Nuclear hypocrisy

• Bloom bashes Huhne - Stephen Slominski writes in the Eastleigh News about Huhne's nuclear U-turn and the ructions caused among local LibDems, 2 July 2011. "Chris Huhne has once again come under pressure yesterday as a leading Lib Dem called for his resignation and Hedge End Councillor Lousie Bloom wrote to The Guardian in protest over the Energy Secretary's Nuclear strategy ... " Lots of good onward links.
• Lib Dem MPs set to rebel against nuclear power ′subsidy′ - Backbenchers say measure would represent breach of trust with voters as coalition agreement rules out bringing in new subsidy, reports Allegra Stratton. Published in The Guardian, 1 July 2011.
  With so many LibDem MPs opposed to nuclear subsidies, we need to target LibDem MPs in our campaigning and support them in voting down key legislation.
• Revealed: British government′s plan to play down Fukushima - internal emails seen by Guardian show PR campaign was launched to protect UK nuclear plans after tsunami in Japan. By Rob Edwards, 30 June 2011.
• Nuclear: secure energy and jobs! - says Chris Huhne (video) in the shadow of Hinkley point nuclear power station. 24 January 2011.
• Huhne: "no to nuclear power" - video - "Nuclear - no! We've been there, we've done that, it's too expensive, too costly, and we shouldn't go down that road." Video from the LibDem website before it was taken down on the 18 October 2010 when they turned their back on yet another policy people voted them in for.
• The sums don′t add up in a special election hustings debate on climate change which was held on 30 April 2010 at Barton Peveril College, Mr Huhne speaks out against nuclear power. Audio thanks to the Eastleigh News, Huhne's constituency newspaper.
• Nuclear Power Not Needed to Meet Climate Targets - Huhne - from Chris Huhne's own website, 5 November 2007. "Ministers must stop the side-show of new nuclear power stations now. Nuclear is a tried, tested and failed technology and the Government must stop putting time, effort and subsidies into reviving this outdated industry. The nuclear industry's key skill over the past half-century has not been generating electricity, but extracting lashings of taxpayers' money." Hooray! Go Chris!
• COST OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL HIGHLIGHTS FLAWS OF NEW NUCLEAR POWER - HUHNE - Chris Huhne slams the Government's plans for radwaste disposal: "The fact that the Government is still only at the beginning of the process to find a safe way, at great cost, of disposing of our existing nuclear waste shows why we should be wary of a new generation of nuclear plants. The cost of existing nuclear waste disposal is now put at more than £70 billion. It is a basic rule that you shouldn't go into things without knowing how to get out of them." On Huhne's own website, 24 June 2007.
• GREENPEACE NUCLEAR VICTORY WELCOME - HUHNE - from Huhne's website, 15 February 2007. "This great result means the Government will have to consult properly about the full implications of a new generation of nuclear reactors. The full economic and environmental costs, as well as the security risk, need to be taken into account. This is also a rebuke of the Prime Minister's style of ‘sofa government'. You cannot perform a U-turn on nuclear power, as Tony Blair did between the last two government statements on energy policy, without a proper debate and a full discussion of the options." You couldn't make it up!
• ATTEMPT TO REVIVE NUCLEAR POWER SUFFERS ANOTHER BLOW - HUHNE - from Huhne's website, 15 June 2006. "This is another blow to the Government's attempt to revive nuclear power generation. Without lashings of public subsidy, private investors are simply not going to take the risk on such a failing technology ... This fine reflects the huge risks associated with nuclear power generation. Rather than expending time and money on building new nuclear power stations, the Government should instead focus on ensuring that current sites function safely."
• Thanks, But We Still Don't Need It, writes George Monbiot. "How on earth can we say what nuclear power stations will cost if we don't even know what their decommissioning entails? The government will assure us today that there will be no subsidies and no guaranteed prices for the nuclear industry ... But in order to guarantee public safety, the government must be ready to rescue our power stations or their waste piles if the nuclear operators are in danger of going bankrupt."
• Cutting energy demand would remove need for Blair's folly - from the Huhne website, 7 July 2006. "Nuclear is a tried, tested and failed technology with demonstrably higher costs than the renewable alternatives. This report's recommendations to use less energy is yet another endorsement of the approach advocated by the Liberal Democrats ... The most sensible way to ensure security of supply and avoid astronomical expense is to use energy more efficiently."
• Blair on nuclear power - over the years ...
• Energy efficiency not nuclear is the answer to energy needs - as Chris Huhne wrote on his own website in May 2006. How right he was: "Our message is clear, No to nuclear, as it is not a short cut, but a dead end. Yes to energy saving, yes to renewables, and yes to a sustainable energy future.". What happened?
• Nuclear technology is prohibitively expensive - from the Huhne website, 17 March 2006: "If we build more nuclear power stations in the future, even more money which could be invested in genuinely sustainable and environmentally friendly forms of power generation will be wasted." Damn right Mr Huhne!