Fine Gael and Sellafield

Tayla

Does anyone know if Fine Gael have any plans in relation to Sellafield? I know that there is not an awful lot we can do but it being so close to Ireland absolutely terrifies me.
I know Enda Kenny and Phil Hogan have spoken out about Sellafield before but will all that change now that they are in government?
This is a massive issue as Sellafield is considered to be a terrorist target,
This government has to sort out the banking crisis and imo doesn't have time for same sex marriage, abortion etc debates, it has a deeper purpose to actually fix our broken country, however I do think that Sellafield is a huge risk for us and should therefore be a priority to the Irish goverment.

Dannyboy83

The eirgrid interconnector is in the process of being installed/finished.

That probably removes the ability of doing anything about it.

galwayrush

Not much we can do about it i think. Even if the plant was closed, it would take many years even to move the amount of nuclear waste stored there alone.

aftermn

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole nuclear debate anymore. Given the history of accidents at Sellafield, I was, for a long oeriod, against any nuclear power. More recently I was beginning to come around to the idea, especially given the safety record of the newer facilities. Even The Greens were beginning to seek consultation on the matter.

Then we saw the Japanese disaster. These people know how to build and have an excellent record of safety. Yet even they are found out by mother nature. Will Nuclear ever be truely safe?

GSF

aftermn wrote: »

Then we saw the Japanese disaster. These people know how to build and have an excellent record of safety. Yet even they are found out by mother nature. Will Nuclear ever be truely safe?

Nobody has been killed by nuclear accidents in Japan. 100k may die from the earthquake/ tsunami which was at the extreme end of the earthquake scale, so I'd say that would suggest that nuclear is actually quite safe.

Frynge

prob more for another tread but the safety record of all nuclear power plants/stations/facilities is generally better than people think. with regard chernobly (the worst by far) the death toll was around 60, and the birth defects were grossly exaggerated. (not quiet what people think)

with sellafield it is maybe not the best run nuclear station. it would also be nice to have some irish government input into the british nuclear oversight process but this may be wishful thinking

goose2005

There are about 20 plants in France too, so Sellafield's hardly that important.

Frynge

that is true but you dont hear about lack of safety standards in france mainly because their is more stringent controls with input from neighbouring nations.
also the british system of stations is an aging network whereas in france, the plants are still considered fairly advanced and they do not go into disrepair

Ray Burkes Pension

Tayla wrote: »

Does anyone know if Fine Gael have any plans in relation to Sellafield? I know that there is not an awful lot we can do but it being so close to Ireland absolutely terrifies me.
I know Enda Kenny and Phil Hogan have spoken out about Sellafield before but will all that change now that they are in government?
This is a massive issue as Sellafield is considered to be a terrorist target,
This government has to sort out the banking crisis and imo doesn't have time for same sex marriage, abortion etc debates, it has a deeper purpose to actually fix our broken country, however I do think that Sellafield is a huge risk for us and should therefore be a priority to the Irish goverment.

Provision for same sex marriage is gonna be considered by the new Constitutional Convention. Its easy to forget Labour are in government too and are taking a lot of their policies in government with them.

Lefticus Loonaticus

Tayla wrote: »

This government has to sort out the banking crisis and imo doesn't have time for same sex marriage, abortion etc debates, it has a deeper purpose to actually fix our broken country,

Our country is not just a broken economy, its a broken society after 100 years of religous conservative rule. Theres a few million woman and a few hundred thousand gay people whos priority it is to acquire basic rights that they have been denied in this country. They care about that a hell of a lot more than you will ever care about the economy.

Max Power1

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Our country is not just a broken economy, its a broken society after 100 years of religous conservative rule. Theres a few million woman and a few hundred thousand gay people whos priority it is to acquire basic rights that they have been denied in this country. They care about that a hell of a lot more than you will ever care about the economy.

so only women?

What about unmarried fathers?

Tayla

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Our country is not just a broken economy, its a broken society after 100 years of religous conservative rule. Theres a few million woman and a few hundred thousand gay people whos priority it is to acquire basic rights that they have been denied in this country. They care about that a hell of a lot more than you will ever care about the economy.

How the hell do you know how much I care about the economy, it upsets me the state of the place, i'm terrified they will close my local A&E, I worry about all the people I know who can't find a job and are getting more depressed by the day.
I am simply pointing out that as a country we don't have time for those issues, fine gael wanted to bring back deer hunting if I recall, well all that stuff can wait, this government should be only thinking about the mess we are in at the moment however if there was to be a disaster at Sellafield then none of that would matter anyway. Every day there is news that they are expecting a terrorist attack in the UK, it is a huge issue for us.

I don't think abortion is a basic right but that is for another thread. You are implying that gay people care more about gay marriage than they do about Ireland getting back on track and I am sure most gay people do not feel that way.

Einhard

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Our country is not just a broken economy, its a broken society after 100 years of religous conservative rule. Theres a few million woman and a few hundred thousand gay people whos priority it is to acquire basic rights that they have been denied in this country. They care about that a hell of a lot more than you will ever care about the economy.

What basic rights are women denied in this country? And I'll think you'll find that Ireland wasn't the only nation where gays were denied rights. You'd swear the way some people went on that the rest of Europe were pushing gay marriage for decades, whilst conservative, priest-ridden Ireland was rhe only hold out. In reality though, Ireland introduces civil partnership a few years after it is introduced in other EU nations, and is on the brink of legislating for full marriage. Don't let the reality get in the way of your narrative of the socially atavistic Irish though...

Riskymove

goose2005 wrote: »

There are about 20 plants in France too, so Sellafield's hardly that important.

there are others in the UK

Wylfa in North Wales is actually nearer to ireland

Sellafield is not even a power plant anymore, its a re-processing plant. Its been made up into a big "bogeyman" so much for political reasons that people end up as worried by the OP.

Corsendonk

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

The eirgrid interconnector is in the process of being installed/finished.That probably removes the ability of doing anything about it.

Whats that to do with Sellafield?

Wolfe Tone

The high cancer and deformity rates in the east(certainly my home county of Louth) surely cannot be coincidental.


I dont like nuclear power, sure its cheap and clean but if something messes up you are screwed. If a regular power plant explodes at least thats it.

Riskymove

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The high cancer and deformity rates in the east(certainly my home county of Louth) surely cannot be coincidental.

differing views

https://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2010/jan/24/cancer-clusters-in-north-east-are-not-linked-to-se/

why does it no happen in Dublin to wicklow stretch opposite power plants in Wales?

Wolfe Tone

Riskymove wrote: »

differing views

https://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2010/jan/24/cancer-clusters-in-north-east-are-not-linked-to-se/

why does it no happen in Dublin to wicklow stretch opposite power plants in Wales?

I got a security warning when I tried to click on that link.

mike65

The link is okay (just the Tribune archive server, I doubt anyone looking after it these days)

France also has a great big re-processing plant called La Hague

http://www.areva.com/EN/operations-1118/areva-la-hague-recycling-spent-fuel.html

wee truck big driver

its time we got or own nuclear plant of course you would have the usual not in my back yard types so we will keep generating are over priced electric with expensive oil till it runs out

Einhard

There's about as much chance of Ireland building a nuclear power plant as there is of North Korea opening a centre for the promotion of democracy. We can't even get an incinerator up and running in Ringsend for Godsake. The Luddites had nothing on the Irish.

Dannyboy83

Corsendonk wrote: »

Whats that to do with Sellafield?

Well, if we've gone to the expense of setting up an interconnector to avail of 500MW which is vital to the development of our economy - I imagine it's probably too late to turn around and dictate how that power must be generated.

nesf

aftermn wrote: »

Then we saw the Japanese disaster. These people know how to build and have an excellent record of safety. Yet even they are found out by mother nature. Will Nuclear ever be truely safe?

I think the fact that 3 stations built in the 70s are holding up this well after being hit by a massive earthquake and a tsunami is a pretty good advertisement for the safety of nuclear these days, especially for countries like ours which aren't in earthquake/tsunami zones.

djpbarry

Tayla wrote: »

... I do think that Sellafield is a huge risk for us...

How big a risk? Could you quantify it in some way?

Tayla wrote: »

I am simply pointing out that as a country we don't have time for those issues...

Last time I was in Dublin, people seemed to have plenty of time to go for pints – I think, as a country, Ireland probably has plenty of time for “those issues”.

Tayla wrote: »

Every day there is news that they are expecting a terrorist attack in the UK, it is a huge issue for us.

You may be unaware of this, but we’ve actually had terrorist attacks here in the UK. Quite recently in fact. I think Ireland emerged relatively unscathed.

djpbarry

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The high cancer and deformity rates in the east(certainly my home county of Louth) surely cannot be coincidental.

How do the cancer rates in the immediate vicinity of Sellafield compare?

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I dont like nuclear power, sure its cheap and clean but if something messes up you are screwed. If a regular power plant explodes at least thats it.

Far more people have been killed in gas explosions than in nuclear accidents, yet people have no issue with gas being piped directly into their homes.

Dannyboy83

nesf wrote: »

I think the fact that 3 stations built in the 70s are holding up this well after being hit by a massive earthquake and a tsunami is a pretty good advertisement for the safety of nuclear these days, especially for countries like ours which aren't in earthquake/tsunami zones.

http://theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/53461/fukushima-nuclear-accident-simple-and-accurate-explanation

Interesting article here which says the media are basically overhyping it to death anyway.

BlaasForRafa

aftermn wrote: »

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole nuclear debate anymore. Given the history of accidents at Sellafield, I was, for a long oeriod, against any nuclear power. More recently I was beginning to come around to the idea, especially given the safety record of the newer facilities. Even The Greens were beginning to seek consultation on the matter.

Then we saw the Japanese disaster. These people know how to build and have an excellent record of safety. Yet even they are found out by mother nature. Will Nuclear ever be truely safe?

Ireland isn't sitting on the edge of a tectonic plate so we aren't in much danger from earthquakes.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Plates_tect2_en.svg

Fratton Fred

My mother in law is convinced that the reason she has lost so many friends and relatives to cancer is because they all swam in the Irish sea as kids and Sellafield is entirely to blame.

The fact they all smoked 40 major a day for 40 years has nothing to do with it, oh no, of course not.

Kurley

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My mother in law is convinced that the reason she has lost so many friends and relatives to cancer is because they all swam in the Irish sea as kids and Sellafield is entirely to blame.

The fact they all smoked 40 major a day for 40 years has nothing to do with it, oh no, of course not.

That's such a common outlook it should be scary!As for a nuclear reactor, I'd happily have one in my back garden. They are very safe, especially the modern types. As said above, the fact a 30+ year old reactor stood up to such a strong earthquake is testament to their safety. There would be no problem now if the backup diesel generators were on an above ground level - the tsunami would not have swamped them.

Morpheus

One nuclear plant in ireland would negate the vast majority of our dependance on carbon based fuels INCLUDING oil.

The only way to reduce the cost of oil is to reduce the dependency on it. I have learned far more about nuclear power stations in the last week (from reading up on what can go wrong) than Ive ever learned whilst worrying about sellafield in the media, previously to this.

Ireland did indeed attempt to build a plant in the 70s. we even had our own Nuclear Energy Board (An Bord Fuinneamh Núicléigh) at the time. This became the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland funnily enough!

I reckon that with todays fuel prices, the Irish population would be more willing to see a nuke plant built in this country.

I personally think it would be a good idea.... but thats just me.

baalthor

Kenny should stand up in the Dail and say:

"This is pointless. The British aren't going to close Sellafield. We've been calling on them to close it for the last forty years and it's still there. The Blair government was the most Ireland friendly Britsh government since Gladstone and did they close it? No!
Calling on the British to close Sellafield is just a waste of our time and a distraction when we have enormous issues that we really do need to solve.
We can work with the British to make sure the place is as safe as possible and monitor what's going on and there already are mechanisms in place for doing this.
Otherwise, that's it! End of discussion !"

Morpheus

Or he could stand up and say:

We are going to take 1 Bn of taxpayers money that was earmarked to pour down the black hole that is now affectionatly called the Banking Crisis and will instead invest it our countries future energy needs and in reducing the cost of electricity use to our populatation.

We are going to create 5000+ jobs over the next 5 years and create new areas of study and expertise in the technology and science sector.

We are going to reduce the countries need to import electricity

we are going to scale down massivly (40% - 50% ... maybe more?) this countries need for fossil fuels.

We will in 5 years stop strip harvesting our peat bogs as a source of fuel.

We will masively reduce our dependency on oil imports.

We hope to eventually Export excess electricity from this new venture.

We will make Ireland a centre of excellence in Nuclear studies.

He flourishes a massively detailed economic and financial study done itno the benefits and savings vs the risks to the countrys future on having a nuclear plant in ireland and opens a debate on the concept of building a nuke plant in ireland.

