The motion, adopted at conference, removes a “blanket opposition to nuclear fission” and instead commits the Green party of England and Wales to assessing nuclear projects alongside other low-carbon technologies.

Its electricity generation policy still prioritises offshore wind, onshore wind and rooftop solar as the primary sources of electricity, but allows elected representatives to support new nuclear reactors on a case-by-case basis.

This was one or the few areas I didn't align with the Green Party before, as I believe that a bit of nuclear is kind of necessary to help round out less consistent energy sources as things stand. I think this is a reasonable stance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don’t mean to be an absolutists and say it could never under any circumstances leak if handled poorly, but even if you just dumped it in a hole in the ground the odds are against that.

We primarily don’t have long term storage for us becuase it’s too valuable and we’re only currently using a small percentage of its potential energy. In other words we are not done with it.

Long term storage that exists like Yucca Mountain are heavily engineered to remove risk.

But if we’re talking about great brittian I mean, build storage on the French model, or pay France or the US for storage, or just do what you always do and toss the damn things into the Thames.

  • source
  • parent