SIR - Mr Goldsborough (T&A, May 5) appears to have forgotten the incident at Windscale in Cumbria when dismissing the significance of past nuclear disasters.
As a proponent of nuclear energy he and others need to consider the following: The costs of constructing nuclear power plants are vast as well as the colossal expenditure of energy in the building process.
The costs of processing and removing radioactive waste is considerable, to such an extent that nuclear energy will never be economical to generate and will be subsidised by the public.
The energy required to extract uranium is considerable and we would be dependent on its availability.
The generation of electricity is only part of our energy needs, energy supplies are also required for transport, unless all modes are electrified.
When we consider the safety implications in terms of leakages of radioactive material and increased concentration of background radiation, the case for nuclear energy hardly stands.
Alternative strategies are required, namely better utilisation of renewables, bio fuels and clean British coal, together with efficiency measures and reducing our demands for energy.
Alec Suchi, Allerton Road, Bradford.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article