Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Dumping radioactive waste in the Lake District


I received this email today:


It’s inspired our poets and painters for centuries, and still provides a haven of unspoiled beauty and calm for millions of visitors every year.

But if we don’t act, our iconic and beloved Lake District could soon be known as something else: the UK’s newest nuclear waste dump and the largest toxic dump in the world. [1]

We’re not making this up. And if this plan goes ahead, it’s not only radioactive waste we’d be dumping: we’d likely be kissing goodbye to tens of thousands of jobs and wiping billions of pounds off our tourist industry as well.

We don’t have much time - decision-makers meet tomorrow. But they’re under heavy pressure already - experts have condemned the plans, local people have been up in arms and thousands have signed a 38 Degrees petition to stop the nuclear dump. A late surge of signatures could be all we need to push them over the edge - and stop this crazy plan once and for all.

Click here to sign the petition:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-lakes-nuclear-dump

A few years ago, the government asked local councils to volunteer to store the country’s nuclear waste. Cumbria County Council responded, lured by the prospect of new jobs in construction. Now councillors are meeting tomorrow to vote whether to start investigating potential dump sites - either next to or actually inside the borders of the national park.

They’re actually considering this. Radioactive waste. Inside our largest national park.

Eminent scientists like Stuart Haszeldine of the University of Edinburgh are already warning that if a dump is built, radioactive gas could leak to the surface within 60 years. But you don’t have to be a geology professor to work out that this plan is a monumentally bad idea. [2]

If we can show local officials their dumping plans are likely to cause a national outcry, they’ll be much more likely to quietly drop them at their vote this Wednesday. Sign the petition now:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-lakes-nuclear-dump

When David Cameron’s government tried to sell off our forests, we didn’t let them sweet-talk a few local decision-makers with promises of economic gain. We banded together as a nation and said, ‘no way - this history, this heritage, this space for wild beauty and freedom belongs to all of us.’

Well, the Lake District is a national treasure. It employs 55,000 people in tourism alone - but how many people are going to want to visit a national park scarred by a Channel Tunnel-sized construction project? Who’s going to go on holiday to a toxic waste dump the size of a city? This is going to cost jobs - and far more than will ever be created by turning the Lake District into the UK’s newest dumping ground. [3]

Most of the country still has no idea this is happening - and we only have 24 hours to spread the word far and wide. Click here to sign the petition - and share it with your friends:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-lakes-nuclear-dump


Thank you for standing up for something so special,

Hannah, David, Marie and the 38 Degrees team

Comments

  • If it doesn't go there - where does it go? Not being a clever dick - but it is an important question and good to know what the alternatives are.
  • If it doesn't go there - where does it go?

    Not being a clever dick - but it is an important question and good to know what the alternatives are.

    That's a very good question, Muttley.

    Radioactive waste is lethal.





  • Got rejected. The tree huggers will be happy
  • Hill-huggers. Not that many trees in Cumbria?
  • Before I agree to it not being 'stored' which is different and less permanent than 'dumped' what other councils volunteered.
    And given that we currently dump it in the third world maybe it is time we dealt with our own mess.
  • Isn't Cumbria the most earthquake prone part of the UK? And what with that fracking going on just down the road....
  • Sponsored links:


  • Poland,Rumania or Bulgaria must be loads of room there.
  • Scott Parker's back garden?
  • This is an interesting conundrum. On the one hand the eco nuts don't want us to use fossil fuels for generating energy so that means basically coal, gas or oil and in a way I can see that it doesn't make sense to just burn a precious natural resource, on the other hand the same bunch don't want nuclear power, which in terms of carbon footprint is very low because of the waste material so how do they thinkwe are going to generate energy? Don't talk to me about useless, eyesore and ridiculously expensive windfarms that don't generate enough power to keep a small viallage going let alone a country. They don't work when the weather is still and they don't work when it's too windy either.

    I saw that Finland are investing a large amount of money on a nuclear storage facility which will be in a deep rock bed that will be totally safe so I guess that's what we need to do. It can also be a good thing in creating jobs we all know that nothing is 100% safe but the alternative is sitting in the cold and in the dark.
  • The emotive use of the word "dump" by the Green mafia also gets an good airing.

    "The most earthquake prone part of the country" Quick everyone, get under the kitchen table, yeh right!

    Thing is, we have had nuclear power generation for over 50 years, we require a safe place to "STORE" the waste and are looking at solutions. One of these options is to store it underground in a controlled fashion and just so happens that Cumbria fits the bill apparently. Until someone tells me otherwise, as someone who really knows diddly squat other than the basics, I think I will trust the experts, not a bunch of reactive hill huggers, who can only bring delay to the process.
  • The emotive use of the word "dump" by the Green mafia also gets an good airing.

    "The most earthquake prone part of the country" Quick everyone, get under the kitchen table, yeh right!

    Thing is, we have had nuclear power generation for over 50 years, we require a safe place to "STORE" the waste and are looking at solutions. One of these options is to store it underground in a controlled fashion and just so happens that Cumbria fits the bill apparently. Until someone tells me otherwise, as someone who really knows diddly squat other than the basics, I think I will trust the experts, not a bunch of reactive hill huggers, who can only bring delay to the process.


    I'm with you on this one Soapy.

