“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.