Shock new report: nuclear power station possible sites named

Britannist · 24-05-2007, 02:39 PM

A report for a UK Government department says new nuclear power stations might be built on the sites of coal-fired power stations in England which have been shut down (some of these are inland). The report also suggests that new nuclear power stations should not be built in Wales or Scotland. In other words, England gets the disadvantages of having the new nuclear power stations - while those parts of the UK outside England only get the benefits (of English nuclear power stations - i.e. English nuclear-generated electricity fed into what would be the non-nuclear electricity grids of Scotland, Wales and (unless a nuclear power station is built in Ulster) of Northern Ireland).

This brief extract is from today's Guardian:

However, the DTI has been advised that the sites of conventional power stations in the Midlands, the south coast near Brighton, and near Bristol could become available. The advice to ministers was outlined in a 50-page report, the only one known to have been commissioned by government specifically on the issue of the siting of new nuclear plants.

The report adds that new stations are unlikely to be feasible in Wales or Scotland because of devolution. :arrow:

:arrow:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/ar...086814,00.html

TonyG · 24-05-2007, 02:41 PM

Quote:

In other words, England gets the disadvantages of having the new nuclear power stations - while those parts of the UK outside England only get the benefits (of English nuclear power stations

It is more likely that they are not proposing to build them in Scotland and Wales in case they go independent. Otherwise they would be able to sell us generated power having been gifted the stations.

Britannist · 24-05-2007, 03:02 PM

Yes, that's what I was thinking, too.

It doesn't say much for the long-term prospects of the UK if reports like this are being written (i.e. reports suggesting that something - such as a nuclear power station - should not be built in one part of the UK because that part of the Kingdom might not stay part of it).

What some in the anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are probably hoping for is exactly what the report (referred to in the first posting to this thread) suggests - that no new nuclear power stations are built in Scotland. The anti-nuclear power campaigners in Scotland then expect that Scottish electricity consumers get the proportion of the electricity that they cannot produce in Scotland from new nuclear power stations in England - or Wales).

The anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are hypocrites.

rjt · 24-05-2007, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

Yes, that's what I was thinking, too.

It doesn't say much for the long-term prospects of the UK if reports like this are being written (i.e. reports suggesting that something - such as a nuclear power station - should not be built in one part of the UK because that part of the Kingdom might not stay part of it).

What some in the anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are probably hoping for is exactly what the report (referred to in the first posting to this thread) suggests - that no new nuclear power stations are built in Scotland. The anti-nuclear power campaigners in Scotland then expect that Scottish electricity consumers get the proportion of the electricity that they cannot produce in Scotland from new nuclear power stations in England - or Wales).

Alex Salmond has been very clear he does not want nuclear power stations in Scotalnd and that he is prepared for gridlock with Westminister over the issue.
The anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are hypocrites.

TonyG · 24-05-2007, 03:09 PM

I'd read that slightly differently.
If Scotland's energy requirements can be met from hydro, gas coal and renewables with no need for nuclear then there is no reason why they shouldn't go down that route.
If they have a surplus then they can sell it to us.
I haven't checked to see which way round it is at present but with the Western Isles project soon to be underway they may well be able to manage it.

Britannist · 24-05-2007, 03:18 PM

I think they might find that 'green' electricity is pretty expensive. This could affect the Scottish economy. If businesses end up paying higher electricity bills, it could lead to job losses.

To have a 100% non-nuclear energy supply in Scotland they are going to have to come up with something a bit more productive than wind turbines (most of which don't work 70% of the time).

Britannist · 24-05-2007, 03:20 PM

Quote:

RJT wrote: Alex Salmond has been very clear he does not want nuclear power stations in Scotland and that he is prepared for gridlock with Westminister over the issue.

He's a political troublemaker.

He and his horrible party (SNP - the Scottish so-called Nationalists) are going to try to pick on as many issues as they possibly can to ferment division between the Follyrood Executive and Westminster and between Scotland and England.

Just as the EU wants the SNP to.

C_steam · 24-05-2007, 03:31 PM

Conventional power stations near Bristol? Any ideas where these might be?

TonyG · 24-05-2007, 03:34 PM

Quote:

To have a 100% non-nuclear energy supply in Scotland they are going to have to come up with something a bit more productive than wind turbines (most of which don't work 70% of the time).

They won't have any problems in the WI, it is by far and away the windiest place in Britain, they should be producing 90% of the time at least.

mkpdavies · 24-05-2007, 03:37 PM

I thought the reason Wales and Scotland were used, was because they were the least populated.

Whereever they do build them, the locals should get free eleccy for life as a sweetner.

24-05-2007, 02:39 PM	#1 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Shock new report: nuclear power station possible sites named A report for a UK Government department says new nuclear power stations might be built on the sites of coal-fired power stations in England which have been shut down (some of these are inland). The report also suggests that new nuclear power stations should not be built in Wales or Scotland. In other words, England gets the disadvantages of having the new nuclear power stations - while those parts of the UK outside England only get the benefits (of English nuclear power stations - i.e. English nuclear-generated electricity fed into what would be the non-nuclear electricity grids of Scotland, Wales and (unless a nuclear power station is built in Ulster) of Northern Ireland). This brief extract is from today's Guardian: However, the DTI has been advised that the sites of conventional power stations in the Midlands, the south coast near Brighton, and near Bristol could become available. The advice to ministers was outlined in a 50-page report, the only one known to have been commissioned by government specifically on the issue of the siting of new nuclear plants. The report adds that new stations are unlikely to be feasible in Wales or Scotland because of devolution. :arrow: :arrow: http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/ar...086814,00.html

24-05-2007, 03:02 PM	#3 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Nuclear Yes, that's what I was thinking, too. It doesn't say much for the long-term prospects of the UK if reports like this are being written (i.e. reports suggesting that something - such as a nuclear power station - should not be built in one part of the UK because that part of the Kingdom might not stay part of it). What some in the anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are probably hoping for is exactly what the report (referred to in the first posting to this thread) suggests - that no new nuclear power stations are built in Scotland. The anti-nuclear power campaigners in Scotland then expect that Scottish electricity consumers get the proportion of the electricity that they cannot produce in Scotland from new nuclear power stations in England - or Wales). The anti-nuclear lobby in Scotland are hypocrites.

24-05-2007, 03:09 PM	#5 (permalink)
TonyG Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,589	I'd read that slightly differently. If Scotland's energy requirements can be met from hydro, gas coal and renewables with no need for nuclear then there is no reason why they shouldn't go down that route. If they have a surplus then they can sell it to us. I haven't checked to see which way round it is at present but with the Western Isles project soon to be underway they may well be able to manage it. __________________ If you don't think you can change the world, who do you expect to do it for you? ---- http://www.mercola.com/townofallopat...ofallopath.htm

24-05-2007, 03:18 PM	#6 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Nuclear power, Scotland I think they might find that 'green' electricity is pretty expensive. This could affect the Scottish economy. If businesses end up paying higher electricity bills, it could lead to job losses. To have a 100% non-nuclear energy supply in Scotland they are going to have to come up with something a bit more productive than wind turbines (most of which don't work 70% of the time).

24-05-2007, 03:37 PM	#10 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,150 Party: Libertarian Party	I thought the reason Wales and Scotland were used, was because they were the least populated. Whereever they do build them, the locals should get free eleccy for life as a sweetner. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

24-05-2007, 03:31 PM	#8 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,797	Conventional power stations near Bristol? Any ideas where these might be?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode