Construction of a nuclear power Station in New Zealand could begin before the end of this decade.

The Power Planning Committee has recommended in a Report on Electric Power Development that unless new resources of suitable cheap indigenous power become available, the New Zealand Government should make a decision in October 1977 (18 months from now) to start building in 1979 a 1200mw nuclear station.

It would begin generating in 1988.

It is a commonly held belief that the Government has already decided to introduce nuclear power, evidenced if one asks the question If, as the present Minister of Electricity claims, the NZED is only carrying out initial planning for the possible introduction of nuclear power, why has it trained a much greater number of experts than is necessary?

The General Manager of NZED, Mr P.N.Blakeley, recently returned from a world tour to announce his confidence that nuclear power would be safe for New Zealand.

He has refused however to provide E.D.C. (Environmental Defence Society) with any references to the scientific bases upon which his belief presumable rests.

The Need for Nuclear Power

The Committee to Review Power Requirements, which has the task of producing the estimates of future electricity demand, has developed the idea that electricity demand in New Zealand should be growing at 7% per year.

This figure is supposed to stand regardless of changes in economic conditions and structures which might bring about changes in energy use patterns, and tends to take on the function of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Because the electricity demand is presumed to exist, generation capacity is brought forward, and the existence of this capacity necessitates an effort to sell the surplus electricity.

However, the system is also unsound in this respect: the electricity demand growth forecast by the committee is being shown to be completely incorrect.

For the last three or four years, electricity demand has not been growing at anything like the proposed rate.

Thus, the Committee to Review Power Requirements is now forced to state that demand will grow by an average of 10% per year over the next five years, just to get their estimates back in line.

Independent Advice

A leading independent investigation of nuclear power, physics professor Dr H.W. Kendall, told the New Zealand Energy Conference in May 1974 that it would be inprudent for a nation to move to nuclear power until all feasible alternative means of providing exploited energy are exploited, energy management and conservation implemented fully, and finally, a compelling need shown to exist.

None of the suggested conditions are being met in New Zealand.

Alternative energy sources are being neglected, notably solar energy conversion of several types, direct use of Main gas at double the efficiency compared with making electricity and geothermal steam.

Energy conservation has also been neglected, notably in building codes which require better insulation.

A compelling need? Earlier statements in this article strongly challenge that such a need exists.

On the basis that the NZED state there is a need for nuclear power in New Zealand, do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

Advantages

1.	Lack of Smoke - no visible air pollution.
2.	Saving of land - no inundation of large areas of land as happens in cases of hydro power.
3.	Low fuel prices - but price of uranium is increasing rapidly as resources become depleted.
4.	Nuclear power a substitute for fossil fuels (i.e. oil, coal, gas) sparing them for other uses.

Disadvantages

1.	For a given electric power, a current nuclear power station wastes at least 50% more heat into water than do other thermal power stations.
2.	Fuel cycle hazards - a nuclear reactor cannot be operated in functional isolation.
3.	Nuclear reactors could have accidents leading to the release of dangerous quantities of radio activity. From R. Mann (biochemistry lecturer at Auckland University) in 'N.Z. Environment' Oct. '76. We just do not know the probabilities of major accidents in nuclear power plants, and if such a disaster occurs people will not be helped by the prior claims of the nuclear industry that the event was 'highly improbable'. New Zealanders may choose, therefore, to exclude from their land the potential for such severe, long-lasting damage.
4.	Decommissioning - the plants have design lives of only about 25-35 years. They will then become extremely radioactive white elephants. Burial may be acceptable.
5.	Long-lived radioactive wastes - no way is known to guarantee exclusion from the human environment of the high-level wastes which as presently produced, cause a Million-year danger.
6.	High capitals costs plus unreliability - although the running costs can look lower than those for, say oil-burning generating, the American nuclear plants are very unrelieable, and the capital costs are high.
7.	Safeguarding wastes - plutonium can be used to manufacture A-bombs. What is the risk of hijacking or mishaps?

Would it not be wise, on the basis of the pro and contra arguments stated, to acknowledge that nuclear power is not a logical "energy step' for New Zealand to take?

Will a minority in high places answer the question for you.

Public Enquiry

The National Government has promised one. There must be the fullest possible public scrutiny of the facts and opinions.

Cross examination is recessary at such an enquiry in order to challenge any exaggerations or distortions from any quarter.

The Minister of Electricity, Mr Holland, is not in favour of it. One of the environmental groups is prepared for cross examination.

It has been suggested the NZED experts are afraid of cross examination, which has been working quite well at the Royal Commission on Contraception. Sterilisation and Abortion.

Bureaucracy or Democracy?

At present the officers in the New Zealand Electricity Department who are interested in the practicalities of nuclear power generation will be the advisers to the Minister of Electricity when he asks for advice on nuclear power.

One suspects strongly the black threat of bureaucracy squeezing out public participation. This treat must not go unchallenged in relation to nuclear power or for that matter any other national issue affecting the people of New Zealand.