Examination of Witnesses (Questions 360-365)
PROFESSOR PAUL
ROGERS, DR
FRANK BARNABY,
PROFESSOR KEITH
BARNHAM AND
MR MALCOLM
SAVIDGE
9 NOVEMBER 2005
Q360 Colin Challen: There is no way of
assessing the future energy consumption.
Professor Barnham: That is my
point.
Q361 Mr Ellwood: With the speed of technology
that has moved forward, the amount of energy that is actually
being extracted from uranium pellets is quite minimal compared
with the energy that is in there. Do you feel that in 50 or 100
years' time there could be a possibility that rather than bury
these and forgetting them, there may be technology that can re-use
these or get more energy out of them, or, alternatively, to have
some form of process which would speed up the decay to make them
completely safe?
Dr Barnaby: You mean transportation;
in other words, it is technically feasible but it is hellishly
expensive.
Q362 Mr Ellwood: It is today.
Dr Barnaby: It is very hard to
see a time when it will not be hellishly expensive.
Professor Rogers: The context
here is the problem for the next five to 30 years on climate change.
We are looking at what needs to be done now and in the very near
future.
Professor Barnham: It does come
back to our original point, that it will involve a lot of transportation
of nasty materials. That is what we are saying, that we are worried
about the third and fourth generation of that and the terrorist
threat. It would be done at some central facility and you will
move the spent fuel. It is almost certainly going to involve some
more transportation around the country to a central point. All
the facilities that I have seen described are central facilities
at the moment which people are talking about. It is a long way
away. It will again involve transport. I come back to the point
that the transport of MOX, the transport of fuel and of spent
fuel are all terrorist targets which we have to be aware of and
try to minimise.
Q363 Colin Challen: You are highly critical
of the Government's ability to progress on introducing renewables.
What evidence do you have that would give us any confidence that
if they changed their attitude in a satisfactory way, renewables
would be able to deliver and fill the generation gap by 10 years'
time?
Professor Barnham: As I say, the
Germans achieved 100% increase last year through their 100,000
roof programme. All we need just for photovoltaic is a 40% increase
per year from our current very low level to get to the current
nuclear contribution by 2023. I would add that the vitally important
point to realise about renewables is that there is such a variety.
There is wind, tidal, wave, CHP and so on and our own photovoltaic
application that we are pushing which involves a certain amount
of energy efficiency, but there is enough spread there to provide.
Q364 Colin Challen: Some of it is still
at the theoretical stage. We are only at the point of prototypes
with wave energy. There are grid connection problems and all these
things. By 2015, could we really think that that would be making
a significant contribution?
Professor Rogers: Yes, certainly,
particularly when one looks at micro generation. We are now having
the first of the micro wind turbines coming on to the market at
about 1000 to 1100 a time. There is massive potential there and
for PV on roofs and even for the older solar collectors for hot
water heating. The potential is clearly there. There needs to
be much more in the way of fiscal inducements, but there is no
doubt that the current technologies can do it. If, at the same
time, we had had the kind of R&D in photovoltaics that we
have had in the nuclear field over the last 30 or 40 years, we
would probably already be at third and fourth generation PVs that
are highly economic. It is a combination of really heavily investing
in R&D while at the same time using the existing technologies
and encouraging them to come onto the market very quickly.
Q365 Joan Walley: On that point, you
mention the fiscal inducements and the R&D and that that could
help us close the gap by 2015. What about public awareness? The
Government is saying that we need to have an informed public debate
about the role that all the different energy options could take,
including nuclear. Where is the public debate about the role of
renewables in all of this?
Professor Rogers: We absolutely
welcome what the Government has said. We hope it is put into practice.
My own local authority at Kirklees is the most advanced in the
country at introducing micro wind power and PV on to schools.
One of the things that recent study has shown is that as soon
as you have that kind of facility, the kids in schools become
far more aware of what is happening and why. It is a very strong
public inducement to recognise the way we have to go. It is certainly
far better than living next to a nuclear power station.
Chairman: Most people would agree with
that. Thank you. I promised you that we would get to renewable
energy by the end and we have done. We are extremely grateful
to you for your time and for coming here and sharing your knowledge
with us. It has been most useful.
| 
