Protesters demand an end to nuclear trains in Gloucester

Press release from STAND:

On Friday the 26th September members of Stand Against Nuclear Development (STAND) are going to demonstrate and leaflet at Gloucester station.

This is in protest at the transport of water-filled flasks carrying highly-radioactive fuel rods from Hinkley nuclear power station to Sellafield nuclear complex in Cumbria for reprocessing, which pass through Gloucester weekly. As well as these highly radioactive flasks there are also flasks of intermediate level waste from 5 different nuclear power stations in the UK which go through Gloucester on their way to Berkeley for storage.

James Greenwood, prospective Forest of Dean parliamentary candidate for the Green party, said: “We are calling for this transport to stop, 1) because these flasks emit low-level radiation – and exposure to any increase in radiation levels means increased risk of cancers, particularly thyroid cancer in children; 2) In a serious accident the flasks would break open, releasing highly-radioactive material into the surrounding environment, causing deaths and requiring mass evacuation.  Can you imagine trying to evacuate Gloucester before the wind covered the city in radio-active poison?”

Barbara French, secretary of STAND added, “We are also calling for plans for building new nuclear power stations in the UK to be scrapped, since operating such stations would mean high-level nuclear waste continuing to be produced for many more decades into the future. This will either have to be stored in the area of the power station, threatening more cancers locally, or be transported by rail to Sellafield, with the dangers this would represent. This is just one of many reasons why STAND opposes the proposed huge new nuclear development at Oldbury.”

This protest in Gloucester is part of a coordinated protest against nuclear trains and nuclear power that is taking place up and down the country this weekend at stations used by trains carrying nuclear waste.

Philip Booth, a Stroud District Green Party member said: "We hugely welcome fellow Glos Greens raising this issue. Highly-radioactive fuel rods from Hinkley nuclear power station travel to Sellafield in Cumbria for reprocessing via Gloucester every week. There are also flasks of intermediate level waste from five different nuclear power stations in the UK which go through Gloucester on their way to Berkeley for storage. It is time to ditch dinosaur risky, uneconomic nuclear technology and embrace renewables...."

Further information about the plans for the new nuclear power station at Oldbury can be found on STAND’s website, www.standagainstoldbury.org



STAND is an independent campaigning group not affiliated to the Green Party. We support them because we share their view that nuclear power is too dangerous and unsustainable. We are glad to host news, press releases, events and announcements from any group, organisation, charity, or business that share our aims and beliefs.

 

Nuclear waste is a huge issue for us on Severnside

Taken from STAND's newsletter. www.standagainstoldbury.org     

Angela Paine and Nimue Brown of Stroud Greens discovered at the Oldbury Community stakeholder meeting that, although Oldbury has not yet started sending waste to Berkeley, there are already 5 Nuclear Power Stations sending their Intermediate Level Waste to Berkeley by rail for storage.

This waste comes via Gloucester and then on to the Sharpness line, going off on a siding to Berkeley.

As well as this, High Level Radioactive waste is transported weekly by rail from Hinkley to Sellafield via Gloucester.

The new station at Oldbury will add to this.

So we will hold an action at Gloucester railway station to make the  population of Gloucestershire aware that this is one of prices they have to pay in order to have Nuclear Power.

We will meet outside Gloucester railway station at 12.00 noon on Friday 26th. September.

There we will disperse onto different platforms to peacefully give out  leaflets.

We will have our “Nuclear Waste Bin” (that we had at Lydney docks) to help draw attention to our action.

It would be helpful if you could let me know if you are likely to be there, as the press always ask “How many people will there be?”

Some information on Nuclear Trains: 

“Nuclear trains" are trains carrying used, but extremely radioactive, nuclear fuel rods from nuclear power stations to Sellafield in Cumbria for reprocessing.

There are over 1,000 nuclear transports through the UK every year. The trains carry spent nuclear fuel on the UK’s rail network – often at peak times and within three meters of ordinary passenger trains.

The trains from each operating Nuclear Power Station typically travel once or twice a week, but this depends on several factors: the number of fuel rods in the cooling ponds, the length of time they have been there, and the current state of the relevant reprocessing plant at Sellafield. For example, at the time of this writing there is a problem with the reprocessing at Sellafield, and some stations (eg. Sizewell have been told they may have to hold their fuel rods 2 or 3 years).

An unnecessary risk.

The fuel rods are taken to Sellafield for reprocessing to separate out the plutonium. The main use of plutonium is in nuclear weapons and there is apparently a world glut of this extremely dangerous substance.

The reprocessing does not reduce the total radioactivity but produces a much greater volume of somewhat lower level radioactivity, which still has to be dealt with as a highly toxic waste - as well as releasing some radioactive waste into the environment. The highly toxic waste will be radioactive for thousands of years.

Highly dangerous cargo

There are two main types of reactors in UK power stations, which use somewhat different fuel. The types are known as Magnox (Magnesium alloy is used to clad the fuel rods) and AGR (Advanced Gas cooled Reactor). There is also one PWR (Pressurized Water Reactor), at Sizewell. After nuclear fuel has been used it is far more radioactive and requires heavy shielding. So although new fuel rods are usually transported by road, used rods are transported by rail. "Nuclear trains" is a short way to refer to the trains which carry used fuel rods from nuclear power stations.

The used rods contain uranium and plutonium and are extremely radioactive. When taken from the reactor they are stored in cooling ponds at the power station for up to 18 months (thus contaminating the water). The rods are then loaded into water-filled lead-lined steel containers called 'flasks', onto which a lid is bolted. Each 50-ton flask is then washed down to remove radioactive surface contamination, loaded onto a lorry which carries it to the nearest railhead, then transferred onto a flat-bed railway wagon (which weighs about 100 tons). A metal cover or 'cabin' is placed over each flask.

Each flask contains about 2 tons of rods, and about 1 million Curies of radioactivity, or 37 thousand million million Bequerels (one Bequerel is equivalent to one click on a geiger counter; the Hiroshima bomb released about 3 million Curies). The outside surface of these flasks emit radiation well above background levels: even the 14-inch thick walls are inadequate shielding against the highly radioactive rods. If the water coolant was lost, the fuel rods would overheat then combust, dispersing a massive dose of radioactivity into the atmosphere. They are a highly dangerous cargo, which the industry insist on calling "spent fuel", thus implying that it is neither waste nor especially hazardous.

Risk of terrorism

The transport of nuclear material is recognised by the International Atomic Energy Agency to be the nuclear operation most vulnerable to terrorist attack or sabotage and tests have shown the flasks to be highly vulnerable to attack from armour piercing rounds. Nuclear transports are unescorted other than by a driver and a guardsman. Their movements tend to be regular and along a single route.

Accidents DO happen

In October 2005, due to simple human error, a cargo of radioactive nuclear waste sat unprotected at Bridgewater station for hours, less than 100  metres from a school.

Nuclear waste trains on the Dungeness to Wilesdan  route have twice been  involved in collisions with vehicles on an unmanned level crossing.

In January of this year a car on a level crossing collided with a Spent fuel rod train going to Sellafield at Silverdale Lancashire. Most fortunately the accident happened on the trains return journey so it was empty. But ………….

“Movement of nuclear materials is inherently risky both in terms of severe accident and terrorist attack. Not all accident scenarios and accident severities can be foreseen; it is only possible to maintain a limited security cordon around the flask and its consignment; the transportation route will invariably pass through or nearby centres of population; terrorists are able to seek out and exploit vulnerabilities in the transport arrangements and localities on the route; and emergency planning is difficult to maintain over the entire route.”

Independent nuclear expert John Large, 2006

So please join us if you are able,

on Friday, 26th September,

at 12.00noon, Gloucester railway station.

And please let me know if you can come.

Better ways to power our future

Taken with permission from the July 2014 STAND against Oldbury newsletter.

www.standagainstoldbury.org  

Wrong technology, wrong place, better ways to power our future

STAND is at present trying to find ways to get the people of Bristol aware of the plans for new Oldbury - and all the problems connected with it.  In October we will be taking part in Nationally organised events to highlight the issue of Nuclear waste. In the meantime, here is some national and International news.

This week the Government has said that communities could be paid millions of pounds just to consider having a facility to bury nuclear waste in their area.

Community projects could receive payments of up to £1 million a year if local people engage with officials about developing a geological disposal facility to permanently store underground the radioactive waste from nuclear power, industry and defence.

The figure would rise to £2.5 million a year if drilling of bore-holes to assess the suitability of a site went ahead - money that would be "no strings attached" as the community would still not be tied in to hosting a site.

