News

Dear Editor,
Re: Campaigners for Nuclear Power Station at Dungeness deliver petition to Prime Minister
The problem is not just the habitats but also development on a low lying flood plain which with probable sea level rises from melting polar ice-caps makes a new station risky.

The constant need to move the shingle banks beside the current stations are basically a hidden subsidy to the nuclear industry in this instance.

Will EDF etc guarantee to pay their way on this, especially when they are in financial trouble anyway?

Further, developers find it much cheaper to build twin reactor stations - though those already being built in France/Finland etc have been beset by delays of years already - and Dungeness would only support an uneconomic single reactor.

The 8-10 sites already listed across the country are already enough, if new build goes ahead, to supply the required UK needs anyway.

New stations also need to have high level waste on site for the life time of it (60 odd years) before transfer to storage elsewhere.

Sellafield is already full to bursting from old station waste and the plans for underground dumping of this are yet to get going and also very expensive to do.

A new station at Dungeness would have to be underneath the site in a large water tank. Another water tank for cooling etc would be built on top of such reactors. Thus a water-tank 'sandwich'.

Dungeness is also near Lydd Airport which again could make it vulnerable to plane attack - maybe even if hopefully no expansion allowed (very occasionally small pax jets are diverted during peak periods elsewhere.)

Such a site would also require a new line of pylons across the Marsh and inland as the cables are larger and would not be able to hang from existing ones.

The UK has dragged its feet over renewables for far too long, whilst others have accelerated things, like Germany's solar industry.

The time has come, with people in the Marsh area planning solar farms, and Ashford Council investigating solar panels on its council homes for instance, to establish small-scale renewables factories on the Marsh instead of new nuclear. These would be ready far sooner than a 'C' station anyway.

Granted flooding in the longer term and the 'B' road nature of the Marsh is also a problem, but such factories would be far easier to 'move' to higher ground if or when necessary, so preserving most local jobs. This alongside expanding 'green' tourism, for which there is already money UK and EU, is a better way forward in this area.

Yours

Ray Duff