Ireland & Nuclear Power

Knasher

There was a large and successful movement to ban nuclear power in the 1980s, leaving us extremely reliant on a dwindling fossil fuel supply. We are moving towards renewable sources but it seems unlikely that we will ever be in a position to be 100% reliant on them. At the very least we will need to build more underwater power links to Britain and import nuclear power from them. Given that, if the government proposed a new plan to build a nuclear plant would you still be against it?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0310/1224291778872.html

Government should rescind nuclear power ban, says expert
LORNA SIGGINS, Western Correspondent

THE GOVERNMENT should rescind legislation that bans nuclear power, according to a leading energy advocate.

The Fine Gael-Labour Coalition should also form an expert group to advise on nuclear power generation, Prof Philip Walton said yesterday.

Dwindling fossil fuels and the uncertainty about oil prices makes planning for Ireland’s energy future all the more pressing, he said.

Prof Walton, NUI Galway emeritus professor of applied physics, was one of three speakers addressing the issue of “nuclear power: facts and fiction” at a presentation in NUIG last night.

It is one of a series being held throughout the State by the voluntary group Better Environment with Nuclear Energy (BENE), of which he is a key member.

Prof Walton said the domestic and international energy situation has changed “radically” since opposition to a proposed nuclear power plant at Carnsore Point, Co Wexford, was voiced by thousands attending free concerts there in 1978 and 1979. “Global warning was not an issue then, and there was a plentiful supply of oil and gas,” he said. “Ireland is nearly 90 per cent dependent on imported fossil fuels. Italy, which is similarly dependent like us, began and then stopped a nuclear energy development programme after the 1986 accident at Chernobyl.

“However, Italy is currently progressing the first of 10 such nuclear plants,” he added.

Prof Walton said there had been a “big renaissance” in nuclear energy provision in Europe, mirrored by a new development programme in Britain. Fossil fuels would last only 500 years, from the time of first discovery to time of eventual expiration, he calculated – “a minuscule time period when one considers the length of time it took those geological deposits to form”.

Renewables “have a place” in Ireland’s energy provision, but would only provide a partial solution, in his view. “One of the problems with wind is that there is no reliable and cheap way of storage, and the storage reservoirs proposed by the Spirit of Ireland initiative are very expensive and would have a major environmental impact, given the amount of land required. Our tidal resources are limited, and wave energy has not developed sufficiently yet. A nuclear power plant equivalent to the type of natural energy power plant proposed by Spirit of Ireland would occupy an area equivalent in size to one football pitch, and would have a 60-year lifespan – compared to 25 years for natural energy storage,” Prof Walton said.

Prof Walton and colleagues in BENE have described as a “myth” the argument that disposal of nuclear waste is an unresolved issue. The effects of Chernobyl have been “greatly exaggerated”, he says, while acknowledging that some 6,000 children subsequently developed thyroid cancer in Ukraine and neighbouring states.

The Commission for Energy Regulation recently noted there was no economic case for nuclear power here, while acknowledging Ireland was among the European countries most dependent on imported fossil fuels.

Nolanger

Knasher wrote: »

Given that, if the government proposed a new plan to build a nuclear plant would you still be against it?

Against because we would not give the jobs to nuclear physicists! Instead some gombeens with connections would end up working there. Also, the Women's Council would want some females working there too with flexitime for minding the kids. It would be a disaster!

phill106

Wheres the
Yes id like a nuclear power station for ireland, as long as it isn't in my back yard option?

TheZohanS

Built it in Donegal.

OutlawPete

With the scenes today of Nuclear Power stations at risk of being destroyed and all that could go with that, I think it should be opposed at every turn, even it means that our only option is that we end up living back in the dark ages.

themadchef

More hamsters, bigger wheels.

antodeco

I think Ireland should go the nuclear route. However knowing this country, it would cost 10 times more than it should, not work, and then be used as the new mosney.

Xavi6

Straight away I've spend a good two minutes debating how the title should be pronounced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlHEJtflcmo

Nodin

TheZohan wrote: »

Built it in Donegal.

No, they'd notice.

Build it in Mulhuddart and make sure its well nailed down.

My name is URL

People in Ireland (particularly in the North East) are still freaked out about Sellafield despite the fact that it no longer produces energy. So much so that an agreement to allow the Gardai to access the site had to be reached. I'd say the majority of people would be against one being built here.

Personally I think it's the only way to go. The alternative seems to be the more 'nesserary evil'.

TPD

I'd be happy to have it in my town, so long as the town gets free electricity as way of compensation. Probably wouldn't be a drip of a modern station's output.

24/7 immersion heater, deep bath here I come!

Poor Uncle Tom

Nuclear is old hat....
Regenerating Plasma Coke is where it's at...

Fremen

Wait, why is it a "necessary evil"? Surely a big, dirty coal plant is a lot more evil than a nuclear power plant?

There are designs out there that are very efficient and produce minimal waste. It depends how much you want to spend.

Podge_irl

OutlawPete wrote: »

With the scenes today of Nuclear Power stations at risk of being destroyed and all that could go with that, I think it should be opposed at every turn, even it means that our only option is that we end up living back in the dark ages.

Yes, because the nuclear power plant that ended up being perfectly safe was clearly the worst thing to happen to Japan today.

smk89

Its a good idea. At least of anything goes wrong and we open a portal to another dimension Gordan Freeman would be irish.

Fremen

Maybe we could power part of Ireland using the intense energy of Ryan Tubirdy's smugness.

humanji

The poll needs a "No, it'd be a good thing to have" option.

I'm sure the majority of people who wuold be against it will just be assuming it'd be like Chernobyl and ignore all the properly built plants around the world that don't have any problems.

Plus, if something bad does happen, we all get superpowers. What's not to like?

Poor Uncle Tom

smk89 wrote: »

.....we open a portal to another dimension Gordan Freeman would be irish.

Can we keep trying until we get Jordan Freeman?
...giggidy....:p

squod

TheZohan wrote: »

Built it in Donegal.

Chinatown FTW.



Anyhow ''they'' can't even build a tunnel without it leaking. The hydro + wind solution is easier. Using wind turbines to pump water into reservoirs and making electricity from standard dams and generators. Infinitely more safe and reliable and will generate more jobs for Irish people from start to finish.


Only for the ''green'' party we probably woulda had it built by now. Them feckers and their bluddy Anglo mates f_ing ruining the place.

Badgermonkey

Fremen wrote: »

Maybe we could power part of Ireland using the intense energy of Ryan Tubirdy's smugness.

John O'Donoghues hubris would be more powerful, if significantly less efficient.

Mike 1972

My name is URL wrote: »

People in Ireland (particularly in the North East) are still freaked out about Sellafield despite the fact that it no longer produces energy. So much so that an agreement to allow the Gardai to access the site had to be reached..

Thought Sellafield was in England ?

Knasher

Fremen wrote: »

Maybe we could power part of Ireland using the intense energy of Ryan Tubirdy's smugness.

While it's an abundant fuel source it hardly seems like a good idea to rely on such an environmentally damaging supply. Our country would be unlivable in a generation.

OutlawPete

Podge_irl wrote: »

Yes, because the nuclear power plant that ended up being perfectly safe was clearly the worst thing to happen to Japan today.

Eh, your sarcasm is wasted in your pointless post.

The fact that the power plant is safe is the 'best thing' that happened today.

The last thing the world needs is something that could be a thousand times worse than Chernobyl was.

Nuclear Power plants could always be an option for terrorists (not just natural disasters) and for that reason humanity should avoid building any more of them.

sonic85

no because it would most definitely be botched. id be in favour of a joint effort with england though. go halves with them and they build it

My name is URL

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Thought Sellafield was in England ?

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/government-backs-more-sellafield-visits-333398.html

Scrambled egg

While I like the idea of us relying on nuclear power, I cannot say I would be for it in this country for the simple fact of who would run it. I'd be slightly terrified that it would be the wrong people put in charge of it (jobs for the boys) and compromise the safety of the plant.

Knasher

Fremen wrote: »

Wait, why is it a "necessary evil"? Surely a big, dirty coal plant is a lot more evil than a nuclear power plant?

There are designs out there that are very efficient and produce minimal waste. It depends how much you want to spend.

But it still produces dangerous waste no matter how efficient you get. Hence why I went with necessary evil, because even though I'd prefer something awesome that can produce enough electricity to supply our demands while still only having a minimal environmental impact, fact of the matter is nothing we have at the moment even gets close.

ctrl-alt-delete

What if we just became a power producing nation, hook a load of excercise bikes up to the national grid and pedal like fook.

Alternate the shifts so we are always on the pedals, organise the shifts so we get adequate rest!

That should have 100 per cent employment, get everyone fit and all our power would be green.

Give me a shout Enda if you need further details.

Podge_irl

OutlawPete wrote: »

Eh, your sarcasm is wasted in your pointless post.

The fact that the power plant is safe is the 'best thing' that happened today.

The last thing the world needs is something that could be a thousand times worse than Chernobyl was.

Nuclear Power plants could always be an option for terrorists (not just natural disasters) and for that reason humanity should avoid building any more of them.

The power plant survived an 8.9 magnitude quake and ensuing tsunami. No doubt terrorists could orchestrate a 9.0 quake or something. I will take you more seriously if you provide me some kind of feasible scenario in which a terrorist could cause a catastrophic event of the magnitude you are inferring.

