Difference between revisions of "Nuclear spin"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
(Undo revision 181826 by Rich (talk))
Line 3: Line 3:
 
     <td width="60%"><p align="left"><B></B></p>
 
     <td width="60%"><p align="left"><B></B></p>
 
{{Template:NuclearSpin}}
 
{{Template:NuclearSpin}}
== NuclearSpin==
+
== Welcome==
 +
Welcome to NuclearSpin, a website that tracks the companies, people and organisations behind the campaign to build new nuclear power stations in the UK and the rest of the world.
  
Welcome to NuclearSpin, your unique portal on the nuclear debate.
+
It aims to provide information about the techniques and tactics they use to persuade the public that we need more nuclear power.
Nuclear power remains central to the British government’s plans for energy. In May 2012, the new Energy Secretary [[Ed Davey]] told the [[Nuclear Development Forum]], the industry-government body which coordinates new build in the UK, that the government believed “the UK remains the best place in the world to invest in new nuclear”. <ref> Nuclear Development Forum, [http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/meeting-energy-demand/nuclear/5602-nuclear-development-forum-minutes-15th-may-2012.pdf Minutes], 15 May 2012 </ref>
 
  
At the same meeting, [[Vincent de Rivaz]], the head of [[EDF Energy]], thanked the British government for their “sense of confidence that new nuclear in the UK should and will go ahead". 2012, he added, is the “defining year” for new nuclear in the UK.  
+
The site also provides information about other people, organisations and companies influencing the debate about nuclear energy.  
  
Despite Fukushima and the pull-outs of the nuclear market by other operators, de Rivaz’s message to the nuclear industry was to “Carry On and to Keep Calm.” <ref> Nuclear Development Forum, [http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/meeting-energy-demand/nuclear/5602-nuclear-development-forum-minutes-15th-may-2012.pdf Minutes], 15 May 2012 </ref> It is business as usual.  
+
NuclearSpin is a free encyclopedia, written collaboratively by a wide variety of volunteers and independent researchers, and is part of [http://www.powerbase.info Powerbase].  
  
But many unanswered questions remain over nuclear: especially over safety, subsidies and waste. All these issues have not yet been resolved, yet the British government is pushing ahead with a new generation of nuclear power plants. In May 2010, the coalition agreement between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats said there would no public subsidies for nuclear. However, we know that the Coalition is trying to wriggle around this commitment by fudging to floor price for carbon. They may well fudge the decommissioning costs too. There is also evidence that the industry and government colluded to spin the safety message after Fukushima.  
+
==About us==
 +
Ten years ago, there was little prospect of new nuclear power stations being built in the UK. Today, the nuclear industry says it is on the brink of building new plants across the country. So what happened?
  
Even MPs do not trust the Government to tell the truth about nuclear. In July 2012, the Science and Technology Committee concluded that "the Government's position as an advocate for nuclear power makes it difficult for the public to trust it as an impartial source of information. <ref> Science and Technology Committee, [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmsctech/428/42805.htm Devil's bargain? Energy risks and the public], First Report, 9 July 2012 </ref>
+
NuclearSpin was launched in 2006, as the British Government began a public consultation that raised the possibility of new nuclear power stations, to expose the nuclear industry’s massive lobbying campaign.  
  
This site is designed to help you see through the nuclear spin. Throughout 2012 we will be updating this portal and its associated pages, the bulk of which were developed in 2008-09. If you'd like to help us by becoming a Powerbase contributor, please email the managing editor melissa.jones@powerbase.info
+
The High Court ruled in 2007 that the Government’s consultation was "misleading, seriously flawed, manifestly inadequate and procedurally unfair", and its plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations were "unlawful", but Ministers still pushed on.<ref> Deborah Summers, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/article/0,,2013618,00.html Government loses nuclear power case], ''The Guardian'', 15 February 2007, </ref> <ref> BBC News, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6364281.stm Nuclear Review "Was Misleading"], 15 February 2007, </ref>
  
== "A devil’s bargain – a choice of last resort" ==
+
NuclearSpin showed how the Labour Government [http://www.nuclearpolicy.info/docs/nuclearmonitor/NNM14.pdf  helped the nuclear industry] and documented the links between powerful politicians, such as Prime Minister [[Gordon Brown]] and Planning Minister [[Yvette Cooper]], and nuclear insiders.
  
