Skip navigation.

“Nuclear power is expensive, slow and dangerous and it won't stop climate change. If the answer is nuclear power, it must have been a pretty stupid question.” Ian Lowe President, Australia Conservation Foundation.


The new battlecry of the nuclear industry is that nuclear energy is the answer to global climate change. Nuclear energy is toxic and dangerous. Far from being rehabilitated, the nuclear option is a convenient distraction from the problem of climate change and stalls real action to combat it.

Nuclear power lobbyists are correct that climate change demands an urgent and quick response.  But replacing polluting coal and other fossil fuel-based power with another environmental disaster -- in the form of nuclear power -- is NOT the answer we need.  Our best long-term solution for an emission free and greenhouse-friendly future are the truly clean and green renewable energy sources – particularly wind and solar - combined with technologies that vastly improve energy efficiency.

In Asia...

Asia is projected to have the largest growth in installed nuclear generating capacity from 2002-2025, accounting for 96% of the total projected increase.
Cost: Nuclear power is more expensive.  Not only is nuclear power more expensive than fossil fuel generation and clean, renewable wind power, it also leaves a legacy of unsafe yet highly expensive technologies.  Costs associated with safety and security, insurance and liability in case of accident or attack, waste management, construction and decommissioning are rising substantially for nuclear power, while the cost of wind and solar power is falling.    Nuclear power plants have only presented a veneer of economic viability in the past due to heavy government subsidies.   As energy markets have liberalized around the world, investors have turned their backs on nuclear energy. The number of reactors in western Europe and the United States peaked 15 years ago and has been declining since.  By contrast, the amount of wind power and solar energy is rising at rates of 20 to 30 per cent a year.  
The hazards associated with nuclear power include the risk of potentially catastrophic accidents like the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster, routine releases of radioactive gases and liquids from nuclear plants, the problem of nuclear waste and the risks of terrorism and sabotage. The International Energy Outlook 2005's projection that Asia will have the largest growth in nuclear generation in the next two decades exposes the region, which consists mostly of developing countries to these hazards, more than any other region. Asia will soon be dumping ground of nuclear technology if we do not reject this trend. and work in favor of renewable energy and improved efficiency.

Waste: Nuclear waste disposal is still an unsolved problem. The most dangerous form of pollution ever created, nuclear waste remains radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years. Uranium mines typically generate volumes of long-lived, low level waste which is kept on site.  Reactors release radioactive emissions to air and water. Reprocessing plants generate a high-level radioactive waste stream and emissions to air and water.   All these pose risks to the health of the public.  Monitoring and maintaining waste deposits over a period spanning 20 times the length of known civilization is an unacceptable burden we are placing on all future generations – with no guarantees of long term safety.

Nuclear proliferation: Nuclear technology, such as uranium enrichment is also used in nuclear weapons production, and therefore a proliferation risk. There are now more than 40 countries with the capacity to build nuclear weapons, and international efforts to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology are failing. Nuclear technology will always carry the risk that it will be used to construct weapons of mass destruction.

Greenhouse polluters: Claims that nuclear power is “emissions free” are false.  Substantial greenhouse gas emissions are generated across the nuclear fuel cycle.  Fossil-fuel generated electricity is more greenhouse intensive than nuclear power, but this comparison only holds true if high-grade uranium ores are available.  Even with such high-grade ores, there is a massive increase in greenhouse pollution from mining, processing and reactor construction before any electricity is generated. The known resources of high-grade uranium ores only amount to a few decades' use at the present rate.   Most of the earth’s uranium is found in very poor grade ores, and recovery of uranium from these ores is likely to be considerably more greenhouse intensive. Nuclear power emits more greenhouse gases per unit energy than most renewable energy sources, and that comparative deficit will widen as uranium ore grades decline.

Safe, clean alternatives

To avoid dangerous further changes to our climate, we need to act now.  Asia in particular should make a commitment to the sensible alternatives that produce sustainable cost-effective reductions in greenhouse pollution: wind power, solar water-heating, energy efficiency, gas and energy from organic matter. Renewable energy and energy efficiency can deliver the power we need – without the environmental and social problems.

Renewable energy already supplies 19% of world electricity, compared to nuclear’s 16%.  The share of renewables is increasing, while nuclear’s share is decreasing.   Renewable energy sources such as wind power and solar power are growing by 20-30% every year.   In 2003, the cumulative installed capacity of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems around the world passed the landmark figure of 2,400 Megawatts of solar photovoltaic power. Global shipments of PV cells and modules have been growing an average annual rate of more than 35% for of the past few years, providing employment for 10,000 people and generating business worth more than 3 billion euros annually.  Wind power, on the other hand, is the world’s fastest growing energy source with installed capacity growing at an average annual rate over the last 5 years of 15.8%

Renewable energies have truly limitless sources, can be more easily deployed in remote developing regions, present absolutely no risk to global security and are environmentally-friendly.

Because there is only a finite amount of investment available for new energy, any investment in nuclear power is effectively money denied to renewables and energy efficiency.  Nuclear power, with fifty years of failure as its track record and still no solutions to its fundamental problems, remains a shockingly poor investment choice. The wise decision then, is to say no to nuclear, yes to renewables and energy efficiency.