<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NVCC &#187; dungeness</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nvcc.org.uk/tag/dungeness/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nvcc.org.uk</link>
	<description>National Voice of Coastal Communities: giving coastal issues a voice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:59:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Dungeness dropped from list of new nuclear reactors &#8211; DOC response</title>
		<link>http://www.nvcc.org.uk/2009/11/dungeness-dropped-from-list-of-new-nuclear-reactors-doc-response/</link>
		<comments>http://www.nvcc.org.uk/2009/11/dungeness-dropped-from-list-of-new-nuclear-reactors-doc-response/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:13:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaydublu</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Kent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dungeness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[romney marsh]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nvcc.org.uk/?p=741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As reported in Construction News and numerous other sources: Dungeness in Kent has been dropped from a Government list of potential locations for new nuclear power stations. The location, which was one of eleven sites nominated by industry in March, was not listed in the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s draft National Policy Statements [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As reported in <a href="http://www.cnplus.co.uk/sectors/energy/dungeness-dropped-from-list-of-new-nuclear-reactors/5210646.article" target="_blank">Construction News</a> and numerous other sources:</p>
<blockquote>
<div>
<p>Dungeness in Kent has been dropped from a Government list of potential locations for new nuclear power stations.</p></div>
<p>The location, which was one of eleven sites nominated by industry in March, was not listed in the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s draft National Policy Statements consultation, which opened today (9th November).</p>
<p>Concerns about how to mitigate potential environmental impacts at the site, coastal erosion and associated flood risk were among the reasons.<span id="more-741"></span></p></blockquote>
<p>In response, Defend Our Coast (DOC) who campaign for continued defence of the coast protecting Romney Marsh against flooding issued a <a href="http://www.defendourcoast.org.uk/2009/11/11/press-statement-dungeness-nuclear-power-station-site/" target="_blank">press statement</a> which starts:</p>
<blockquote><p>It is extremely bad news for Romney Marsh that the Government has decided not to select a site at Dungeness for the building of a third nuclear power station. The people of the Marsh have had their future snatched away. With the stroke of a pen this Government has thrown the whole future of the Marsh into doubt.</p>
<p>Local consultations carried out have revealed that there is little opposition to a further nuclear station at Dungeness from the local population. Even those of us who have reservations about nuclear power have to accept that the safety record of Dungeness has been excellent and the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. It will be a major setback for the local economy which urgently needs meaningful employment being created, particularly for our young people.</p>
<p>From DOC&#8217;s perspective there are even greater concerns with regard to coastal protection. The building of a new Nuclear Power Station (&#8216;C&#8217;) would bring protection to the wider Marsh, its wildlife and environment. It would raise the whole value of the Marsh and would bring confidence and investment to this unique area. The old transformer building within the licensed site was being proposed as the position for a new station with the footprint of the new station not exceeding that of the existing building, thus not affecting any SSSI, SAC or similar designations. Rather than being labeled a ‘threat to the environment’ it would actually provide good reasons to protect the area, the population and the wildlife.</p></blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Read the transcript &#8211; <a href="http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/news/npsstatement/npsstatement.aspx" target="_blank">Ed Miliband statement to the House on the draft National Policy Statements</a></li>
<li>Find out more about the <a href="https://www.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/home/" target="_blank">Consultation on the draft National Policy Statements for energy infrastructure</a></li>
<li>Read the full <a href="http://www.defendourcoast.org.uk/2009/11/11/press-statement-dungeness-nuclear-power-station-site/" target="_blank">DOC press statement</a></li>
</ul>
<div id="_mcePaste" style="overflow: hidden; position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 144px; width: 1px; height: 1px;">It is extremely bad news for Romney Marsh that the<br />
Government has decided not to select a site at Dungeness for the<br />
building of a third nuclear power station. The people of the<br />
Marsh have had their future snatched away. With the stroke of a<br />
pen this Government has thrown the whole future of the Marsh<br />
into doubt .<br />
Local consultations carried out have revealed that there is little<br />
opposition to a further nuclear station at Dungeness from the<br />
local population. Even those of us who have reservations about<br />
nuclear power have to accept that the safety record of<br />
Dungeness has been excellent and the benefits outweigh the<br />
disadvantages. It will be a major setback for the local economy<br />
which urgently needs meaningful employment being created,<br />
particularly for our young people.<br />
From DOC&#8217;s perspective there are even greater concerns with<br />
regard to coastal protection. The building of a new Nuclear<br />
Power Station (&#8216;C&#8217;) would bring protection to the wider Marsh,<br />
its wildlife and environment. It would raise the whole value of<br />
the Marsh and would bring confidence and investment to this<br />
unique area. The old transformer building within the licensed<br />
site was being proposed as the position for a new station with<br />
the footprint of the new station not exceeding that of the existing<br />
building , thus not affecting any SSSI , SAC or similar<br />
designations. Rather than being labeled a ‘threat to the<br />
environment’ it would actually provide good reasons to protect<br />
the area, the population and the wildlife.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.nvcc.org.uk/2009/11/dungeness-dropped-from-list-of-new-nuclear-reactors-doc-response/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

