The papers have been filled with reviews of the year and we're barrelling into awards season, so it's only fitting that we have some awards of our own. My colleagues over on the very entertaining Nuclear Reactions have been staging their own award ceremony, "to recognise those who have help make the nuclear industry the over-subsidised and under-scrutinised joke it is today".

Here's the latest in the Deep Green column from Rex Weyler -author, journalist, ecologist and long-time Greenpeace trouble-maker. The opinions here are his own, and you can sign up to get the column by email every month.

The nuclear industry has hitched a ride on the climate change bandwagon, proclaiming that nuclear power will solve the world's global warming and energy problems in one sweeping "nuclear renaissance."

As you might expect, there's a catch. Nuclear energy faces escalating capital costs, a radioactive waste backlog, security and insurance gaps, nuclear weapons proliferation, and expensive reactor decommissioning that will magnify the waste problem.

The government would have you believe that all is well in the world of nuclear power. That the path to building more of them in the UK is smooth and care-free.

It isn't. We know this because we're keeping a keen eye on the whole process. A very keen eye. And Greenpeace investigations have exposed that the path is not as smooth as the government will have you believe.

Legal advice from top lawyers says that the government's nuclear plans are open to a number of challenges, on a number of fronts, over a number of years.

It's official, Brown's personal pollsters tried to fix another public consultation on new nuclear power.

Late yesterday we received an astonishing response to our complaint to the Marketing Research Standards Board about the government's second public consultation on nuclear power. The board sets the standards for opinion research and found that the market research company Opinion Leader Research breached the Code of Conduct. The board said Opinion Leader "information was inaccurately or misleadingly presented, or was imbalanced, which gave rise to a material risk of respondents being led towards a particular answer."
Read more »

Hartlepool nuclear plant - completely out of action

Should you happen to find yourself debating with a passionate supporter of nuclear power about how to supply our country's future energy needs, the odds are that pretty early in the debate they'll play their trump card - namely that only nuclear can supply the 'base load' necessary to ensure that the lights stay on throughout the long, dark British winter. Hang the dangers of radioactivity, forget the ruinous expense, they'll say - we can't do without nuclear power.

Interesting news from our colleagues in Turkey, where 37 activists from Greenpeace and Global Action Group were arrested after protesting against nuclear energy last week.

The Turkish government has been busily trying to find a supplier for its first (of many, potentially) nuclear plant. But the plans have been stopped dead by... investors. Of the six companies supposedly interested in the contract, only one made a bid. And, without competition, Turkish law prevents the government from issuing the tender for a new nuclear plant.

Read more on Nuclear Reaction. 

Yesterday: "I want British companies and British workers to seize the opportunity and lead the world in the transformation to a low carbon economy and I believe that we can create in modern green manufacturing and service one million new jobs" - Gordon Brown.

Today: British Energy is sold to French nuclear company EDF for £12.5 billion, exporting thousands of potential UK jobs to France, dealing a hammer blow to our chances of meeting our legally binding Renewables Obligation. 

John Hutton committing to take action on climate change at the 2007 Labour Party Conference © Rose / Greenpeace

"No coal plus no nuclear equals no lights," said Business Secretary John Hutton (pictured above, proving he really has heard of climate change, honest) today.

Bearing in mind the findings of leading energy consultants Pöyry (pdf) that we don't need new nuclear or new coal to keep the lights on - we just need the government to meet its own, existing targets for energy efficiency and renewables - he might better have said "no vision plus no guts equals no chance of averting catastrophic climate change". Which at least has some basis in fact.

Oh dear. From Nuclear Reaction:

Yesterday we brought you the fantastical tale of the Brazilian government announcing their ambition to build 50 new nuclear reactors by 2050. No sooner had the disbelieving laughter died down here at Nuclear Reaction, along came the World Nuclear Association (WNA) with an amazing fantasy of its own. Wait until you see this - it's amazing. There are comedians who would kill for this ability to make people laugh...

Some unsettling news appeared in the Independent over the weekend, which revealed that an Environment Agency report has said that containers at Sellafield (where most of the UK's waste is stored) may not be as stable as was thought. The document effectively destroys Britain's already shaky disposal plans just as ministers are preparing an expansion of nuclear power.