sign in sign up
<<
Home , Kyle and Carrick, SCRAM, Uranium

In the two years that SCRAM has been in exist~nce, the nuclear scene has changed beyond recognition.

Two years ago, was un­ questioningly accepted as a clean , safe and cheap source of . Now , after the excellent sixth report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution on "Nuclear Power and the Environment"; and following persistent blunders by the nuclear industry, the ~C P. ~ ! Pickets Austr alian Consulate, Edinburgh. volume and extent of public protest has grown considerably. PROTEST And this is not just because nuclear power is uniquely dirty - leaving highly A shipload of uranium left radioactive wastes to be safeguarded for several weeks ago. It sailed in spite up to half a million years . It is not of a mass demonstration by trades• just because nuclear power is supremely unionists and environmentalists at the dangerous to society - a ' dockside. economy' ltas distinctly totalitarian implications . It is not just because SCRAM discovered from Greenpeace in nuclear power is questionably economic­ London that the uranium was due to Tony Benn, the Secretary of State for arrive in Merseyside on Wednesday 27th Energy, has publicly recognised the July - so, at very short notice, a inadequacy of current nuclear-economic picket of the Australian Consulate in analysis. The reason that SCRAM and· Edinburgh was organised for that day. more people in and elsewhere It attracted attention and showed ­ are reacting against 'going nuclear' is arity with the Australian demonstrators. that it is becoming increasingly clear (See story on page 2.) that there are many simpler and better ways of meeting our energy needs. Aware of, and encouraged by, the growing To take just one example, Professor Sir public support for SCRAM and its aiJDS , Martin Ryle, the AstJ,"onomer Royal, argued we have launched this Bulletin to pro­ recently in an article in "Nature" that vide a medium for nuclear and energy the most economically feasible and envir­ news ~d information for the many people onmentally acceptable method ~f avoiding and groups whom we know are sympathetic. the so-called 'energy gap' was to devel­ This introductory issue contains articles op windpower - along with the other re­ on waste-dumping in the Galloway Hills, · newable energy options - now. The large­ uranium mining on Deeside and the muddles scale production of windmills would also surrounding the proposed developments at create much more useful long- term employ­ Torness, .East . ment (especially in the structural steel, It is in tended to electrical and aircraft industries) than fi"-f+Ojj:8::::Qi-~-;;;~~- Mj;;::i*~tt:~r;;~Jl of the proposed ( r ¥8£~ .) uc t..t3,l".J.- ~.,.. any conceivable nuclear programme. progr-. ,. se•• ~~a~ 2 JJ feature guest articles by various experts and will examine alternative energy stra­ ANTI-NUKE tegies as as in-depth critiques of nuclear policies. We will also take care STICKERS and to keep you informed of the activities of SCRAM and other sympathetic groups. BADGES

We have come a long way in two years - are available but we're still a long way from halting from : this c~untry's nuclear aspirations. One of the main purposes of this publication SCRAM is to bring together groups, indivLduals 2a Ainslie Place and information, in order to strengthen Edinburgh 3 the campaign in Scotland. If you think this is a worthy aim, we hope that you Badges read 'Atomic Power? No thank you' will be able to support us and contri­ Stickers read 'Nuclear Power? No tha~s· bute to the Bulletin. We have been able. to produce and distribute No.l free, Both are printed in red on yellow with but we will need your help, criticism black lettering. and subscriptions if we are to continue - a mere £1.00 pays for the first six Badges : 20 p each issues (including postage)! Stickers : 2 p each (12 for 15 p) We hope to be hearing from you (postage extra)

Rob Edwards Chairman, SCRAM •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

WHO WE ARE URANIUM THE SCOTTISH CAMPAIGN TO RESIST THE ATOMIC MENACE (SCRAM) is a national organisation established in November PROSPECTS 1975. Its objectives are

