper voice. Somerset County, West Somerset and Sedgmoor Councils were all involved.

But this time there will be no local hearings and no guarantees that local people will have a voice in the IPC proceedings, which will be held in London."

Nuclear Watchdog Reveals Harmful Safety Incidents--Daily Telegraph

Nuclear watchdog reveals harmful safety incidents

Britain has had seven safety breaches of "actual consequence" at its nuclear power stations in the last decade – one of which was classed as serious.

Operators of Britain's nuclear power stations reported 1,343 incidents to the Health and Safety Executive since 2001. The authority's inspectors classified 773 of them as posing no threat, while 563 were safety anomalies.
But seven incidents, five of which were related to power plants operated by British Energy, have been listed as harmful.
The most recent occurred last year at Dungeness B, after British Energy had been taken over by French nuclear giant EDF, when there was found to be "non-compliance or inadequacy" in its safety arrangements.
The most serious incident was a leak at Sellafield power station in 2005 which went undetected for months. No one was injured when around 80,000 tonnes of acid containing 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg of plutonium leaked from a broken pipe into a sealed concrete holding.
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which is responsible for the UK nuclear industry, fined Sellafield's operator, British Nuclear Group £2m. The company was also criticised for not realising there had been a safety breach any sooner.
Mike Weightman, the Health and Safety Executive's director of nuclear safety, said: "The UK's nuclear safety regulatory regime is acknowledged to be one of the most stringent in the world, and the nuclear industry has a strong safety record."
Of of the 10 nuclear power stations in the UK, seven will have come to the end of their working lives by 2018.
Britain wants to build 10 new stations, but the first is not likely to be ready before 2017.
The National Audit Office last week cast doubt on the Government's plans for new nuclear power stations without public subsidies.

Nuclear Fears at Wylfa---From The Daily Post--Dr Carl Iwan Clewes

Will are DECC meeting on the 6th February be the same?
There should be democratic discussions not totalitarian planning in our economy

Nuclear fears
THE Department of Energy and Climate Change Office for Nuclear Development (OND) held a consultation exercise at Wylfa recently.
Unfortunately, it did little to allay the fears for those of us who have genuine concerns about any future development of a nuclear power station on Ynys Mon.
The OND confirmed that high-level radiation waste for Wylfa B could not be moved off site and would be stored at Wylfa for up to 160 years so making us an obvious target for any malcontents
Representatives dismissed the proximity of RAF, Y Fali as of no concern despite the training of many pilots from overseas and the recent near-miss incident between two Hawk fighters during a training session
There was equal dismissal of the illogic of locating the station over a 100 miles from the major users of the supply and, thereby, losing some 30% of the supply in transmission.
No evacuation procedure for the island is in place in the case of a real emergency
Findings of increased levels of childhood cancer and, notably, leukaemias recognised by the German government in populations living in proximity to nuclear stations were not felt to be relevant here. Further work is urgently required
The impact on areas of conservation of international importance was disregarded as “the national interest” prevails
Some 9000 workers will be involved in the construction phase. No consideration has been made of the impact of a massive development such as this on the Welsh language and culture which, not surprisingly, did not feature during any of the presentations from the platform nor in the exhibition in the Cemaes village hall which also ignored the language
Despite all the above, the OND have disregarded our Welsh Assembly Government Minister`s call for a public inquiry
Several councillors and employees of Wylfa spoke supporting the OND`s proposal. I believe most of them are mindful of the concerns outlined above and yet support a new nuclear station based primarily on the need for employment. This is understandable but other opportunities abound not least in the area of energy as Ed Milliband the Westminster Minister announced on Friday with the new generation of off-shore wind turbines providing a quarter of the UK`s energy requirements and, potentially, a massive boost for employment in the Holyhead area. This is where our efforts should lie. We should lead urgently by example and avoid any of the potential pitfalls of new nuclear build.
Dr Carl Iwan Clowes FFPH, Rhoscefnhir, Ynys Môn

Thursday, 21 January 2010

Nuclear Waste "Would Alarm Public"

Return to:Prof Eng Home Archive 2010 Articles January Print Page

Government not dealing with Sellafield radioactive waste 'because it would alarm public', experts say

Nuclear experts have said the government is avoiding dealing with radioactive waste at Sellafield because doing so would alarm the public about nuclear new build.

