The Peakist

One thing would have prevented decades of radioactive pollution in the far north of Scotland: open government, George Monbiot

It is as far out of sight, and as far out of mind, as any place on the British mainland could be. From the point of view of our political leaders, this is just as well. If the perennial farce at the Dounreay nuclear site, on the north coast of Scotland, were any closer to the surface of public consciousness, we would be hounding and haranguing them wherever they go. A report in this weekend’s Sunday Times suggests that the agencies charged with cleaning the site up have, in effect, conceded defeat. Dounreay - or the area surrounding it - cannot be wholly decontaminated. Nuclear pollution from the site will last for as long as the fissile metals remain radioactive. (more…)

 By JON GERTNER, New York Times

Workers at the Alvin W. Vogtle nuclear-power generating station sometimes describe it as being in the middle of nowhere, and in many respects they’re right: situated on a bend in the Savannah River, in the thick pine forests of central Georgia, the plant is an hour south of Augusta and a two-hour drive, if you disobey the speed limit, from the outskirts of Atlanta.
(more…)

I was interested to see the Sun’s editorial today. Not renowned for dealing with the weightier topics of national debate the Sun nevertheless dutifully weighed in today to support the government’s pro-nuclear stance in the Energy Review. What was intriguing however was to see Britain’s favourite tabloid warning:THE WORLD is on the brink of a new dark age (more…)

The Conservatives have said nuclear power should be used only as “a last resort” to supply the UK with energy.
Their Energy Review’s interim findings say there should be a “level playing field” for environmentally-friendly sources and other means of power.
(more…)

It’s interesting to note in the light of George Monbiot’s polemic that the Observer ‘Energy’ special report, headlined with ‘Earth at the tipping point’ was sponsored by Shell advertising, with www.shellspringboard.org offering funding to small businesses for ‘ideas that combat climate change’. Monbiot’s line “BP and Shell are to Exxon what New Labour is to the old Tories” is apposite. Interesting to see also, two pages before the Monbiot piece “Oil Price likely to fall, says [BP CEO] Browne”

“It is very likely that, in the medium term, prices will stand at about $40 on average. In the very long run, even $25 to $30 are possible,” he said in an interview with the German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel.

Lord Browne accepted that it was unlikely prices would fall sharply in the short term but dismissed notions that the price could only go up as scarcity increased. Large oilfields were still being found, he said, and regions such as west Africa had more hydrocarbons that could be tapped.

He also noted that Canada’s oil sands could also be exploited profitably. Even though they were expensive to bring out of the ground, production costs remained well below world selling prices for crude.”

What are we to make of such optimism - perhaps little given BP’s role in maintaining the fiction of global oil abundance through the Statistical Review. “Chaos ahead, says Brown” would be unlikely to calm investors. But this is hardly ‘Beyond Petroleum’ is it?

And more to the point perhaps someone should tell Brown that the economic viability of tar sand production lies in $50 a barrel and up range, which is why Chavez is pushing OPEC to set this as a minimum barrell price should prices start falling. You can’t have it both ways, you’ve either got $25 a barrel crude or you’ve viable tar sand production and an investment climate open to deep sea exploration.

Uranium production peaked in 1981 and the supply is running out, yet the UK still plans to build more nuclear power plants, writes Michael Meacher.

One of the most serious reasons for opposing Tony Blair’s premature go-ahead for nuclear power has so far not been mentioned. It’s not the impasse over where to dispose of the radioactive waste that will remain highly toxic for 100,000 years, nor the terrorism risk, nor the dangers of building new reactors without containment and near to population centres as is proposed, nor even the cost which makes nuclear utterly uncompetitive once decommissioning is taken into account. The key issue is whether adequate supplies of uranium are available. They are not. (more…)

Seven international parties involved in an experimental nuclear fusion reactor project have initialled a 10bn-euro (£682m) agreement on the plan.

The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (Iter) will be the most expensive joint scientific project after the International Space Station.

Wednesday’s agreement in Brussels gives the go-ahead for practical work on the project to start.

(more…)

by PATRICK MOORE

In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That’s the conviction that inspired Greenpeace’s first voyage up the spectacular rocky Northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands.
(more…)

by Michelle Boyd

Global warming is an undeniable and urgent problem, and support for taking federal action is increasing. Now, a debate is raging about the proper course of action; what will produce the greatest gains in the shortest time?
(more…)

Alternatives unlikely to meet demand for large-scale power
By Andrzej Zwaniecki, Washington File Staff Writer

Washington — Nuclear energy is the best option for large-scale power generation that does not add to emissions associated with global warming, according to U.S. officials, industry representatives and an increasing number of foreign governments and international groups.
(more…)

Britain’s nuclear waste should be buried in deep underground caverns that could take many decades to build, according to the official body set up to advise the Government.

(more…)

Senior British defense officials were scheduled to meet today to
discuss the possibilities and ramifications of an attack on Iran, the Sunday Telegraph reported. General Sir Michael Walker (Pictured), Lt.-Gen. Andrew Ridgway, and Maj.-Gen. Bill Rollo will join government and foreign office representatives.The Telegraph quoted a Foreign Office source as saying, “Monday’s meeting will set out to address the consequences for Britain in the event of an attack against Iran. The CDS [chiefs of defence staff] will want to know what the impact will be on British interests in Iraq and Afghanistan which both border Iran. The CDS will then brief the Prime Minister and the Cabinet on their conclusions in the next few days. If Iran makes another strategic mistake, such as ignoring demands by the UN or future resolutions, then the thinking among the chiefs is that military action could be taken to bring an end to the crisis,” the official continued.

Perhaps this is a good time to review whether Iran poses an imminent threat to global security. (more…)