Nuclear Power Stations (Hansard, 1 November 1989)

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, the construction of new nuclear power stations in England and Wales is a matter for the CEGB. In considering any application for his consent to the building of a new power station, the Secretary of State will consider all relevant factors including the report of any public inquiry held.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware, and will he inform his right honourable friend, that according to research carried out at the Rocky Mountain Institute and elsewhere investment in energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy is between five and seven times as effective both in terms of cost and in reducing the greenhouse effect?
In view of the massive amounts of money now being spent by British Nuclear Fuels in persuading the public that nuclear energy is the answer to the greenhouse effect, will the Government use some of their publicity money in order to inform the public of the true facts concerning the greenhouse effect and various forms of investment in energy?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, the Government believe that nuclear power has a vital strategic role to play in achieving security of supply. Nuclear and renewables help to limit the damage which burning fossil fuels does to the environment. Energy efficiency is not an alternative to building power stations. Both are needed.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, will my noble friend confirm that despite what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, there is strong evidence to support the view that nuclear energy reduces the risk of acid rain and of damaging the ozone layer? Will Her Majesty's Government therefore uphold their policy of encouraging the nuclear power programme?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, my noble friend is quite correct. Fossil fuels are not without their hidden costs. Burning coal has environmental costs in terms of acid rain and the greenhouse effect, as my noble friend has said. The cost of coal-fired 240 electricity does not take into account the £1 billion per year in grants which the taxpayer is making to British Coal.

The Earl of Halsbury
My Lords, will the noble Viscount confirm that if we stopped building nuclear power stations we could run out of nuclear engineers? When we finally needed them there would be no one available to build stations. That would be another of our heavy industries to go down the drain.

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I agree with my noble friend. We need all the nuclear engineers possible, both now and in the future.

§ Lord Mason of Barnsley
My Lords, is the Minister not aware that policy on building nuclear power stations has a bearing on the future of the coal industry? Can he say what truth there is in the report from the Department of Energy that in order to ensure the success of the privatisation of the electricity industry, including nuclear power plants, the Government intend to force the closure of 26 coal mines, with the eventual loss of 30,000 miners' jobs?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I am not prepared to comment on those figures. What I will say to the noble Lord is that the Government's aim is to help to secure British Coal's future as a competitive supplier. We believe that British coal can be a competitive fuel. The Government invest more than £2 million a day in British Coal and have invested £6.5 billion since 1979. Those who supply fuel to the electricity industry will have to ensure that they are competitive.

§ Lord Mason of Barnsley
My Lords, that is just not good enough. The Minister should be frank with the House. First, is he not aware that the report from the Department of Energy exists and that it has been submitted to a Cabinet sub-committee? The figures that I have suggested are in the report. The noble Viscount ought to face the House with the frank answer that the eventual effect of that report means the closure of mines and job losses in the coal industry once again.

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I believe that the House would not expect me to continue with these speculative items.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the French are now 70 per cent. dependent upon nuclear power stations for the generation of electricity, which they export to this country in substantial quantities? Will my noble friend consider giving a free ticket to the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, to go to France to try to persuade the French that they have been entirely wrong in everything they have done for the past 20 years?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, my noble friend is quite right. The French electricity industry relies enormously upon the PWRs that it has built.

§ Lord Ezra
My Lords, is the noble Viscount prepared to give an indication to the House of what he considers to be the likely comparative trends of the costs of nuclear power, taking all factors into account? Will he say the extent to which existing nuclear power stations in the United Kingdom are competitive with other forms of electricity generation, or to what extent that could become the case in the future?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I think it is right to say that the Government have never denied that nuclear power is more expensive than fossil-generated power. That is the reason for the non-fossil fuel obligation and the fossil fuel levy. Electricity customers benefit from the diversity of supply that nuclear provides. The Government believe that those who benefit should contribute to the cost.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, has the noble Viscount studied the document entitled Power in Europe and the document to which my noble friend Lord Mason of Barnsley referred? Does the noble Viscount agree that the cost per kilowatt hour of nuclear unit is nearly three times the cost of a coal-fired kilowatt hour? In that case why are we so keen on developing our resources of nuclear engineers? Why is the diversity of supply so important, and why will it cost £1.4 billion a year in the nuclear levy to keep this going? Is there any hope of the PWRs being built at anything near an economic rate?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, the noble Lord asked me a number of questions. The Government have decided that the public electricity supply companies should fulfil the non-fossil fuel obligation. The cost of nuclear fuel, as I said, is recognised to be higher than that of fuel produced from the fossil fuels. I also said that there are some other costs involved with generating electricity from fossil fuels which have not been taken into account so far.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that some of us think that it is counter-productive to have to listen to the conclusions of various reports which are quoted, such as that by the Ark group, merely because they fit in with the preconceived ideas of the people who quote them? Is there any evidence at all to show that people who have to make the decisions have deliberately ignored any evidence for or against the desirability of having or not having nuclear power?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I think my noble friend is correct. In the construction of any new nuclear power station all the costs and the requirements for the industry will be taken into account.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, will the noble Viscount bear in mind that a reputable organisation has produced the figures to which his noble friend Lord Harmar-Nicholls and I referred as being part of a document which formed a presentation by the Secretary of State for Energy to Cabinet colleagues?

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I believe that that document is also confidential. I am sure the House would not expect me to comment on the figures.

Noble Lords
Order!

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead)
My Lords, we are now half-way through the time which the House has itself decided we should allow for Questions. I suggest that we take one final question. If that question has to be from the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, because he feels he wishes to ask a final question, then of course the noble Lord is free to do so.

Noble Lords
Order!

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I, as well as any other noble Lord, am in the hands of the House. It is for the House to decide the matter, but I suggest to your Lordships that one more question would be enough.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, will the noble Viscount tell his noble friend Lord Orr-Ewing that I am quite prepared to go to France to look at the nuclear programme there at his expense? Is the noble Viscount also aware that the French nuclear programme is now in severe trouble, as can be seen from a Question that has been tabled for Written Answer? We are talking about the future of the human race. Is he aware that it is not gossip but scientific research which has shown that the use of nuclear reactors to produce electricity, far from reducing the greenhouse effect, will add to it? Is he further aware that the use of renewables and energy efficiency are far safer methods of producing electricity and reducing the consumption of electricity and thus reducing the greenhouse effect?

Noble Lords
Speech!

§ Viscount Ullswater
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord. I do not believe that nuclear fuel poses the environmental dangers that he suggests. I should also say that, yes, we need energy efficiency, but that does not mean that we need to reduce the amount of power generated.