Advisory group Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates (NWAA), made its claim today as it submitted evidence to a group of MPs examining government plans to support the building of a new fleet of nuclear power stations.

The written evidence submission from the independent group of nuclear experts is a damning indictment of the government’s assertion that it has made “effective arrangements” to manage the problem of nuclear waste disposal. The 34-page document concludes that current government policy is “not fit for purpose

Dr Rachel Western, lead author of the submission, said that too little was understood about the contamination levels of the waste from new reactors for the government to claim it had solved the problem.

She told PE: “The government is avoiding dealing with Sellafield here and now, because it really illustrates to the public how dangerous radioactive waste can be.

She said that risks included the possibility of a chemical “deflagration” occurring within existing waste stored at Sellafield, resulting in the uncontrolled emission of heat, flames, sparks and burning particles.

Following recommendations from the now defunct Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CORWM), the government plans to build an underground geological repository to store the most dangerous nuclear waste. This will contain both waste from the next generation of nuclear plants and legacy waste from the past 50 years of power generation and nuclear research. However progress has been slow, with site selection a major barrier, and a long timescale for construction.

According to the NWAA submission, technical problems with the development of a repository are “legion”. Report contributor Dr David Lowry said concerns over the repository meant it would be difficult to establish an adequate safety case for nuclear new build, unless the rules were relaxed.

He said the British government should learn from attempts in the US to establish a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, which have been abandoned by the Obama Administration. “There the Americans decided they couldn’t meet safety standards,” he said.

“It’s time to be honest and for the government to say: ‘this is more complicated than we thought’, and open up a proper consultation with the public, rather than asserting that they have solved the problem.”

Dr Lowry said doubts over the viability of a repository could hold up the licensing of new reactor designs. Both US firm Westinghouse and French giant Areva are bidding to build new designs in the UK.

Concerns over plans to build new nuclear plants were voiced in November last year by several former members of CORWM. They warned that it was “irresponsible” for ministers to push ahead with nuclear new build without what they said was a “viable” plan to store nuclear waste from the reactors.

Sellafield said that spent fuel from around the world had been “safely stored for many decades”. It said: “The waste arising from current reprocessing operations is treated within a few months and converted into a stable glass form within stainless steel containment for low level wastes.

“These are extremely stable and suitable for longer-term surface storage or future geological disposal.

Sellafield added that “historic” wastes arising from nuclear programmes during the Cold War presented “additional challenges”. “These challenges are well understood and appropriate measures are in place to safely retrieve these wastes and convert them to stable forms.”

© PE Publishing, 20 January 2010

Areva and EDF Have A Gallic Contretemps! Mon Dieu.....

Probably The Kazakhs and the people from Niger realise China will give them a better price for uranium.

Energy security???? Are you sure Mr Miliband and Mr Brown?

Bitter row throws French nuclear industry into turmoil

Adam Sage, Paris -- The Times, January 19, 2010

The French nuclear industry is in turmoil as uranium supplies

have dried up and the treatment of spent fu el has been blocked

amid an increasingly bitter row between the heads of its two

main state operators.

EDF, the electricity group that runs 58 reactors in France, said

that Areva, the nuclear energy group, had stopped uranium

deliveries on January 4 and was refusing to take away spent

fuel for reprocessing.

''The transport of combustibles isn't working at the moment,''

Anne Lauvergeon, the chairwoman of Areva, said.

As a result, used fuel is remaining at EDF sites instead of being

reprocessed at La Hague treatment plant in northern France.

Mrs Lauvergeon blamed a breakdown in talks over a new 800

million contract with EDF to process spent fuel.

''We've been talking for too long,' she said, calling on President

Sarkozy's Government to resolve the dispute.

Although Areva supplies 68 per cent of the uranium used in

EDF's reactors, which themselves produce 77 per cent of

electricity in France, the electricity group said it had enough

stocks to last several months without envisaging power cuts.

A spokesman said that it could keep spent fuel at its plants

without risk of a radioactive leak.

But the dispute is certain to damage the reputation of the two

nuclear operators, which are both among the world's biggest.

As insults flew between the two state-owned groups, which are

both significant players in Britain's energy sector, Areva denied

that it had stopped uranium supplies but confirmed EDF's claims

about the block on treating spent fuel.

The dispute comes amid tense relations between Mrs

Lauvergeon and Henri Proglio, who followed his appointment

as chairman of EDF in November with a call for a shake-up of

the French nuclear sector.

