The dirty business of reprocessing nuclear fuel has been questioned like never before this year: so much so that arguments against have gone beyond traditional environmental grounds to suggesting it is "an economic nonsense, which should end immediately".
Factor in reports damning Sellafield's operation, loss/suspension of contracts and retrenchment (notably in Britain and Germany), and it adds up to an immensely difficult time for the nuclear industry.
Now Denmark has lost its patience. It sees rising technetium 99 levels on its shores (accumulating, but not a health threat) due to Sellafield activities many hundreds of miles away. It has found ready allies in Scandinavia, and the palpable outrage of the Danish Environment Minister, Mr Svend Auken, has acted as a formidable anti-Sellafield battering ram.
The Governmentail Ard Fheis, rowed in as it emerged that a 1998 agreement on bringing radioactive discharges into the sea to close to zero by 2020 might be deployed to force an end to reprocessing sooner
primarily, because current technologies could not deliver on a such a commitment. The agreement was signed in Portugal by the EU and 15 signatory countries to the OSPAR convention on marine pollution based around the north-east Atlantic.
Taking account of the extent of posturing, it is surprising that the Republic came up with a stronger motion for the OSPAR meeting in Copenhagen. The motion calls for an immediate cessation of reprocessing at Sellafield, while the Danes seek a suspension generally with a resumption only after suitable storage options are determined in advance of a reprocessing ban.
The Minister of State for Energy, Mr Joe Jacob, has tabled the Irish motion but will be absent as the gathering is a technical one on behalf of the host country he will declare the negotiations open and withdraw. The Green Party believes the Irish stance has been fatally weakened by Mr Jacob's absence.
Its TD, Mr Trevor Sargent, said it suggested that the issue was not being treated with the seriousness needed. "There are clear opportunities at the meeting to push for an end to reprocessing. To achieve this, the strongest signals must be sent to the British government," he said.
The British government said last week it planned to reduce discharges into the sea by a further 85 per cent by 2020. Yet it admitted there would still be substantial discharges in 20 years.
Greenpeace, buoyed by a poll showing nearly nine in 10 British adults think Sellafield should be stopped from discharging reprocessed radioactive waste, said the British position was a betrayal of a commitment given in 1998.
However, it is in no doubt about the opportunity to accelerate the end of Sellafield's reprocessing activities. "Every day at Sellafield is another day of nuclear pollution," according to a Greenpeace spokesman, Mr John Bowler. "For the first time an international proposal is on the table to end it for good. We are calling on Ireland to join Denmark in making this meeting a historic success for human health and the environment."
BNFL has stressed the "Sintra agreement" is subject to caveats. Achieving next to zero discharges would be "subject to technical feasibility, legitimate use of the sea, impact on man and biota and paying particular attention to the safety of workers in nuclear installations". That amounts to some leeway, notwithstanding its commitment to substantially reduce discharges.
Mr Jacob, however, says initial indications are that the draft British strategy "does not go far enough". He is heartened by support from the German government but is resisting attempts to withdraw his motion in favour of the Danish one.
If signatories other than Britain and France agree a common position, the outcome, though acutely embarrassing, would not be binding on the reprocessing states. A consensus decision agreed by all parties would inevitably involve a motion considerably weaker than those tabled by the Republic and Denmark.
Mr Jacob insists the level of opposition to reprocessing now in place amounts to "pressure like never before" on Sellafield, BNFL and the British government.