Article Tools

The UK’s government hopes to bring 11 new nuclear sites to the United Kingdom, with the first online by 2018. Personal response.

See the BBC news article here.

I live near Wylfa and I’m glad to see this news. Nuclear energy is the only way we can continue our present lifestyle in an even half sustainable manner.

Personally, I’m holding out for nuclear fusion, which is hopefully not more than half a centaury away. Renewable energy, while it is clean, simply cannot meet the energy demands of the UK.

How Greenpeace can protest nuclear energy is beyond me, it’s a simple question of numbers. One turbine generates about 0.35 Mega Watts on average. Wylfa generates 980 MW from two Magnox reactors. You do the math. Now figure out how much area each individual turbine requires and compare that to the total area of the Wylfa site, also bearing in mind that’s Wylfa’s production is constant.

Nuclear energy is safe. It’s had a couple of accidents and we’ve learnt from them, and no system has ever been 100% safe- people get killed just sitting down on a chair for God’s sake. I’ve yet to see any compelling argument against nuclear energy, and anyone who’s got one is welcome to put it forward.

As a side note, I think other alternate energy sources do have their place. Wind power can subsidise main electricity production, but can never replace it. Small private wind turbines can help out a great deal over time. Solar water heating works very well, although photovoltaics leave a lot to be desired. Tidal causes ecological damage, as do many hydro electric schemes. So Greenpeace, if nuclear is not an option- what do you suggest?