The price we all pay for the Governments inability to make decisions

Britain faces the prospect of power shortages and soaring prices this winter after the National Grid warned of a shortfall in electricity-generating capacity yesterday. The alert coincides with a surge in gas prices, which are now 40% higher than in continental Europe, and the confirmation that a vital import plant in South Wales will not be operational this winter.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2202128,00.html

This demonstrates the need for base load energy generation based on non carbon fuels. In my view, the Government will not make any decison until voters start dying of cold in signifcant numbers or the lights start going out in London!!!

Chemicals put 27,000 people a year at risk | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

Chemicals put 27,000 people a year at risk Special reports Guardian Unlimited

Chemical spills, leaks and explosions put up to 27,000 people at risk of injury in a single year, according to the most extensive government survey yet of chemical accidents. More than 3,000 people suffered effects including poisoning and burns from contamination during 2005.

The Health Protection Agency's report includes hundreds of incidents involving mercury, asbestos, carbon monoxide and pesticides; it reveals 1,040 accidents involving potentially harmful leaks and emissions of chemicals directly affected an estimated 27,000 people, with up to 3,400 reporting symptoms of exposure. A fifth of accidents were industrial but nearly as many were in people's homes.

HPA report can be found at
http://www.hpa.org.uk/publications/PublicationDisplay.asp?PublicationID=94

It's intresting to consider how much effort the nuclear sector puts into controling discharges and reducing discharges close to zero. These resources might return a greater safety benefit if they were directed to reducing chemical leaks, spills and explsoions

Government loses nuclear power case

This sorry story demonstrates that it doesn’t pay to take short cuts with due process. It is always better to take some short term pain for success in the longer term.

The key points are

Greenpeace said the government failed to present clear proposals and information on key issues surrounding a new generation of nuclear power stations, such as the disposal of radioactive waste and the financial costs of building new plants. Mr Justice Sullivan agreed, saying the information given on waste was "not merely inadequate but also misleading". He added that information of substance did not emerge until after the consultation period had ended.

The consultation document gave every appearance of being simply an "issues paper".

It contained no actual proposals and, even if it had, the information given to consultees was "wholly insufficient for them to make an intelligent response".

Mr Justice Sullivan said “Something has gone clearly and radically wrong" with the consultation exercise.

Fairness required that consultees should be given a proper opportunity to respond to that substantial amount of new material before any decision was taken.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/article/0,,2013618,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6364281.stm

It is also ironic in view of my post last May, where I said "Who says that decison has not already been taken !!!"
http://freds-take-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2006/05/be-green-and-say-yes-to-nuclear.html

The next question is whether the Government will appeal the judgement; if it does not, it will be interesting to see how the government puts the wheels back on!!