Dispute over mud dumping continues to stir up passions
Plans to dump mud off the south Wales coast that has been dredged from near the Hinkley Point nuclear sites are the focus of fierce controversy. Political editor David Williamson dredges the fact from the fiction
WORK is expected to start next month on dredging 300,000 tonnes of mud from the Severn estuary adjacent to a nuclear power station.
But opponents of the move are not backing down – a protest was due to take place yesterday evening outside the Senedd and a fresh call has been made for Natural Resources Wales (NRW) to suspend the licence.
Those opposed to the dredging argue we cannot be sure that the 300,000 tonnes of mud that could be deposited on the Cardiff Grounds site is safe because the full range of tests to establish there is no radioactive risk has not been carried out.
EDF Energy, the company building the two new Hinkley Point C nuclear reactors – which are expected to provide power for around six million homes – is adamant there is “no threat to human health or the environment”.
These assurances have failed to satisfy campaigners who argue there are too many unanswered questions for the work to go ahead.
Champions of the Hinkley project will see the objections as attempts by anti-nuclear activists to stall a major project. But those at the forefront of the efforts to stop the dredging insist their concerns must be addressed.
Right now, anyone living along the coast will want to separate the facts from the fiction.
The mud is coming from a stretch of seabed along the Somerset coast that has been a centre of nuclear power generation for decades.
Hinkley Point A stopped producing electricity in 2000 after 35 years of operations; Hinkley Point B has been generating electricity since 1976. EDF now wants to take mud and sediment so it can drill six vertical shafts for the cooling water system for the new Hinkley Point C power station.
The energy giant claims the material is “no different to the sediment already at the Cardiff Grounds” and is “not classed as radioactive under UK law”. But campaigners do not believe the tests that have been carried out are sufficiently thorough.
Cian Ciarán, keyboard player with the Super Furry Animals, is among those with deep anxieties about the proposals and about the UK Government’s decision to give a new lease of life to nuclear power.
He said: “Having lived in the shadow of Wylfa and Trawsfynnydd in the north of Wales in my youth and now Hinkley since moving to Cardiff in 1994, the question of nuclear power and everything it encompasses has become an unwanted part of my psyche. It’s likely the same for so many others.
“This latest development is just another negative consequence of the UK Government’s new nuclear build programme. I’ve grown tired of the excuses and the lack of accountability; in this instance all we ask is for adequate testing be carried out before the mud is moved, until then it should stay where it is.
“No-one, regardless which side of the Bristol Channel they live on, should be subjected to such irresponsible actions. To my mind this is yet another example of an contemptuous Westminster Government and Welsh Labour conspiring against its own people.”
Tim Deere-Jones, a self-employed marine pollution consultant, came to prominence when he spearheaded a petition which netted more than 7,000 signatures and secured a debate in the Assembly. He remains convinced that years of discharges from the existing nuclear stations mean more detailed study is needed.
He said: “Those sediments had been in receipt of discharges from the Hinkley A nuclear station and the Hinkley B nuclear station... If you’ve got 300,000 tonnes of that stuff being dredged and dumped so close [to south Wales], you need to know exactly what you’ve got in it in terms of radioactivity.”
He argues there are forms of radiation that would not have shown up in the tests carried out on the mud.
“We don’t really have a full understanding of what types and concentrations of radioactivity are in that mud,” he said.
Mr Deere-Jones also has questions about where the mud will be carried if it is dispersed by currents.
Setting out a series of “problems”, he said: “What radioactivity have we got in the mud? Don’t know.
“How much radioactivity have we got in the mud? Don’t know.
“Where is that material going to end up after being slung into a dispersal site. Don’t know.”
South Wales Central AM Neil McEvoy has just written to NRW calling for an urgent suspension of the marine licence for the dredging.
He told us: “I’m concerned because I do not believe enough testing has been done. We’re talking about mud being dredged from outside a nuclear reactor and NRW are relying on shallow tests using only one type of spectrometry.
“When potentially nuclear mud was tested in Kosovo they used three methods of gamma spectrometry, beta spectrometry and plasma mass spectrometry, and yet the mud from outside Hinkley was tested using only one of these methods. Why was that good enough for Kosovo but not good enough for Wales?
“If anything is lurking in this mud, it is going to be deep down. But hardly any deep testing has been done and even then it was almost 10 years ago, with the raw data now missing.
“We need to ... urgently suspend the licence until proper and thorough testing has been done. I just do not believe it has been proven that this mud is safe beyond doubt.”
John Wheadon, Permitting Services Manager for NRW, said: “We issued this marine licence to NNB Genco in July 2014, authorising the disposal of dredged material from the Hinkley Point C development site at Cardiff Grounds disposal site.
“Every element of the application was considered thoroughly, including testing of the sediment from the dredge sites by independent experts in accordance with international
standards.
“The licence required NNB Genco to undertake additional sampling and monitoring. These requirements have now been fulfilled and we’ve given the company our approval to undertake the disposal activity.
“We’re confident the proposed activity will not harm people or the environment.”
An EDF Energy spokeswoman said: “The mud is typical of sediment found anywhere in the Bristol Channel and no different to sediment already at the Cardiff Grounds site. Greenpeace has acknowledged that the mud is ‘not toxic’. Natural Resources Wales has confirmed that new, independent analysis of sediment samples taken in 2017 carried out by [the Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science] has again shown that the sediment is not classed as radioactive under UK law. It poses no threat to human health or the environment.”
EDF claims any dose of natural and artificial radiation people might receive would be “infinitesimally small” and “far below the threshold requiring a more detailed assessment”.
A Welsh Government spokeswoman said: “The recent Petition Committee’s report showed Natural Resources Wales made their determination based on expert advice. It also confirmed all tests and assessments concluded the material is within safe limits, poses no radiological risk to human health or the environment and is safe and suitable to be disposed of at sea.”
Sophie Howe, the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales, said she could not overturn the decision to grant a licence.
She said: “The decision to grant a marine licence, allowing for sediment arising from the construction of Hinkley Point C to be disposed off the coast of south Wales, was taken in 2014 and the marine licence was issued by Natural Resources Wales in 2014, before the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act came into force on April 1, 2016.”
Dr Richard Bramhall of the Low Level Radiation Campaign – a former member of the UK Government’s Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters (CERRIE) – has voiced worries about the tests.
In a letter to NRW, he raised concerns that the tests did not assess whether uranium, plutonium and other alpha-emitting elements were present in minute “particulate” form.
He stated: “As larger fragments break up, any given amount of particulate matter will become more mobile, be more easily inhaled into the deep lung and the lymphatic system, and will emit more radiation.”
Whether or not the campaign against dredging will win new support in the weeks leading up to work commencing may well come down to this – do people trust the assurances of government, the NRW and the energy company?
Plaid Cymru is adamant the dredging should not go ahead. Llyr Gruffydd, the party’s energy spokesman, said: “Plaid Cymru opposes the dumping of the waste from Hinkley Point in England in Welsh waters. We believe that it is completely unacceptable and unprincipled that waste from a nuclear construction site in England should be disposed of in Welsh waters.”
A Welsh Conservatives say claims about the toxicity of the mud have been “refuted” but they are prepared to look at the issue again if confronted with new evidence.
A spokesman said: “The Welsh Conservatives support the strict evaluation of any proposed projects to ensure the public’s safety, and we will re-evaluate our position if new evidence is brought to light.”
And the bigger battle against new nuclear power will definitely continue
Friends of the Earth spokeswoman Bleddyn Lake said: “The difficulty of disposing of potentially radioactive substances, coupled with the justifiable and understandable concern of the public, highlights the utter folly of moving ahead with nuclear new build at Hinkley Point.
“Nuclear power is horribly expensive, the reactors take far too long to build and the UK still doesn’t know what to do with the long term radioactive waste that has been amassed already.”
Kate Blagojevic, Greenpeace UK’s Head of Energy, said: “Although EDF have said that the mud isn’t toxic, it has been cleared to make way for a nuclear power station that will create vast quantities of hazardous waste that will create storage and financial problems for generations to come. With the cost of renewable energy falling so fast, and nuclear being both harmful and hugely expensive, it makes no economic or environmental sense to build Hinkley Point C .”