Nuclear sites consultation starts
As the consultation begins on which sites should go forward for Nuclear New Build, all three previously proposed locations in Copeland are still in the frame.
Locations at Sellafield, Braystones and Kirksanton have all been included by the Department of Energy & Climate Change in a final list of 10 sites for public consultation. This will take place over the 15 week period which starts today and concludes on February 22.
I believe that new nuclear build is very much in the interests of Britain and that Copeland has a great deal to offer as a site for new nuclear facilities. We need to consider the advantages and problems of all the sites which have been nominated very carefully.
Given the constraints on grid capacity and local infrastructure, I have my doubts about whether new nuclear build on more than one site in West Cumbria is likely. The arguments in favour of Sellafield as the site do appear stronger than either of the other sites. My colleague David Moore has called on RWE to drop its plans for Kirksanton and Braystones.
“For most people, Sellafield is the preferred site, it makes sense having everything in the same place and I think all our weight should go behind the plans for Sellafield." he said. "This would remove all the anxiety and worry surrounding the proposed Braystones and Kirksanton locations.”
Locations at Sellafield, Braystones and Kirksanton have all been included by the Department of Energy & Climate Change in a final list of 10 sites for public consultation. This will take place over the 15 week period which starts today and concludes on February 22.
I believe that new nuclear build is very much in the interests of Britain and that Copeland has a great deal to offer as a site for new nuclear facilities. We need to consider the advantages and problems of all the sites which have been nominated very carefully.
Given the constraints on grid capacity and local infrastructure, I have my doubts about whether new nuclear build on more than one site in West Cumbria is likely. The arguments in favour of Sellafield as the site do appear stronger than either of the other sites. My colleague David Moore has called on RWE to drop its plans for Kirksanton and Braystones.
“For most people, Sellafield is the preferred site, it makes sense having everything in the same place and I think all our weight should go behind the plans for Sellafield." he said. "This would remove all the anxiety and worry surrounding the proposed Braystones and Kirksanton locations.”
Comments
Have you formally announced your resignation from the party?
There was a review of Conservative policy towards nuclear power earlier in this parliament. During that period Zak Goldsmith put forward, as he was entitled to do, the anti-nuclear argument, but this was never the majority view within the parliamentary party or generally. The party quite clearly came off the fence in favour of nuclear more than a year ago.
The land near Sellafield is the obvious site. Development within the vicinity of Sellafield, minimising the visual impact on our beautiful Cumbrian scenery makes sense. Kirksanton and Braystones are ‘virgin’ sites and building in these areas has huge environmental ramifications. Whilst the villages are small the villagers have rights and these ought to be respected in the consultation process.
There are environmental issues; Kirksanton borders a RAMSAR site and a SSSI site protected by international law. Cooling water in the sea could raise the temperature impacting the ecological balance. Kirksanton though outside the boundaries of the National Park is in sufficiently close proximity to have a visual impact on the National Park.
On the other side of the equation, a good many Millomites see the economic benefits of a site at Kirksanton. The perception that most of the area’s wealth is returned to Whitehaven leads them to believe that a development at Sellafield alone will lead to more of the same.
Sellafield has a problem with water supply. The rivers and lakes from which water is sourced are worked to full capacity. The site of the proposed development is distant from the sea. It would be possible to extract water from the sea and build a plant to desalinate it, but Kirksanton and Braystones may have more immediate supplies of water.
If these projects are commercially driven then Kirksanton and Braystones may still be in the equation. Clearly there are a lot of hurdles to get through and the impact on the environment and the lives of the residents should be at the forefront of the decision-making in the planning process.
Additionally it would make sense commercially to maximise the number of reactors in the area, as the cost of developing transportation to the National Grid will be high. Three reactors have been proposed at Sellafield, but a capacity of nine has been muted. (Still pending water supply.) If establishing grid transport is costly, would it not be the more commercially viable option to utilise all three sites? Is it all or nothing?
It appears that Jamie Reed may have been a little premature in popping the champagne corks for Sellafield, as I understand it the £70 million paid for the land is part of some form of options agreement, payable in instalments, the last not being due until the actual building starts. Clearly it is a serious bid, as the company would not risk good money without reasonable probability of a return. RWE N-Power also has put down serious money.
Nothing at this stage seems a foregone conclusion. Other sites are in the frame nationally. If this is commercially driven then I believe Jamie Reed is very much in the dark as to the outcome. It is essential that local politicians get wise as to what is going on and do the best for the whole of Copeland. If Sellafield is the preferred site then the wealth and infrastructural benefits need to be shared throughout the district.
Personally I would prefer Sellafield alone from an environmental perspective, along with assurances that the wealth and benefits will be shared throughout the district. I sincerely hope that economic common sense is weighted against the wishes of local people, the needs of the nation, concern for the environment and the technical details that the developers will have to overcome.
Jamie Reed should cut out the PR kidding for the sake of balanced evaluation for the benefit of the community rather using it to promote his election campaign.