You may as well suggest we don't build dams cause terrorists could blow them up. Hell, that could well cause more damage.

An event 1,000 times worse then Chernobyl (which won't happen btw) still wouldn't come close to the level of damage all the world's fossil fuel plants cause already.

Mike 1972

My name is URL wrote: »

People in Ireland (particularly in the North East) are still freaked out about Sellafield despite the fact that it no longer produces energy.

For most of its life Its primary purpose wasnt really the production of energy.

It was mainly a reprocessing facility and as such was widely opposed even by some who wouldnt necessarily object to nuclear power per se.

WolfForager

Knasher wrote: »

While it's an abundant fuel source it hardly seems like a good idea to rely on such an environmentally damaging supply. Our country would be unlivable in a generation.

Wait what? How could it be anymore environmentally damaging than Poolbeg? Have you seen the amount of carbon that monstrosity emits from it's chinmneys??

Podge_irl

Knasher wrote: »

But it still produces dangerous waste no matter how efficient you get. Hence why I went with necessary evil, because even though I'd prefer something awesome that can produce enough electricity to supply our demands while still only having a minimal environmental impact, fact of the matter is nothing we have at the moment even gets close.

Humanity is a necessary evil by that criteria.

Incidentally, a nuclear reactor is a perfectly natural phenomenon.

mahamageehad

I would be against a power plant. I would simply not trust a power plant built in Ireland. Look at the rest of Ireland. Most government projects so far have ran way over budget, way over deadlines and still had major problems.

I think it's ridiculous that Ireland, a small island, hasn't really started harvesting wave, wind and solar power. I am open to correction but the % of energy made up from these technologies must be minimal and aren't a lot of them privately owned?

WolfForager

Solar energy isn't feasible in Ireland. Getting planning permission for windmills is an absolute joke. And tidal/wave energy is horrifically expensive. GO GO NUCLEAR!

My name is URL

Mike 1972 wrote: »

For most of its life Its primary purpose wasnt really the production of energy.

It was mainly a reprocessing facility and as such was widely opposed even by some who wouldnt necessarily object to nuclear power per se.

Well whatever it was used for through history, the majority of people were/are vehemently opposed to it or the building of one in Ireland, despite other nations showing that they can work well and are far more efficient and cost effective than other energy plants.

JOSman

France generates 70% of their power via nuclear. They also export excess to neighboring countries. It has to be the way to go.

Just use it to power your green car.

OutlawPete

Podge_irl wrote: »

I will take you more seriously if you provide me some kind of feasible scenario in which a terrorist could cause a catastrophic event of the magnitude you are inferring.

.

9/11 Report Reveals Al Qaeda Ringleader Contemplated a NY-area Nuclear Power Plant as Potential Target
by Kyle Rabin

The 9/11 commission report, which was released on July 22, 2004, suggests that the plot's ringleader had considered crashing a commercial airliner into a nuclear power plant in the New York area. The report explains that Mohamed Atta, who piloted one of the planes that hit the World Trade Center, "considered targeting a nuclear facility he had seen during familiarization flights near New York." The nuclear plant was not identified, but the report says the plotters already had agreed to target the World Trade Center. The Journal News broke the story over the weekend.

Several strong pieces of evidence point to Indian Point. First, the terrorists had rented planes from Teterboro Airport – in northern New Jersey about 30 miles from Indian Point – for their reconnaissance flights. Second, a June 16th 9/11 panel statement noted that the terrorists' test flights included trips along the Hudson River corridor. Third, the Indian Point nuclear power plants in northwestern Westchester County are about 35 miles from midtown Manhattan. Other area nuclear power plants are more than 100 miles from New York City.

"Located just 35 miles from the world's financial and media center, with 20 million people living around it, Indian Point presents an obvious target for future terrorist attacks," said Alex Matthiessen, executive director of Riverkeeper. "According to the 9/11 Commission's recently released report, Indian Point may already have been in Al Qaeda's crosshairs. With the Republican convention coming to New York, this is of particular concern."

According to President Bush and other top security officials, nuclear plants remain high on the list of possible future terrorist targets. Compounding concerns about the threat to Indian Point is the fact that the plant is only a few minutes flying time from several airports that have been plagued by notoriously checkered security records. Furthermore, as the 9/11 investigation has revealed, we have a long way to go to improve our intelligence and military capability to stop future attacks.

When pieced together, various intelligence and media reports suggest that Indian Point was contemplated as a possible target for the 9/11 attacks and remains an attractive target today. The following is a brief list of developments over the past 2 and half years:

• A 9/11 commission panel transcript released in mid-June revealed that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, originally proposed using hijacked planes to strike 10 targets, including "unidentified nuclear power plants." That same transcript noted that the terrorists had trained in the Hudson Corridor in preparation for the 9/11 attacks.

