Wednesday 2 nd February 2011
Why we need Nuclear Energy by Sir Bernard Ingham
Today we were privileged to welcome Sir Bernard Ingham (left). Sir Bernard was brought up in Yorkshire and joined the Hebden Bridge Times as a reporter, subsequently working for the Yorkshire Evening Post, The Yorkshire Post and the Guardian, where he became a member of its Labour staff in London in 1965. In 1967 he joined the Civil Service as Press and PR Adviser to the Prices and Incomes Board, before becoming Director of Information at the Departments of Employment and Energy and, as Under Secretary, Head of the Department of Energy's energy conservation division. From 1979 until 1990 he was Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's Chief Press Secretary. He was knighted after Mrs Thatcher's resignation - and his retirement - in 1990. At present he is the Secretary of “SONE” – Supporters of Nuclear Energy.
Sir Bernard introduced his topic by briefly comparing nuclear energy to a household kettle – it is a method of heating water. Steam is produced which then drives turbines which produce electricity. He told us that the UK has been generating electricity by nuclear energy for over fifty years safely, continuously, reliably and cheaply. On the government’s own figures, it is the cleanest method. Taking everything into account it emits half the CO2 of wind power, 100 times less than gas and 200 times less than coal.
Since its introduction, nuclear energy has generated up to one third of the nation’s electricity. It is now down to approximately 12.5%. There have been no new nuclear power stations constructed in recent years and the older ones have been shut down. In fact all of them will have been shut down by 2015. Currently no licences have been issued for construction of new facilities though there are three consortia known to have plans. In any case, even if approval is granted in the next few months, there will be no new operational nuclear power stations until at least 2020 leaving an energy gap.
The alternatives to nuclear energy include coal, oil, gas, wind, waves, solar and hydro for power generation. Coal, oil and gas are too dirty. Hydro power requires land and we have used already used the feasible sites in the UK. Solar, wind and waves are unpredictable as they cannot be relied on to produce the continuous service needed.
Sir Bernard told us that a high proportion of MP’s supported the use of Nuclear Energy electricity production but were not willing to publicly argue for it because of the “green” pressure groups. He added that a number of greens had now expressed the view that they were mistaken in having argued against this method as they now realised how much cleaner it was than using fossil fuels (coal and gas).
Sir Bernard discussed the safety record of nuclear energy power generation. He told us that in the UK there has not been a single death reported in respect of nuclear energy power generation in more than 50 years, at the Three Mile Island accident in the USA, the safety system worked and the community was not affected and the Chernobyl disaster directly caused the deaths of 56 people. However, in respect of the latter, many people have died due to the effect of radiation exposure. The Chernobyl design had already been criticised in the West where it could not have been licensed. New designs of reactor are safer than ever before. One should also remember that mining for coal and drilling for oil and gas have their own dangers.
Sir Bernard also discussed whether nuclear waste is a problem. In his view it is not. The UK has been managing its waste since it started commercial power supply operations in the 1950’s. Waste is categorised into low, intermediate and high level categories and is processed and stored by appropriate methods.
This report cannot detail the technicalities if nuclear power generation operation and management and so I would encourage you to research further. As Sir Bernard Ingham indicated in his talk, “Supporters of Nuclear Energy” is a group working to promote the use this method of power generation and there are a number of information leaflets available to download from their web site: www.sone.org.uk which also supported his presentation – in fact he distributed two to those present. They also present the “pro” argument by correspondence in the national press. He read out some extracts from a recent one sent to the UK government.
In conclusion, a number of attendees took the opportunity to ask questions. These included queries about how supportive government ministers are, safety against terrorism, possibility of refurbishment and accuracy of numbers of deaths at accidents. Sir Bernard responded to all of these and in respect of the latter saying his figures were based on UN numbers and reports in newspapers were not.
Malcolm Davis was invited to propose a vote of thanks to Sir Bernard for joining us. Malcolm referred to his own professional experience which included power station construction. He felt that some members present were now more supportive of nuclear energy power generation as a result of the arguments that had been put to us. Accidents have occurred due to poor design (e.g. Chernobyl) but new designs in the West are based on safe operation over years and are getting safer. He thanked Sir Bernard for the presentation and those present joined him in warm applause.
Peter Anning
President Frank Rae and Sir Bernard Ingham
Photographs by Deric Tonge