When the dust settles on this, I would reckon that he would get a majority of the population who would be in favor of this, provided we were going to build a reactor which had the latest safety measures and was of the newest type available again AFTER a lengthy debate with all parties and groups across the country involved.

djpbarry

Morphéus wrote: »

We will make Ireland a centre of excellence in Nuclear studies.

Ireland is decades behind France, the UK, the US and Japan in this field and would be better off concentrating on areas where they may have a competitive advantage, such as renewables (wind, wave, tidal, etc.).

Morpheus

These "technologies" will never yield as much return as a nuclear power station. you would need MANY of each type of facilities installed AND maintained... to produce even a fraction of the power from nuclear fission.

Tayla

djpbarry wrote: »

How big a risk? Could you quantify it in some way?

it's impossible to know exactly how it could affect us but I will indeed quantify later this evening

djpbarry wrote: »

Last time I was in Dublin, people seemed to have plenty of time to go for pints – I think, as a country, Ireland probably has plenty of time for “those issues”.

Sorry maybe I wasn't clear but I meant this government has the main issues to sort first, all these side issues have to go to the end of the list for now.

djpbarry wrote: »

You may be unaware of this, but we’ve actually had terrorist attacks here in the UK. Quite recently in fact. I think Ireland emerged relatively unscathed.

I am aware that lately there were numerous failed plots and arrests, that a lot of Europe is expecting terrorist attacks, a massive threat at christmas time,Ireland hasn't really pissed anyone off so I don't see why we would be a terrorist target and that's not a dig at anyone but I wouldn't worry about terrorist threats here in Ireland.

belacqua_

Riskymove wrote: »

Sellafield is not even a power plant anymore, its a re-processing plant. Its been made up into a big "bogeyman" so much for political reasons that people end up as worried by the OP.

A bogeyman?! Nothing at all to do with the Windscale disaster then, or the Thorp leak in 2005 ...

Diarmuid

goose2005 wrote: »

There are about 20 plants in France too,

59 actually, providing almost 80% of the electricity needs of the country. One of the cheapest countries for electricity in Europe. Zero CO2 emissions from their nuclear plants. They are the biggest exporters of electricity in the world.

sarumite

aftermn wrote: »

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole nuclear debate anymore. Given the history of accidents at Sellafield, I was, for a long oeriod, against any nuclear power. More recently I was beginning to come around to the idea, especially given the safety record of the newer facilities. Even The Greens were beginning to seek consultation on the matter.

Then we saw the Japanese disaster. These people know how to build and have an excellent record of safety. Yet even they are found out by mother nature. Will Nuclear ever be truely safe?

I remember this time last year when oil was gushing out of the deep horizon well and people were saying the same about oil. As someone said recently (can't remember who is was) "good technology doesn't protect us from bad decisions). Personally I couldn't agree more with that statement.

wee truck big driver

there are some plans to erect some wind turbines in my area and you would think they where asking families to kill there first born boy i wouldnt hold out much hope for a nuclear plant. i am not a big fan of wind turbines myself but only on the basis that they are not an efficent means of producing electri and is only used to fool people into the pretence that we are creating green energy

Tayla

wee truck big driver wrote: »

there are some plans to erect some wind turbines in my area and you would think they where asking families to kill there first born boy i wouldnt hold out much hope for a nuclear plant. i am not a big fan of wind turbines myself but only on the basis that they are not an efficent means of producing electri and is only used to fool people into the pretence that we are creating green energy

I used to live in wexford and someone built wind turbines and then the same person tried to build a bioenergy plant in a protected wildlife area, not only that but there would have been I think 50 trucks a day passing through and that would have been to begin with, on terrible country roads with a tiny bridge which would not be able to withstand all those trucks on it,

we were in contact at the time with residents in Devon where they had built one and they said the smell was absolutely disgusting (even though of course they told us there would be no smell) their river even turned orange at one stage.

Luckily there were a lot of objections and they withdrew there planning application.

Noone really had a problem with the wind turbines but the bioenergy plant would have destoyed the area as a lot of people go down in the summer to the beach.

cavedave

There are serious nuclear risks. They are from weapons though not modern power stations. Hellman (the cryptographer) has calculated "relying on nuclear weapons is as risky as living in a town surrounded by thousands of nuclear power plants"

If you are really worried about radiation risks nuclear weapon disarmament is the campaign you want not shut sellafield

A "small" nuclear war between India and Pakistan, with 50 nukes on both sides, would make so much smoke that it would produce climate change unprecedented in human history.