1. To inform the public of the present and proposed nuclear developments Scotland's ancient and sand­ and their social, political and stones sometimes contain weak concen­ environmental implications. trations of uranium and the nuclear lobby are well aware of its increas­ 2. To oppose the further development ing scarcity value. Uranium resour~es of nuclear power in Scotland and are of great international strategic elsewhere. importance, both economically and politically. There is simply not 3. To press for a long-term strategy enough in existence to fuel the pro­ based on conservation and on the jected global expansion of thermal use of renewable resources. reactors - hence the industry's pressure for the fast breeder and CFR 1 ••••• at DoWlreay . SCRAM has organised several nuclear site occupations and other national protests, has held many public meet­ The OECD expect shortages to get des­ ings and has established links with perate in the next decade. At ~resent, all sectors of the community. There Britain imports about 2000 a are local groups throughout Scotlapd year from (all of whose reserves who associate with SCRAM and campaign are already sold out for the next dec­ on nuclear issues. SCRAM is strictly ade) and from South . Supplies non party-political. We are always are also expected shortly from ·, anxious to hear from anyone who has where the Rossing contract with Rio time, expertise or (of course) money Tinto- Ltd. (an allegedly monopoly to offer. contract) is the source of growing controversy over apartheid- and from ...... Australia where development has already been delayed by environmentalist action 'SCRAM', in nuclear jargon, means to and where the ~pposition Labour Party. 'shut down' a reactor. has voted to ban mining for export. Add to this the current American (for dumping toxic wastes) could cover litigation against RTZ and the alleged thousands of acres. The health hazards producers' cartel which pushed up the arising from radioactive dust and gas sevenfold over the last seven would be comp9unded by pollution from years and you can see why the SSEB want toxic heavY that would be leached to get started on Scotland's expensively into soils, and organisms over a weak but increasingly viable uranium wider area still. This could possibly : especially as it could take 12. ~terilise valuable ~orested and agricul­ years before a Scottish mine begins pro­ tural land for centuries. duction (assuming no delays from oppos­ ition groups! ) • Friends of the Earth (Aberdeen) have produced a detailed report on this sub­ ject, entitled "A Promise to Move Mountains: The Search for Uranium on ------,I I Deeside"* which has had a reasonable Proposals by.the SSEB to carry : impact on the local auth~rities and in out test drilling for uranium : the local press. Our main concern now in Orkney have been greeted with : is to pursue a national campaign. Not widespread opposition. Friends l only might the SSEB public relations of the Earth, Aberdeen (formed : exercises succeed in other places (eg : in Spring 1977) is campaigning : , where the syndrome : against the SSEB' s plans to do : is so malignant),but fighting through : test drilling on Oeeside .• Adrian : local planning procedures seems almost : Watts, Co-ordinator of FoE in : certain to ultimately come unstuck - : Aberdeen. explains the situation. : since the Secretary of State for Scotland I I is not only Judge and Jury for final ~------~ planning decisions but Chief Prosecutor also, in being responsible for the SSEB Between 1968 and 1973 the Institute of and their prospecting activities. Geological Sciences carried out initial surface surveys in the North of Scotland for the UKAEA. They are currently pur­ So we would like other SCRAM groups and suing more surveys for the Department of member~ to help by sending letters to Industry. The IGS are acting as consult­ the Secretary of State for Scotland, to ants to the SSEB who are interested in M.P.s and to the media, demanding : Orkney, Caithness and elsewhere in the Highlands and in Aberdeenshire anu a) that the Secretary of State should Kincardine. So far no drilling has atop all~uranium exploration~ begun; and in the North East we have until he states a policy on extract­ helped to persuade the Council ion (eg naming those parts of Scotland concerned to subject drilling to plann­ which will or will not be protected ing procedures (which are discretionary from extraction on local, social, in this case). economic or environmental gro.unds);

