tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post3275492528747158496..comments2024-03-27T18:54:46.951+00:00Comments on Syniadau :: The Blog: Listening to the people Syniadauhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13876017048168055247noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-37941740327813161132013-07-07T14:39:20.864+01:002013-07-07T14:39:20.864+01:00Now let's turn and look at the benefits, to se...Now let's turn and look at the benefits, to see whether these outweigh the costs. Clearly the only possible benefit is jobs; together with the money that those jobs will bring to the area, which will circulate in the local economy and in turn provide more jobs. I can't think of any other possible benefit.<br /><br />On the subject of jobs, I'd recommend people take the time to read <a href="http://stop-wylfa.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Maniffesto.pdf" rel="nofollow">this</a> analysis of how to provide sustainable employment growth in Môn. <br /><br />The first thing I would emphasize is that no jobs in the nuclear industry will be lost by not building Wylfa B. Wylfa A provided work for about 600 people directly and about another 200 in the wider economy, although this has probably gone down due to the final shutdown of one of Wylfa A's reactors. However decommissioning will, according to Magnox, provide work for between 600-700 people for twenty years ... and further work will still be required after that, but not on such an intense basis.<br /><br />The second thing to note is that the figure of 6,000 jobs currently being quoted will be, in the main, construction jobs. They will exist only while Wylfa B is being built (let's be generous and say for ten years). Unemployment in Môn is a problem, but the figure quoted in the document is 2,400. Even if we round that up and assume that all these unemployed people will get these jobs (which in itself is highly unlikely) it still means that <b>fully half</b> of them will be filled by people from elsewhere. And what will the local people who did get these jobs do after construction is complete? There won't be any need for so many extra construction workers on Môn on an ongoing basis, will there? So people will either have to move away to find work in that field, or look for other work. That's no different from the situation now! In terms of jobs, Wylfa B is a short-term, unsustainable fix. A sudden glut of short-term jobs will distort the economy and make it <b>harder</b> to grow the long-term, sustainable jobs that Môn (and every other part of Wales) really needs. It will do more harm than good.<br /><br />-<br /><br />So those are the pros and cons. For me, the cons heavily outweigh the pros. MHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09329059309196746446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-54791093040065576462013-07-07T14:34:51.130+01:002013-07-07T14:34:51.130+01:00I have quite a bit of sympathy with what you'v...I have quite a bit of sympathy with what you've said, Alwyn. The question is identifying what the benefits are, what the costs and liabilities are, and comparing the two to decide which is the best option. So I'll try and set out both the pros and the cons as I see them. <br /><br />-<br /><br />Cons first: I agree that there are risks to Wales whether a nuclear power station is built in Wales or somewhere on the west coast of England. It is true to say the proposed new Hinkley C nuclear power station would be closer to a larger number of people in south Wales than Wylfa B would be in north Wales. But even that must be put into perspective. The exclusion zone around Fukushima is 20km, and Barry Island is 23km from Hinkley Point. Heysham is even further away from the north Wales coast.<br /><br />Nuclear power has safety risks, but the risk of a large-scale disaster is low. However these risks are only low, and can only be kept low, by applying very strict safety and security measures, and these measures cost a large amount of money on an ongoing basis. Nuclear power is not commercially viable, and the risks are not commercially insurable; therefore the public purse <b>of the place in which a nuclear power station is located</b> has to pick up a large part of the costs. <br /><br />This is the nub of the question. If the costs are paid by taxpayers across the UK, Wales will only pay its 5% of the ongoing cost of (at worst) 8 new nuclear power stations. If Wales is independent it will have to pay 100% of the ongoing cost of one new nuclear power station. If, as I strongly suspect, the UK only commits to building one or two stations, and abandons the rest because the ones that it did commit itself to are behind schedule and are costing far more than predicted (as has happened with every one so far) Wales will be lumbered with an even more disproportionate share of the costs <b>if</b> Wylfa B is one of them.