However, alongside the bribes, the Government has removed a local council’s right to stop the process, as it is no longer possible for any one, single, layer of government to refuse to host the waste, as happened at Cumbria, making a mockery of any attempt at consultation.

With the process of talking to communities and investigating sites taking up to two decades, communities could be paid more than £40 million without committing to accepting a £12 billion nuclear waste facility - with increased payments if it gets the go-ahead.

The Government said going ahead with a facility, would be paid for by the taxpayer and take 100 years to plan, construct, fill and seal off.

 Greenpeace UK energy campaigner Louise Hutchins said: "This is a bullying and bribing approach by a government that is getting desperate about solving this problem.

"First David Cameron reneged on his promises not to allow new nuclear reactors until the problem of waste disposal was solved. Now he's resorting to bribing reluctant communities just to talk about nuclear waste whilst stripping them of the right to veto it.

"A better use of this money and political will would be to spend it on the proven clean energy technologies that don't require thousands of years and billions of pounds to clean up."

STAND steering group hold meeting with Chris Gifford

Taken with permission from the July 2014 STAND against Oldbury newsletter.

www.standagainstoldbury.org  

Last week a group of STAND members had a very useful meeting with the author of books on Nuclear Power and a retired Health and Safety Executive  chief for engineering. The key points he talked about were:

·      Most people are not aware of a lack of evacuation plans and the fact you can not insure your home against radiation.

·      The safety review following Fukushima has done nothing to protect us against a similar accident. The only difference is that emergency plans have been extended from 2 to 2.5 km where the limit goes through an area of population.

·      The Government is still planning for 10 new nuclear stations.

·      The nuclear lobby is powerful and self perpetuating through bodies such as Royal Society of Engineers.

·      The Health and Safety Executive for NP has now become the Office for Nuclear Regulation.  ONR is paid for by the nuclear industry while being the only safety overseer. There is concern that ONR is bringing in a new culture, which includes "supporting economic growth", while still "holding industry to account".

Not so carbon neutral nuclear

c. Russ

One of the arguments used to support the nuclear industry is that it is clean. Leaving aside what happens when nuclear goes wrong (and everyone always promises that it is perfectly safe, except for those few times, that could never possibly happen here, which we are to believe...) and leaving aside the issue of having radioactive waste that will have to be stored securely for thousands of years, is there any merit to the ‘carbon neutral’ claim?

Those of us who lived near Berkley and Oldbury stations when they were running, know that they did not belch smoke into the air in the manner of a traditionally ‘dirty’ fossil fuels station. However, there is more to the life, and carbon impact of a nuclear power station than what it does in the moment of producing energy.

If this is something you’d like to know more about, do please have a read of Dr Iain Fairle’s recent piece in The Ecologist – nuclear power is no answer to global warming

 Dr Iain Fairlie is an independent consultant on radioactivity in the environment who has spoken in Stroud on several occasions. You can find out more about his visits to Stroud here  and more about Dr Fairlie here.

A viable future

On March 11th, people all over the world remembered the victims of the Fukushima Nuclear disaster 3 years ago. In the Forest of Dean, STAND (Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development), organised a special commemorative meeting on the harbour wall of Lydney Docks to remember the people of Fukushima.

With nuclear development on the agenda for Oldbury, people in Gloucestershire are increasingly aware of our vulnerability.  Fukushima showed us all too plainly that flooding at the Oldbury site would put us all in danger – a real risk given rising sea levels and climate change bringing more torrential rain. We do not want to be the world’s next nuclear disaster. We do not want to be the tragic dead whose memory future protestors will gather to commemorate.  

Stroud’s Molly Scott-Cato, the Green Party MEP candidate for the South West, was one of the speakers and features in this film by Philip Booth.

We need a sane, sustainable future based on safe technology, not highly dangerous and destructive nuclear energy, which is far from clean once you take into account the process of sourcing and refining uranium.

http://www.nuclearsevernside.co.uk/

.

Plans For new Nuclear Development at Oldbury

This is a press release from STAND which we are sharing because the Green Party does not believe reliance on nuclear power to be the way forwards.

Artist's impression of proposed nuclear power station at Oldbury (based on plans published by Horizon

Plans For new Nuclear Development at Oldbury will have appalling impact on local area say local groups.

