News

Dungeness nuclear stations - underwater within 100 years

Posted by editor on Nov 29, 2009 - 02:32 PM
Filed under: Environment, Have your say!

Dear Editor,

The fact that the beach beside the two power stations has to be maintained by diggers on a 24/7 basis, should indicate quite clearly the real reason why Dungeness was rejected.

The existing stations will most definitely be underwater within 100 years due to natural coastal erosion.

Its hardly common sense to build a monolithic new station which will be highly radioactive and therefore immovable for at least a thousand years is it ?

The government would rather not directly cite this as the key reason for abandoning Dungeness in case the media drew attention to the the coastal erosion at other intended sites. For example the districts around Cumbria, which already are clearly a flood zone anyway.

Ivor Windscale

© Hawkinge Gazette and Channel Coast News 2009

Comments


Author	Your Comment

Barrie Botley	Your Headline:: Did you know Dungeness would have been a nuclear waste dump posted:: Nov 30, 2009

not registered	I wonder how many people knew that had the decision to build a new nuclear power station at Dungeness, the site would have accumulated very high level radioactive waste for the lifetime of the reactors. It would have become a very high level radioactive nuclear waste dump. Unlike the A & B stations where spent fuel is removed from site on a weekly basis, new reactors store waste on site. The waste would be so hot and high in radioactivity that it could not be touched for over 100 years after the plant had ended its useful life, in total 160 years from its start up date. This fact was vehemently denied by all bar the Lib Dem Shepway District Councillors at their meeting last Wednesday 25th Nov. A row ensued after Lib Dem Councillor Lynne Beaumont made the claim. How is it that a large number of councillors denied that radioactive waste would be stored on site when they voted a motion to support the reinstatement of Dungeness to the new build list. I think it is scandalous that that was probably the largest and potentially most dangerous building project they would ever have to decide upon and they were not aware of the most important facts. I wonder if it had anything to do with the fact that at the many nuclear new build presentations held in Shepway British Energy never mentioned anything about this issue. Barrie Botley, Kent Against a Radioactive Environment (KARE)


Varrie Blowers	Your Headline:: Storage of high-level radioactive waste from new nuclear build posted:: Dec 01, 2009

not registered	Shepway District Councillors are seriously misinformed. The Nuclear National Policy Statement, announced on 9 November, states quite clearly that high-level radioactive waste will be stored at all new nuclear power station sites for around 160 years (i.e. during operations and for 100 years thereafter) (Draft National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power Generation EN-6, 3.8.17). This means that there will 10 high-level radioactive waste dumps around the coast of England (with one in Wales), some of which are crumbling, like Dungeness. Varrie Blowers, Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG)