| At first sight, the ninepage document seems
innocuous enough. It is a list which includes beautiful islands
like Lundy, untouched nature reserves like Dartmoor and some
stunning protected forests. But this is no advertisement for
the wonders of rural England. It is instead a secret list
of 537 sites deemed a suitable dumping ground for the nation's
nuclear waste. It includes no fewer than 76 sites in the West.
The document was written in the 1980s by Nirex,
a team of Government geologists and specialists, when secrecy
was considered paramount. It was only recently released under
the Freedom of Information Act. "The list was drawn up
in the 1980s in secret because that's how things were done
at that time," said Chris Murray, managing director of
Nirex.
"That was a fatal mistake."
Dealing with nuclear waste has been a political hot potato
for more than 50 years. Britain now has half-a-million cubic
metres of highly radioactive waste - enough to fill five Albert
Halls - in ponds and tanks at power plants and other sites
around the country. These surface stores were always meant
to be interim measures for dealing with nuclear waste, the
Achilles heel of the UK's atomic energy programme.
They represent, after all, a radiation risk and a target
for terrorists. Yet for almost 30 years, successive British
governments have chosen to sweep the problem under the carpet
rather than take decisive action. But this is one problem
which will not go away. The present generation of nuclear
power stations are creaking towards the end of their shelf
life.
In the West, for example, just two stations remain active
- Oldbury in South Gloucestershire and Hinkley Point in Somerset.
By 2011 both will be decommissioned, while by 2023 all current
nuclear power stations in the UK will be closed for business.
The legacy will be an estimated 500,000 cubic metres of nuclear
waste, including everything from fuel rods to turbines and
reactor components. The expense will be vast. Current estimates
suggest that it will cost £58billion to dispose of the
waste, while decommissioning West nuclear plants is likely
to cost £3billion.
So what is being done? Since November 2003 the Committee
on Radioactive Waste Management has been consulting top scientists
and the public different over options for disposing of waste.
It recently published a shortlist of four, and many experts
believe it is likely they will recommend burying the nuclear
waste deep underground. The committee is expected to report
back to the Government in July 2006.
In this context, the sites suggested by the Nirex document
could well come into play again. They were selected on two
grounds, the first of which was geology to make sure water
would not come into contact with the material. The second
was the ownership of the land, which is why many of the sites
are Government owned. The managing director of Nirex stressed
the list was still relevant. "The one thing I have to
say to you is that I cannot rule out Lundy or any other site,"
he said.
Debate rages, however, over whether it is possible to bury
nuclear waste safely for hundreds of thousands of years. The
process involves putting the waste in concrete and glass in
sealed rock vaults 300 metres below the surface. But Jim Duffy,
a spokesman for the Stop Hinkley campaign group, is particularly
concerned about the possibility of Hinkley Point being used
as a waste dump. Mr Duffy said: "The containers they
are putting the waste into could leak like a teabag."
He added: "There is a strong chance the material could
leak into the water supply. Future generations could end up
drinking it." |
