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

Opposer: Ingham

This debate is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.

To support this motion is to have suicidal tendencies.

The reality of abandoning nuclear power would mean a return to a Middle Age lifestyle.

The debate is irrelevant.

Nothing sums it up better than this week's news that 5,000 a year die in Britain's hospitals. How many does nuclear kill in a year? I quote official Government statistics.

'There have been no deaths, no raised radiation levels. . .'

Not a single stiff.

Take Chernobyl. 45 died - that's all. Yes, it should not have happened. It was a disgrace to engineering. But the consequences are far less than you would be led to believe.

There is more radiation in one brazil nut than there is in eight lobsters from the Irish Sea off Sellafield. Medical Science emits 14 times more radiation than the energy industry.

Lies, distortion, scaremongering and the incompetence of the green movement is why we are here.

My 25 years in politics have shown me that economics are the most riggable things known to man. I have no doubt that Britain will turn again to nuclear when it discovers it cannot do without it. And it will happen sooner than you think. When an energy shortage looms nuclear will become instantly economic.

And what of the alternatives?

Hydro? Let's sink some more valleys and see how the public like that. Tidal? What happens when the estuary changes? Wave? £1.5M to power 25 houses says it all. I am all in favour of a mixed approach - but only if it is practical.

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.