Last updated 16:07, Wednesday, 22 October 2008

ONE of the most important factors in the future fate of Sellafield is to be the subject of a top-level debate next week.

Title
Author
Copyright

Description

The debate as to whether the UK’s stockpile of plutonium – most of which is held at Sellafield – should be considered an asset or a liability could have a major impact on the economic future of region.

The government, through the NDA, have yet to decide on what should be done with the stockpile, which is currently considered an asset of no value on their balance sheets.

The West Cumbria Site Stakeholder Group is hosting the meeting, which will take place in Cleator Moor Civic/Masonic Hall, on Tuesday from 1pm until 4pm. Entry is free and all are welcome.

Pro-nuclear supporters believe that the energy potential of the plutonium can and should be unlocked by reprocessing it, which could mean new development at Sellafield.

However anti-nukes fell that such an expensive option is too much of a burden for the UK tax-payer to bear, and would rather see it made safe and stored.

Martin Forwood, of Cumbian’s Opposed to a Radioactive Environment (Core) has spent over 20 years campaigning against nuclear operations in the county, particularly reprocessing. He said: “I have no doubt that the plutonium stockpiled at Sellafield should be considered a liability – how can it be anything else?

“The size of the stockpile is embarrassing and sadly, like all things nuclear, there are no good options as to what to do with it. Stopping any further production would be a good start.

“Of the ‘less bad’ options and as a waste product, plutonium could be put through some kind of Vitrification process (mixed with glass, to make it easier to store) or it could be turned into low spec Mox fuel, but I doubt there is currently the capacity to do that at Sellafield without building a costly new plant to do that.

“Though the current Sellafield Mox Plant (SMP) is struggling to produce high spec Mox fuel, it would be technically possible to convert it to produce low-spec Mox. And whilst there are other facilities in the world that could process UK plutonium, there are great risks and costs involved in transporting it to Europe or elsewhere. Selling it to a third party would also involve transport risks that will undoubtedly be politically unacceptable.

“As I understand it, the Government does not anticipate using plutonium in Mox fuel in any new reactors built in the UK, and the possibility of new reactors at Sellafield is still a long time off – if ever.

“In short, to achieve the overall objective of the final disposal of plutonium in a nuclear dump somewhere, it seems logical to treat it as a waste product now and not put it through the expense and dangers of re-using it as reactor fuel with all the health and safety issues that involves.

“In any case, it seems unlikely that there will be any new power stations at Sellafield in the short term, a new reactor or two at Sellafield is a long time off.”

Dr Peter Wilson was born in Nottingham in 1936. After education at Nottingham High School he gained an open scholarship to St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, to be taken up after National Service (1955-57) in which he was a radio mechanic at the Shape military headquarters near Paris. At Oxford he gained first-class honours in chemistry, then took a PhD at Leeds University. In 1964 he was appointed to a research position at the nuclear reprocessing site at Sellafield, where he remained until he retired in 2001.

He is the author of The Nuclear Fuel Cycle and currently represents the Church Council on the West Cumbria Site Stakeholder Group, and feels strongly that the plutonium stockpile should be regarded as an asset.

He said: “When you look at the fact that only one per cent of the energy obtainable from the uranium that went into making a fuel rod is abstracted when it is used once-through, surely there can be only one answer to the question, asset or liability?

“Together with the remaining and otherwise largely unusable uranium, it represents 99 per cent of a finite resource that, as a matter of environmental responsibility, should be used in fast reactors to reduce requirements for new mining – the most damaging part of the cycle.

“There are increasing problems in the security of various energy sources, and by utilising what we already have we can make enough fuel to last for centuries, rather then decades.”

Anyone interested in attending the workshop, which is free, should contact June Shield at Sellafield, on 019467 85828 or e-mail June.t.shield@ sellafieldsites.com