Comments on: Labour, losing its soul over nuclear http://www.jonworth.eu/labour-losing-its-soul-over-nuclear/ At the intersection of the EU, UK politics and tech Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:28:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: James Rogers http://www.jonworth.eu/labour-losing-its-soul-over-nuclear/comment-page-1/#comment-80453 James Rogers Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:33:49 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/labour-losing-its-soul-over-nuclear/#comment-80453 Yes but Jon, the disaster in Ukraine is very unlikely to happen to any nuclear power plant in Western Europe. The Chernobyl plant used a very dangerous form of reactor, which has not—to my knowledge—ever been used in the West. A few of these old-style reactors linger in the Baltic states and there are plenty still in Russia, but any remaining in the European Union are being phased out, part I thought due to enlargement obligations. In an ideal world, it would be nice to get rid of fission plants, but these seem the best of a gaggle of bad options. We can't burn coal—even though we have plenty of it in Europe—because it is too polluting. Our oil reserves are running out, and this is also polluting. Our gas is running low in the North Sea, and we don't want to have to import any from the Russians, as we can see what bag of worms that will bring about. And while we should certainly be investing far more into renewable sources—including nuclear fusion—these are still in their infancy, while the only economically viable source of clean power is wind, but the sporadic nature of the wind means that wind turbines can only supplement our needs. Nuclear energy therefore seems to be a plausible and appropriate response to the energy dilemma. That is why I—as a Labour Party member—support its enhancement. I also support the continuance of our nuclear deterrent, although I think we should work with France to upgrade it, seeing that our needs in this area should really be coterminous. I may be an idealist, but I do know that nuclear disarmament is a pure fantasy—and probably dangerous too! Yes but Jon, the disaster in Ukraine is very unlikely to happen to any nuclear power plant in Western Europe. The Chernobyl plant used a very dangerous form of reactor, which has not—to my knowledge—ever been used in the West. A few of these old-style reactors linger in the Baltic states and there are plenty still in Russia, but any remaining in the European Union are being phased out, part I thought due to enlargement obligations.

In an ideal world, it would be nice to get rid of fission plants, but these seem the best of a gaggle of bad options. We can’t burn coal—even though we have plenty of it in Europe—because it is too polluting. Our oil reserves are running out, and this is also polluting. Our gas is running low in the North Sea, and we don’t want to have to import any from the Russians, as we can see what bag of worms that will bring about. And while we should certainly be investing far more into renewable sources—including nuclear fusion—these are still in their infancy, while the only economically viable source of clean power is wind, but the sporadic nature of the wind means that wind turbines can only supplement our needs.

Nuclear energy therefore seems to be a plausible and appropriate response to the energy dilemma. That is why I—as a Labour Party member—support its enhancement. I also support the continuance of our nuclear deterrent, although I think we should work with France to upgrade it, seeing that our needs in this area should really be coterminous. I may be an idealist, but I do know that nuclear disarmament is a pure fantasy—and probably dangerous too!

]]>