Ministers supported nuclear power, but avoided new onshore wind farms as the main means of protecting the UK from future energy crises. But a new poll shows that Tory voters’ support for wind turbines is almost in line with that of Labor and Liberal Democrats – suggesting that the windsweeping, as a result of Conservative pressure, runs counter to Conservative views. voters of the party itself. In the Opinium poll, 79% of Tory voters strongly or somewhat in favor of wind farms in the UK, compared to 83% of Labor voters and 88% of Liberal Democrats. Two-thirds of all voters said they would be happy to have a wind farm built near them. By contrast, only 46% of all voters were in favor of the new nuclear power plants in principle, while only 32% were in favor of gas-fired power plants. Less than a third of voters would be happy with the construction of a nuclear power plant near them, while less than a quarter would approve of a gas station in their neighborhood. Poll approval data for wind farms in the United Kingdom These findings suggest that government thinking is some distance from the public perception of the need to ensure energy security, while still working to achieve clean zero emissions. It also runs counter to warnings from experts that atomic energy dependence raises key concerns for the nation. They point out that the country’s next nuclear power plant, Hinkley Point C, which is under construction in Somerset, was supposed to start generating electricity in 2017, but will not do so until 2026 due to delays that increased the cost of the plant by 16 billion pounds to 23 billion £. “Instead of this wasteful nuclear plan, the government should invest in onshore wind energy to help reduce the bills of the people now,” said Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davy. “Safe storage of nuclear waste is also costly, complex and controversial.” However, former Energy Secretary Tory Charles Hendry – who now advises the energy industry – said he was pleased the government had pledged more nuclear power but doubted whether the financing model for the new plants would attract enough interest from the private sector. The government had to consider whether it should take full funding for the construction of the factories, he said. “This is happening in almost every other country in the world. Then, if he chooses, when they are made, he can sell them to the private sector. “This is the surest way to get the investment you need and the partnerships you need.” However, scientists warn that high dependence on atomic energy is premature when the critical issue of nuclear waste disposal has not yet been addressed. The United Kingdom has not yet selected a site for the construction of an underground stockpile of spent fuel rods and radioactive investment that has accumulated over the past seven decades of nuclear power plant operation. Most of the country’s nuclear waste is still stored above ground, at Sellafield in Cumbria. The Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant is far behind schedule. Photo: Reuters “We need to build an underground store that is acceptable to the locals, geologically stable and large enough to store the 750,000 cubic meters of nuclear waste that we will have accumulated once all our current reactors are operational,” he said. Professor Claire Corkhill of the University of Sheffield. “It will take another decade at best. “Only then will I be happy to know that another eight nuclear power plants will be built in the United Kingdom.” In 2019, the United Kingdom resumed its efforts to reach an agreement on the construction of an underground nuclear waste facility. So far, residents in four areas – three in Cumbria and one in Lincolnshire – have volunteered to investigate whether it would be possible to build the store in their neighborhood. Drilling will be carried out in the near future to test how groundwater flow can damage an installation in any area. Then, if the rocks there are deemed appropriate, geologists will have to assess whether a fairly large underground store could be built on this site. “We could find an area with good rocks but not enough space to store all the waste we need to bury,” Corkhill added. “Then we may have to try to find a second or completely new site. “This is not an issue we can rush.”