In spring 2012, the [[Nuclear Industry Association]] (NIA) argued that “After the unprecedented tsunami in Japan last March and the damage inflicted upon the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, it was hardly surprising that a poll conducted in June 2011 saw a drop in public support for nuclear, with the results showing that people with favourable opinions about nuclear fell from 40% to 28% and unfavourable opinions increased from 17% to 24%.
+
In 2008, the site was expanded to look at the push for nuclear in other countries, expose [[The_Secret_Pro-Nuclear_Push_In_Schools]] and explain why [[Nuclear is not the Answer to Climate Change]].  
  
It continued: “However, a recent survey conducted in December 2011 by Ipsos MORI has indicated that the dip in support for nuclear energy has been short-lived, with figures all but returning to those marked in polls conducted before Fukushima - favourability towards the industry recovered to 40% and unfavourable opinions reduced to 19%.
+
Nuclear power is now central to the British government’s plans for future energy. But our politicians are not being straight with us about the cost of nuclear power or its safety.
 +
For example, the coalition agreement between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in May 2010 said there would no public subsidies for nuclear – but the Government is now in discussions about “contracts guaranteeing subsidies for up to 40 years”.<ref> Juliette Jowit, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/18/nuclear-power-ministers-reactor Nuclear power: ministers offer reactor deal until 2050], ‘’The Guardian’’, 18 February 2013</ref> We explore this in on 2012 briefing [[Media:NuclearSubsidies_SpinWatch_briefing_May_2012.pdf|Broken Promises: Subsiding the Nuclear Industry]].
 +
The Government also colluded with the [[Nuclear Industry Association]] to play down the safety implications of the nuclear accident at Fukushima in Japan in 2011.
 +
In July 2012, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee concluded that public does not trust the Government to tell the trust about nuclear power. It said "the Government's position as an advocate for nuclear power makes it difficult for the public to trust it as an impartial source of information”.<ref> Science and Technology Committee, [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmsctech/428/42805.htm Devil's bargain? Energy risks and the public], First Report, 9 July 2012 </ref> This site is designed to help you see through the nuclear spin.  
  
The NIA's Chief Executive, [[Keith Parker]] argued that, "The poll clearly shows that public opinion has not only recovered from last summer’s dip but it has also resumed its gradual year-on year improvement. The 50% support figure for new build is the highest it has ever been." <ref> NIA, [http://www.niauk.org/images/industry_link/industrylink_35.pdf Nuclear: What do the public think?], ''IndustryLink'', Issue No.35 Spring 2012 </ref>
+
If you'd like to help us by becoming a contributor, please email our managing editor melissa.jones@powerbase.info
  
However, Professor [[Nick Pidgeon]], Director of the Understanding Risk Programme, Cardiff University, giving evidence to the House of Commons [[Science and Technology Select Committee]] argues that “a large proportion of recent support” for nuclear power “remain[s] conditional - a 'reluctant acceptance' at best" and added that "while many more in Britain have indeed come to support nuclear power over the past decade they do so while viewing it only as a 'devil's bargain', a choice of last resort in the face of the threat of climate change”. <ref> Science and Technology Select Committee,  [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmsctech/428/42805.htm Devil's bargain? Energy risks and the public], 9 July 2012</ref>
 
 
== Background ==
 
 
NuclearSpin was originally launched in response to the British Government's 12-week consultation on energy in 2006. In 2007 the High Court ruled that the government's plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations were "unlawful" and the way it consulted with the public over the decision was "misleading, seriously flawed, manifestly inadequate and procedurally unfair".<ref> Deborah Summers, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/article/0,,2013618,00.html Government loses nuclear power case], ''The Guardian'', 15 February 2007, </ref> <ref> BBC News, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6364281.stm Nuclear Review "Was Misleading"], 15 February 2007, </ref>
 
 
What made [[Gordon Brown]]'s decision in January 2008 to give the go-ahead to a new generation of nuclear plants politically sensitive was his younger brother [[Andrew Brown]]'s role as director of communications with [[EDF Energy]], the UK subsidiary of [[EDF]] and one of the leading companies pushing for a nuclear rebuild programme in the UK.
 
 
The Labour Government also sped up the planning process, making it easier for nuclear power plants to be built. Planning Minister [[Yvette Cooper]] was criticised for her "nuclear cronyism" due to her father's links to the nuclear industry.
 
