Nuclear Power is a hard subject. On the plus side it doesn’t create carbon dioxide and is extremely efficient. On the other side of the argument their is the safety concerns (although I think there would be so many things in place to make sure it is safe) and the fact that the waste is impossible to dispose of and has to be stored up in the hope that no one will dig it up.
The positives are for our short term benefits but the waste will be around of the long term. Should we be concentrating more on trying to cut back on the amount of energy that we waste away in our greedy western way?
Greenpeace did this protest because they knew that Tony Blair would probably be announcing a Nuclear plan for the UK. And we all know that when Tony announces something he will stick to it no matter what even if its obvious that he is losing.
Maybe Greenpeace just realised that the state of the economy and amount of money in our pockets is more important to society and the Government than the environment and so had no other way of getting attention. Who can blame them and others who have to resort to the same kind of tactics (e.g. Fathers For Justice).
Problem with power generation is that all forms of it are unpopular to someone. There will soon be a shortage in generation capacity because a lot of plants are reaching end of life.
There is a lot of effort going into saving energy through technologies like micro CHP but at the same time old style plants will still be required and esepcially in the case of nuclear, but for all types of plant they take a long time to build.