Lib Dem members survey: majority back nuclear power as part of UK’s energy mix

Lib Dem Voice has polled our members-only forum to discover what Lib Dem members think of various political issues, the Coalition, and the performance of key party figures. Over 530 party members have responded, and we’re publishing the full results this week.

Almost 60% of Lib Dem members back nuclear power

LDV asked: Do you believe that nuclear power, alongside oil and gas and renewable sources, should be part of the UK’s energy mix?

    58% – Yes, nuclear should be part of the mix
    36% – No, nuclear power should play no part in the UK’s energy mix
    5% – Don’t know / No opinion

A convincing, though, not overwhelming majority of Lib Dem members continue to back nuclear power as part of the UK’s energy mix according to our survey. We asked a similar (though not exact) version of this question last August — then, 68% backed nuclear power with 25% opposed. The narrowing in support this time round suggests recent events in Japan may have heightened public concerns about nuclear’s safety as an energy source.

Here is a selection of your comments:

I fear we have no choice.

Yes to funding research into safer nuclear power (e.g. thorium). No to subsidising nuclear power stations; this means ensuring nuclear power plants fund their own clean-up costs somehow. Fukushima should prompt us to re-examine nuclear safety (including addressing regulatory capture), but nuclear is still safer than coal (similarly to flying being safer than driving; when it goes wrong it goes very wrong, so becomes more newsworthy).

I would prefer to avoid nuclear power but I am prepared to accept it.

We don’t want another Japan here in Britain.

In spite of Fukushima, I still believe global warming is a bigger immediate danger

My heart says no, my head says yes.

Nuclear technology has moved on since our own stations and the ones in Japan were built.

We have to reduce our consumption of energy by living simpler. It starts with we want from life not the technology to sustain our insatiable demand for energy.

Woeful lack of information, investment and commitment to renewables. It’s now or never!

I personally think we should be working harder to reduce our reliance on oil and gas. If domestic heating is to be converted from boilers to electrically powered heaters or heat pumps the increase in demand for electricity will be substantial and there is no way renewables will supply enough.

I disagree with the question’s suggestion that oil and gas should be part of the UK’s energy mix!

Existing nuclear stations should be phased out – emphasis on renewable sources

On balance I think no, but not because I’m ideologically opposed – I just think new stations are too costly and risky, taking investment away from renewables which could come on line earlier and are safer…

  • Almost 1,300 Lib Dem paid-up party members are registered with LibDemVoice.org. Over 530 responded to the latest survey, which was conducted between 18th and 24th April.
  • Please note: we make no claims that the survey is fully representative of the Lib Dem membership as a whole. However, LibDemVoice.org’s surveys are the largest independent samples of the views of Lib Dem members across the country, and have in the past accurately predicted the winners of the contest for Party President, and the result of the conference decision to approve the Coalition agreement.
  • The full archive of our members’ surveys can be viewed at www.libdemvoice.org/category/ldv-members-poll
  • Read more by or more about .
    This entry was posted in LDV Members poll.
    Advert

    5 Comments

    • Despite the success of the nuclear industry’s propaganda, the opinions of a few LD voters won’t amount to much in the face of the inescapable reality that nuclear is the most expensive option:

      * Does nuclear power have a negative learning curve? Real escalation in reactor investment costs while solar plummets. “New nukes have gone from too cheap to meter to too expensive to matter for the foreseeable future.” http://climateprogress.org/2011/04/06/does-nuclear-power-have-a-negative-learning-curve/

      Also, nukes take 10+ years to deploy. The UK does not have 10+ years to wait. 9 of our 10 nukes are due to go offline in the next 12 years. The only way to replace that lost capacity is with renewables that can be deployed (relatively) cheaply, quickly and safely.

    • I didn’t answer the poll, but don’t know what I woul dhave done if I had.

      Although it seems to have escaped the person who wrote the question, nuclear IS part of the mix – so how could I answer “No, nuclear should not be part of the mix”.

      But I don’t think we should build new nuclear stations – the money is better spent on other stuff that will get cheaper as we develop it, not more expensive which is what has happened to nuclear despite over 50 years of subsidy.

    • Don’t forget the Winscale, Cumbria 1957 accident when the nuclear core caught fire, this ranked at level 5,
      Fukusima started ar level 4. If the best we can do on renewables is to go chasing windmills (while continuing with oil gas and coal), whlist ignoring geothermal, tidal, wave and solar power I am convinced 1. We don’t care about global warming or 2. it is a myth
      I’m very sad to see Lib Dems go nuclear.

    Post a Comment

    Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

    If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

    To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

    Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

    *
    *
    Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

    Advert



    Recent Comments

    • User AvatarJoe Bourke 20th Jun - 3:08pm
      Peter Martin. Secular stagnation refers to an economy with a long-term lack of demand. Historically, a booming economy with low unemployment and high GDP growth...
    • User AvatarMatt (Bristol) 20th Jun - 2:22pm
      Jamie D: "At the same time, I suspect that some conservatives (emphasis on the small “c”) may realise the recent democratic failure is a reason...
    • User Avatarchris moore 20th Jun - 2:21pm
      Boom and bust abolished. 3.23% growth rate forever. We are the Immortals.
    • User AvatarChris Cory 20th Jun - 1:53pm
      Didn't I read that Tim Farron tried to recruit Rory ? If so, then he at least didn't see R.S. as just another died in...
    • User AvatarJamie Dalzell 20th Jun - 1:31pm
      Regarding comments above, I agree that Rory Stewart's policies are in may ways status quo. That should not be surprising, he is a Conservative. Such...
    • User AvatarPeter Martin 20th Jun - 1:27pm
      @ JoeB, "The claim that fiscal stimulus can deliver real annual growth of 3% regardless of what supply shocks hit the economy or what capacity...