 
For a full briefing on the so-called 'facilitative actions' which the Government carried out to speed up nuclear developments see [http://www.nuclearpolicy.info/docs/nuclearmonitor/NNM14.pdf New Nuclear Monitor No.14 (pdf)]
 
 
To help people make up their own minds about nuclear power, NuclearSpin was last updated and expanded in 2008/09 with the following information:
 
 
* New sections on countries and regions, including [[Nuclear: Australia|Australia]], [[Nuclear: Belgium|Belgium]], [[Nuclear: Canada|Canada]], the [[Nuclear: EU|EU]], [[Nuclear: Finland|Finland]], [[Nuclear: France|France]], [[Nuclear: Germany|Germany]], [[Nuclear: Japan|Japan]], [[Nuclear: United Kingdom|United Kingdom]] and [[Nuclear: United States|United States]];
 
 
* Expanded profiles on pro-nuclear organisations and lobby groups.
 
 
* An analysis section, including Why [[Nuclear is not the Answer to Climate Change]] and [[The_Secret_Pro-Nuclear_Push_In_Schools]].
 
 
* NuclearSpin also worked with [http://www.sourcewatch.org Sourcewatch] to develop a [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Portal:Nuclear_Issues Nuclear Portal page]. Some articles and profiles were deleted from this NuclearSpin site and moved across to SourceWatch. Deleted pages include a redirect to the relevant Sourcewatch page.
 
 
In 2012 we began the process of updating the NuclearSpin portal, focusing on the companies and individuals who are pushing nuclear in the UK.
 
 
     </td>
 
     </td>
 
     <td width="1%"></td>
 
     <td width="1%"></td>

Revision as of 10:34, 1 March 2013

Nuclear spin.png This article is part of the Nuclear Spin project of Spinwatch.

Welcome

Welcome to NuclearSpin, a website that tracks the companies, people and organisations behind the campaign to build new nuclear power stations in the UK and the rest of the world.

It aims to provide information about the techniques and tactics they use to persuade the public that we need more nuclear power.

The site also provides information about other people, organisations and companies influencing the debate about nuclear energy.

NuclearSpin is a free encyclopedia, written collaboratively by a wide variety of volunteers and independent researchers, and is part of Powerbase.

About us

Ten years ago, there was little prospect of new nuclear power stations being built in the UK. Today, the nuclear industry says it is on the brink of building new plants across the country. So what happened?

NuclearSpin was launched in 2006, as the British Government began a public consultation that raised the possibility of new nuclear power stations, to expose the nuclear industry’s massive lobbying campaign.

The High Court ruled in 2007 that the Government’s consultation was "misleading, seriously flawed, manifestly inadequate and procedurally unfair", and its plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations were "unlawful", but Ministers still pushed on.[1] [2]

NuclearSpin showed how the Labour Government helped the nuclear industry and documented the links between powerful politicians, such as Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Planning Minister Yvette Cooper, and nuclear insiders.

In 2008, the site was expanded to look at the push for nuclear in other countries, expose The_Secret_Pro-Nuclear_Push_In_Schools and explain why Nuclear is not the Answer to Climate Change.

Nuclear power is now central to the British government’s plans for future energy. But our politicians are not being straight with us about the cost of nuclear power or its safety. For example, the coalition agreement between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in May 2010 said there would no public subsidies for nuclear – but the Government is now in discussions about “contracts guaranteeing subsidies for up to 40 years”.[3] We explore this in on 2012 briefing Broken Promises: Subsiding the Nuclear Industry. The Government also colluded with the Nuclear Industry Association to play down the safety implications of the nuclear accident at Fukushima in Japan in 2011. In July 2012, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee concluded that public does not trust the Government to tell the trust about nuclear power. It said "the Government's position as an advocate for nuclear power makes it difficult for the public to trust it as an impartial source of information”.[4] This site is designed to help you see through the nuclear spin.

If you'd like to help us by becoming a contributor, please email our managing editor melissa.jones@powerbase.info

NuclearSpin Categories

NuclearSpin News

NuclearSpin investigations and documents from this website have been covered by:

Resources

Briefings

9 May 2012: Broken Promises: Subsiding the Nuclear Industry

Briefings archive

To help people understand key issues on nuclear power, NuclearSpin in 2009 published a series of in-depth analysis pieces on key issues surrounding the debate concerning building new nuclear power plants in the UK. We will be updating these briefings and associated pages in 2012.

Search for other articles on the Nuclear push at the Spinwatch site

Notes

  1. Deborah Summers, Government loses nuclear power case, The Guardian, 15 February 2007,
  2. BBC News, Nuclear Review "Was Misleading", 15 February 2007,
  3. Juliette Jowit, Nuclear power: ministers offer reactor deal until 2050, ‘’The Guardian’’, 18 February 2013
  4. Science and Technology Committee, Devil's bargain? Energy risks and the public, First Report, 9 July 2012