Nuclear is not the answer

Before solving the problem of radioactive waste management, to embark on a new round of waste creation to add to what has already been amassed, is bizarre. Renewables can, and indeed must, meet all our energy requirements, and have as yet been barely investigated or developed. Fully exploited, wind alone could provide at least 20% of current demand, and with storage technology already well developed, can be available as a constant source. The simplistic idea that when the wind stops blowing in one place there is no electricity, is ignorant. Wind turbines can be sited on high ground or out at sea, either way, the wind is blowing most of the time in these locations, which anyone who spends time outside appreciates.

River turbines producing energy have not been mentioned by anyone, yet once rivers were major sources of energy and could be again. With increased rainfall predicted, this would be a useful byproduct of floods, but also a continuous source of power except in the case of widespread drought. There are still many unused waterwheels on rivers, these could be refurbished to make a start.

Anaerobic digestion of human and animal waste with the gas produced utilised and fed into the gas supply grid for public consumption has also yet to be explored, although it is being trialed on a few farms at present, with the local community benefiting. Hereford and Worcester authority turns its seage into gas this way, and if all sewage plants were to have digesters and compressors added, this would not only remove a huge amount of the methane, one of the greenhouse gases, presently being emitted into the environment, but would also be supplying yet more renewable energy. This could be implemented immediately, as fast as it takes to build digesters. Somewhat quicker than nuclear reactors.

A solar roofs project to retrofit as many houses as possible as fast as possible across the country with photovoltaic [PV] panels, while changing building regulations to compel builders to incorporate them into all new builds with the purpose of making all new houses energy neutral, should be a priority. Concentration on completing all home insulation projects as soon as possible, and changes in the law to raise the energy efficiency of ALL new electrical appliances as well as light bulbs would also substantially affect the amount of energy needed. Possibly a removal of standby mode from TVs and other electronic devices would be useful, or at the very least an education campaign to persuade people not to use standby due to it using 60% of normal consumption, and is often left on for hours.

With all these measures there is no need to replace any nuclear stations with new nuclear [same as old nuclear but with added bullshit], and all coal fired stations can be replaced with biogas stations as they come to the end of their lives. Short term, any or all of these renewables are faster to implement than nuclear could ever be, many of them could be contributing energy within months, not decades as with nuclear.

Nuclear is a technological fantasy which can never deliver more than it presently does. The government may find much opposition to any attempt to build new nuclear stations, even if the French are panting to get stuck in and cover this country with the monstrosities like they have France. The population, apart from a tiny but vocal loony minority, are in favour of renewables, especially those communities which have benefited directly, and with a little more government help many would jump at the chance to get involved and do something positive in their own lives. This is where vision would meet a popular response if it existed in this anodyne bunch of managers we call government.