04 October 2005

Back to the future

A good little background report on nuclear power in which is the following interesting perspective reported: "There is a subtly different alternative history of the past few years, and nuclear power's apparent fall from grace. This version says that the nuclear industry has always had powerful support in government, but that the privatised British Energy's financial screw-up in 2002 was so severe that the 2003 white paper couldn't afford to be too generous. Only now that BE's failure is fading from the public memory can the nuclear renaissance some hope for begin."

Which somehow chimes true.

There's some good stuff too on the current issues of the debate; the projected energy gap and the ways to plug it -including a surprising defence of coal stripped of its carbon dioxide.

The article is pessimistic about the nuke industry's chances.

"Opponents of nuclear power such as Juniper believe that, while the public, democratic campaign against a nuclear renaissance will hinge on popular fears about safety, waste and terrorism, the real battle will be fought in Whitehall on economic grounds. It is a battle that the nuclear industry, for all its formidable lobbying power of engineering firms, unions, scientists, sympathetic columnists, politicians and bureaucrats, will struggle to win."



This article is thorough enough to bookmark for future debate-following and arguments in the pub.

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Back to the future:

No comments:

"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"

 I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...