Hallo, Crisis Forum people,


A quick line re: the  HMG nuclear power gorgon now raising its ugly head,
and a very provisional way in which  Crisis Forum  could participate or
offer some support to any emerging broader anti-nuclear power alliance.

When the issue began to 'take off' a little time ago, David Cromwell and
myself discussed getting up a conference/workshop on the issue. However,
just at the moment, with the urgency of the issue paramount, I think that
may be a luxury and -  logistically-wise -  requiring more effort than what
would be achieved as a result.

What is needed rather is a direct route to nipping this potential disaster
in the bud. In other words, a clear presentation of why  nuclear power is
not the answer to  climate change to an audience  who if not core
decision-makers per se, can most effectively influence that 'debate' : i.e.
parliamentarians/ leading column writers/ business leaders etc. etc.  with
the presentation itself coming from those most clear-sighted 'experts'  ( I
include here NGO campaigners, hands-on professionals and practitioners as
well as  subject-specific academics)   who can present a case
authoritatively but  succinctly.

In other words the provisional suggestion is this: the creation of a short,
independent  document ( a green paper? )  setting out the case from as many
angles as possible but in such a way that the policy makers/opinion formers
can use it usefully and speedily.
 Requiring in turn a mechanism (and hence funding)  for wide distribution.

I don't really need to spell out the issues which such a document might
contain to people much better informed than myself: but issues would not
simply include technical, supply and economic problems but would raise
amongst  others the following:
the history of nuclear power (for those uninitiated)
who stands to benefit from nuclear power?
what are the security issues in an age of alleged global 'terrorism'?
the nuclear power-weapons nexus in the context of the NPT
the  organisational  and societal implications  of nuclear power
ethics, nuclear power and climate change
ongoing epidemiological issues associated with production,  transport,
long-term storage, decommissioning,
long-term  broader environmental, social as well as economic costs
the issue of time-lag in setting up a large nuclear programme in the
context of short, medium and long term climate change  imperatives
is there a more positive and effective way forward? (i.e. what are the
'real' issues at the heart of the matter, or why is nuclear power a
dangerous 'red herring')
 etc etc etc

Where does CF come in ? Not necessarily at all  if either a) the idea is
considered not worth developing or b) if it is another grouping/consortium
can produce more quickly/ efficaciously

What we, loosely, members and associates  of CF, might be able to provide,
if we grouped our resources and networking together, is access to the best,
most appropriate experts ( I have in mind that this should NOT be a
treatise, just a series of max. 10 page A4 statements from  a max. of 20
'experts' in different fields, i.e. covering the ground as effectively and
broadly as possible).

With  somebody/some persons  possibly but not necessarily in the CF frame
acting as go-between, hub, manager and director of process (probably not
David Cromwell or myself)

If this is  the way forward,  this would require a sharp, sustained funding
input for a relatively brief  duration of project.

As I say, it's just an idea. However, given that a meeting is being got up
under Green Alliance auspices this coming Tuesday  to discuss the issue and
that this will  include FOE, Greenpeace etc, I raise this  suggestion now to
see if there are grounds for exploration ( i.e  has anybody out there got
any views on the matter? ) but  also  from this individual  a firm view that
this should be about maximising the resource potential of the anti-nuclear
power (pro-genuine dealing with climate change) opposition tout ensemble and
against the possibility of any  duplication.

mark levene
01926 641026

ps I'm away all next week at a conference (to which I'm going by boat!), so
if you want to reply,  respond to the list.
pps for anybody, who is an advocate of nuclear power, or ambivalent towards
it, apologies for this missive.