The SSEB would employ a mining company b) and that we should have the opport­ (RTZ perhaps) to pursue viable discov­ unity to challenge the SSEB's assumed eries. Fortunately, FoE have the right to search for uranium on behalf experience of successfully helping to of the Scottish consumer. defeat RTZ when they tried to mine copper in Snowdonia five years ago - and know some of the tricks that can Finally, FoE (Aberdeen) would greatly be tried (like pretending to dredge appreciate the help of anyone who has for nearby as a decoy project). experience of fighting the SSEB on points of policy, with knowledge of the The main objections to uranium extract­ principal personalities involved, or ion, apart from the obvious arguments with good arguments challenging the against this first stage in the fuel SSEB projections of electricity demand, cycle, arise from the vast scale of their nuclear programme or just to tear operations involved. Scotland's uranium apart their propaganda about how profit­ deposits are so weak and yet so increas-­ able and cheap nuclear electricity really ingly valuable that very large mining is! operations would be necessary ... on a scale that would literally devastate wide areas. An open-pit mine that may *Price 75p including postage from be likely on Deeside could be a mile FoE, 165 King Street, Aberdeen. wide and 700 feet deep. lagoons TORNESS CONFUSION

Public attention has recently been centred on Fast Breeder Reactors and Reprocessing at Windscale.Con­ struction work is due to start on a thermal reactor at Torness early in 1979 - yet it is still uncertain which type of reactor will be built there.

After the public ~nquiry in June 1974, the South of Scotland Electricity Board recetved permission to build any of S CR~2 camp a t Torness, 1976 four types of reactor :

AGR - Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor In fact, only the last three options SGHWR - Steam Generated Heavy were given any conside~ation. So the Water Reactor real choice the committee had to make HTR - High Temperature Reactor was between the AGR, PWR and SGHWR. LWR - Light Water Reactor ADVANCED GAS-COOLED REACTORS

In July 1974 the then Secre~ary of State for Energy, Mr . Eric Va.rley, announced The Sunday Times, in February 1976, described the AGR programme as a that the Government, after taking advice from the Nuclear Power Advisory Board, "technological muddle even more had decided that electricity boards expensive than Concorde". should adopt the SGHWR for their next Considerable difficulties have been nuclear power station orders. encountered with AGR stations. There are continuing doubts about corrosion RUMOURS and the process of deterioration in and steel components. The During the early summer of 1976, there CEGB themselves, i .n December 1973, were various rumours in the national described them as "a catastrophe we press and particularly at the National must not repeat" after a long series Energy Conference organised by Tony of construction difficulties which Benn, that the Government were consider­ had prevented them from producing a ing the cancellation of t he SGHWR pro­ single kilowatt of electricity. gramme in which they had placed such faith for two years. If more AGR stations were to be ordered, including one for Torness, another two or even three years SELECf COMMITTEE operating experience would be re­ quired before they could be ordered The Select Committee on Science and with confidence. This time lag Technology rapidly .convened an inquiry. could throw the nuclear industry They considered that there were four into disarray. possible alternative strategies open t p the U. K. if the SGHWR was abandoned: PRESSURISED WATER REACfORS 1. Withdraw from nuclear power altogether and base a future programme on a comb i nation of fossil fuels and - renewable The CEGB has long been in favour of sources of energy. these reactors . Friends of the Earth helped to persuade the Government not 2 . Abandon thermal re actors and to order these American Light Water concent rate on the Fas t Breeder. Reactors in 1973. Many scientists sti ll believe that PWRs have such 3. Adopt the AGR instead of the severe unsolved safety problems .that SCHWR. w~ dare not order any. There is , at present, an enormous legal and poli­ 4. Adopt the Ameri can Pressurised tical row ·bl owing up in West Ger many Water Reactor (PWR). over PWR safety. STEAM GENERATED HEAVY WATER REACTORS will undoubtedly cause problems for the turbine manufacturers and the The South of Scotland Electricity nuclear power construction industry. Board has consistently championed the If the next of AGR construction SGHWR. It argues that the present goes as well as the last ( Dungeness ·s reference design is "unnecessarily is now seven years behind schedule), costly" and is not an "optimised perhaps the Government will realise engineering solution". This is due that nuclear power is far more expen­ partly to more severe safety criteria sive thdn it appears to be and not applied to SGHWRs than are applied to necessarily safe. PWRs. On the other hand, the CEGB and Atomic Energy Authority are in favour of cancellation. The CEGB Chairman,as Pete Roche, Treasurer, SCRAM far back as 1972, described them as out of date technology. The AEA has given no convincing reasons for its change in policy. Without such evidence, the credibility-of its advice must surely be open to.question.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIGNS

