Bid to halt plan for radioactive waste (From Daily Echo)

Bid to halt plan for radioactive waste

2:34pm Wednesday 3rd February 2010 in

By Peter Law » Feature Writer

Skip social links
Print
Email
Comments(15)

ENVIRONMENTAL campaigners want plans to dispose of radioactive waste from the Sellafield nuclear plant in the New Forest to be scrapped.

They have called for the low-level radioactive waste oil, which is stored in sealed UN-approved drums, to remain at the Cumbrian plant.

The risk to the Hampshire public is considered negligible as the level of radiation is thousands of times lower than that which arises from everyday natural radiation exposure.

There are fears transporting it 350 miles could be an environmental disaster if a truck was involved in an accident.

Under a proposal ten trucks a year would make the journey from Cumbria to a Spanish-owned incinerator in Fawley.

New Forest Friends of the Earth spokesman John Walker said: “We totally object to the proposals and we see no reason why this should not be dealt with elsewhere.

“We are also concerned that this could set a precedent for nuclear waste from other sources to be disposed of in the New Forest.”

Each truck would carry about 40 barrels of radioactive waste, which consists of contaminated lubricants, as well as hydraulic and engine oils.

If approved by the environment Agency, up to 100 cubic metres of the waste would be sent to Hampshire each year.

The Fawley incinerator is the only treatment plant in the UK authorised to deal with this type of waste.

New Forest Liberal Democrat Councillor David Harrison said: “I think it is irresponsible of central Government to transport waste of that nature such large distances.

“You would have thought that if you are going to produce material of that type then you are going to provide a facility to deal with it on or near the site.”

The first load, which is likely to travel down the busy M3, M27 and A326, could arrive as early as the spring.

Once incinerated, the ash will be dumped at the Pound Bottom landfill site near Salisbury.

New Forest District Council leader Barry Rickman said: “I am confident that the material they are transporting does not pose a danger to the residents of the New Forest.”

Barrie Foley, New Forest National Park Authority interim chief executive, said the NPA had not been consulted on the plans.

radiation FAQs

■ What was the radioactive waste used for at Sellafield nuclear power plant?

It consists of contaminated lubricants, as well as hydraulic and engine oils. It was previously stored in safety compounds on site at Sellafield and is, on average, about ten years old.

■ Why does the radioactive waste have to come to Hampshire?

The Fawley incinerator, owned by Tradebe, is the only treatment plant in the UK authorised to deal with this type of low-level radioactive waste. Previously the oil had been stored in safety compounds in Sellafield or sent to Sweden for incineration.

■ What is the risk to the public if there is a leak?

The authorities insist there is no risk to the public as the level of radiation is thousands of times lower than that which arises from everyday radiation exposure.

The major environmental risk comes from the oil itself, for example pollution of watercourses.

■ What risk does incineration pose to the air?

A Health Protection Agency assessment, conducted on behalf of Tradebe, indicates that any radiation exposure to those living close to the incinerator will be low and well within the recognised radiation dose limits.

Comments(15)

Waysider says...
3:26pm Wed 3 Feb 10

England!!!, The dustbin of the world. Where the feel-good factor has long departed the shores, Where greedy councellors milk the OAPs for every penny they can get, to line own pockets. (they should get off our backs and look for a real job), 'work' they don't know the meaning of the word. Where pensions are the main topic - theirs of coarse. Where the word Sympathy is rarely heard, leaving it to lie among the other unmentionables, sxxt and syphilis in the dictionary. The people out in Canada were in revolt against a proposed burner on their back doors, but this country welcomed the idea with open arms, and I could go on. No, i'm not a militant individual, merely a septuagenarian, phew, who happens to be rather concerned for the future well-being of his grandchildren, and, as for adding fluoride to the water, what parent in his/her right mind, would allow their children to drink the stuff, knowing that they will catch all sorts of illnesses in later years as a result. You can lead a horse to water, but!, you can't make it drink.