Which genius chose it as a site for a power station in the first place? At the enquiry back in 1958, evidence was submitted to show it to be 'the most significant shingle foreland ...in Europe, and one of the major coastal depositional features to be found anywhere in the world'.
The enquiry was also warned of the (rather evident) nonsense of building a large structure on eroding shingle, and subsequently the power station has needed constant beach-feeding.
The reason given for rejecting the site this time was 'significant negative effects on several national and internationally protected nature conservation sites, and that as well as the Dungeness SAC and the Dungeness to Pett Level SPA, these include the Dungeness SSSI and National Nature Reserve (NNR)'. Local MP Michael Howard did not seem to be sure whether this was a good thing or not when interviewed.
It seems astonishing that, after so many protests in the 70s and 80s against nuclear power, we now appear to be back in a position to prefer nuclear to 'dirty' coal and gas, because we failed in the meantime to develop alternative sources or power quickly enough. Perhaps it was politically easier to scar the poorer areas with coal-fired power stations, and dump nuclear generating plants on Dungeness than it was to put wind-farms in the backyards of swing-voters.
A further three sites were examined in this recent review - at Druridge Bay in Northumberland, Kingsnorth in Kent and Owston Ferry in South Yorkshire, and although "worthy of consideration", have been rejected for now.
Druridge is one of the loveliest areas of the country - please consider it sacred.
In looking around for information, I happened upon an interesting website, called Greenie:
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/. It's actually compiled by a chap called John Ray, not our own cuddly Fred and is well worth a read..... this world is going straight to hell.