On December 22nd, 1976 the .Select Committee finally recommended the continuation of the SGHWR programme and that site work should begin on schedule at Torness. However, it had one reservation : "although 2i years have elapsed since the adoption of the SQHWR system for the next series of reactors, the reactor has neither been de~igned to agreed parameters nor accurately costed and, in conse­ quence, neither the opp~nents nor the THE BOMB supporters can argue their case with the ability to carry conviction in President Carter has now approved the the minds of others." development (but not the deployment) of the . This , unlike CONFUSION conventional nuclear warheads, produces little blast and fire damagebut large Since December the SGHWR programme has quan·dties of neutron . Blast been under review yet again. Tony Benn, damage is likely to be restricted to a after pre~sure from the AEA, asked for few hundred yards but doses of 8,000 a report from the Nuclear Inspectorate rads of will reach out and from the Nucrear Power Company on for half a mile from the detonation point. the three possible reactor systems. This warhead has been greeted enthusias­ The Sunday Times, on 20th March this tically in some quarters because it could year, reported that the Department of be used as an effective tactical weapon Energy had conceded that the case against between opposing armies without leaving the SGHWR was almost irresistible. a long-lasting residue of radiation or Furthermore, the Nuclear Inspectorate causing extensive damage. Equally, how­ is expected to be relatively unenthus­ ever, it could be used against cities: iastic about the PWR, pointing to the destroying the inhabitants but leaving difficulty of adapting it to B.ritish the city intact. safety requirements. The AGR now begins to look more attractive to the Government. Senator Hatfield of Oregon has suggested that the neutron wave produced by the The final decision should come some bomb might convert in the air time during this summer~ but if it is into radioactive carbon-14. Since carbon- decided to use the AGR as the design 14 has a half-life of 6,000 years, the for Britain's next phase of nuclear neutron .bomb may be a significant long­ reactors, neither the CEGB nor the term radiation hazard after all. SSEB will be wholly satisfied. Also, the further delays necessary to gain operating experience with the AGR Earlier this year we, in the South­ West, had visits from various charming and persuasive gentlemen who harangued NUCLEAR us on bow safe and desirable was their project for burial of high-level nuc­ lear waste among our bills. DUSTBIN? They would, they said, be starting test borings in April to initiate this delightful scheme.