Their squabble has been cited as one of the factors behind

France's failure to secure a 30 billion contract to build reactors

in Abu Dhabi.

The contract went to a South Korean consortium led by Korea

Electric Power, and Mrs Lauvergeon implicitly blamed EDF for

failing to back her in the negotiations.

''I fully assume my responsibilities and those of Areva, but I don't

intend to assume other people's,'' she said.

She added: ''South Korea was ready to do anything to win, in

terms of price and in state financing.

Small Doses of Radiation Are Dangerous!!

Dr Ian Fairlie spoke at one of our Oldbury lectures in November

Most scientists in this field agree that there is danger even in small doses of radiation

The Guardian, Wednesday 20 January 2010

Dr Ian Fairlie is an independent consultant on radiation risks and a former scientific secretary to the government's Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters. He is writing a book, Radiation Risks Revisited, commissioned by an independent environmental trust.

You reported the view that radiation risks are exaggerated, but left out vital information on radiation protection (Radiation health threat overstated - Oxford professor, 11 January). The article relied upon and extensively cited a retired professor of particle physics, Wade Allison, who is neither a radiation biologist nor an epidemiologist, and is not in my view an expert in radiation risks. Indeed, the other three scientists quoted in the article pointedly refrained from supporting Allison. His sole contribution to the literature is a self-published book.
An article alongside (Nuclear theory: the current consensus) states that "a single dose below 100 millisieverts (mSv) is usually considered safe", and later gives Allison's claim that "there is a threshold of about 200 mSv, below which the body can repair all DNA damage caused and, therefore, which is safe". But there is no safe dose of radiation: no matter how low it is, a small risk remains

The linear no-threshold (LNT) theory is used by all the world's radiation authorities - the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, the International Commission on Radiological Protection, the

Tuesday, 19 January 2010

Nuclear Protest on The Steps of The Council House in Bristol,UK

Members of the Lib Dems, Green Party, Greenpeace and residents of Shepperdine amongst others protested  on the steps of The Council House in Bristol,UK.

About 20 anti-nuclear protesters including Dr Mark Wright of Bristol Lib Dems congregated outside of the Council House on College Green prior to todays council meeting.

One of the motions for today which was written by Mark was a proposal that Bristol and its environs including Oldbury and Hinkley should become nuclear free.
The motion was fourth on the agenda.
Mark said "We have really increased the debate by raising this important motion at our meeting. I have had radio interviews with three sets of people and numerous phone calls and letters from people interestyed in the debate."

Reg Illingworth from Sane said " It is fantastic that Mark is getting the City of Bristol involved in the debate---We in Shepperdine have great concerns about a nuclear power staion being built in our community"

Living Under The Volcano-----The Tsunami


Our Government has once again come up with a master stroke of short term thinking and muddled strategy. It is proposing that a new Nuclear Power Station and radioactive waste storage site should be built at Oldbury on Severn , in the exact place that was devastated by a tsunami on 30th January 1607. Considering the fact that the coastline of Britain extends to some 7723 miles, I find myself wondering if this is the wisest place to consider. We know for a fact that sea levels are rising and that the Severn Estuary has the second highest tidal rise and fall in the world.

The last tsunami affected over 354 miles of our coastline, killing more than 2000 people in its wake and flooding an area as far inland as Glastonbury . The force of the waters tossed giant rocks around all along the coast leaving them stacked up like dominos.

Dr Haslett of Bath Spa University College and Dr Bryant conducted a geological survey of the estuary in 2004 and concluded that “two large chunks of farmland... were simply washed away, one where the foundation of the Second Severn Crossing is and the other is now the reservoir for the Oldbury Nuclear Power Station”. If and when another tsunami were to hit a such a proposed nuclear facility, will all nuclear contamination be contained. We know that even under normal conditions at Sellafield Nuclear processing and storage facility that they have had instances of radioactive contamination nearby and worrying Leukaemia clusters.

A possible cause of the suggested tsunami is not yet known, but the possibilities include a submarine landslide off the continental shelf between Ireland and Cornwall , or an earthquake along an active fault system in the sea south of Ireland . This fault system has apparently experienced an earthquake greater than magnitude 4 on the Richter scale within the last 20 years, so the chance of a bigger tsunami earthquake is a possibility.

