I suggest a campaign about ...

'New nuclear' energy: the great green rip-off

The government has told us that we need more nuclear power stations to combat climate change. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Nuclear power is incredibly expensive and incredibly dangerous. The New Economics Foundation estimates that to pay for building new reactors and processing their waste, nuclear power providers could increase our electricity bills by almost three times the industry estimate. So that's a hike from £45 a quarter to around £100.

Opting for ten new nuclear power plants is a quick fix solution that will leave us with a terrible legacy of cancer-causing radioactive waste that nobody knows what to do with.

If nuclear power is allowed to get a grip on the energy sector now it could kill off any hope of a viable, affordable market in truly renewable forms of energy.

Reports by Greenpeace, the New Economics Foundation, the Sustainable Development Commission, the Centre for Alternative Technology and many other respected organisations have outlined strategies for future energy provision that does not include nuclear power.

WE HAVE TO STOP THIS NOW BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.

We want a future, not a disaster.

1,593 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Nancy BirchNancy Birch shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    393 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Alan DebenhamAlan Debenham commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The idea that new nuclear build is some sort of panacea essential to keeping supplies of electricity afloat and for keeping our reduced carbon emissions on target are even bigger brain-washing lies than the ones about how our public services must be hacked ( topical word ?) and our wages/jobs sacrificed to meet our 'enormous deficit' financial crisis when, like the Green Party, we all know that it is the bankers, financiers, and their multi-million pound speculative money dealings, fat-cat salaries and bonuses, should pay for the collapse which their greed created.
        As never before, it surely is time for a political renaissance - especially from the under 30s - in the name of 'green socialism' to see that future power is put back again more towards people and democracy and less kept in the hands of national and global financial organisations which currently hold governments under their control and often to ransom.
        Also, whenever big money changes hands like the 12 billion pounds EdF was said to have paid Brown's Labour Government for the then destitute - close to bankruptcy - British Energy ( our existing nuclear empire ), it should be obvious to everyone that the political message behind it is that the deal must carry some undercover obligations to allow EdF fairly free, subsidised reins on a new programme of nuclear new build. The fact that the Lib Dems - Chris Huyne especially - are now eating Tory humble pie on this, as they are on the 'big deficit' crisis, is sure evidence that the powers behind the policies are big business interests not House of Commons people-elected MPs and their national parties.

      • Art4ArtsacheArt4Artsache commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Basic economics: Use what is freely available but will not cause problems impossible to cope with: Solar, Tidal, Wind? Geo-thermal? Horse & Pedal-power & if this isn't enough for our needs, learn to need less. Deconstruct whatever is too vast & learn to live less lazily with smaller units of everything. And when my life is no longer meaningful, ease me out of it.

      • robert woodlandrobert woodland commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        a promise of the greenest government ever....bollocks comes to mind.... nuclear power is dangerous,expensive, unsafe , and unnecessaary... were surrounded by sea, wind and sun...lets use it ...... safer, greener and cleaner.......how green are you mr cameron to burrie radio active waste underground and at sea.......think about it a little more.........

      • Peter J KirkhamPeter J Kirkham commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, where next?
        Accidents happen.
        Nuclear power is not safe, not economic, not reliable
        and is certainly not green.

      • Marianne BirkbyMarianne Birkby commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Over 100 problems with "geological disposal" have been identified, and a report published by Dr Helen Wallace, for Greenpeace
        International confirms that deep disposal of radioactive wastes has the
        “potential for significant radiological releases through a variety of
        mechanisms”. The Environment Agency talks of a "knowledge gap"
        In other words EVEN if Cumbria's geology was not already known to be
        wonderfully leaky and complex, geological disposal would not be the
        "solution" to high level nuclear wastes.

        There is no "solution" - that is the problem of nuclear waste. The plan
        to bury it in Cumbria to 'solve' the waste problem in order to make even more cancer causing waste is being 'gently' pushed as "steps towards geological disposal" . The usual watchdogs like the National Park have been neutered . They are "Partners" in the whole diabolic "Process"

        http://web.mac.com/mariannebirkby1/iWeb/Radiation%20Free%20Lakeland/RADIOACTIVE%20DUMP%20DIARY/77616710-7B0C-4116-8CF5-921FDE51E927.html

      • PCAHPCAH commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yes, we MUST stop new nuclear build. All the reasons why are clearly set out in 'Nuclear Power is not the Answer' by Dr Helen Caldicott. We also need to remind the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation that we are paying them to protect us from nuclear industry violation of safety regulations; we are not paying them to protect the nuclear industry from compensation claims.

      • PCAHPCAH commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yes, we MUST stop new nuclear build. All the reasons why are clearly set out in 'Nuclear Power is not the Answer' by Dr Helen Caldicott. We also need to remind the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation that we are paying them to protect us from nuclear industry violation of safety regulations; we are not paying them to protect the nuclear industry from compensation claims.

      • JudeJude commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yet again we are told that low levels of radioactivity is harmless!! Actually THE SMALLEST LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVITY IS HARMFUL. There is no harmless level
        Hinkley

        Plans being developed to deal with nuclear waste at Hinkley Point A in west Somerset will see radioactive gas and liquid released into the sea. The power station began decommissioning in 2001 and is working on a system to put "intermediate" waste in vats of acid to reduce it down. Magnox, the company that manages the site, said there would be no risk to public health or the environment. But a nuclear expert questioned the controls in place at Hinkley Point. Magnox said the process of dissolving materials in acid would give off gas and produce liquid that was radioactive, however those releases would be very low and cause no harm.

        BBC 23rd May 2011

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-13501260

      • JudeJude commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        How come the Government can afford to replace our Trident nuclear missiles, but is taking money away from the most vulnerable in our society....the long-term sick and disabled who are already largely poverty stricken? And we just let them??!! A responsible society takes care of those in need.......first

      • The-Mighty BushThe-Mighty Bush commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Latest studies suggest a simple return to hemp farming could build a clean sustainable economy within 20 years, hemp can be used to make.
        Fuel, repacements for both diesel and petrol.
        Plastics, the stems contain 77% celulose.
        Paper, upto 4 times the yield per acre of timber.
        Cotton, hemp fabric is stronger and longer lasting.
        Steel, hemp can be made into sheet material as strong and light as carbon fibre but for a fraction of the costs.
        Hempcrete is stronger than concrete but uses far less energy to manufacture
        Hemp is the 2nd fastest growing plant on the planet after bamboo, it will grow everywhere and until the late 1930's was farmed extensively all over the world, Henry Ford was a hemp farmer, he build cars from hemp fibres.
        Hemp farming is prohibited because the hemp plant is a variety of the cannabis plant, it is of absolutely no use as a recreational drug, the active chemical (THC) is not present, you could smoke a whole field and only get a headache.
        It's prohition is a crime against humanity that is all about giving a trading advantage to the oil, paper from woodpulp and cotton industries that funded the campaign to have hemp prohibited in the 1st place.
        Cannabis prohibition has never been about public health, it was big corporations buying their products a trading advantage via corrupt politicians willing to take their bribes, our governments all know this and the continued prohibion only proves they're still complicit today.

      • JudeJude commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I agree, and we need to keep making our views known to those who are making the decisions. After all, it's our country and our earth. It doesn't belong to politicians.

      • stevesteve commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Our children should be giving a good clean country to grow up in.
        Not born into nuclear

      Feedback and Knowledge Base