Proposals by the UKAEA to We let them know in certain (so we carry out test drilling for thought) unmistakable ways that we the possible disposal of did not agree with them or wish to high level nuclear waste in become pigs for their lethal Galloway have" le.d to much experiment. Various heated arguments local opposition, including took place in different centres - the formation of SCRAM South Dalmellington, , Patna, Dumfries, West. Dorothy Paulin, their Castle Douglas, Newton Stewart - and, Chairman, explains how they though they persisted in stating that feel and what they are doing the views expressed at the meetings were "not representative", we venture to hope that BNFL and Harwell were, in fact, left in little doubt about the overwhelming local and, indeed, The basic problem of the nuclear national opposition to the project. industry, a problem which has not been, and is nowhere near being, A petition from the electorate of solved is that of waste disposal. Galloway with around 10,000 signatures, and two similar petitions from South BNFL would like to sweep it under and from the S.N.P., may have the carpet and go blithely ahead, helped to convince them. Similar waste hoping that it will be solved "some disposal projects in other parts of day soon" - but they must not be the country have apparently been aban­ allowed to do so. It is immoral and doned, possibly because private owner­ irresponsible not only to put pres­ ship, or weight of national opinion ent generations at genetic and other (as in the Lake District) made access risk, but to thrust a proble~ of un­ more difficult - as opposed to the known and incalculable danger (which, accommodating of Forestry Commission even now with existing wastes extends owned land in Galloway and South Ayr­ further into the future of mankind shire. than the Stone Age extends backwards) upon defenceless generations yet unborn. But fierce opposition in the South-West has at least forced Harwell to admit It is reprehensible to propose burial that, even to do test borings, it would of high-level wastes anywhere in a be necessary to have Planning Permission small, over-crowded island like Britain from Kyle & Carrick District Council. We and more especially (as is envisaged) expected this to be applied for in early in a water catchment area pronounced spring. No application has yet been unsuitable by the Institute of Geological made. Why? Are they trying to find a Sciences (Report 76/12 HMSO). For this, way round? Are they awaiting the result and other reasons, every effort should of the Windscale Enquiry? Are they hop­ be made to support protestors at the ing people will weary and relax their Windscale Enquiry so that a breathing vigilance so that they can slip in un­ space may be won and the nation may noticed? We don't know, but we don't have. a chance to get its priorities trust them an inch. right. Our own Professor Tolstoy, who ***** is a distinguished geo-physicist, is a Kyle and Carrick District Council witness at the Enquiry on behalf of will have to decide whether or not SCRAM. Help us to support him- write to allow test drilling for waste (having got your facts right) to your dumping (if the UKAEA applies). M.P., to the Secretaries of State for Please write to Mr. Gibson-MacDonald Scotland/Energy/Environment, to the of the Planning Committee, Kyle and Kyle & Carrick District Council, or to Carrick District Council, B.urns House, aayone you think may be helpful; and be Burns Statue Square, Ayr, to express prepared, should it become necessary, your oppositlon to the AEA's plans. fOr a spot of civil disobedience! Every letter will help. NON-NUCLEAR FUTURE FOR SCOTLAND A paper by Andrew MacKi:llop concerning ACTION possible non-nuclear energy futures for Scotland is expected to be published The Campaign for is shortly by the S.N.P. organising a major demonstration against the British nuclear base at Holy Loch on This paper will include details of how the Clyde on September lOth. energy conservation will reduce energy demands, while can also Transport is being arranged by CND from make a substantial contribution. different parts of the country to and the journey from Glasgow In 1975-76, nuclear energy contributed to Dunoon (near the Holy Loch) will be about 10.7% of our electricity and 1.06% by the paddle steamer 'Waverley' for of our gross total primary energy; by the first 1000 people who book. 1988 and 1993, energy conservation meas­ ures could eliminate 19% and 31% of 1973 Leaflets advertising the demonstration gross primary energy, with the generation are available free (but pre·ferably with of up to 19,000 jobs. By 1988 and 1993, a donation that will at least cover the renewable energy sources could provide postage}, For leaflets, bookings and about 7% and 10% of 1973 b,aseline energy further information contact : demand, or. 8 2/.3% and 15% of energy ..tern­ Ian Davison, and after conservation. Several of the Scottish CND, energy conservation measures, and some 420 Sauchiehall Street, of the renewable energy resources could Glasgow G2. alone eliminate a need for energy more (tel: 041-942 1099} than equal to the present nuclear contri­ If in Edinburgh, for transport contact bution. Fiona Riddoch, 2a Ainslie Place.

