Prime Minister
I've been anxious to come up here for some time. As you've been round and seen, the Fast Breeder Reactor is working and working very well. Research is constantly being done to improve it and make it better. Before we take a final decision on the commercial Fast Breeder Reactor, we have to have an enquiry. What has been impressed on me today very much is don't have two enquiries, namely one in principle and one on a specific project—combine the two and have it on a specific project, should a specific project, should a specific project be able to go ahead. Obviously, Dounreay would be one of the sites to be considered because the people here are familiar with it, they welcome it. There is a local authority who understands it and has lived with it in this area for a very long time and knows the strenuous efforts that are made for safety. Indeed, I'm sure you noticed as we went round, the people here are extremely fit and I think if more and more people come round the plant like this, it will help enormously to get rid of some of the fears which some people have about nuclear—fears which, I think, are unfounded.
Question
Without prejudging the outcome of an enquiry, how would you favour …
Prime Minister
Without prejudging, I personally would like to see it go ahead, but I would have, nevertheless, to have a look at the conclusions of the enquiry. It's not my personal view that counts. Though, as you know, I've always been interested in more research and development and in Britain keeping ahead. As you know, in France, they are now building Super Phoenix, although, at one time, we were ahead of them in the early stages of the fast breeder. Let me put it this way—I don't share the fears that some people have of nuclear power. If you compare nuclear power with other methods of generating electricity, I don't know of one person who has lost his or her life because of the generation of electricity from nuclear power—not one. You think of the risks that are involved in winning coal, in getting oil, the risks involved are enormous. I don't know of one person who's lost their life in the generating of nuclear energy or electricity.
Question
With that in mind and the fact that you don't seem to like the fact that we've fallen behind with France, would you be expecting to make a decision fairly soon?
Prime Minister
Well, that was what I had in mind when I said that one of the things people had said to me today was don't just have an enquiry in principle—have it in relation to a specific project. And, of course, it would take some time before a specific project was ready to have an [end p1] enquiry about it. But it may be that that would be a faster way of proceeding than having an enquiry in principle and then on the project because, as you know, the enquiries tend to be very lengthy. But we are pledged to have an enquiry before we go ahead and not to prejudge the outcome of the enquiry.
Question
From what you've seen today, Dounreay is very much in the running?
Prime Minister
Dounreay obviously will be one of the sites to be considered and one great thing about it is that it will be very welcome with the people here.
Question
The unions here have expressed some fears that the development might not be able to allay any fears for them?
Prime Minister
I've said to them exactly what I've said to you.
Question
How do you see the nuclear programme developing generally in Britain over the next few years?
Prime Minister
Well, we've got two AGRs at Hinkley and Hunterston, of course. There are three more to come on stream. They'll all, of course, be base load, which makes a very great contribution to your generation of electricity when you have five big base load AGRs. How much do you get for a magnox now? As a percentage of the electricity generated, how much?
(Thirteen)
Thirteen. But that includes two new AGRs, doesn't it? (I am sorry. Eleven on magnox)
Eleven on magnox.
(The AGRs take it up to twenty)
Take it up to twenty, yes. So you see, it does make a very considerable contribution to the generation of electricity and what we were trying to say, both at the Strasbourg European Summit and at the Tokyo Summit, is this: for decades—two decades certainly, the world has depended on oil for the generation of a large part of its electricity and, of course, for petrol. There's been an increasing demand for electricity. We shall be vulnerable to oil supplies unless we buy an alternative supply that is continuous—that won't run out as fossils will—will be a fast breeder nuclear. And before you get the fast breeder, we've got magnox. The United States have got PWR. What we have to consider is the next stage in this country and whether we go PWR or not. That also would have to be the subject of an enquiry. But I think the strategy is not in doubt. [end p2] We want a source of electricity generation that is not a fossil fuel, because the fossil fuels are by definition finite.
Question
The next stage would be PWR, or something, after AGR, and then you're talking about the fast reactor?
Prime Minister
Well, on your fast breeder reactors, you see, you could not get a sufficient programme ready. You have to have an intermediate stage. After your AGRs. At the moment we've ordered two AGRs, at Torness and Heysham. That's number two at Heysham. The first of Heysham's AGRs is due in eighteen months and the second at Heysham has now just been ordered. The one at Torness has been ordered and those are the two now for which instruction plans are being prepared. A decision will soon have to be taken—when I say soon, I mean within about two years on the future of the fast breeder.
Question
Prime Minister, obviously a programme of that kind will be very expensive. Is it something that Britain can do on her own or will there be room for cooperation …?
Prime Minister
You have to finance your own power stations. No-one's going to pay for those for you, and that's the really big cost. The big cost is the building of a power station. What's Heysham and Torness now? About £1,500m. for the two at the prices that were reigning 18 months ago. So no-one's going to pay the cost of your nuclear power station and that is the very big cost. But you've got to generate electricity by some means. And it's not cheap either to build either coal or oil-fired stations. The difference is not very great. Fast breeder reactors would be slightly different because we haven't built one yet.
Question
Torness has attracted a lot of hostility from the people round about. What would you say to them?
Prime Minister
Well, I think there will be hostility until more people are familiar with the generation of electricity by nuclear power. You've had Hunterston A in Scotland working for a very long time, since 1964. Now, we haven't had any problems from there. That really is one of the success stories.
I pressed the button on the reprocessing plant. Now, that is reprocessing fuel for a fast breeder reactor, the thing that generates the fuel that you need for the next round—the next cycle. Now no-one else in the world has one of those yet. No-one else at all. It's not like Windscale. There, you're taking material from the magnox reactors and extracting the plutonium from that—plutonium which can't be used again in the magnox. Or for the fast reactor. So, in fact, the worst thing you can do to material from a nuclear power station is leave it lying around. You've got to reprocess it. But the material reprocessed from magnox produces plutonium. The best thing to do with plutonium is to burn it. That's the safest thing to do—that is to burn it. That means you've got to have a [end p3] fast breeder reactor in which to burn it. I only make the point because I used to see all sorts of things being written about the dangers of plutonium. Those who do research on fast breeder reactors say the only thing to do with plutonium is to burn it because that is the easiest way to get rid of it. And it also means that you're not using up precious oil or gas. And even coal will not last forever. Some of those things you really ought to be conserving as a source material for chemicals because, don't forget, your whole chemical industry depends, to a tremendous extent, on your coal, your gas and your oil. And, really, it's not good to burn some of that stuff under boilers. If you can find a different source of fuel, you can use your coal, your oil and your gas to a far better purpose in the future. I do happen to be a conservationist on nature's materials.