Former researchers of nuclear winter used sophisticated new climate models to assess what would happen if, say, there was an exchange of 100 Hiroshima-sized bombs (1.5 kilotons) between India and Pakistan. The smoke clouds would disrupt the weather long enough to collapse some agriculture, leading to starvation of as many as a billion people.

Boskowski

GSF wrote: »

Nobody has been killed by nuclear accidents in Japan. 100k may die from the earthquake/ tsunami which was at the extreme end of the earthquake scale, so I'd say that would suggest that nuclear is actually quite safe.

Oops. 3 days later with Armageddon around Fukushima on the horizon this statements now looks a bit premature.

mike65

Still true, and it'll remain true. Fukushima is not to going to explode in a mushroom cloud. I'll wager more people will die younger that might otherwise be the case due to inhaling the air of Chinas cities than anything that comes out of that nuclear power station.

djpbarry

Morphéus wrote: »

These "technologies" will never yield as much return as a nuclear power station. you would need MANY of each type of facilities installed AND maintained... to produce even a fraction of the power from nuclear fission.

I think we both know that’s complete nonsense.

Tayla wrote: »

it's impossible to know exactly how it could affect us but I will indeed quantify later this evening

But you said it was a huge risk?

Tayla wrote: »

I am aware that lately there were numerous failed plots and arrests, that a lot of Europe is expecting terrorist attacks, a massive threat at christmas time,Ireland hasn't really pissed anyone off so I don't see why we would be a terrorist target and that's not a dig at anyone but I wouldn't worry about terrorist threats here in Ireland.

My point is that a terrorist attack in the UK is extremely unlikely to cause harm to anyone in Ireland.

Diarmuid wrote: »

59 actually, providing almost 80% of the electricity needs of the country. One of the cheapest countries for electricity in Europe.

Because (as far as I am aware) the cost of storing/disposing/researching what to do with the waste is covered by the French taxpayer.

Diarmuid wrote: »

Zero CO2 emissions from their nuclear plants.

If you ignore construction, maintenance, decommissioning and the refinement and transport of fuel.

wee truck big driver wrote: »

i am not a big fan of wind turbines myself but only on the basis that they are not an efficent means of producing electri...

On what basis? It has been consistently shown that on-shore wind is one of the cheapest means of electricity generation. Off-shore wind is likely to catch up in the not-too-distant future.

Morpheus

djpbarry wrote: »

I think we both know that’s complete nonsense.

no we dont both know. can you enlighten us heathens with some facts please?

djpbarry

Morphéus wrote: »

no we dont both know. can you enlighten us heathens with some facts please?

After you. You made a claim, you back it up.

easychair

djpbarry wrote: »

Ireland is decades behind France, the UK, the US and Japan in this field and would be better off concentrating on areas where they may have a competitive advantage, such as renewables (wind, wave, tidal, etc.).

Really? Would you be happy to be relying on wind power or wave power? I wouldn't, as they are unreliable and can't guarantee a good constant source of power.

ei.sdraob

65MW out of ~2100MW installed at time of this post...

djpbarry

easychair wrote: »

Really? Would you be happy to be relying on wind power or wave power?

No, but I wasn't proposing that anyone should be, was I?

ArmaniJeanss

Einhard wrote: »

There's about as much chance of Ireland building a nuclear power plant as there is of North Korea opening a centre for the promotion of democracy. We can't even get an incinerator up and running in Ringsend for Godsake. The Luddites had nothing on the Irish.

Kind of bizarre when compared to the Swedes where 90% of a village insisted on their numclear power plant staying when the governent offered to close it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Sweden

*********
We need to bribe people to get around NIMBYism.
Find a remote but suitable location for a nuclear power plant. Have a plebiscite of everyone within a 10 mile location. Offer them 10K per household and 1/2 price energy for life as long as they stay in that house.
Guarantee as many jobs as possible will be sourced locally.
There will be a Yes vote.

A generation later when people see how safe it is there will be the potential to build more.

cavedave

ArmaniJeanss
Find a remote but suitable location for a nuclear power plant.

Carnsore Point was deemed the likeliest place to put a nuclear power station when the issue was examined in the 1970's