Military nuclear power expansion confirmed

Spread the love

Military interests are pushing new nuclear power, and the UK government has finally admitted it. The government has announced the “biggest expansion of the [nuclear] sector in 70 years.” This follows years of extraordinarily expensive support for nuclear power, which has been justified on the grounds of energy security and climate change. However, the government’s own analysis shows that nuclear power is more expensive than other low-carbon technologies, and that it will not be able to contribute significantly to the UK’s energy needs for many years to come.

Military Influence Driving New Nuclear Power in the UK

Related Video

Published on: August 5, 2022 Description: shorts #nuke #nuclear #nuclearpower #northkorea #israel #india #pakistan #china #usa #russia #army #military #war #usaarmy ...

Countries with most nuclear weapons

The UK government has declared its intention to significantly expand the military nuclear power sector, marking the most significant expansion in 70 years. This announcement raises questions about the underlying reasons for this decision, especially considering the expensive support that military nuclear power has received in recent years. Official assessments have acknowledged that military nuclear power underperforms compared to alternative energy sources, and the only new power station under construction is still incomplete, running behind schedule and over budget.

The Hidden Agenda: Military Nuclear Ambitions

The government’s lack of detailed justification for supporting military nuclear power in energy terms suggests that other factors are at play. A closer examination reveals the influence of military interests in driving this expansion. The UK’s nuclear weapons program requires the maintenance of skills and supply chains associated with civil nuclear energy. This interdependence has been acknowledged by other nuclear-armed states but has largely been kept secret in the UK.

Historical Evidence of Military Influence

In 2006, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair reversed his previous stance and pledged to revive military nuclear power. This decision was influenced by a major study conducted by the RAND Corporation for the Ministry of Defense (MoD), which warned that phasing out civil nuclear power would jeopardize the UK’s industrial base for nuclear submarines. Subsequent reports and parliamentary hearings have consistently emphasized the need to sustain civil nuclear capabilities to support military objectives.

The Logic of “Keeping the Nuclear Option Open”

The government’s emphasis on “keeping the nuclear option open” suggests that the military rationale for military nuclear power is paramount, regardless of its economic or environmental implications. Energy ministers have acknowledged the artificial distinction between civil and military nuclear programs, indicating a desire to integrate the MoD into energy decision-making.

International Context: Other Nuclear-Armed States

The UK is not alone in its military-driven nuclear expansion. Other nuclear-armed states, such as the US, France, Russia, and China, also struggle to maintain expensive military infrastructures, particularly those related to submarine reactors, while their civilian nuclear industries decline. These countries tend to be more open about the interdependence between civil and military nuclear programs.

Implications for the UK: Energy, Climate, and Democracy

The military’s influence on military nuclear power in the UK raises concerns about energy policy, climate action, and democratic accountability. The concealed subsidies for military nuclear power distort the affordability of nuclear submarines, making them appear more cost-effective than they are. This, in turn, hinders progress in addressing climate change and promoting affordable energy sources. The lack of transparency and public scrutiny surrounding these military-driven decisions undermines democratic principles.

Wrapping Up

The UK government’s decision to expand military nuclear power is primarily driven by military interests. This hidden agenda has significant implications for energy policy, climate action, and democratic accountability. The government’s failure to provide a robust justification for its support of military nuclear power raises questions about the true priorities and values guiding its energy decisions.

FAQ’s

1. Why is the UK government expanding the nuclear sector?

The decision to expand the nuclear sector is primarily driven by military interests, as the UK’s nuclear weapons program requires the maintenance of skills and supply chains associated with civil nuclear energy.

2. How does the expansion of nuclear power impact energy policy and climate action?

The concealed subsidies for nuclear power distort the affordability of nuclear submarines, making them appear more cost-effective than they are. This hinders progress in addressing climate change and promoting affordable energy sources.

3. What are the implications for democratic accountability?

The lack of transparency and public scrutiny surrounding these military-driven decisions undermines democratic principles.

4. What other nuclear-armed states have similar military-driven nuclear expansions?

Other nuclear-armed states, such as the US, France, Russia, and China, also struggle to maintain expensive military infrastructures, particularly those related to submarine reactors, while their civilian nuclear industries decline.

5. What are the hidden costs of military-driven nuclear power?

The hidden costs of military-driven nuclear power include the distortion of energy policy, the impediment to climate action, and the undermining of democratic accountability.

Links to additional Resources:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-61336984 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/07/uk-government-admits-nuclear-power-is-not-cheap-or-quick https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/04/07/boris-johnson-pledges-biggest-expansion-nuclear-power-70-years/.