DOCSLIB.ORG

No.86 December 1991/January 1992 £1.25

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
No.86 December 1991/January 1992 £1.25 No.86 December 1991/January 1992 £1.25 At this momentnewsofDounreay's at SCRAM's Safe Energy journal is best stunning incompetence and at produced bi-monthly for the British I COMMENT I worst criminal negligence is Anti-nuclear and Safe Energy ricocheting around the world. This movements by the Scottish Campaign S we go to press, Dounreay to Resist the Atomic Menace. Views has scored an 'own goal' in latest fiasco must surely lead expressed In articles appearing in this governments to concluded that journal are not necessarily th~ of A the debate over their bid to SCRAM. become a world centre for reprocess­ sending HEU spent fuel to Dounreay ing highly enriched uranium (HEU) hardly represents a sensible waste spent fuel from research reactors. management policy. scram, skram, v. They have lost lOkg of HEU. to shut-down a nuclear HERE remains, quite rightly, reactor in an emergency. Trying to pass their 'cock-up' of as an dissatisfaction throughout the 'incident', plant manager Geny Jordan T renewable community. For was reluctant to speculate on the HEU's sure, there have been some 'breaks' CONTRIBUllONS whereabouts. He told the press: "'There for renewable generation oppor­ We welcome contributions of articles, is no evidence to suggest that it left the tunities, but after more than a de­ news, letters, graphics and site, either through the effluent lines or cade of stultification they are still photographs; which should be sent to SCRAM at the address below. in somebodys pocket" He continued: paltry and the transformation is gained grudgingly at best. ''At this stage, I can't discount any LETTERS possibility." And continued: "Where We are still in something of a debilitating SCRAM reserves the right to edit letters the material is, whether it exists or not, interlude. No prospective government to fit the available space. All letters for or whether it is an error in accountancy publication should be submitted by the can make positive moves with the news deadline below. or whatever, must be pure speculation nncertainty of limited power and funds. at this stage." COPY DEADUNES For those with an active interest in The station's reprocessing plant was The ·copy Deadline for feature articles renewables, there is a tendency, after so for the next issue (February/March '92) shut down at the beginning of long in the wilderness, to adopt a wait is 14 January. (Feature articles are December, after the AEA, under the and see attitude. Yet important issues approximately 850 words per page.) supervision of European Community have still to be addressed: should News copy should normally be Inspectors, discovered the material was renewables be connected to national and submitted no later than a fortnight after missing. The last comprehensive international grids, or local networks the features deadline. stocktake of Dounreay's nuclear with control of local people; how can we ADVERllSING inventory was in April this year, when move to suppress the use of no discrepancies were found. carbon-based fuels without adding Advertising rates are shown on page 27. Or Wyn Lywellyn, a specialist in suffering to the least well off; how can Inserts can be mailed out with the nuclear materials accountancy, has reconcile the demands of new journal - details on request. technologies with the legitimate been flown up to Dounreay to head an BACK ISSUES investigation into the matter. It is aspirations of other outdoor users? Back copies of the journal are available expected that the plant will remain To tum into the winds of change is a for most issues. Copies from the closed at least until his investigation is vital for survival, but to lack previous year cost £1.20 (inc. p&p) or £6 completed. Lywellyn is to report for the set of six. Issues more than a year determination, is to be blown away in old are 75p (Inc. p&p). directly to the Department of Energy, the gale. The renewable community his inquiry is expected to be must not shelter behind the obstacles SUBSCRIPllONS completed by the end of the year. but must get out there and use the For details of subscription rates see the Dounreay are obviously holding out elements to their advantage. form on the back page. for the loss to be a paper one only. PRODUCllON Jordan claims that the accountancy NTI-NUCLEAR and renew­ able energy campaigning has Editors: process is not an exact science because Nuclear News- Mike Townsley of the complex measurements A never been more important. Safe Energy- Oave Spence required. This begs the question, why The renewable industry is looking up. Layout- Graham Stein Thenuclearindustrycontinues to lurch carry out complex measurements if Front cover drawing: David Shaw they don't give a reliable answer? along its crazy, drunken path. New demandsareconstantlybeingmadeon However, another possibility is that SCRAM campaigners and great op­ the HEU has been deposited portunities exist for interested activists. somewhere within the reprocessing plant itself, either small amounts all Any interests in therangeofnuclear and Published by SCRAM, 11 Forth over the place, or more worryingly all renewable issues can be fully developed Street, Edinburgh EH1 3LE. in one place. If it is all at one point with experience at SCRAM. You will '11' 031-557 4283/4 within the system, then it goes a fair also be