Stroud directly downwind from massive new nuclear plant.

DJs Stroud Calling and the Blue Moon Collective to hold benefit roadshow in support of campaign group on Saturday 1st February.

A roadshow organised by STAND (Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development) will be held at The Market Tavern, Union Street, Stroud, on Saturday, 1st February at 7.30. STAND say they will produce evidence that a proposed nuclear power plant to be built at Oldbury on Severn is unnecessary, unsafe, dangerous to health and a hugely expensive method of producing electricity; and that a leading international statistician and epidemiologist has calculated that there is a one in 300 chance of a serious Fukushima type accident at the nuclear power station.

There will also be a talk from Dennis Hayden, a nuclear test veteran, about the dangers to health from routine low-level radiation releases from nuclear power stations

The audience can ask questions and voice their opinions on a proposal which, STAND claim, could have enormous implications for the whole area.

After the talk there will be music from DJs Stroud Calling and the Blue Moon Collective. There is no charge for admission.

Hitachi, probably best known in this country for its televisions, has joined forces with Horizon to produce a huge new nuclear power plant at Oldbury on Severn. They plan to build 3 or 4 huge new reactors next to the old power station which will produce 8 times the electricity of the old station.

The new nuclear plants will be just a few miles as the crow flies from Stroud, which is well within the evacuation zone imposed after the Fukushima disaster and directly downwind from the prevailing south westerlies. They will be using the new Advanced Boiling Water Reactors which have been approved in the USA but not yet in any other country. The advantage of this type of reactor is that they can be built quickly.

Given the ongoing environmental disaster at Fukushima, Japan, some local environmentalists are concerned about the safety of any Nuclear development here in the UK. But with this particular proposal there are extra concerns.

Barbara French of Severnside Together Against Nuclear Development (STAND) claims that it is utter folly to consider building a new nuclear station on the site.

"With rising sea levels, and the history of a tsunami and a sea surge of 3 meters above normal high tide up the Severn, it is madness to be building on that site" she said. "It can only be a matter of time before it suffers a catastrophic flood, one way or another. Should there be a serious accident, the experience of Chernobyl in the Ukraine, and more recently Fukishima in Japan, shows that not only Stroud but Gloucester, Bristol and surrounding areas would be uninhabitable, perhaps for ever. And, unlike in Japan, there appear to be no plans at all to protect the local population should there be an accident. "

Another concern is the size of the development. "They say that plans produced by Horizon show the intended reactor size will be 4 times the size of the present reactor building", said Barbara French, "and on top of that, the three or four cooling towers will be absolutely enormous and an eyesore. According to Horizon’s own report it will even be visible from Stroud and surrounding areas". [See artist's impression based on Horizons own plans]

For a local Green Party report on nuclear power, have a look here.

Nuclear power is not a cheap option

A letter from one of our local Green councillors, Martin Whiteside, tackling nuclear issues. Re-blogged for the benefit of those of you who may otherwise have missed it.

23^rd October 2013

 

Dear Editor,

The agreement to let the French and Chinese build a new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset has serious implications for us in Gloucestershire.  If we are not careful, next in line could be the go ahead to build a massive new nuclear power station close to us on the Severn at Oldbury. If something went wrong, (like happened at Fukushima, Chernobyl or  Three Mile Island) this would, at average wind speeds, carry radioactive contamination to us in Dursley in 40 minutes, Stonehouse in one hour and Nailsworth or Stroud in 1 hour 20 minutes.

Nuclear power is not only dangerous, it also makes no economic sense. These nuclear power stations will only be built with a guaranteed price subsidy from you and me and our children - on our electricity bills for the next 35 years. Our higher bills will be subsidising shareholders and taxpayers in France and China for a generation! Does handing over this technology to foreign companies make us more energy secure in an uncertain future? The Greens don’t think so. Who will be left with the legacy of the nuclear waste (we still have found a way of dealing with our existing waste – let alone any new waste!) - we will! Who will suffer if there is an accident – we will!

The Green Party energy policy is based on the latest scientific evidence. It shows how we can live comfortable lives without nuclear, while still radically reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. We need to invest more in energy conservation and genuine renewables. The good news is that this will also create many more local jobs than nuclear, and with technologies that are locally owned and creating local profit. It makes a lot of sense.

