UK Parliament / Open data

Energy Bill

Proceeding contribution from Charles Hendry (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 30 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bills on Energy Bill.
That is a valid point. If the assumption in the early days was that five nuclear power stations would be needed, the cost of road infrastructure and the building of the repository would be very high; but if we ended up with 20, the figure would change dramatically. There must be equity, or the cost will be prejudiced against the early developers, and it is they who will kick-start the programme if it is to happen. Will the Minister also tell us more about his approach on the reprocessing of spent and used fuels? There is considerable potential for that within the industry. Britain has led the world on it in the past, and will be keen to do so again. It could greatly reduce the volume of waste that needs to be disposed of, particularly for the most radioactive of materials. The Government, however, are being rather coy about their plans on reprocessing. Also, how would this be factored into the costs? If some radioactive material were to be reprocessed and therefore did not require disposal so the volumes were significantly different from those initially estimated, how would that be taken into account in the long-term costs? In general, we accept the way in which the Government are progressing, but we believe that it is very important to have clarity so far as the industry is concerned, and a lot of detail has still to be sorted out.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

475 c320-1 

Session

2007-08

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber

Legislation

Energy Bill 2007-08
Back to top