makinganessentialcontribution part of the way to forming a critical to environmentalism. If you want to Fax : 031-557 4284 (no junk faxes) mass. This, presumably, is why they develop research, journalism, cam­ have taken the precaution of halting paigning or a range of skills, you should ISSN 0140 7340 Bi-monthly reprocessing activities, which could contact SCRAM now. Bring your own cost the AEA £125,000 a day. wages. LBR needs you! 2 Safe Energy 86 SAFE ENERGY CONTENTS FEATURES I 8 UK flouts EC radhealth Directive The UK Government has failed to implement a European Community Directive, produced in the wake of the Cher­ nobyl disaster, which calls for an extensive public infor­ mation campaign on the possible consequences of radio­ logical emergencies. Mike Townsley outlines the Directive, and reports on threatened legal action by the Nuclear Free Local Authorities. 10 Danube dam damned While Hungary pulled out in 1989, Czechoslovakia continues amidst contoversy with its Danube hydro-electric power scheme. Bridget Gubbins has been to the site of the dam, and finds environmental arguments being used by both sides in the dispute. 12 Harwell- an environmental disaster Recent contamination of local water supplies is just one of the environmental problems facing the Harwell nuclear research establishment. Government Agencies, argues Paul Mobbs of Banbury Environmental Research Group, seem to be closing ranks, rather than openly dealing with the difficulties. Beyond the grid 14 The role of small scale alternative energy systems, separate from the grid, is considered by Dave Preece. In the light of his own experiences building an energy efficient house, he indicates the benefits to the individual and society as a whole of a diverse, decentralised, sustainable energy policy. Profits before safety 16 Direct discharge of untreated radioactive waste from British Nuclear Fuels' Springfields Works, into the River Ribble near Preston, is regarded by Government Agencies as the "best means practicable". Friends of the Earth's Radiation Monitoring Unit Co-ordinator, Nick Cassidy, summarises their findings and calls for an immediate cessation of Springfields' discharges. 18 Hydro power politics In the first of two articles on Scottish hydro-electric power, Pat Agnew, Scottish Green Party speaker on energy, looks at the political and historical background which led to the development of the UK' s only established renewable energy. December '91/January '92 3 meeting helped to secure the new money: However, this is not the end of the story, Prometheus unfound "Culham certainly helped, but fusion ex­ eventually the fusion plasma should perts already knew fusion would work, so become so hot that the reaction is self APAN, the European Commission they had no problem convincing their sustaining, the so-called ignition point. J (BC), the US and the Soviet Union governments to put up the money. Even 1he temperatures attained are such that have all pledged £7S million towards the Soviets came in without a murmur." the plasma has an irritating tendency to designing a l,OOOMW fusion reactor, On November 9, deuterium and tritium "boil off" some of the materials from the the International Thermonuclear Ex­ gas were heated to around 200 million OC containment vessel walls. Impurities then perimental Reactor (ITER), based on - some ten times hotter than the centre of enter the plasma and shut down the reac­ the findings of the Joint European Torus the sun - in what has been described as tion. In order to prevent this happening a (JET) project at Culham. JET's "historic breakthrough" in head­ 'pumped diverter' is being designed to The funds cover a 6 year period and lines around the world. This led to the alter the shape of the magnetic field cur­ involve a commibnent to establish a 200 reactor generating power for the ftrst time. rently used to control the plasma within strong central research team. While ensur­ It produced a peak of2MW in a pulse that the huge doughnut shaped reactor vessel. ing the short tenn future for fusion, there lasted under 2 seconds. What was the cost It should create a low temperature area, is as yet no commibnent for the full.£2.8 of this momentous achievement? £1 bil­ shielding sensitive areas of the vessel. billion estimated costs of the entire pro­ lion pounds since 1983 and on the day a This, according US fusion pioneer Ed­ ject. Both the US and the Soviets have 700MW pulse of electricity to heat the ward Teller, is like trying to a confine jelly expressed doubts about future involve­ deuterium and tritium.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scotland, Nuclear Energy Policy and Independence Raphael J. Heffron
