Today was quite a big day in Sweden. The nuclear plant Barsebäck was shut down at midnight, after almost 30 years in service. While other countries are doing the opposite and building new plants (e.g. Finland), Sweden is implementing the results of a 1980 referendum. One reactor at Barsebäck was shut down in 1999 and now in 2005, the second and last one is on its last legs (it will actually take years to properly close operations).
I haven't really made up my mind yet what I think of it.. In a way, it is a decision that has been taken through a democratic process.. but shouldn't such decisions be amendable, as circumstances and scientific "truth" change? Because it isn't clear whether nuclear is that bad compared to if the shutting down of Barsebäck means that Sweden has to import more coal-produced energy from abroad. Maybe it's a necessary evil. On the other hand, environmentalists and one group of politicians (usually the centre left and the left) argue that we need to step away from a debate centered on the choice between two evils. By reducing Swedish reliance on nuclear energy we can push the development of alternative energy such as biofuels and solar power (wind and water power is just a small part). As long as we keep all reactors (Barsebäck is not the only plant in Sweden), that development will never gain momentum. I'm kind of attracted to this sentiment, while at the same time thinking that I would prefer shutting down dangerous nuclear plants in other countries, e.g. the former USSR, before closing the relatively safe Swedish ones. Though "safe" is not a term I really want to use in this context. The Barsebäck director mentioned on TV this morning that it will take 8 years before the work with the decontamination of the plant can even begin, before they can even enter the place.. And the issue of where to store it is far from resolved. But by 2013 a Right-wing government might have re-started the reactor, which they plan to do should they come to power in September 2006...
The other milestone which was crossed at midnight was that Sweden imposed a smoking ban at all restaurants and bars, following in the footsteps of Ireland, Italy and some American states. This is a decision that I have no problem with whatsoever!
As someone who was a bit too near to Chernobyl when it blew up, I am with you on shutting down or at least making the most unsafe of the nuclear reactors safer...Of course, there is the eternal question of what will replace them? In a number of cases in the Soviet Union, reactors were shut as a result of pressure from environment/nationalist movements, only to be reopened after independence. When people are asked about safety concerns vs. having to spend the whole winter freezing your ass off, who can blame them?
ReplyDeleteFusion. My mate Greta's fiancé is getting stable bursts of up to 5 minutes at the JET in Culham.
ReplyDeleteBy-product - water.
Don't worry, our arses are nowhere near freezing off.
Marianne, what do you mean with "stable bursts of up to 5 minutes at the JET". Water?
ReplyDelete