Nuclear power's inherent unsustainability: an unavoidable reality
In the heart of the UK, at the Sellafield complex, a flagship atomic waste management and fissile materials storage site, a significant safety and security concern has arisen. This issue, in microcosm, highlights the challenges of nuclear energy in achieving sustainability and meeting intergenerational equity criteria.
The National Audit Office (NAO) has identified the site's plutonium stock and associated management facilities as one of Sellafield's top 10 highest hazards. Decaying plutonium canisters pose a specific concern, with even minute quantities of plutonium released into the atmosphere potentially causing cancer if the alpha radiation particles get into human lungs.
The Sellafield Ltd Board of Inquiry concluded that the understanding of chemical legislation at Sellafield, including The Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations DSEAR, has been inadequate. This was evident when the initial discovery of suspect chemicals at Sellafield's Analytical Services Laboratory (ASL) was made on 3 October, almost three weeks before the operational alert was declared and the Army's Bomb Squad was called in.
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the owner of Sellafield, has 140,000 kilogrammes of explosive plutonium in store on the site. Some older plutonium packages are to be repacked in existing plants to ensure their safe management in the short to medium term.
The long-running battle on what kind of energy sources should be treated as "sustainable" continues. Nuclear industry groups argue that using uranium as an energy source "deserves a sustainable label" based on its low carbon emissions and existing secure waste disposal sites. However, this claim is met with opposition, as the long-term sustainability of nuclear technology is at risk if the definition of sustainability from 1987 by the UN-sponsored World Commission on Environment and Development, emphasizing meeting present needs without compromising future generations, is not considered.
The gas and nuclear industries have ramped up lobbying to secure last-ditch changes to European rules defining which investments are sustainable. They fear exclusion from a new "green" list could deprive them of billions of dollars of funding. Reuters revealed that in the four months since the rules were published, gas and nuclear industry representatives held no less than 52 meetings - in person or virtually - with EU officials.
To help get the message across, several nuclear lobby groups enlisted the help of the public, tweeting to encourage responses to an EU consultation in April on the proposed rules - and suggesting what to write, resulting in the "fake" generation 126 responses to the EU consultation from concerned citizens asking for nuclear power to be termed sustainable.
The Brundtland Commission, chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland in 1987, defined Sustainable Development as development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, stated in 2013 that nearly all human traditions recognize that the living are sojourners on Earth and temporary stewards of its resources.
With the climate section of the EU's Sustainable Finance Taxonomy due to be finalised this year, the outcome could prove crucial as nuclear power and most natural gas plants and pipelines were excluded from a provisional list published in March. The outstanding question remains: What are the UK's safety and nuclear regulators doing about this terrifying and utterly unacceptable threat to the lives of millions of British residents?
Read also:
- Planned construction of enclosures within Görlitzer Park faces delays
- Heavy-duty zero-emission vehicles may be exempted from tolls for how long, according to the commission's proposal.
- PG&E's California microgrid initiative generates substantial benefits
- Tracking progress and wealth nations' role in energy transformation