    Scotland, Nuclear Energy Policy and Independence EPRG Working Paper 1407 Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 1457 Raphael J. Heffron and William J. Nuttall Abstract This paper examines the role of nuclear energy in Scotland, and the concerns for Scotland as it votes for independence. The aim is to focus directly on current Scottish energy policy and its relationship to nuclear energy. The paper does not purport to advise on a vote for or against Scottish independence but aims to further the debate in an underexplored area of energy policy that will be of value whether Scotland secures independence or further devolution. There are four central parts to this paper: (1) consideration of the Scottish electricity mix; (2) an analysis of a statement about nuclear energy made by the Scottish energy minister; (3) examination of nuclear energy issues as presented in the Scottish Independence White Paper; and (4) the issue of nuclear waste is assessed. A recurrent theme in the analysis is that whether one is for, against, or indifferent to new nuclear energy development, it highlights a major gap in Scotland’s energy and environmental policy goals. Too often, the energy policy debate from the Scottish Government perspective has been reduced to a low-carbon energy development debate between nuclear energy and renewable energy. There is little reflection on how to reduce Scottish dependency on fossil fuels. For Scotland to aspire to being a low-carbon economy, to decarbonising its electricity market, and to being a leader within the climate change community, it needs to tackle the issue of how to stop the continuation of burning fossil fuels.
    [Show full text]
  • STATUS REPORT on SEISMIC RE-EVALUATION English Only Text
    Unclassified NEA/CSNI/R(98)5 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques OLIS : 10-Nov-1998 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Dist. : 16-Nov-1998 __________________________________________________________________________________________ English text only Unclassified NEA/CSNI/R(98)5 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY COMMITTEE ON THE SAFETY OF NUCLEAR INSTALLATIONS STATUS REPORT ON SEISMIC RE-EVALUATION English text English only 71673 Document incomplet sur OLIS Incomplete document on OLIS NEA/CSNI/R(98)5 ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: − to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; − to contribute to sound economic expansion in Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and − to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter; Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996) and the Republic of Korea (12th December 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom. Region 4 South-East Scotland: Montrose to Eyemouth
    Coasts and seas of the United Kingdom Region 4 South-east Scotland: Montrose to Eyemouth edited by J.H. Barne, C.F. Robson, S.S. Kaznowska, J.P. Doody, N.C. Davidson & A.L. Buck Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House, City Road Peterborough PE1 1JY UK ©JNCC 1997 This volume has been produced by the Coastal Directories Project of the JNCC on behalf of the project Steering Group. JNCC Coastal Directories Project Team Project directors Dr J.P. Doody, Dr N.C. Davidson Project management and co-ordination J.H. Barne, C.F. Robson Editing and publication S.S. Kaznowska, A.L. Buck, R.M. Sumerling Administration & editorial assistance J. Plaza, P.A. Smith, N.M. Stevenson The project receives guidance from a Steering Group which has more than 200 members. More detailed information and advice comes from the members of the Core Steering Group, which is composed as follows: Dr J.M. Baxter Scottish Natural Heritage R.J. Bleakley Department of the Environment, Northern Ireland R. Bradley The Association of Sea Fisheries Committees of England and Wales Dr J.P. Doody Joint Nature Conservation Committee B. Empson Environment Agency C. Gilbert Kent County Council & National Coasts and Estuaries Advisory Group N. Hailey English Nature Dr K. Hiscock Joint Nature Conservation Committee Prof. S.J. Lockwood Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences C.R. Macduff-Duncan Esso UK (on behalf of the UK Offshore Operators Association) Dr D.J. Murison Scottish Office Agriculture, Environment & Fisheries Department Dr H.J. Prosser Welsh Office Dr J.S. Pullen WWF-UK (Worldwide Fund for Nature) Dr P.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Energy: the Big Lie
    The Trap Chapter 6 Nuclear Energy: The Big Lie You believe that it is possible to make a very major change in our energy policy? Yes. Technology is now available which would allow us to transform the way we produce and use energy. If we seize the opportunity to make a radical change, the effects would be extraordinarily beneficial to the economy, the environment and public safety. What has suddenly changed to make you so optimistic? The Cold War has ended. During the Cold War, the principal weapons were nuclear. Nuclear energy was an extension of military research and both were to some degree controlled by the same state scientific elites, which for reasons of national security maintained secrecy even when the nuclear programme was extended to non-military projects. Successive governments believed that if problems arose in the civil project, these should be kept secret so as not to endanger the military programme. At first it was thought that nuclear energy would be safe and unlimited, and therefore would put an end to western dependence on imported energy. It was also believed that electricity generated by nuclear means would be, as the Chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission declared, 'too cheap to meter'.1 Western governments devoted a major part of their resources to developing nuclear energy. Between 1979 and 1990 the member nations of the International Energy Agency spent nearly 60 per cent of their energy research budget on nuclear power. Only 9.4 per cent was devoted to developing renewable sources of energy and 6.4 per cent to methods for saving energy.2 With almost unlimited state backing, nuclear scientists and administrators operated in secret and above the law.