    You can't make an omelete without breaking eggs..............

  • Dump makes it sound like it will be poured into Lake Windermere!
    radioactive gas could leak to the surface within 60 years
    I don't know all the facts to make a comment on the general proposal either way, but there's absolutely no way they'd choose a site where this was likely, or even a very remote possibility. If he said 600 years I might believe him though...
  • The emotive use of the word "dump" by the Green mafia also gets an good airing.

    And of course terminology like the 'Green Mafia' indicates a totally open minded approach to the subject.

  • edited January 2013

    The emotive use of the word "dump" by the Green mafia also gets an good airing.

    And of course terminology like the 'Green Mafia' indicates a totally open minded approach to the subject.

    Well spotted Exiled_Addick but a failure to spot in my post the fact that I am open to some more enlightenment on a subject I admit I only know the basics about lets your reply down. Can you justify the claim that the waste is just being dumped for me Exiled?

  • Did you know that a chunk of Japan's nuclear waste is shipped to The UK for sorting ?
  • No Soapy, I can't and am not trying to but confrontational and emotive language does nothing to further the debate, whichever side it comes from.

    I am a geologist, although not one working in the field of nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal was covered in one of my university modules and based in what I learnt then and since I would seriously question if there is anywhere particularly well suited to underground disposal of nuclear waste. Nowhere is remote enough, at least certainly not on the mainland.

    Read up on the Yucca Mountain project. That is a controversial enough idea in itself there is nothing nearly as suitable in the UK.

    Some of the waste will be hazardous for longer than humans have existed as a species and for a decent chunk of time even by geological standards. No one can have an accurate idea if what conditions the waste may
  • Sponsored links:


  • PL54 said:

    Did you know that a chunk of Japan's nuclear waste is shipped to The UK for sorting ?

    Yes, and we get paid billions for it.
  • so other than "we dont want it" you have no answer as to where it should go.

    and we cant use oil, gas, coal or nuclear but no one has any answer to how 80/75% of our energy will come from.

    We should do as the French did build 20/30 Nuclear power stations and sell that energy to other countries as well as supplying ourselves.
    They dont have a n issue with it and as "good europeans" why not copy them


  • so other than "we dont want it" you have no answer as to where it should go.

    and we cant use oil, gas, coal or nuclear but no one has any answer to how 80/75% of our energy will come from.

    We should do as the French did build 20/30 Nuclear power stations and sell that energy to other countries as well as supplying ourselves.
    They dont have a n issue with it and as "good europeans" why not copy them


    Or sling Big Rob an extention lead...
  • Jayajosh said:

    PL54 said:

    Did you know that a chunk of Japan's nuclear waste is shipped to The UK for sorting ?

    Yes, and we get paid billions for it.
    We ? I thought a priovate contractor shipped it - I guess government somewhere gets paid to decontaminate it at Sellafield or wherever.
  • so other than "we dont want it" you have no answer as to where it should go.

    and we cant use oil, gas, coal or nuclear but no one has any answer to how 80/75% of our energy will come from.

    We should do as the French did build 20/30 Nuclear power stations and sell that energy to other countries as well as supplying ourselves.
    They dont have a n issue with it and as "good europeans" why not copy them



    hydrogen

  • so other than "we dont want it" you have no answer as to where it should go.

    and we cant use oil, gas, coal or nuclear but no one has any answer to how 80/75% of our energy will come from.

    We should do as the French did build 20/30 Nuclear power stations and sell that energy to other countries as well as supplying ourselves.
    They dont have a n issue with it and as "good europeans" why not copy them


    all together now .... THIS
  • No Soapy, I can't and am not trying to but confrontational and emotive language does nothing to further the debate, whichever side it comes from.

    I am a geologist, although not one working in the field of nuclear waste disposal. Nuclear waste disposal was covered in one of my university modules and based in what I learnt then and since I would seriously question if there is anywhere particularly well suited to underground disposal of nuclear waste. Nowhere is remote enough, at least certainly not on the mainland.

    Read up on the Yucca Mountain project. That is a controversial enough idea in itself there is nothing nearly as suitable in the UK.

    Some of the waste will be hazardous for longer than humans have existed as a species and for a decent chunk of time even by geological standards. No one can have an accurate idea if what conditions the waste may

    Fair dos. I'll wikipedia Yucca Mountain Project, ta
  • edited January 2013
    Surely there is nothing new about nuclear gear in Cumbria? Didn't Sellafield used to be called Windscale?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire
    There again, Chernobyl buggered up the lamb!
  • This is a massive issue here in Australia for a couple of reasons....

    1] We have a shitload of Uranium that we currently can't sell to a couple of key markets (India, China) for political reasons, one of which is over what these places will do with the nuclear waste.

    2] Australia - especially South Australia - wants to become a 'nuclear waste treatment centre' and start charging people to dump their nuclear waste in the huge and uninhabited SA outback - this is something of a controversial idea as you can imagine!
  • wickford said:

    Surely there is nothing new about nuclear gear in Cumbria? Didn't Sellafield used to be called Windscale?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire
    There again, Chernobyl buggered up the lamb!

    Yes, the waste is stored at Drigg just down the coast from Sellafield. It's cunningly hidden by a row of conifers and protected signs saying `Beware of Snakes'.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!