Showing posts with label pawb. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pawb. Show all posts

Monday, 12 May 2008

Nuclear Cover-Ups Continue

This is a letter I've written which has been published in today's issue of the North Wales Daily post

Just over 50 years ago the biggest cover up in British nuclear power history occured at Windscale (now Sellafield), where overheating of graphiote rods in the core (due to a rush to develop plutonium and tritium) caused a fire which was afterwards scandalously blamed on the staff who had fought bravely to contain the fire.
These days we are told that the industry has learnt and is now much safer but recent reports from the continent have shown this is not true. In France, the nuclear safety industry inspectors have uncovered a number of faults. Over a quarter of the welds in its stell liner were not in accordance with welding norms and their were cracks found in its concrete base - both of these are potential threats as these things are supposed to contain radioactivity. The design is the European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) which is also facing problems in Finland (the only other country where this reactor is being built) and is the propsed design for new nuclear power plants in the UK, including the proposed Wylfa B.
Also, Greenpeace have recently reported that a Spanish nuclear power station, Asco-I, had caused significant radioactive contamination of public areas outside the plant. The plants operator had kept this secret for four months! The state regulatory agency also underestimated the problem for several days and eventually announced that the leak was one hundred times larger than they had originally announced!
Given the dangers involved, should we really trust such companies as involved in these projects with our safety given they are clearly much more interested in making a 'quick buck'? Furthermore do we want to build a new Wylfa B when the proposed reactor is known to be faulty, not to mention the many other problems with nuclear power?

Friday, 11 April 2008

On Building Anti-Nuclear Campaigns

A week or so ago this question was brought up on Duncan’s blog. In the course of replying to the post I raised several points which I wish to develop further here. I’m going to develop them in relation to nuclear power in North West Wales, however, I hope that to an extent they can be transposed elsewhere, although important differences need to be taken into account (ie. the Sellafield reprocessing centre is obviously a different type of establishment to most nuclear plants).

In an attempt to appear ‘green’ first Blair’s labour government and now Brown’s has been driving towards a new generation of nuclear power as a solution to the ‘energy crisis’. They present it as a carbon neutral solution which needs to be adopted as existing energy sources (coal, gas, oil) are too dirty (and rely to a large extent upon ‘unreliable’ countries) and renewables (wind, tidal, wave etc.) are not developed enough get. So naturally what’s good for British capitalism is good for everyone.

But lets not forget that nuclear power gets ten times as much spent on research into it than renewables, or that nuclear gets massive subsidies. Or that nuclear power is not carbon neutral – the uranium has to be mined and transported, nuclear power stations have to be constructed etc. This isn’t to mention the health risks of radiation seeping out, the somewhat clichéd possibility of meltdown (unlikely – but given the bad safety record of the British nuclear industry, and the likelihood of a new generation of nuclear power been privately owned – it cannot be written off) and, probably most worryingly of all, that there is no known way of dealing with nuclear waste (and simply saying that we’ll somehow be able to deal with it in the future doesn’t solve the problem).

So nuclear power isn’t good and we know it. But this isn’t the whole story – nuclear power has been in existence in the UK for over 40 years, it has become embedded into local communities. Many of the places where nuclear power stations have been built are somewhat rural or isolated and thus the nuclear power plant is likely to be the main employer in the area. No matter how forceful the above arguments are, this is likely to be of far more importance.

I mean to write another piece on decommissioning nuclear power plants and nuclear waste, but for now it is sufficed to say that decommissioning tends to employ as many people as an active plant. Transfynedd is Gwynedd has been in the process of decommissioning for over 15 years now and still employs around about as many people as when it was active. This is before mentioning that maintaining renewable sources of energy would also employ some more people too. However, this level of employment is on a capitalist basis is only a beginning, on a socialist basis by reducing the working day, employment could be found for many more people.

As Socialists we need to go beyond just what any other anti-nuclear protesters say (as they do not necessarily solve peoples problems) and explain what a socialist society could do about these issues. We also need to orientate anti-nuclear campaigns to engaging in campaigning activities. Whilst Pawb (www.stop-wylfa.org.uk) is very good in terms of explaining the problems with nuclear power, it is much less good at getting ordinary people in Ynys Mon and Gwynedd involved in trying to do something to change the world around them. It is not just a question of doing something to stop this generation of nuclear power plants from being implemented, but a question of taking our destinies into our own hands so we don’t face this same battle again.

Thursday, 7 February 2008

Stop the Anglesey nuclear time-bomb

I wrote this article (in this weeks The Socialist) based on recent developement on Anglesey and the battle between local politicans over who can be pro-nuclear enough. Also people may have noticed i've said in blogs i was writing this article, anyway here it is. There is also another version at www.socialistpartywales.org.uk

The pro-nuclear alliance of Anglesey County Council and local Labour MP Albert Owen have launched a new propaganda offensive to win people to the idea of a new nuclear power station at Wylfa on Anglesey.

Iain Dalton
They claim that without it, the island will lose 1,500 jobs. This figure has been inflated by Wylfa taking on temporary workers, and by including 400 jobs at Anglesey Aluminium which the company have publicly stated will not be threatened by closure of Wylfa, although they may use it as a pretext to move production to a lower wage economy.

However, a new nuclear station would employ far fewer people than the current station due to new technologies, and that is before cost-cutting practices of the new station's private owners (Wylfa is presently publicly run).

Local campaign group Pawb are arguing for an alternative employment plan for the island. Much of this lies around the potential for harnassing renewable energy sources, as the island has near ideal conditions for several technologies including tidal, wind, solar and wave. Additionally, based on the experience of decommissioning Trawsfnydd in nearby Gwynedd, decommissioning the current Wylfa station will provide at least 500 jobs for at least fifteen years.

Over a thousand people have now signed a petition organised by Pawb. Socialist Students in Bangor are helping to organise a public meeting.

There are lots of issues the mainstream politicians don't want to talk about. The fact that Wylfa has been shut down several times means that nuclear isn't a sure supply of energy as they argue. Cost-cutting could result in disastrous situations; the memory of Chernobyl still hangs across north Wales as farmers in the region are still affected by restrictions on animal movements as a result of fall-out from that disaster.

Furthermore, a new nuclear power station is seen as carbon neutral, but what about carbon emissions from mining fuel, transportation and construction of the plant itself? Also, the nuclear waste cannot be safely disposed of at present; this is a radiation time-bomb for future generations.

As the government announced the new plants, former Welsh Secretary, Peter Hain, offered his support for them, alongside Plaid Cymru leader Ieuan Wyn Jones. Both were prepared to grease the wheels for big business, whilst claiming, like the council, to be fighting for local jobs. Their policies are no solution to the endemic lack of jobs in north west Wales.

Pawb have launched a new website: www.stop-wylfa.org