• A reporter for Al-Jazeera, the Arab news network, said on a "60 Minutes II" broadcast in April 2003 that Mohammed told him in an interview that al-Qaeda's first choice of a target was nuclear facilities. They were removed from the list for fear "it might get out of hand," but future attacks were not ruled out.

• In November 2003, the Department of Homeland Security advised law enforcement officials that al-Qaeda may be planning to fly cargo planes from another country into vital U.S. targets, including nuclear power plants.

• In President Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, he told the nation that diagrams of American nuclear plants had been found in al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan.

EXCERPT FROM FINAL 9/11 REPORT: "…Atta also mentioned that he had considered targeting a nuclear facility he had seen during familiarization flights near New York – a target the referred to as 'electrical engineering.'" (P. 245 of 9/11 Commission report) www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/911report/documents/911Report_Ch7.pdf

The following excerpt from Staff Statement No. 16 prepared for the Commission on Terrorist Attacks sheds more light on which plant Atta may have been referring to:

EXCERPT FROM STAFF STATEMENT NO. 16: "In addition to the test flights, some of the operatives obtained additional training. In early June, Jarrah sought to fly the 'Hudson Corridor,' a low altitude 'hallway' along the Hudson River that passed several New York landmarks, including the World Trade Center."

www.nytimes.com/2004/06/17/politics/17ptext.html.

Mike 1972

My name is URL wrote: »

Wdespite other nations showing that they can work well and are far more efficient and cost effective than other energy plants.

Sellafield never "worked well" niether could it be in any way described as efficient and cost effective and only a Britain and France ever attempted to reprocess nuclear fuel on a serious scan scale while The USA Japan and USSR really only toyed with the idea.

Even "ordinary" nuclear power tends to be heavily reliant on public subsidy (direct and hidden) in most countries.

Yakult

Either Nuclear power or fusion power. Its the future and we are gonna have to give in a some stage to it.

WolfForager

Don't think fussion will ever happen in our time, the materials needed to withstand the heat produced just don't exist. However if it could be achieved it would shadow the energy produced by fission dramatically plus at less cost and would be ALOT "safer".

Dolph Starbeam

I call the Safety Inspector job.

Corsendonk

OutlawPete wrote: »

Nuclear Power plants could always be an option for terrorists (not just natural disasters) and for that reason humanity should avoid building any more of them.

So are water reservoirs so should I give up on mains water and switch to Evian? Or perhaps stop travelling on public transport as that is a favourite attack target of terrorists.

Garseys

I'd have no problem with Nuclear Power in Ireland, once it is run by a competent agency. The "ah sure, it'll be grand" attitude in it's running could lead to lots of problems

OutlawPete

Corsendonk wrote: »

So are water reservoirs so should I give up on mains water and switch to Evian? Or perhaps stop travelling on public transport as that is a favourite attack target of terrorists.

What are you waffling about.

Are you honestly comparing a possible nuclear fall out to terrorist attacks on public transport?

Corsendonk

When the East-West interconnector kicks in we will be importing Nuclear generated electricity from the UK.

mahamageehad

WolfForager wrote: »

Solar energy isn't feasible in Ireland. Getting planning permission for windmills is an absolute joke. And tidal/wave energy is horrifically expensive. GO GO NUCLEAR!

But shouldn't we be looking into why planning permission for windmills is a joke and ways of reducing the cost of tidal energy first before embracing technology that could wipe us all out??

I mean i can't be the only one thinking of a Homer Simpson type safety inspector!!!

Oranage2

nuclear power would reduce Ireland carbon emmissions well below kyoto targets. also with fossil fuel rereverses coming to an end it will be our only option. also moneypoint is far worse than a nuclear station and also lets not forget that we import nuclear from the UK

a nuclear and wind power energy plan is what Ireland should be doing but instead we're burning tonnes of coal like idiots while the rest of the world progresses

Corsendonk

OutlawPete wrote: »

What are you waffling about.

Are you honestly comparing a possible nuclear fall out to terrorist attacks on public transport?

Yes..............do you have a problem with people having different opinions?

Captain_Generic

Considering Irelands geological stability, and the fact that we would be way down any terrorist organizations list of targets(if at all), its a good option

Corsendonk

Podge_irl wrote: »

Yes, because the nuclear power plant that ended up being perfectly safe was clearly the worst thing to happen to Japan today.

Unless you watched Sky News who tried portraying it as the End of Days, amazing how some people buy in to that Hollywood Hype journalism.

Mike 1972

Garseys wrote: »

I'd have no problem with Nuclear Power in Ireland, once it is run by a competent agency. The "ah sure, it'll be grand" attitude in it's running could lead to lots of problems

"Ireland" + "Competent Agency"

Does not compute