23 Feb 2009

Green Left 'Nuclear energy is a red herring'






An article entitled "Nuclear Power? Yes please.." appeared in the Independent newspaper on 23 February, 2009. It states that "four of the country's leading environmentalists" advocate nuclear power as a solution to climate change.

The vast majority of the green movement remain staunchly opposed to nuclear power.

FIrstly, it will take more than a decade for these plants to come on stream, which removes one plank of their argument about nuclear power stations to be ready in time to deal with climate change. Renewables are quicker to build.

Secondly, the large companies ready to profit from this bonanza historically ask for huge government subsidies. Were the renewable energy sector to be subsidised on the same scale, the unit cost of the new technologies would plummet.

Thirdly, very few jobs are created in giant nuclear plants, a central concern today as we stare at the abyss of an economic depression.

Fourthly, nuclear power will generate around 8% of our energy needs despite all the projected capital expenditure.

Instead, we propose the immediate implementation of energy efficiency projects up and down the country. We can save many times more energy than that generated by Nuclear. Moreover, we can put tens of thousands of people back into jobs by retooling houses and businesses.

Finally, we should be subsidising UK technology companies to use their talents for solar, wind and tidal energy. We are already falling behind Germany, Denmark and even Portugal in the introduction of renewables.

Instead of the red herring of nuclear energy, the green movement calls for investment in modern, robust, renewable energy.

5 comments:

Marie Curie said...

One word, Derek...

France.

Phil said...

Marie, it just doesn't scale. Any solution has to be fit for all, not just a few elite industrialised nations. Unless, that is, you don't give a damn about human equity and ethical concerns.

GRLCowan said...

A few years ago the cell-phone ring-tone industry, powered by inconspicuous nickel-and-diming of cellphone users -- or their parents -- was bigger than the uranium mining industry. And the price of finding a barrel-oil-equivalent of U, in recent years, has been on the order of a penny. So of course it scales.

Why would oil interests put out glossy ads saying, in effect, we're trying to think of everything, with pretty pictures of solar, biofuel, etc., and a conspicuous absence of the one thing they really don't like, if it didn't scale?

Has this blog any relation to the one of the same name that Judith Lewis once had?

How fire can be domesticated

Green Gordon said...

Pro-nuclear Green candidate faces axe
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/pronuclear-green-candidate-faces-axe-1630314.html

A Green Party parliamentary candidate is facing disciplinary action after calling for the reintroduction of nuclear power, which is strictly against party policy.

Anonymous said...

interestingcurove