Umweltverbrechen multinationaler Konzerne - Greenpeace
Umweltverbrechen multinationaler Konzerne - Greenpeace
Umweltverbrechen multinationaler Konzerne - Greenpeace
Erfolgreiche ePaper selbst erstellen
Machen Sie aus Ihren PDF Publikationen ein blätterbares Flipbook mit unserer einzigartigen Google optimierten e-Paper Software.
Subsequent<br />
behaviour of company<br />
around 3500 highly radioactive sources at Sellafield (including losing<br />
some). In 1999/2000 BNFL received 15 non-compliance with<br />
legislation and six enforcement notices from the UK Environment<br />
Agency, for example, for failing to report dischages of radioactive<br />
gases from Sellafield.<br />
Public action: Sellafield has sparked public demonstrations of<br />
concern for many years. In the past year, there have been large<br />
demonstrations in Ireland and Norway, sea-bourne protests from<br />
Norwegian non-governmental groups, and the a 1-million signature<br />
petition from Ireland delivered to Tony Blair by Ali Hewison, the wife<br />
of U2's Bono.<br />
Declaring bankrupt: An announcement by the UK Government on<br />
28 th November 2001 that ownership of Sellafield will be transferred<br />
from BNFL to a Liabilities Management Authority (LMA) amounted to<br />
a tacit admission that activities at Sellafield are now regarded by the<br />
Government as uneconomic. The Secretary of State for Trade and<br />
Industry, Patricia Hewitt told the House of Commons that<br />
“… to enable the LMA [Liabilities Management Authority] to exercise<br />
its role across the whole public sector civil nuclear liabilities portfolio,<br />
the Government now propose to take on responsibility for most of<br />
BNFL's nuclear liabilities and the associated assets. The most<br />
significant of those will be the Sellafield and Magnox sites”.<br />
Poor throughputs have plagued the THORP reprocessing plant, and<br />
are causing a growing disquiet amongst BNFL’s overseas<br />
reprocessing customers. There is now serious doubt over the profit<br />
projections originally used to justify THORP.<br />
In documents leaked to <strong>Greenpeace</strong>, BNFL customers recently<br />
stated that: “…the next business plan will result in another increase<br />
of more than 10% in operating costs, mainly due to the projected 11 th<br />
year of operation of THORP … such cost increases and<br />
uncertainties are commercially highly unsatisfactory and make it<br />
impossible to manage our own fuel cycle business economically,<br />
given the cost pressures we are under.”<br />
Having expressed their displeasure at increasing costs in spring<br />
2001, the foreign customers were reported in October 2001 to have<br />
agreed on new contract terms. Although the customers will pay more<br />
than originally anticipated, the extra cost has been described as “not<br />
unreasonable”, suggesting that BNFL must have agreed to pay some<br />
of the costs of operating THORP for longer. Above all, customers<br />
were said to be satisfied to have limited their exposure to delays in<br />
vitrification of high-level waste at Sellafield, and clarified that they<br />
would not be billed for THORP decommissioning costs 182 . What is<br />
not clear yet, is whether the customers have been told that the<br />
increases in operating costs are unlikely to stop at 10% and will<br />
probably be as much as 30%.<br />
Sellafield’s second largest customer, after the Japanese utilities, is<br />
British Energy. BE recently called for an end to reprocessing. A BE<br />
spokesman stated that:<br />
182 Nuclear Fuel 15 th October 2001. “BNFL overseas customers agree on new reprocessing contract terms”.<br />
89