Steve Hawkes
Over 900 restaurants nationwide. Find your nearest now
An overwhelming majority of people believe that nuclear power will have a role to play in meeting Britain’s future energy needs, despite continued opposition from environmental campaigners.
The latest in a monthly series of ethical reports compiled for The Times describes a growing groundswell of support for a new generation of nuclear power plants.
Nearly two thirds of those surveyed by Populus said they believed that nuclear power will form part of an overall energy mix in the future, alongside coal, gas and “green” energy. More than one in five argued that it was the best way of tackling climate change. Only 20 per cent said that they remained opposed to the idea of nuclear power “under any circumstance”.
Industry experts believe that at least two new nuclear power plants will be built in the foreseeable future as ageing facilities reach the end of their life. This month British Energy said that it was likely to build any new facilities near its existing plants in the South of England – at Dungeness, Kent; Sizewell, Suffolk; or Hinkley Point, in Somerset. A High Court judge ordered the Government to launch a new consultation process over its nuclear power plans this year after legal opposition from Greenpeace. However, Malcolm Wicks, the Energy Minister, has confirmed the Government’s support for nuclear as a way of cutting down the amount of energy bought in from overseas.
Around 20 per cent of Britain’s energy comes from nuclear power plants, with less than half that amount generated by renewable sources.
The survey reveals that 86 per cent of people believe that energy companies should do more to address environmental issues, despite a huge investment in “green” energy in the past five years. British Gas is seen as the least environmentally conscious supplier, even though it launched what it claimed was Britain’s “greenest” available energy tariff in July. The company pledged to offset all CO2 emissions from the gas and electricity used by customers signing up to “Zero Carbon”, as well as investing more money in renewable energy and cutting CO2 emissions in schools.
On a scale of one to five, British Gas scores an average rating of 3.56, behind all its leading rivals and Good Energy, the self-styled “100 per cent renewable electricity supplier”, which top scores with 4.76.
Populus said that British Gas’s poor score reflected a growing gap between perception and reality in consumers’ understanding of renewable energy. It pointed out that 35 per cent of those surveyed believe that all the electricity pumped into the homes of customers on “green” energy products comes exclusively from renewable sources – which is practically impossible. In fact, the “green” energy simply forms part of the overall mix sent to everyone.
Consumer watchdogs cite this misunderstanding as one of the reasons why green energy products should carry a star rating. They claim that customers are often being duped, as suppliers charging a premium for “green” energy would have had to make an investment in wind farms or hydro power anyway to meet renewable targets laid down by the Government.
Ofgem began industry-wide consultation on how such a ratings scheme would work in June.
Concerned consumers
The Populus survey questions consumers who make decisions about purchases based on social and environmental factors, and not only on price. Findings show that almost half the UK population are concerned consumers
The moment your toes touch the sand and your gaze meets water, you know you’re in the Bahamas.
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2005 / 55
£59,500
Great car insurance deals online
Circa £60,000
The Army Benevolent Fund
London
£28k+ Basic + Commission
Drummond Selection
London
12-15 days a year, c £12K
Springboard
London
£Competitive
American Airlines
Heathrow, London
Great Investment, River Views
One and Two Bed Apartments
Wandsworth Town
Times Online Property Search will help you Find It
like nothing on Earth!
.
Must end 28 Feb 2009!
Save up to 25%
Amazing Far East Offers
Visit Malaysia from £755pp
Great travel insurance deals online
.
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Contrary to the propaganda put out by the industry, nuclear power is not "emission free" - it is NOT a solution to climate change.
The fission reaction does not emit carbon dioxide, but uranium must be mined, shipped, milled, manufactured into rods, the power stations must be built, decommissiioned, mine sites must be remediated, waste facilities must be mined and secured in perpetuity....all of which are NOT carbon free.
We are currently using the good ore - as ore grade declines more energy/carbon will be required for all of these steps as we dig up more rock for a given amount of uranium/thorium.
Don't get suckered by the nuclear industry's advertising. Nuclear is not even economically viable - it survives on subsidies forR&D, ongoing accident/terrorism insurance, decommissioning, waste storage - all currently taxpayer funded in most parts of the world.
A mix of efficiency, hydro, large scale solar thermal, offshore wind, tidal, and wave can be the long term solution.
Steve, London, UK
Nuclear power is the only way, if you were to get anywhere near the same generating capacity you'd have to build 17241 wind turbines in order to match 5 modern fast breeder reactors(5 nuclear power stations generating 2000 MW each, giving you around 10,000 MW combined).
Infact even if you built the same reactors as we have now (1600MW) you'd still need 13793 turbines to match the same power as 5 nuclear power stations!
Just to show you have 'efficient' wind turbines actually are:
"The planned 322 MW wind farm south of Glasgow will be the biggest wind farm in Europe. The £240 million farm is ordered by Scottish Power and the 140 wind turbines are to be delivered by Siemens" - that is 2.3MW per turbine, and turbines have a mere 25-28% true capacity. Reducing that figure to..oh.. 0.58MW. Giving the farm a total true output of 81MW - at a cost of £240 million.
Thats not to mention connection charges, electricy lost through transmission, and destroying our gorgeous countryside.
Stuart Forsyth, Kelso, Scotland
It is not surprising that a majority say that nuclear will form part of the future energy mix (by the way it is 20% of electricity but only 8% of total energy). However that is not the same as "backing it"!
We are building up a problem of safe storage of nuclear waste to which we have no agreed solution so cannot say what it will cost. We will pay very dearly for several hundred years to store waste after only 30 years of operation to generate it! hardly a good business proposition.
If a similar rate of invesrtment went into renewable energy forms as that which goes (and has gone historically) into nuclear, it is highly likely that we could reduce carbon emissions without recourse to nuclear.
It seems that government does not wish to consider that option seriously. We may all regret that one day.
John Griffiths, London,
What is the point of an article on energy which includes the statement that "around 20 per cent of Britainâs energy comes from nuclear power plants" when the true figure is 3.7%? I think the author has confused energy with electricity. These are not the same and an energy commentator should know this.
stephen Bull, fontes, france
Well, that would be in response to the propoganda. We've spent 50bn so far and 80bn to decommission in the pipeline, yet just 20% of our needs met, and declining. Put £50bn into energy efficiency we could probably cut our consumption by way more than 50%, for ever, won't need coal or nuclear, could reduce our natural gas consumption and on-site renewables could take most of the strain. But that would reduce consumption, challenges the control energy companies have over our lives and pockets (they also bank roll politics) and reduces taxation and its an example of democracy and empowerment. So it won't happen and we'll be sold down the river, again.
This government sells it as the only option but energy efficiency is the only sensible option now that we waste so much, but it counters the prevailing capitalist ideology, we cannot be allowed to reduce consumption, so it will be rejected.
Philip Ridley, Putney, London