    [Show full text]
  • Endless Trouble: Britain's Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant
    Endless Trouble Britain’s Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (THORP) Martin Forwood, Gordon MacKerron and William Walker Research Report No. 19 International Panel on Fissile Materials Endless Trouble: Britain’s Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (THORP) © 2019 International Panel on Fissile Materials This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License To view a copy of this license, visit ww.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 On the cover: the world map shows in highlight the United Kingdom, site of THORP Dedication For Martin Forwood (1940–2019) Distinguished colleague and dear friend Table of Contents About the IPFM 1 Introduction 2 THORP: An Operational History 4 THORP: A Political History 11 THORP: A Chronology 1974 to 2018 21 Endnotes 26 About the authors 29 About the IPFM The International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM) was founded in January 2006 and is an independent group of arms control and nonproliferation experts from both nuclear- weapon and non-nuclear-weapon states. The mission of the IPFM is to analyze the technical basis for practical and achievable pol- icy initiatives to secure, consolidate, and reduce stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and plutonium. These fissile materials are the key ingredients in nuclear weapons, and their control is critical to achieving nuclear disarmament, to halting the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and to ensuring that terrorists do not acquire nuclear weapons. Both military and civilian stocks of fissile materials have to be addressed. The nuclear- weapon states still have enough fissile materials in their weapon stockpiles for tens of thousands of nuclear weapons. On the civilian side, enough plutonium has been sepa- rated to make a similarly large number of weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long Term Storage of Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor (Agr) Fuel Xa9951796 P.N
    IAEA-SM-352/28 THE LONG TERM STORAGE OF ADVANCED GAS-COOLED REACTOR (AGR) FUEL XA9951796 P.N. STANDRING Thorp Technical Department, British Nuclear Fuels pic, Sellafield, Seascale, Cumbria, United Kingdom Abstract The approach being taken by BNFL in managing the AGR lifetime spent fuel arisings from British Energy reactors is given. Interim storage for up to 80 years is envisaged for fuel delivered beyond the life of the Thorp reprocessing plant. Adopting a policy of using existing facilities, to comply with the principles of waste minimisation, has defined the development requirements to demonstrate that this approach can be undertaken safely and business issues can be addressed. The major safety issues are the long term integrity of both the fuel being stored and structure it is being stored in. Business related issues reflect long term interactions with the rest of the Sellafield site and storage optimisation. Examples of the developement programme in each of these areas is given. 1. INTRODUCTION British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) has been contracted to manage the lifetime irradiated AGR fuel arisings from British Energy reactors1. The agreement formulated is a mixture of reprocessing (covering the planned life of the Thorp reprocessing plant) and interim storage for the remainder of the fuel arisings. Interim storage is projected to be up to 80 years to comply with direct disposal acceptance criteria and projected repository availability. Eighty years represents a significant increase in storage times compared to current operational experience; of around 18 years. Confidence that AGR fuel can be stored safely for extended periods has been provided by our experience of storing AGR fuel to date and the supporting research and development programmes initiated in the late 1970's for wet storage and 1990's in the case of Scottish Nuclear (SNL) dry storage project.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Energy Outlook – 2008
    Nuclear Energy Outlook – 2008 This Nuclear Energy Outlook (NEO) is the first of its kind and Nuclear Energy Outlook – 2008 responds to the renewed interest in nuclear energy by many OECD member countries. World energy demand continues to grow unabated and is leading to very serious concerns about security of supply, soaring energy prices and climate change stemming from fossil fuel consumption. Nuclear energy is being increasingly seen as having a role to play in addressing these concerns. This Outlook uses the most current data and statistics available and provides projections up to 2050 to consider growth scenarios and potential implications on the future use of nuclear energy. It also offers unique analyses and recommendations on the possible challenges that lie ahead. NUCLEAR ENERGY OUTLOOK Topics covered by the NEO include nuclear power’s current status and projected trends, environmental impacts, uranium resources and security