Why Nuclear Power in Scotland is not Needed, Economic, Wanted or Safe

John Drummond in conversation with Energy Scotland's John Proctor and Leah Gunn Barrett

Last evening, John Proctor of Energy Scotland and I were guests on The Nation Talks podcast with John Drummond. We discussed why more nuclear power in Scotland should be a non-starter. It’s not Needed, Economic, Wanted or Safe. And yet English Labour - from Kid Starver to Viceroy Murray to Anus Sarwar - are rabidly pro-nuclear, pushing this costly and dangerous energy source onto Scotland without our consent.

The video link to the programme is below. I’ve also provided notes below that I used to prepare, many taken from my previous posts.

Why Nuclear power is being pushed onto Scotland

The Corporate Nuclear Lobby has conducted one of the most aggressive lobbying and public relations campaigns of all energy sources. It pushes politicians and the public to support nuclear based on sketchy information and outright lies which aren’t challenged in the Scottish media.

The nuclear industry is funding lobby group Britain Remade, which launched a campaign to lift the ban on new Scottish nuclear power at a May 1 meeting in Dunbar, near the Torness power plant. English Labour’s Scotland manager Anus Sarwar accused the SNP of depriving Scotland of billions in investment and thousands of jobs, which is a lie. This is the same dude who wouldn’t save Grangemouth and its 500 jobs, after vowing he would.

And Viceroy Murray is pushing nuclear, even removing his name from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) pledge.

English Labour is bankrolled by the nuclear lobby. Tony Blair is one of its biggest beneficiaries and cheerleaders. The Nuclear Energy Association loved his Institute’s 2024 pro-nuclear power report.

Nuclear power subsidises nuclear weapons production

Here’s the dirty little secret - the UK Government needs nuclear power. Without it, there’d be no nuclear weapons programme, the flaccid UK’s national virility symbol.

All the processes of the nuclear fuel cycle - uranium mining, refining and U-235 enrichment - are used for both civilian and military purposes; the UK Capenhurst facility makes nuclear fuel for both reactors and Trident submarines; and nuclear reactors create tritium (the radioactive isotope of hydrogen), which is necessary for nuclear weapons.

A 2017 University of Sussex study found that the costs of the Trident programme would be “unsupportable” without “an effective subsidy, from electricity consumers to military nuclear infrastructure”. Consumers, bearing the costs of uneconomic nuclear power, are also subsidising nuclear weapons that don’t even work! The Trident delivery system has failed two tests in a row, in 2016, and 2024. Despite these fiascos, the UK government insists that Trident “remains the most reliable weapons system in the world.”

Westminster won’t allow the southeast of England to be polluted by these nuclear rustbuckets so has confined them to “north Britain.” Nor will it tell its northern colony how badly they’re polluting the land and water. In 2017, the MoD stopped publishing annual reports from its internal watchdog, after the reports for 2005-2015 flagged “regulatory risks” 86 times. It has also blocked Scotland’s environment agency from releasing information about radioactive pollution from the Clyde nuclear bases at Faslane and Coulport for the last ten years.

Scots are getting the mushroom treatment - kept in the dark and fed a load of shite.

I. Nuclear is Not Needed – Renewables are far cheaper and safer

There are better, cheaper, safer solutions to intermittency and concerns over grid stability issues. Renewable energy is not only safer than nuclear, it’s 3-4 times cheaper - £38 to £44 per MWh, vs nuclear at £150 per MWh.

And Scotland is loaded with renewables. In 2022, they generated the equivalent of 113% of Scotland’s total electricity consumption, a 26% increase over 2021.

Nuclear isn’t needed for baseload power, which can be provided by any mix of generators, including wind and solar, if constant backup sources like tidal are provided. And nuclear can’t be easily switched off, so its presence on the grid limits much cheaper renewables, raising costs to the consumer.

So, Scotland doesn’t need nuclear in order to have a resilient energy system. We’ll continue to rely on Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGTs). Abated CCGTs can be brought on line if the government invests in Hydrogen.

Scotland’s comparative advantage lies with tidal and other renewable technologies, not nuclear. No nation has been as blessed with valuable natural assets as Scotland, but we lack AGENCY to use them to benefit our own population.

II. Nuclear is Not Economic – it’s a fiscal sinkhole that needs govt subsidies.

To repeat, the cost of electricity from renewable sources is 3-4 times cheaper than nuclear. But nuclear costs are even higher. Every spent rod of nuclear fuel takes ten years just to cool down. Then there’s the expense of decommissioning a plant at the end of its life - £132 billion, paid for by consumers through tax. So not only is nuclear 3-4 times more expensivethan renewables, it costs each household £4,600 to decommission the plants.

Just look at the UK’s two nuclear white elephants. Sizewell C’s costs have ballooned to £38bn and it won’t be operational until late 2030s. The UK govt is ponying up £14.2 billion in subsidies (Reeves can’t afford £2 billion for the WFA) because the private sector won’t touch it with a barge pole without govt guarantees. Hinkley Point C’s costs are £46 billion (and counting), which exceeds the entire £41 billion devolved budget for Scotland!

UK’s 8 nuclear plants are all owned and operated by France’s state energy company, EDF, which has troubles of its own. In June 2024 , nuclear prices turned negative and France took six plants offline, replacing the lost power with far cheaper renewables.

Scotland has two EDF-run nuclear plants - Hunterston B in West Kilbride, Ayrshire which ceased generating in January 2022; and Torness near Dunbar, East Lothian, whose life has been extended to 2030, when it was supposed to stop operating in 2023. It has 585 cracks in its graphite core, igniting fears of a nuclear meltdown.

Yet Anus Sarwar bizzarely insists that Scotland must invest in nuclear power to cut bills. You can’t make this stuff up. The private sector is running a mile from nuclear power because of its out-of-control construction costs, the propensity for plants to develop cracksand the intractable problem of what to do with tonnes of radioactive nuclear waste.

The Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) that English Labour is pushing, aren’t even real. There’s NO approved design - they’re a Potemkin village. Only two SMRs are operating in the world today - in Russia and China. Both are performing at less than 30% capacity and have been plagued by cost and time overruns. According to the World Nuclear Energy Status Report, these problems “make it even less likely that SMRs will become commercialised.”

So, English Labour is trying to force onto Scotland plants that aren’t even commercially viable. It’s regurgitating the marketing hot air from a desperate industry that’s frantically funding pathetic careerists like Sarwar, Starmer and the Viceroy who are pushing this crap.

Rachel the Freeze Reeves just raided £2.5bn from the £8.3bn GB Energy budget to develop SMRs.

SMRs 1) are more expensive than and just as dangerous as large nuclear reactors, 2) will generate more radioactive waste and 3) will turn communities into de facto long-term nuclear waste disposal sites. Businesses like data centres that want an on-site SMR won’t have the necessary waste infrastructure to safely manage and store large quantities of radioactive waste, making the communities de facto long-term nuclear waste disposal sites.

English Labour wants to replace Torness with SMRs. Dunbar Labour councillor Norman Hampshire said “a lot of work is going on behind the scenes” to ensure Torness remains an active nuclear site, otherwise, “the UK would have to import energy” and “Scotland can’t just keep its energy to itself.” Does he seriously claim to represent Scotland?

Martin Whitfield (Labour MSP South Scotland) said what’s need to change Scotland’s position is “a change of government.” He questioned whether Scotland has the authority to ban nuclear power since energy policy is reserved to the UK. It does, because the Scotland Act 1998 devolves planning to Scotland.

III. Nuclear is Not Wanted - the public is being lied to

The Scottish public isn’t being told the truth about nuclear. Again, we’re getting the "mushroom treatment.” Lobby group Britain Remade published a poll claiming over 50% of SNP voters wanted the nuclear ban lifted. They were asked: “Should Scotland use new nuclear power to get to Net Zero?”

They should have been asked: “Should you pay 3 times as much for your electricity with an additional cost to your household of £4600 to have unsafe nuclear power when renewables with hydrogen storage are cleaner, cheaper and safer?”

The IFS recently passed a motion in support of keeping the moratorium. SNP and other pro Indy parties MUST make this a key issue for 2026. It is a vote winner and there is clear water between then and Unionist parties on this. Former Modern Studies teacher Michael Shanks said he would be OK with a new nuke plant in his backyard. Baloney. He doesn't even know the configuration, where it’s an EPR (European Pressurised Reactor) or an SMR (Small Modular Reactor).

Direct Democracy could stop nuclear power in Scotland

Nuclear power is an issue crying out for Direct Democracy, where the Scottish People, not special interests who are in bed with the politicians, have the power to decide via a referendum whether or not they want it.

In 1994 when the Tories tried to privatise Scotland’s water, Strathclyde Regional Council organised a referendum where 97% voted to keep Scotland’s water in public hands.

The SNP should organise a referendum using the Referendums Scotland Act 2020 to avoid nuclear being forced onto us.

IV. Nuclear is Not Safe - at any stage

The Torness plant was scheduled to shut down in 2023 but in 2016, operator EDF extended its life to 2030 - despite the fact that it now has THE SAME NUMBER of cracks - 585 - in its graphite core that finally forced the closure of the Hunterston B facility on safety grounds. The French recently shut down a reactor that has as many cracks as Torness.

The spent nuclear fuel ends up at Sellafield, Europe’s most toxic nuclear site, described as a “bottomless pit of hell, money and despair.” It’s a huge complex of aging buildings never designed to hold toxic nuclear waste long-term. Sellafield has been polluting Scotland’s waters for decades, contaminating shellfish as far north as Port Appin in Argyll, 160 miles away. It's also driving up cancer rates making Scotland the cancer capital of the world. And it’s a money pit. The National Audit Office estimates Sellafield clean-up costs are at least £136bn and rising.

The nuclear waste problem is insoluble. 2018 Greenpeace report on the global crisis of nuclear waste said the entire nuclear fuel cycle, from uranium mining, enrichment, reactor operation and reprocessing to nuclear reactor decommissioning, produces hazardous nuclear waste.

The UK Government has tried for 49 years to find a community willing to accept radioactive waste. The waste problem has been made more dangerous and costly by Sellafield. So the Government’s new approach, Geological Disposal Facility (GDF), is based on “voluntarism and partnership”. But there are no signs this will work:

• Multiple official bodies have warned that Sellafield poses a “significant risk to people and the environment.”

• The local council that hosts Sellafield has said the Government’s new program is fundamentally flawed.

• It’s doubtful whether it will ever be possible to prove that the resultant radiation from a UK nuclear waste site would ever be acceptable;

• With no solution to nuclear waste, the UK is starting a new nuclear building program which will worsen the waste problem and result in vastly increased radioactivity from spent fuel and other highly radioactive wastes which will have to be stored indefinitely at vulnerable sites scattered around the UK coast.

The UK won’t give up on its never-ending quest to screw Scotland. It has stolen our oil and gas and now our renewables, and now is trying to force us to accept not needed, not economic, not wanted and not safe nuclear power.

Please sign the petition calling on the Scottish Administration to implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to give Scots the tools to exercise their sovereignty and the ability to say NO to nuclear.