Last week a reporter from The Mirror walked up to an unattended nuclear waste train in a NorthWest London depot and planted a fake bomb on the train.
“The gate was open, there were no security guards… I walked up to the train and planted my bomb.”
Tom Parry, reporter
“I’m appalled. Every one of these trains would be a potential target for terrorists. If you had an incident in London, I estimate that 190,000 people would have to be evacuated. Those flasks were designed to counter accidents. But they weren’t designed to counter the likes of al-Qaeda.”
Dr John Large, nuclear transport expert
Greenpeace have launched a campaign to let the public know about the nuclear waste trains that run through our towns and cities every week.
“If a train carrying this dangerous nuclear waste train were involved in a serious accident or terrorist attack, large areas of London would have to be evacuated and thousands could die. Yet Tony Blair wants to build more nuclear power plants and continue to send these nuclear waste trains through London for the next 100 years.”
Greenpeace
And not just London, these nuclear waste trains run from Scotland to Kent often just metres away from other passenger trains and stop at normal stations, putting thousands of unwitting members of the public at risk. Greenpeace have published a timetable of nuclear transports to help make the public and the government aware of these dangers.
The World Alliance for Decentralised Energy (WADE) published a report earlier this year comparing centralised nuclear power generation and decentralised power generation using renewables and combined heat and power (CHP) plants. WADE looks at the criteria of cutting carbon emissions, security of supply and cost, and its findings suggest that a decentralised solution is the superior option, because it’s:
- cleaner – CO2 emissions are 17% lower than in the nuclear scenario.
- cheaper – overall capital costs are over £1 billion lower than in the nuclear scenario and the retail costs of electricity to the end user are lower too. The model doesn’t include the cost of managing nuclear waste, so in reality the cost advantage will be much greater than the £1bn. Recent estimates of the existing nuclear waste cost are as high as £70 billion.
- more secure – UK gas consumption is 14% lower than in the nuclear scenario.
With 87% of the British public opposed to new nuclear power stations (Green Party Energy Survey 2006) it’s time to think again Tony! We want our government to represent our opinions!