The Windscale Public Enquiry is likely to continue until at least November and funds are still required by the ·objectors in order that they can pre­ sent their case. Donations of any s~ze will be gratefully accepted. These should be sent to : FAST-BREEDER DEVELOPMENT "Windscale Fighting Fund" Friends of the Earth, , West , Belgidm, Italy 9 Poland Street, and Holland have signed a series of London WlV 3DG. agreements in order ·to set up a joint company for research and development of fast-breeder reactors and their MALVILLE DEMONSTRATION OF EUROPEAN mar~~eting abroad. SOLIDARITY

This united action is in direct Malville in France is the site for the opposition to Presiderrt Carter's call 'Superphoenix' - the proposed French for a moratorium on fast-breeder dev­ Fast Reactor. Groups in opposition to elopment.* The agreements were signed this have already held demonstrations only a few days after a "very substan­ at the site; but these will be eclipsed tial" leak of gas by a massive demonstration to be held occurred at an atomic at Pierre­ there on 30th July. latte in France. This plant, which produces 'hex' fuel, is comparable to The organisers expect that 100,000 people BNFL's Springfield works. The leak is will attend, coming from all over Europe. said to have occurred as a consequence of human error.

Group~ unable to attend have sent letters of support which will be read out at the *Germany and France have agreed not to demonstration - SCRAM's letter of solidar­ export further reprocessing facilities ity will be among them. As far as we know, on account of the threat of nuclear pro­ this is the first time that a British liferation. It appears that they con­ anti-nuclear has made such a move sider that the export of fast-breeder and it is to be hoped that this will be reactors does not constitute prolifer­ the beginning of further international ation. contact and co-operation. NEXT ISSUE OF THE SCMM ENERGY BULLETIN : SUBSCRIBE OCTOBER

This issue will contain an up-~o-date anal ysis of the Windscale Enquiry, an NOW! ex-employee's view of the nuc~ear industry plus current news. We also hope to carry an article on ·wind power by Sir Martin Ryle and articles I wish to subscribe to the SCRAM Energy and news sent to us ~roa around the Bulletin for the yea r 1977/ 78. country. Please send me the next five issues at Any comments or ~ontributions to the the annual subscription fee of £1 . 00 Bulletin should be addressed to : (inc luding postage). Mike Leven, Editor, SCRAM, 2a Ainslie Name • . •. •••• ....•••••••• • ••••••• • •.• •• • Place, Edinburgh 3 (031-225 7752 office hours). Address • . . • •...• . • .. •• . ..•..••..•.•.••. In particular, . we hope to publish ...... •. details of any events or activities in Scotland and hope to receive regular contributions from around the country. This Bulletin should act as a medium I enclose cheque/ PO for • ••• · · ···· · ~··· of communication between groups thrOugh­ (cheques payable to SCRAM; no receipt out Scotland but. this can only happen will be issued unless requested) if th6 groups are willing to contribute.

So, let's hear from you please ... ! Signature ......

Date • • • ••.••••••••••• • • • . ••• • • •.•• ••. •• Please send this f orm, subscription fee SUPPORT (and any donations!) t o : SCRAM, 2a Ainslie ~lace, Edinburgh 3. Thanks. SCRAM! PLUTONIUM ON THE ROAD The Private Secretary to Sir John Hill, Chairman of the AEA, says in a letter In other words, they are actually plann­ dated 19 July, .1977 : ing to transport plutonium nitrate from one end of Scotland to Windscale. "It will be several years before Plutonium nitrate was picked out by the the additioo~l which will Royal Commission on Environmental Pollu­ close the full plutonium fuel tion in the Sixth Report on "Nuclear cycle have been built and commiss­ Power and the Environment" as being ioned at Dounreay. During this "especially hazardous from the point of pe riod ... plutonium will be trans­ view of dispersion" (para 319) . It is ferred between Dounreay and Wind­ one of the easier forms of plutonium to scale and for a limited time these make into a bomb .. . . transfers will be as plutonium nitrate. In addition , fue l elements for PFR will be moved from Windscale t o Dounreay.

It will be some time before any movements of plutonium nitrate take place between Dounreay and Windscale ·and in the meantime the Authori ty are in consultation with the Govern­ ment Department s concerned on the best arrangements for doing this~ u 0