of supply, costs, safety and regulation, radioactive 2008 waste management and decommissioning, non-proliferation and security, legal frameworks, infrastructure, stakeholder engagement, advanced reactors and advanced fuel cycles. www.nea.fr (66 2008 08 1 P) € 105 -:HSTCQE=UZYVUX: ISBN 978-92-64-05410-3 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY Erratum Nuclear Energy Outlook 2008 ISBN 978-92-64-05410-3 Page 278 Table 9.2: “Annex 2” states whose ratification is necessary for entry into force of the CTBT* State Ratification State Ratification Algeria 11 July 2003 Israel Argentina 04 Dec. 1998 Italy 01 Feb. 1999 Australia 09 July 1998 Japan 08 July 1997 Austria 13 March 1998 Korea 24 Sept. 1999 Bangladesh 08 March 2000 Mexico 05 Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • The United Kingdom 2002 Review INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
    INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY Energy Policies of IEA Countries The United Kingdom 2002 Review INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY Energy Policies of IEA Countries The United Kingdom 2002 Review INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR 9, rue de la Fédération, ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION 75739 Paris, cedex 15, France AND DEVELOPMENT The International Energy Agency (IEA) is an Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris autonomous body which was established in November on 14th December 1960, and which came into force 1974 within the framework of the Organisation for on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall implement an international energy programme. promote policies designed: It carries out a comprehensive programme of energy co- • to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth operation among twenty-six* of the OECD’s thirty and employment and a rising standard of living in Member countries. The basic aims of the IEA are: Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development • to maintain and improve systems for coping with oil of the world economy; supply disruptions; • to contribute to sound economic expansion in • to promote rational energy policies in a global Member as well as non-member countries in the context through co-operative relations with non- process of economic development; and member countries, industry and international organisations; • to contribute to the expansion
    [Show full text]
  • Agency Board Meeting 29 May 2018
    SEPA 21/18 Agency Board Meeting 29 May 2018 Board Report Number: SEPA 21/18 Chief Executive’s Report Summary: The Chief Executive Report highlights areas of environmental achievement and concern, enforcement action, and major partnership activities, as well as business related issues in respect of corporate performance and activity, since the Board meeting on 24 April 2018. We have developed a first quarter roadmap focusing on the various initiatives planned to meet our Annual Operating Plan commitments. This report is intended to concentrate principally on progress made on these initiatives, as well as media interest and any significant enforcement action. Risks: N/A Resource and N/A Staffing Implications: Equalities: N/A Environmental and N/A Carbon Impact: Purpose and For information audience of the report: Agency Board, Scottish Government and Public Report Authors: Terry A’Hearn, Chief Executive Philip Graves, Senior Business Consultant, Business Strategy Appendices: None 1 SEPA 21/18 Chief Executive’s Report Introduction Over the past month, we have made further progress on some key Organisational improvements. A critical activity has been that we have done a lot of work on designing the detailed structure for the Compliance & Beyond portfolio. This has included work on how responsibilities for allocating work flows and tasks under One Planet Prosperity will take place in this and other portfolios across the organisation. We have also initiated work on how we can shift the focus of some of our planning work so that we have more influence earlier in planning processes. There is considerable enthusiasm in our planning function for this review work as staff believe that, if we can make good changes, we will increase our influence and help deliver better long-term decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009 with Particular Emphasis on Economic Issues
