Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Nuclear unclear

Letters

Like many, I was disturbed by the confident 'yes' vote for nuclear power from the NCE 500. While I was distinctly relieved to read your editorial, I continue to be somewhat disappointed by the nature of the anti-nuclear debate.

The fact that nuclear power makes many of us uncomfortable is not sufficient to silence the pro-nuclear lobby.

Nuclear power is unsustainable.

Whatever we decide to do now in the context of needing a quick energy fix will affect generations to come - somebody will have to pay for and administer nuclear waste management programmes for centuries.

If we accept this risk and expense in the UK, poorer nations will follow us and nuclear proliferation thus becomes an inevitability. The risk of problems arising from nuclear power then increases substantially, and richer countries will inevitably waste time, money and political muscle trying to control this risk.

We invest, and always have invested, tiny amounts of money in research and development of renewables in contrast with nuclear. With such biased financial support, it is hardly fair to conclude that nuclear is the only feasible alternative to fossil fuels.

Edward Hoare, edwardhoare@gmail. com

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.