Vol. 388 No. 8
asked the Minister for Energy if he will make a statement on the proposal to dump nuclear waste into caverns in the Irish Sea off the coast of Great Britain; and the representations which have been made to the British Government about this proposal.
31.
asked the Minister for Energy if his attention has been drawn to a decision in principle by the British Government to proceed with exploratory trials at the Sellafield Nuclear installation with a view to providing for the permanent storage of up to four million tonnes of low grade and medium nuclear waste which will be accumulated in Great Britain over the next 20 years in subterranean caverns to be constructed by the British statutory authorities; if he proposes to take any action on behalf of the Irish Government to express the concerns of the Irish people with regard to the environmental impact and potential danger which such a proposal would pose to the health of Irish citizens living on the east coast of Ireland; the steps he proposes to take to ensure that the Irish authorities are kept fully informed of details of all studies which arise out of this preliminary inquiry; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
44.
asked the Minister for Energy if his attention has been drawn to recent reports that NIREX in the United Kingdom were again considering the possibility of the construction of underground storage facilities for nuclear waste at Sellafield, possibly in caverns under the Irish Sea; if, in view of the serious implications of such a move for this country, he has made any representations to the British authorities on the matter indicating Irish opposition to such proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
157.
asked the Minister for Energy if he has made any representations to the British Government in relation to that Government's proposal to store nuclear waste under the Irish Sea.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 31, 44 and 157 together.
I am aware that the Nuclear Industry Radioactive Waste Executive (NIREX) in the UK, have for some time been considering options for disposal of radioactive waste. NIREX originally defined a number of options for further study and one of these was storage in caverns under the Irish Sea. The Irish Government were opposed to this option and made their views known to the UK authorities. According to the most recent information available to me in the matter, sub-seabed disposal is no longer being considered.
In an announcement on 21 March 1989, NIREX nominated sites on land at Sellafield and Dounreay in northern Scotland for a programme of geological and other investigations to establish which, if either, would be suitable for a deep repository for solid low and intermediate level radioactive wastes. Assuming permission is granted quickly, these investigations will take up to 18 months and will lead to more detailed investigation of a single preferred site. Based on experience to date, my Department will be kept fully informed of developments by NIREX and will be in a position to give me appropriate advice as the situation develops.
Is the Minister satisfied that the British Government have dropped entirely the possibility of these deep-water caverns? In the context of the proposed site at Sellafield, has any assessment been carried out of the dangers that that new proposal may pose to this country? If no such study has been carried out, what detailed study does the Minister intend will be carried out with a view to making representations on this new proposal to the British Government?
In February of this year the Nuclear Energy Board were informed by NIREX that the seabed caverns were no longer under consideration. We subsequently checked the position with the authorities in the Isle of Man as they had similar fears and they received the same information about a month ago. I think we can assume and accept from the best evidence available to us that that proposal has now been abandoned. Obviously, we are happy about that because we have made a strong case against it in the beginning.
With regard to other studies, I do not think I can enlighten the Deputy because they will have to be considered in the light of further examination and I will inform the House as soon as information that is of interest to us comes to light.
Do the Government intend to make representations with regard to this new proposal bearing in mind the deep concern that people feel about the Sellafield plant and the inefficiencies we have seen in the working of that plant and which have led to ongoing pollution of the Irish Sea?
This and other items are continually on the agenda between my Department and the Department of Energy in the United Kingdom and between NIREX and the Nuclear Energy Board. I am anxious to maintain a strong position in safequarding our interests in all these developments, many of which cause the worries which the Deputy has outlined.
Is the Minister satisfied that his Department's dealings with NIREX are based on a frank and free exchange of information and that the representatives from NIREX are telling the Irish authorities the truth?
I have no reason to believe otherwise. As I have said they informed us in February of their decision of the proposed caverns, and our subsequent contact with the Isle of Man confirmed that they were getting precisely the same information. I am happy that the arrangement is on a free and frank basis and I am anxious to maintain that.
While the Minister has indicated that NIREX are at least consistent would he agree that that does not necessarily mean they are truthful? Having regard to the full and extensive nature of Question No. 31, would the Minister outline to the House the precise steps his Department proposes to take to ensure that the British Nuclear Authority, NIREX, and British Nuclear Fuels are closely monitored over the next number of years so that we can avoid the mishaps and cover-ups that have characterised their activities in the Irish Sea over the past 20 years?
I am most anxious to put the reporting relationship between NIREX and the Nuclear Energy Board and between my own Department and the Department of Energy in the UK on as firm and solid a base as possible so that all information pertaining to our interests would be readily available. I assure the Deputy that is my aim.
Could the Minister outline whether he has been in direct contact with his counterpart in the British Government on the issue of storage of nuclear waste? Would he accept the view expressed by Greenpeace that there is no technical solution to the problem of disposing of nuclear waste and that it is no more satsfactory to have it stored on the ground than it is to have it in caverns under the Irish Sea? We must insist that our interests in this area are considered by the British authorities.
The Deputy's question about my contact with my counterpart in the United Kingdom is timely because arrangements are now being put in train for a meeting to take place very soon at which I will make sure that these matters are on the agenda. I accept also that there is no safe hiding place for nuclear waste. Storage, whether under the sea or on land, cannot be accepted as guaranteeing that the public at large are safe.
This is a most regrettable aspect of this type of development and is one of the reasons we have maintained our status as a non-nuclear power. I am not able to say what the ultimate solution to these problems is because, of their nature, they have an international dimension. We have to work very hard to ensure that whatever scientific and technical matters have to be addressed they will give the maximum degree of safety and security to the public. However, as long as there are these problems, there is always a risk, and it is our job to minimise it to the greatest possible degree.
Having regard to the Minister's comment that there is no established definite safe means of storage of radioactive waste, could he tell the House whether he has a preference that such waste is stored above ground or under the sea? Would he consider ground storage to be safer in relative terms than storage in deep subterranean caverns? Given the duration which the waste remains active, would it not be preferable to have access to it on the surface as distinct from it not being accessible if it were stored in deep caverns?
I find it difficult to answer that question beyond saying that if I had to have an enemy I would rather see him coming than have him approach from behind.
Will the Minister give the House an assurance that he will make available to Members a copy of any submission he may make to the British Government regarding the new proposals for storage at Sellafield? Will he indicate to the House whether he will meet his counterpart in Britain and insist on the fullest information being made available to him and his Department in the context of any feasibility study or assessment that the British Government carry out to ensure that the fullest scientific information is made available from the British to us? We should also ensure that we can independently assess the validity of any assessment they may carry out so that we are in a position to guarantee the maximum protection for our population regarding the proposed cavern on a land site which they now apparently have in mind?
I would not have any hesitation in placing before the House any documents at my disposal in relation to a case I will be making to the UK. None of us can claim all the wisdom in this matter and, as regards any support or information from the House as a whole towards establishing our position on this and being able to maintain it, I certainly will facilitate the House in every way. Naturally I am not in the same position to give a guarantee whether the British Government will, from time to time, be as forthcoming with me. I can only assure the House that I will be doing anything I can to ensure that that is the position.
In dealing with the problem of waste disposal, has the Minister come any closer to a decision on the court action which his predecessor indicated would be taken against the UK if Ireland's demands were not met?
I am no nearer to a final decision than I was some months ago when I answered the same question.
