David McEwan Hill (Letters, 15 January) sums up the nuclear energy debate.
Despite the fact that the SNP decided as an election pledge that a non- nuclear future for Scotland was in the best interests of the environment and the public, Labour in Westminster claims this is just a political stunt.
In 2002, the pro-nucl
ear lobby launched a scathing attack on the then Scottish Executive's proposals to increase the use of renewable energy, knowing the only hope for nuclear power was to kill off research and development into renewable energy. Has Labour in Scotland forgotten this?
Knowing that nuclear is uneconomic and unsafe and requires non- renewable fuel has no future in any case, New Labour, aided by a desperate pro-nuclear lobby, has resorted to a "no carbon emissions" argument for nuclear power. This is about as convincing as its "weapons of mass destruction" argument for the Iraq war. The emissions may be no-carbon, but taking into account building, maintaining, protecting and decommissioning the stations, extracting, transporting, protecting and enriching the uranium, then processing, transporting and protecting the spent fuel and constructing, maintaining and protecting the storage vaults forever, nuclear power is about as carbon-neutral as 1950s coal-fired power stations.
There are various fundamental aspects of energy use we need to address, namely reducing our energy needs, concentrating on renewable sources and encouraging smaller, decentralised, community-owned or household generation, which would release us from the financial grip of large, privately owned utility companies.
Not only is the pro-nuclear argument flawed, but any reliance on it as a solution lessens the impetus to develop clean, renewable, safe and decentralised solutions. We have the best tidal and offshore wind resources in Europe and we should all be grateful that the Scottish Government – supported by the Greens and Lib Dems, public opinion and every environmental group in the country – is determined to go down the non-nuclear route. New Labour will hopefully wake up and realise we need nuclear power about as much as we needed super-casinos.
IAN HENDRY, Craiglockhart Gardens, Edinburgh
The announcement by the Scottish Government of a-non nuclear energy generation strategy is to be welcomed for another reason – we have no Scottish source of uranium. With the exception of Canada, most uranium is found in countries where the regime is not always stable. In Canada, supplies are getting more difficult due to geological conditions.
With the increase in nuclear plants in the developing world, the demand for uranium is increasing and it is a finite source. It would be embarrassing and economically disastrous if, at some point, nuclear power stations were to have to close due to lack of supplies.
Scotland has wind resources and our large coastline is ideal for tidal power.
With modern controls we can tap much smaller river supplies for hydro-power. Combined heat and power is almost 100 per cent efficient (around three to six times the efficiency of other generating sources) and, consequently, when powered by bio-fuels, needs a much smaller supply than conventional schemes.
The Scottish Government should benefit in two ways, firstly from a stable, widespread generating base (rather than having all our watts in one basket) and, second, if we develop these technologies here we can export them, bringing in revenue .
BRUCE D SKIVINGTON, Stapeley Avenue, Edinburgh