If our Government was in charge of planning in the U.S.A., I have little doubt that they would consider building their next Nuclear Plant straddling the San Andreas fault in San Francisco, “because it hasn’t shifted for a bit!

When the waters come it seems distinctly possible to me that the entire region could become contaminated. Perhaps we should twin somewhere in the area with Chernobyl now and get it over with.

Ashley Haigh, Thornbury, South Gloucestershire

Monday, 18 January 2010

Anti-Nuclear Protest at Bristol City Council Before Council Meeting Tomorrow

There is a small protest planned tomorrow in conjunction with the motion listed to be heard which was raised by Dr Mark Wright about Bristol City Councils concern of their lack of involvement in the consultancy by DECC and Horizon.

Oldbury is only 9 miles from the Bristol City Boundary and has a significant population that could be affected by the development. Hinkley is only 28 miles away.

If you wish to attend the protest please be at The Council House by 1.40pm

Hard Hitting Report on Nuclear Waste from Nuclear Wate Advisory Associates

18 January 2009


Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates (NWAA), a group of experts with over 200 years of collective experience of the issues involved in nuclear waste, have submitted detailed written evidence to the House of Commons’ Energy and Climate Change Select Committee Inquiry into the new suite of National Infrastructure Policy Statements, arguing that the national nuclear policy statement indicating government’s intention to support new nuclear power stations in the UK is ‘not fit for purpose’.

In a hard hitting document, NWAA argues that:

Four former members of the government’s own Committee on Radioactive waste Management (CoRWM) – two of whom are members of NWAA - have previously written to the Secretary of State to say that in their opinion, ‘It is unknowable whether or not effective arrangements (for the long term management of new build waste) will exist....’

• The generic scientific grounds upon which the last attempt to dispose of radioactive waste at during the Rock Characterisation Facility programme in 1997 have not been resolved and are therefore still pertinent to the situation today

• Technical problems associated with a disposal facility are legion and most are recognised by the Environment Agency, thereby making any assertion of confidence in the disposability of radioactive waste premature

• Health impact assumptions from exposure to ionising radiation in UK are imprecise and the means by which they are calculated is more by ‘educated guesswork’ than by scientific evaluation

• Nuclear Decommissioning Authority assessments of the disposability of new build nuclear fuel have yet to be carried out by the lead environmental regulator, the Environment Agency, which means confidence expressed by government is potentially misplaced and certainly premature

• Reliance on experience abroad is no grounds for generating confidence as in Finland and elsewhere, disposal of waste is in its infancy and far from proven.

• No assessment has been made of the acceptability of radioactive waste management from the mining and milling of imported uranium, which Government consultants reveal currently produce over 90% of the ‘radiological dose detriment’ form the uranium fuel chain for modern reactor fuel

The document concludes:

In short, the Government’s conclusion “…that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations” is not supported by the evidence. The Nuclear National Policy Statement is, therefore, not “fit for purpose”.

For further information contact:

Dr Rachel Western (primary author) -

Dr David Lowry (contributory author on uranium waste) - 0774 050 3518

Pete Roche (primary editor) -0131 444 1445

Professor Andy Blowers -

Dr Jill Sutcliffe –

Phil Davies –

Val Mainwood 01206 825052 m: 07950981677

Opposition builds in attempt to stop the 'nuclear juggernaut'

We Brits are like lambs to the slaughter between a desperate Government and foreign multi national power companies who are not being allowed to develop in their domestic markets.

Opposition builds in attempt to stop the 'nuclear juggernaut'

Sunday, 17 January 2010

South Lakeland anti nuclear group Radiation Free Lakeland has been invited to give oral evidence to the Parliamentary Select Committee Inquiry on the Future of the Nuclear Industry.
Marianne Birkby (pictured) founder of the group will be giving evidence on Wednesday, January 27 in Westminster.

She said: “The nuclear juggernaught will only be stopped by people saying no – as people are doing in Germany where 50,000 people of all walks of life , including convoys of farmers on tractors marched in Berlin opposing the proposed extension of the life of existing nuclear plants - no one in Germany is proposing new build and certainly no country in the world is proposing such a blanket nuclear sacrifice zone in such a small area as the UK government".

