Rede von MdEP Rebecca Harms auf dem Nuclear Energy Forum am 22. Mai 2008 in Prag
Ladies and Gentlemen,
With the launch of the European Nuclear Energy Forum, the European Commission had promised to organise a "broad discussion among all relevant stakeholders on the opportunities and risks of nuclear energy".[1] In reality, this assembly is by no means representative of the European societies. It is above all a reunion of nuclear industry representatives and their allies in utilities and politics. I profoundly regret that.
The nuclear community has launched a massive and, so far, highly successful PR campaign to bring outdated technology back on the agenda. Media, decision makers, convey the idea of a nuclear revival. French President Sarkozy is playing the salesman for the Franco-German AREVA NP reactor builder promising nuclear plants to countries like Algeria, Libya, Marocco, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and anyone who asks for it kindly enough.
The problem is not so much to see nuclear plants like mushrooms popping up all over the planet, this will not happen, the industry does have neither manpower nor fabrication capacity to turn these fantasies into reality. But at a moment when the international non-proliferation regime is virtually "on the brink of collapse", as former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer put it[2] , the mere suggestion that nuclear technology could be applied anywhere to the benefit of civil societies everywhere is based on a dangerous and irresponsible misconception.
None of the countries that have been visited by the French salesman have an appropriate nuclear regulation in place, highly trained, independent experts to supervise, control and inspect, the necessary maintenance infrastructure and the indispensable electricity grid. The European Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) plan to help. In a joint statement, elaborated under secretive conditions without any public or parliamentary consultation and signed on 7 May 2008, future "priority fields" of cooperation explicitly include the "enhancement of national infrastructures, as needed, in countries wishing to launch new nuclear power programmes". The program is designed with the objective of "fostering the use of nuclear energy".
"Political and public acceptance", the Commission also states, "is a prerequisite for the further development of nuclear energy." The Commission's own studies have consistently shown that a vast majority of EU citizens don't want nuclear power. Furthermore, the latest report indicates that twice as many EU citizens favour the decrease of nuclear power in the electricity mix, than those that wish an increase of the role of nuclear power. And yet, the Commission has reinforced its alliance with the IAEA to foster nuclear madness. Why are we here in Prague then today, if everything has been decided already anyway?
In fact, democracy is just another broken promise. The nuclear industry and their allies have never delivered. The UK is an excellent but only the latest in a long list of examples.
The Commission sees in the EU a "mature nuclear industry spanning the entire fuel cycle with its own technological base and highly skilled workforce". In reality, the industry is facing a dramatic skilled worker shortage. Worse, the UK Nuclear Installations Inspectorate has admitted it would like 180 inspectors but has only 165. "It is no secret that we have had problems recruiting the right kind of people," said a spokesman.[3]
Continued use of nuclear energy "would increase our energy independence", says the Commission. In 2005, 1.5% of the uranium consumed in the EU15 was mined in the only operating mine in the EU – that is the uranium mine Rožna in this country – not one gram in the UK nor in France. That increase in energy independence could be called marginal at best.
Nuclear energy is "relatively shielded from price fluctuations", according to the Commission. Wulf Bernotat, chairman of E.ON told The Times in London that the cost per nuclear plant to be built in the UK could be as high as €6 billion - nearly double the UK Government's latest €3.5 billion estimate[4]. That's a pretty steep increase for an energy "shielded from price fluctuations".
Not to talk about waste management. Astonishingly, almost half the entire budget - over €1.9 billion this year - of the UK Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) is spent on decommissioning the UK's old reactors and nuclear facilities. Nuclear consultant Ian Jackson estimates that the total being spent on decommissioning is equivalent to an extra penny in the pound on income tax. The Government's latest estimate for this massive 100-year clean-up programme covering the UK's 20 state-owned nuclear sites totals €92 billion, but this figure is expected to continue to rise.[5] No subsidies, the UK government repeatedly said. The industry shall pay the full price for the management of nuclear wastes from any future plant. Jackson concluded that "the problem is that unfortunately this fully commercial price would make disposal far too expensive, killing the prospects of any new nuclear build programme in Britain."[6]
The Commission pretends "to inform the public, promote its welfare and protect its safety and security. Transparency must become synonymous with the notion of a nuclear future."
French writer Daniel Pennac has written "transparency is a conjuror's concept". If the European Commission, the nuclear industry and its allies want to prove him wrong, they have to start to give change a chance rather than organising an expensive look at decisions already taken.
________________________________________
[1] If not otherwise stated, all European Commission quotes from ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/forum/index_en.htm
[2] The Guardian, 31 March 2008
[3] The Guardian, 31 May 2006
[4] Nuclear reactors will cost twice estimate, says E.ON chief, The Times, 6 May 2008; http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/utilities/article3872870.ece
[5] Clean-up slows down at Britain's obsolete reactors, The Observer, 18 May 2008; http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/18/britishenergygroupbusiness.nuclearpower
[6] Nuclear Engineering International, April 2008