<br /><br />It should be obvious that if Wales was already an independent country we wouldn't even think of building a new nuclear power station. As we can produce more electricity than we consume from renewables, we don't need to. And we couldn't afford to even if we wanted to. <br /><br />If the subsidy were only required for <b>building</b> a new nuclear power station, then we might well have a case for arguing that Westminster should spend that public money in Wales rather England (remember that Scotland and Northern Ireland can decide energy policy for themselves). But <b>building</b> a nuclear power station is the <b>cheap</b> part. The lion's share of the subsidy will be required to protect the public from radioactive toxic waste for many generations to come. A nuclear power station (and especially one where the waste is stored on site) is therefore completely incompatible with an independent Wales. It will be a burden round the necks of future generations which we will struggle to afford.MHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09329059309196746446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-52302382135826524142013-07-07T05:07:28.356+01:002013-07-07T05:07:28.356+01:00KP if you joined Plaid Cymru to vote for Leanne be...KP if you joined Plaid Cymru to vote for Leanne because she is "a non Welsh speaker" you made a big mistake. I first met Leanne in the early 1990's and she was a Welsh speaker then. Not fluent and not very confident in her linguistic abilities, perhaps, but nonetheless a Welsh speaker.<br /><br />I oppose nuclear energy, I would prefer that new generation nuclear plants were not built, they are dangerous, dirty and expensive. <br /><br />The conundrum that I have is that if the British Government decides to build new generation nuclear plants, we in Wales will suffer the downside of building them even if they are built in Lancashire, Gloucestershire or Somerset. We live in danger of Hinkley point and Hasham, we pay the tax subsidies required to redevelop those sites, but we get none of the benefits.<br /><br />If, against what I believe to be sensible judgement, Westminster goes ahead with a new generation nuclear plants, I would prefer Wales to get some of the benefits by building them in Wylfa and / or Trawsfynydd rather than having to put up with the problems of nuclear energy without having any of the benefits.Alwyn ap Huwhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06194724336424525283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-29950238603355532582013-07-06T08:35:13.632+01:002013-07-06T08:35:13.632+01:00As neat a piece of rationalisation as I've rea...As neat a piece of rationalisation as I've read in a long time.Shambohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11298228425648534849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-44670001962529616372013-07-06T00:09:47.152+01:002013-07-06T00:09:47.152+01:00Duplicity is the issue here. The stance of the pro...Duplicity is the issue here. The stance of the prospective candidates of Labour and Plaid are identical. But one candidate is duplicitous!<br /><br />Duplicitous in this matter, duplicitous in how many other matters? Why, he too may have a holiday home in France and yet I bet he speaks little or no French. kphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03313438657508449613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-61421937217503134562013-07-05T23:44:40.353+01:002013-07-05T23:44:40.353+01:00Let's see, KP. You say you're against nuc...Let's see, KP. You say you're against nuclear, and that you won't vote for Rhun because he's ambivalent about whether he supports it or not ... but that you will vote for Labour even though Tal Michael is outspokenly in favour of Wylfa B.<br /><br />Why not go and lie down in a quiet room for a while?<br />MHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09329059309196746446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-82260441665493706372013-07-05T22:40:07.386+01:002013-07-05T22:40:07.386+01:00Not so 'MH'. I hate Wylva much more than I...Not so 'MH'. I hate Wylva much more than I hate Plaid Cymru. Why, I even joined the party so that I could vote for Leanne Wood because she was a female, a non-Welsh speaker and decidedly anti-nuclear.<br /><br />Now with all this obfuscating from the likes of this new chap, Rhun, I have no choice but to vote Labour. Not because I support the Labour party, far from it. I just find it hard to accept that Plaid should win with such a duplicitous policy on nuclear.<br />kphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03313438657508449613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-60903167551330671722013-07-05T16:56:47.391+01:002013-07-05T16:56:47.391+01:00You mustn't let your hatred of wind turbines g...You mustn't let your hatred of wind turbines get the better of you, Royston. Just click the link to read the questions, see who was asked, and when.<br /><br />-<br /><br />Very funny, KP. You hate Plaid even more than Royston hates wind turbines.MHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09329059309196746446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-59651818991193564232013-07-05T16:33:27.353+01:002013-07-05T16:33:27.353+01:00Spot on! The fellow comes across as a fraudster.
...Spot on! The fellow comes across as a fraudster.<br /><br />Normally I'd vote Plaid. This time it's Labour.kphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03313438657508449613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-985080357558043054.post-89601531432293447772013-07-05T16:28:27.493+01:002013-07-05T16:28:27.493+01:00As with any survey, so much depends on who was que...As with any survey, so much depends on who was questioned, when they were questioned, and what the question was.<br /><br />It would be possible to get 100% in favour of wind turbines if the question was: 'We shall all die excruciating deaths in temperatures of 150 Celsius unless we have millions and millions of wind tubines. Are you in favour of wind turbines?'Jac o' the North,https://www.blogger.com/profile/02032744625666336148noreply@blogger.com