Martin Whiteside – Green Party District Councillor

Free talk on the nuclear future of Gloucestershire

The Green Party is sponsoring a talk on Thursday the 26^th of September: Waste Not, Want Not - the Future of Radioactive Waste and Nuclear Safety in Gloucestershire.  Nuclear engineer John Large will talk about radioactive waste and the threats to Gloucestershire.

 

According to http://www.horizonnuclearpower.com/oldbury “The 420 acres (170 hectares) of land next to a former nuclear power station at Oldbury is included on the Government's list of sites that have been deemed potentially suitable for new nuclear development.” There is a planning process before building can take place, and it will take years. “Potentially suitable” is not a done deal.

 

There are questions we should all be asking about our future. How will the planned Oldbury Nuclear Power Station affect us? Where and how would the waste be stored? What would happen in a containment failure?

 

John Large will talk about the proposed new nuclear power station at Oldbury and the radioactive waste it will generate. The fully illustrated presentation will consider the options for dealing with the existing and future radioactive waste at Oldbury, how the quantity and dispersion of this waste might be enormously increased and spread in the event of an accident.
 
John Large is an independent nuclear engineer and analyst, known primarily for his work reporting on nuclear safety and nuclear-related accidents and incidents. He has undertaken research for the UK Atomic Energy Authority and produced reports for Greenpeace Germany, Greenpeace France and Friends of the Earth.  In 2011, he gave evidence to the European Parliament, challenging the arguably inadequate proposals to review the European Community’s nuclear safety requirements following the Fukushima disaster.

 

Waste Not, Want Not - the Future of Radioactive Waste and Nuclear Safety in Gloucestershire, takes place on the 26^th of September, 7.30pm, Old Town Hall, The Shambles, High St, Stroud GL5 1AP, Free admission to this informative event. Teas, coffees and cakes to cover costs.

The Nuclear Industry, Government and the Media

Have you ever wondered why we receive so little information about the ill-fated nuclear reactors at Fukushima? Or the massive, year-long protests against proposed new nuclear reactors on the East and West coasts of India? Or even about Scotland's decision to be nuclear-free? Why do we hear so little about the ill-effects of nuclear power, its enormous cost and legacy of dangerous radioactive waste?

In 2004 Andrew Brown, Gordon Brown's brother, was hired by the world's largest nuclear power provider, Electricite de France (EDF), as head of media relations. In 2008, EDF bought British Energy and its eight old nuclear power stations. In 2010, the nuclear industry worldwide peaked, before beginning its rapid decline to the present level, the same as 10 years ago. EDF's shares began their downward slide and the prospect of them being allowed to build any more new nuclear power plants in France looked less and less likely. In 2011, as their share value continued to plummet, EDF formed a stakeholder advisory panel, employing Chris Patten, chair of the BBC Trust, as chair of the panel and Diane Coyle, vice chair of the BBC Trust, as a member the panel. She is married to BBC News Technology Correspondent, Rory Cellan-Jones. Other members of the panel include Will Hutton, former editor of the Observer and a leading commentator on social and political affairs, and Sir Richard Lambert, former director of the CBI and former editor of the Financial Times. Chris Patten is linked to David Cameron through Patten's former chief of staff, who is now chief of staff to Cameron.

The British public have been subjected to a barrage of pro-nuclear publicity, including mantras such as 'Nuclear is carbon free' and 'We need nuclear to keep the lights on'. But the cost of nuclear new-build has risen exponentially over the past decade, and EDF has now lost 85% of its share value while the cost of many forms of renewable energy has fallen and continues to fall.

EDF has been promised numerous Government subsidies to help cover the costs of nuclear new build, while Hitachi, who were responsible for the design of the Fukushima reactors and bought the land adjacent to the old Oldbury nuclear power plant, are watching with interest to see how much taxpayer money they can rely on. Do we really want to allow Hitachi to build a new nuclear power plant at Oldbury?

Angela Paine

Together with Nadine Smykatz-Kloss and John Marjoram, Angela has organised two talks on aspects of nuclear energy. The dates for your diary are:

Thursday, 26th September: John Large will talk about radioactive waste and threats to Gloucestershire.

Wednesday, 30th October: Roger Moody will talk about the devastating environmental impact of uranium mining and ask whether nuclear power really is carbon neutral

Both talks will take place in the Old Town Hall in Stroud, from 7.30 till 9.30pm.