    The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009 With Particular Emphasis on Economic Issues By Mycle Schneider Independent Consultant, Mycle Schneider Consulting, Paris (France) Project Coordinator Steve Thomas Professor for Energy Policy, Greenwich University (UK) Antony Froggatt Independent Consultant, London (UK) Doug Koplow Director of Earth Track, Cambridge (USA) Modeling and Additional Graphic Design Julie Hazemann Director of EnerWebWatch, Paris (France) Paris, August 2009 Commissioned by German Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety (Contract n° UM0901290) About the Authors Mycle Schneider is an independent international consultant on energy and nuclear policy based in Paris. He founded the Energy Information Agency WISE-Paris in 1983 and directed it until 2003. Since 1997 he has provided information and consulting services to the Belgian Energy Minister, the French and German Environment Ministries, the International Atomic Energy Agency, Greenpeace, the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the Worldwide Fund for Nature, the European Commission, the European Parliament's Scientific and Technological Option Assessment Panel and its General Directorate for Research, the Oxford Research Group, and the French Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety. Since 2004 he has been in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies lecture series for the International MSc in Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering Program at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes. In 1997, along with Japan's Jinzaburo Takagi, he received the Right Livelihood Award, also known as the “Alternative Nobel Prize”. Antony Froggatt works as independent European energy consultant based in London. Since 1997 Antony has worked as a freelance researcher and writer on energy and nuclear policy issues in the EU and neighboring states.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland's First Coastal and Marine National Park : a Consultation
    Scotland’s first coastal and marine national park A CONSULTATION Scotland’s first coastal and marine national park A CONSULTATION Scottish Executive, Edinburgh 2006 © Crown copyright 2006 ISBN: 0-7559-5170-0 Scottish Executive St Andrew’s House Edinburgh EH1 3DG Produced for the Scottish Executive by Astron B47606 09/06 Published by the Scottish Executive, September, 2006 Further copies are available from Blackwell’s Bookshop 53 South Bridge Edinburgh EH1 1YS The text pages of this document are printed on recycled paper and are 100% recyclable © All photography courtesy of Scottish Natural Heritage except page 34 Contents v Minister’s foreword 1 Introduction 3 Background to National Parks in Scotland 5 Chapter One: The added value and benefits of a Coastal and Marine National Park 13 Chapter Two: Selecting the Location of Scotland’s First Coastal and Marine National Park 39 Chapter Three: Functions, Powers and Governance 49 Next Steps 51 Summary of Questions ANNEXES 55 Annex A: Regulatory Impact Assessment 59 Annex B: List of Organisations to be Consulted 65 Annex C: Overview Map of 10 Areas 67 Annex D: Functions and Powers of National Park Authorities 69 Annex E: Other sources of information Minister’s foreword iv-v Scotland’s first coastal and marine national park Coastal and Marine National Parks are a key part of my National Park status will attract increased numbers of overall strategy for Scotland’s marine and coastal tourists, presenting new opportunities to enhance visitor environments. It is a further element in a series of initiatives spend which would in turn generate additional income that the Scottish Executive have taken in recent years that locally, increase business confidence and enhance the demonstrate the importance we attach to the vitality of our image of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • The Electricity (Amendment of Scottish Pension Schemes) Regulations 1990
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally made). This item of legislation is currently only available in its original format. STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1990 No. 2181 (S.189) ELECTRICITY The Electricity (Amendment of Scottish Pension Schemes) Regulations 1990 Made - - - - 29th October 1990 Laid before Parliament 12th November 1990 Coming into force - - 3rd December 1990 The Secretary of State, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 105 of and paragraph 1 of Schedule 15 to the Electricity Act 1989(1), and of all other powers enabling him in that behalf, hereby makes the following Regulations: Citation and commencement 1. These Regulations may be cited as the Electricity (Amendment of Scottish Pension Schemes) Regulations 1990, shall come into force on 3rd December 1990 and shall have effect from 29th March 1990 as respects regulations 1, 2 and 3 and from 31st March 1990 as respects regulations 4 and 5. Interpretation 2. In these Regulations– “the North Board” means the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board; “the North Scheme” means the Hydro-Electric Pension Scheme formerly called the Hydroboard Superannuation Fund. “the South Board” means the South of Scotland Electricity Board; “the South Scheme” means the ScottishPower Pension Scheme formerly called the South of Scotland Electricity Board’s Superannuation Scheme. Amendment of Schemes relating to Board members and former Board members 3.—(1) The amendment to the North Scheme (relating to members and former members of the North Board) set out in Part I of the Schedule hereto shall have effect. (1) 1989 c. 29; see the definition of “prescribed” in section 64(1), as applied by Schedule 15, paragraph 5(3).
    [Show full text]