nuclear-news

We don’t need coal or nuclear power stations to save planet|11Oct08|Socialist Worker

We don’t need coal or nuclear power stations to save planet
Socialist Worker online Sadie Robinson October 2008 Supporters of coal and nuclear power say they are the only energy sources that can tackle climate change, but there are better alternatives, writes …………………………over the longer term there is a need to develop new forms of energy production.

A number of nuclear and coal plants are to close down over the next 20 years. This will reduce Britain’s electricity generation by around 30 percent. But there is no reason why nuclear or coal plants should fill the gap.

Greenpeace published a report on Britain’s energy requirements last month. It concluded that “there is no need to build new fossil-fuelled power generation to keep the lights on”.

Efficiency

It argues that if the government meets its targets on improving energy efficiency and developing renewable energy, there will be no need for new electricity generation until after 2020………………….Nuclear is being promoted as clean, cheap and efficient, but it is the opposite of all three.

Carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere in every stage in the production of nuclear power. It has taken massive government subsidies to build nuclear power stations in the past, and new ones will require that again.

Nuclear energy requires the building of large plants far from the places where the energy will be used.

This wastes a massive amount of energy as it is lost in transmission from the plants to towns and cities………………………

Investing in clean energy and making changes to the way society is organised are the real way to meet our energy needs.

Renewable energy could end our dependence on fossil fuels and massively reduce carbon emissions.

We don’t need coal or nuclear power stations to save planet|11Oct08|Socialist Worker

Tags: nuclear, antinuclear, radioactive, uranium

October 8, 2008 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment