PRESS RELEASE. 19th March 2014.
Glastonbury Council Urges Hinkley Opposition
Glastonbury Town Council has written to 300 Town and Parish Councils in Somerset, urging them to oppose a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point.
The letter raises concerns over nuclear waste storage, nuclear accidents, and the impact of construction traffic on the county.
It says that since the council agreed to write to other councils, the record flooding and storm surges in West Somerset have only deepened those concerns.
And it ends, "We believe that statements of concern and opposition by local representative bodies such as yours could play a part in determining Somerset's future for the good".
What's really going on with the Pressurised Reactor construction in Europe?
here from 28 Nov 2017 examines the nuclear waste disposal problem in just location.
We have these sites right across the globe all over our Oceans.
There are even instances where pipes have been setup in the sea so the waste can be disposed off even easier and unseen.
was shown on German and French TV but not in England.
For obvious reasons the English don't want anyone to see it.
This is the English version which we hope you will mirror and call attention to. It discusses the effects of sea dumping of radioactive waste on the health of people living on the local coasts, like the Irish Sea and the Baltic Sea, which is the most radioactive sea in the world. The documentary focuses on the British sea dumping in the English Channel Hurd Deep about 12 miles north of the Channel Island of Alderney. Alderney is also subject to releases to the sea from the French Nuclear Reprocessing Plant at Cap de la La Hague 12 miles East of the small island.
Prof Chris Busby who was consulted on the health effects of this marine radioactive pollution visits the island with the producers and makes measurements of contamination on the beach. Busby originally visited the island in 1998 with Jersey MP Stuart Syvret and found an excess of brain tumours and also general cancer mortality which was written up as a Green Audit paper and became part of a BBC news story at the time. They were both chased off the island.
Manfred Ladwig manages to get Dr John Cooper, head of the UK radiological protection organisation, the HPA, to admit that they balance childhood cancer cases against the advantages of cheaply disposing of nuclear waste. Cooper also agrees that his position involves a conflict of interest since he is head of HPA which takes advice on radiation protection from ICRP. Cooper is on the ICRP committee. He therefore takes advice from himself. We also hear from Prof Richard Wakeford, ex head of research for Sellafield, but now an "independent" expert, also on ICRP, who tells us the coastal child leukemias were caused by "population mixing". How long do we have to be subject to advice from these clowns?
When asked which political party he supported the Dalai Lama suggested that if he were political he would support the Greens.
Ex Hinkley Point Worker Dishes The Dirt On nu-KILLER
Published on 30 Jul 2017
Paget is a former Science advisor to the British Cabinet, and brings this alert from the North Atlantic Intelligence Group - UK Director's Office, London, his team of independent intelligence analysts.
The absolute terror of the utter disastrous Fukushima event is discussed with ex British Secret Agent and ET hybrid, Peter Paget, in this Skype interview in England, late July 2017. We are under Extreme threat from this multi reactor "accident".
Japan Nuclear Expert: Simply impossible to remove melted fuel from Fukushima — Corium “has spread all over… could actually have gone through floor of containment vessel” — Only way to deal with these reactors releasing dangerous radiation is to cover in concrete — Will take centuries of work, Video from 2015
Nuclear vs Renewable Debate - Newsnight featuring Caroline Lucas
Hinkley Point: the ‘dreadful deal’ behind the world’s most expensive power plant..
By Holly Watt
Thu 21 Dec ‘17 06.00 GMT
Last modified on Fri 22 Dec ‘17 10.01 GMT
Building Britain’s first new nuclear reactor since 1995 will cost twice as much as the 2012 Olympics – and by the time it is finished, nuclear power could be a thing of the past. How could the government strike such a bad deal?
Hinkley Point, on the Somerset coast, is the biggest building site in Europe. Here, on 430 acres of muddy fields scattered with towering cranes and bright yellow diggers, the first new nuclear power station in the UK since 1995 is slowly taking shape. When it is finally completed, Hinkley Point C will be the most expensive power station in the world. But to reach that stage, it will need to overcome an extraordinary tangle of financial, political and technical difficulties. The project was first proposed almost four decades ago, and its progress has been glacial, having faced relentless opposition from politicians, academics and economists every step of the way.
Some critics of the project have questioned whether Hinkley Point C’s nuclear reactor will even work. It is a new and controversial design, which has been dogged by construction problems and has yet to start functioning anywhere in the world. Some experts believe it could actually prove impossible to build. “It’s three times over cost and three times over time where it’s been built in Finland and France,” says Paul Dorfman, from the UCL Energy Institute. “This is a failed and failing reactor.”
Others have pointed to the cost. At present, the estimated total bill for Hinkley Point C is £20.3bn, more than twice the London Olympics. To pay for it, the British government has entered into a complex financial agreement with Électricité de France (EDF), the energy giant that is 83% owned by the French government, and China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN), a state-run Chinese energy company. Under this contract, British electricity consumers will pay billions over a 35-year period. According to Gérard Magnin, a former EDF director, the French company sees Hinkley as “a way to make the British fund the renaissance of nuclear in France”. He added: “We cannot be sure that in 2060 or 2065, British pensioners, who are currently at school, will not still be paying for the advancement of the nuclear industry in France.”
New Nuclear Madness
Why bother to write anti-nuclear verse?
Why conjure with words
to state the bloody obvious?
Whether the rhyme is gentle and fluffy,
or ranting and angry,
we know the truth already, don’t we?
And why fight and campaign?
Did the suits ever listen to folks like us
cos we wrote, or petitioned,
or gathered, or marched?
Well, now is the hour
for the wake-up call in the corridors of power:
time to open closed ears and open closed minds,
time to shout with one voice
until they take notice of the word - NO!
Time to fight and write and recite
against new nuclear madness.
Here goes………
When I was a kid,
a girl in my class
thought she’d grab some attention,
and asked anyone who’d listen,
“Did you know there’s a bomb
that can kill thousands in a second?”
I didn’t know.
But that moment’s a memory still on replay,
cos suddenly even a child’s world was no longer safe.
OK, so they’re not going to make warheads at Hinkley,
no weapon to drop on some enemy.
The boffins in white are going one better -
creating a time-bomb
to hold us Brits to ransom.
They’re giving us, not one,
but two shiny new reactors
on Avalon’s sunset horizon.
“Fifteen men on the dead man’s chest……”
Keep going with your crazy plan, EDF,
and we’ll have a whole stash of toxic treasure
buried on this island.
X marks the spot
for the next million years -
a hidden hoard of radioactivity
seeping slowly from captivity,
creeping into the bones of your ancestors,
and of your descendants.
Look west from the Tor
and you’ll see it - stark, solitary -
the concrete castle
of 21st century Uranian alchemy,
where they’re raising a power
that conforms to their will,
so they tell us.
“It’s under control,
we’ve got it sussed,
perfectly harmless.
And so much quicker and cheaper
than harnessing awkward things like wind and water.”
The white-coated sorcerers smile
behind their protective masks, and declare,
“Don’t waste our time splitting hairs,
we’re too busy splitting atoms!”
But if this beast overcomes its masters,
breaks free in a blaze of its own glory,
mutating the living in rapacious ecstasy,
defecating into the sea-
we’d have a Wasteland
that couldn’t be healed
by compassion, or by asking the redeeming question.
Across the marshes and moors
Avalon’s shining Castle of Glass
faces Hinkley’s concrete fortress,
with its warband of bureaucrats and fatcats and eggheads,
set to hold and expand their territory,
wielding weapons of lies and complacency.
But if they win in this fight, they are losers,
who poison their own victory feast.
Avalon’s peaceful warriors,
now is the hour for your wake-up call -
time to take up the Chalice from under the hill,
and pass it across the divide.
To offer the cup of true perception,
that mends the severed connection
between soul and flesh, man and earth.
Now is the hour to shout with one voice,
“Decontaminate…..decommission.
Let freedom from fear be our gift
to the next generation.”
by Cat Watling
Copyright © H. Catherine Watling
We Totally Oppose The Construction Of Hinkley C.
Our Children and Our Children's Children
will NOT Thank us for Hinkley C.
Electricity consumers 'to fund nuclear weapons through Hinkley Point C'
Scientists tell MPs government is using expensive power project to cross-subsidise military by maintaining nuclear skills
The government is using the “extremely expensive” Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to cross-subsidise Britain’s nuclear weapon arsenal, according to senior scientists.
In evidence submitted to the influential public accounts committee (PAC), which is currently investigating the nuclear plant deal, scientists from Sussex University state that the costs of the Trident programme could be “unsupportable” without “an effective subsidy from electricity consumers to military nuclear infrastructure”.
Prof Andy Stirling and Dr Phil Johnstone from the Science Policy Research Unit at the university write that the £19.6bn Hinkley Point project will “maintain a large-scale national base of nuclear-specific skills” without which there is concern “that the costs of UK nuclear submarine capabilities could be insupportable.”
Their evidence suggests that changes in the government’s policy on nuclear power in recent years will effectively allow Britain’s military nuclear industry to be supported by payments from electricity consumers.
Last June, MPs passed a motion in favour of replacing four submarines carrying Trident missiles at a cost of £40bn.
Council Letter Text: 12th March 2014
Glastonbury Town Council oppose the proposed Hinkley C development in West Somerset for the following reasons:
1. Concerns over the huge impact that the 9 year development might have upon our locality and the county as a whole, particularly construction traffic;
2. The potentially catastrophic impact that a nuclear accident at the facility would have on our community and our region;
3. The negligent immorality of leaving highly radioactive waste and spent fuel at the site for future generations to deal with - for at least 100 years and most probably for many thousands.
Since then, the government has announced it's "Strike Price" deal with EDF and it has become apparent that the Hinkley C project will be the most expensive nuclear power station on the planet, with EDF profits being guaranteed by a 35 year price-fix for all UK consumers.
In recent months there has also been mounting pressure to store additional radioactive waste from other UK sites at the Hinkley Point complex, raising the prospect of West Somerset becoming a "second Sellafield" in future.
In the light of this Glastonbury Town Council further resolved to contact our sister councils in Somerset inviting you to join us in opposing the proposed Hinkley C project.
Since we made that decision, the unprecedented flooding in Somerset, record storm surges, and even the recent earth tremor have raised further concerns about the viability and long-term safety of Hinkley C. As EDF's "Final Investment Decision" is yet to be made, and the financial deal is being scrutinised by the EU Competition Commission, and Parliament"s Public Accounts Committee will investigate it shortly, we believe that statements of concern and opposition by local representative bodies such as yours could play a part in determining Somerset's future for the good.
Glastonbury Town Council 2014
A recent meeting with EDF has done nothing to allay the towns fears, according to Councillor Jon Cousins (St Edmunds Ward).
"Basically, EDF pulled out of a public meeting and sent David Eccles to our council meeting instead to tell us that Hinkley C would be good for jobs," said Mr Cousins.
"He could tell us nothing about the nuclear emergency plan for Glastonbury - except that we shouldn't eat or drink anything - and assured us without a blink that EDF were prepared to store spent fuel at Hinkley Point for thousands of years".
"I was shocked to discover that the spent fuel building will not be as heavily protected as the reactor building, making it an obvious target for a malicious attack - and it will still be vulnerable to attack or natural disaster long after EDF have packed up their profits and gone".
The letter from Glastonbury Town to other councils says that Hinkley C would be "the most expensive nuclear power station on the planet" but that the final investment decision has still to be made, as the governments deal with EDF is now under review by the competition commission.
"It's not too late for Somerset people and councils to raise a voice and stop this project before the construction traffic has started rolling," said Councillor Denise Michell (St Benedict's Ward).
"Glastonbury is a town which is ill-prepared for the impact of that traffic, but despite a very reasonable appeal from Councillor Ian Tucker, Mr Eccles said that ultimately it would be up to the contractors which roads they used, and EDF could not be expected to give us any assurances."
"It seems that all the big issues with this project are some one else's responsibility, and EDF's only responsibility is making the money.
With the public subsidy agreed by the government, Hinkley C profits are apparently set to be well over £50 billion. That puts the so called "benefits to the community" into perspective.
Somerset could end up shouldering the liabilities of this project for generations, and Glastonbury council are not at all happy about that," she said.
Glastonbury Councillors Protest against New Nuclear at Hinkley Point C
From left to right. Cllr. Jon Cousins, MP. Caroline Lucas, Cllr. Alyson Black, Cllr. Denise Michell and Cllr. Ian Forster.
More than six years after a tsunami devastated Japan’s west coast and overwhelmed the Fukushima nuclear power plant it has been revealed radioactive water could be pumped into the sea. There are 900 tanks filled with water that could spill if there was another earthquake or tsunami.
Click here to Read more from the METRO
Monday 27 Nov 2017
Ten Reasons To Say No To Nuclear Power
1. Climate change is underway. Renewable energy can be brought online faster, more cheaply and more safely than nuclear power.
2. Reactors are sitting-duck targets and are not even defended to the ferocity of the 9/11 attacks.
3. Nuclear power is not emissions-free. Reactors routinely release radioactivity and use fossil fuels at every step from uranium mining to waste storage.
4. Building more reactors in the U.S. sends the wrong message abroad. Commercial nuclear technology inevitably leads to nuclear weapons capability.
5. The Yucca Mountain high-level radioactive dump is unsound and even if opened could not accommodate all wastes if generation continues.
6. Evacuation plans are unrealistic. Hurricane Katrina taught us that a mass evacuation during a serious radiological release would be a chaotic catastrophe.
7. A typical 1000 megawatt nuclear reactor produces enough plutonium each year to make 40 atomic bombs, an unacceptable risk.
8. New and old reactors are most prone to break down. U.S. reactors are old. New ones increase the risk of accident.
9. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission—mandated to watchdog the nuclear industry – chooses to protect industry profit over public health and safety.
10. The most defenseless are at the greatest risk—children, the elderly, minorities, the poor and animals—at every phase of the nuclear fuel chain.
Ten Brighter Ideas!
1. If every household installed one compact fluorescent light bulb, the power savings would equal the power produced by one nuclear reactor. 1=1!
2. Twenty compact fluorescents in every U.S. home could displace at least 25% of U.S. nuclear reactors.
3. Updated lighting, appliances, heating, cooling and other electrical systems can save more energy than all 103 U.S. reactors produce annually.
4. Cost-effective energy efficiency measures for homes and businesses can save at least 20% of electricity use.
5. Turning off and unplugging electrical equipment not in use and line-drying clothes seem like small measures but can make a big difference.
6. Homeowners and renters alike can choose to buy green power instead of nuclear-generated electricity.
7. Properly sealing and insulating your home can save 25%-40% of building heat loss.
8. Renewable energy sources can meet 25% of U.S. energy needs by 2025.
9. Shifting to locally-generated electricity avoids waste, reduces brownouts and blackouts, increases efficiency of service and creates jobs.
10. Every dollar spent on nuclear power instead of fossil fuels results in releasing six times more carbon than if the same dollar is spent on efficiency.
Produced by Beyond Nuclear, a project of Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Now doesn't that make more sense?
This song is a cover of Elvis Presley's famous song, with anti Nuclear lyrics recorded after Fukusima's terrible accident..
Click here for News From The Chernobyl Site.
Forests Around Chernobyl Aren’t Decaying Properly It wasn't just people, animals and trees that were affected by radiation exposure at Chernobyl, but also the decomposers: insects, microbes, and fungi.
Nearly 30 years have passed since the Chernobyl plant exploded and caused an unprecedented nuclear disaster. The effects of that catastrophe, however, are still felt today. Although no people live in the extensive exclusion zones around the epicenter, animals and plants still show signs of radiation poisoning.
Birds around Chernobyl have significantly smaller brains that those living in non-radiation poisoned areas; trees there grow slower; and fewer spiders and insects—including bees, butterflies and grasshoppers—live there. Additionally, game animals such as wild boar caught outside of the exclusion zone—including some bagged as far away as Germany—continue to show abnormal and dangerous levels of radiation.
Read more on the link above..
The Town Council and most residents here in Glastonbury are completely against nuclear power.
If anyone agrees with new-nuclear, then they are discounting a few very important things.
There is, of course, a major risk of terrorism!
The Environmental and Geological factors that don't bear thinking about and then there is the Radioactive Waste problem, both in the short term and long term.
The unbelievable Financial Costs to British Tax Payers and then, what sort of Ethics and Legacy will we be leaving for future Generations!