nuclear power

Last edited 1 January 1970 at 1:00am
n/a

Greenpeace response to the Strategic Siting Assessment consultation

Last edited 14 November 2008 at 6:13pm
Publication date: 
14 November, 2008
Greenpeace's response to the Consultation on the Strategic Siting Assessment Process and Siting Criteria for New Nuclear Power Stations in the UK and related documents, including a study of the environmental and sustainability effects of the proposed siting criteria ('the environmental study'), and a Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening Report.
Download the report:

Greenpeace podcast: another nuclear consultation was fixed

Last edited 21 October 2008 at 4:04pm -

In this edition of our podcast we bring you far-flung forest news from Indonesia, where Jamie reports from the Esperanza on the 'Forests for Climate' tour, plus another Amazon update from James. But first, closer to home, nuclear campaigner Nathan Argent gives Greenpeace's reaction to the news that the government tried to fix another public consultation on new nuclear power, and ponders the implications for UK energy policy.

Download this podcast

You can also listen to it right now - just click the play button below.

Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes | Google Reader | My Yahoo!

You can also subscribe by email to receive an alert when a new episode is published.

Want to know more about the issues in this podcast?

Another nuclear consultation was fixed »
Nuclear Rhetoric vs reality »
Greenpeace ship in Indonesia to investigate forest destruction »
Greenpeace Forests for Climate blog »
Amazon deforestation »

Last edited 1 January 1970 at 1:00am
n/a

Official ruling - Brown's pollsters fixed second public consultation on nuclear power

Last edited 17 October 2008 at 9:46am
17 October, 2008

Gordon Brown's public consultation on nuclear power was fixed by the market research company which carried out the polling, according to the official trade body. 

UK nuclear capacity in meltdown

Posted by jossc — 6 October 2008 at 4:59pm - Comments

Hartlepool nuclear plant
Hartlepool nuclear plant - completely out of action

Should you happen to find yourself debating with a passionate supporter of nuclear power about how to supply our country's future energy needs, the odds are that pretty early in the debate they'll play their trump card - namely that only nuclear can supply the 'base load' necessary to ensure that the lights stay on throughout the long, dark British winter. Hang the dangers of radioactivity, forget the ruinous expense, they'll say - we can't do without nuclear power.

Turkish investors turn away from nuclear

Posted by bex — 30 September 2008 at 12:07pm - Comments

Interesting news from our colleagues in Turkey, where 37 activists from Greenpeace and Global Action Group were arrested after protesting against nuclear energy last week.

The Turkish government has been busily trying to find a supplier for its first (of many, potentially) nuclear plant. But the plans have been stopped dead by... investors. Of the six companies supposedly interested in the contract, only one made a bid. And, without competition, Turkish law prevents the government from issuing the tender for a new nuclear plant.

Read more on Nuclear Reaction

Rhetoric vs reality

Posted by bex — 24 September 2008 at 10:44am - Comments

Yesterday: "I want British companies and British workers to seize the opportunity and lead the world in the transformation to a low carbon economy and I believe that we can create in modern green manufacturing and service one million new jobs" - Gordon Brown.

Today: British Energy is sold to French nuclear company EDF for £12.5 billion, exporting thousands of potential UK jobs to France, dealing a hammer blow to our chances of meeting our legally binding Renewables Obligation. 

The truth about the energy gap: a response to John Hutton

Posted by bex — 22 September 2008 at 10:21am - Comments

John Hutton at the Labour Party Conference 2007

John Hutton committing to take action on climate change at the 2007 Labour Party Conference © Rose / Greenpeace

"No coal plus no nuclear equals no lights," said Business Secretary John Hutton (pictured above, proving he really has heard of climate change, honest) today.

Bearing in mind the findings of leading energy consultants Pöyry (pdf) that we don't need new nuclear or new coal to keep the lights on - we just need the government to meet its own, existing targets for energy efficiency and renewables - he might better have said "no vision plus no guts equals no chance of averting catastrophic climate change". Which at least has some basis in fact.

11,000 nuclear reactors by 2100?

Posted by bex — 17 September 2008 at 12:27pm - Comments

Oh dear. From Nuclear Reaction:

Yesterday we brought you the fantastical tale of the Brazilian government announcing their ambition to build 50 new nuclear reactors by 2050. No sooner had the disbelieving laughter died down here at Nuclear Reaction, along came the World Nuclear Association (WNA) with an amazing fantasy of its own. Wait until you see this - it's amazing. There are comedians who would kill for this ability to make people laugh...

Follow Greenpeace UK