There are a growing number of voices opposing the new nuclear build proposed for the North West, with three of the sites in west Cumbria.
As well as Radiation Free Lakeland these voices include Cumbria Wildlife Trust and The Nuclear Free Local Authorities Secretariat (based in Manchester).
Cumbria Wildlife Trust have "grave concerns" about the negative wildlife impacts of new nuclear power stations on Cumbrian and North Lancashire's land and marine environments.
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to the Select Committee, and one of their many serious concerns is that the 'expression of interest'in 'geological disposal' of high level nuclear waste by Cumbrian councils is a sham
They say Cumbrians could be forced to accept more than one high level waste dump. They also say nuclear power makes climate change far worse.
Radiation Free Lakeland agree and have been saying this since 2008.

They make the point that for Cumbria to have a viable, diverse and healthy future the county should withdraw from the sham 'volunteer' process now and say a strong NO to 'geological disposal' and new builld

MP Steve Webb Gets Stuck In to Help with Undemocratic Process

RESIDENTS baffled by the planning process that will decide if a second nuclear power station will be built at Oldbury are being offered help from their local MP.

Northavon MP Steve Webb met with representatives from the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) last week, which is the new body that will decide on any future nuclear developments.
Mr Webb said: "After my discussions with the Infrastructure Planning Commission it has become clear to me that the process of consultation over a new nuclear power plant risks baffling us all. "There are pre-application consultations, exhibitions and debates, preliminary public meetings and full public hearings, all over a period of more than two years. "We have to give our views to the nuclear power company, to the council, to the Government and to the Infrastructure Planning Commission. It is vital that there is real clarity so that people who feel strongly about these issues know when and how they can have their say."

At the moment people living near the Oldbury site are being encouraged to respond to the Department for Energy and Climate Change's consultation on the National Policy Statement for Energy Infrastructure.
It was this document which listed Oldbury as a preferred site and it is this consultation that will guide the IPC when it makes its decisions.
Separate to the government's consultation, E.ON, the energy company that wants to build a new station at Oldbury, will be carrying out its own consultation with residents. This will all take place before an application is submitted to the IPC, which is not expected to be until towards the end of 2011.

Mr Webb said: "One of the key conclusions of my meeting with the planners is that people who feel strongly about this issue need to be willing express their views to lots of different organisations and over a period of years. "This is a long and cumbersome process, but I will do my best to help local people feed in their views about issues big and small."

Local residents have until February 22 to respond the government’s consultation on the National Policy Statement for Energy Infrastructure.

For more information visit

Friday, 15 January 2010

Summary of Hinkleys EDF Demo Today


About twenty five campaigners took part in a demonstration outside the EdF offices in King Square Bridgwater this morning for about an hour and a half. Demonstrators wore white 'nuclear' overalls and gags over their mouths with one protestor wearing a gas-mask. Media presence was excellent.

Media coverage:

BBC Points West News interviewed several campaigners as well as Crispin Aubrey, the event coordinator. They asked tough questions but campaigners gave well informed responses on the issue over losing our voices in the new streamlined planning process. They interviewed the Chief Executive of Sedgemoor District Council against the background of the demo. Sedgemoor have until recently been very chummy with EdF in their plans to build Hinkley C. But yesterday they gave EdF a rough ride in their meeting discussing their response to the DECC nuclear consultation calling amongst other things, for a Health Assessment of the area due to local concerns (Stop Hinkley) raised about health effects of radioactive discharges.

ITV West also interviewed Crispin as well as the Western Daily Press and Western Morning News who sent a joint photographer.

The Bridgwater Mercury / somerset County Gazette also interviewed and photographed the demonstrators.

A freelance photographer with access to the national press also took pics.


Bridgwater police had phoned Stop Hinkley on four occasions before the demo, asking for details about the demo and having been told that protestors would be wearing 'hoods and masks'. We explained that the gags were symbolic of losing our local voice in the new planning system. EdF had given the police the phone number of a Stop Hinkley committee member and asked him to go to the police station to discuss the demo on Tuesday.

Today about seven police were in attendance and took photographs of the campaigners. They asked Crispin Aubrey to come to the police station afterwards but he declined, saying he needed to follow up the protest and suggesting they phone him later.

A fuller press report will be issued later today.

Many thanks to all who took part.


A short demonstration is planned for 1.30pm on Tuesday 19th at Bristol City Council. A motion on whether to object to plans for new nuclear at Hinkley and Oldbury is due to be debated by the Council.

Please email if you plan to go along.

Jim Duffy

Stop Hinkley
Site Meter