Nuclear power is a distraction from the urgent task of tackling climate change

Nuclear damages attempts to tackle climate change nuClear News Dec 14 It is now almost 15 years since Tony Blair asked the Number Ten Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) to carry out a thorough review of energy policy. That review ultimately led to the 2003 Energy White Paper which concluded that the current economics of nuclear power make it an unattractive option, and that there are still important issues about nuclear waste which need to be resolved.

In launching the White Paper in Parliament the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry at the

time, Patricia Hewitt, said: “It would have been foolish to announce …a new generation of nuclear power stations, because

that would have guaranteed we would not make the necessary investments in energy efficiency and renewables.”

Unfortunately, as we know, the nuclear lobbyists got to work straight away and this policy was

eventually reversed. (1)

When the Nuclear White Paper was published in January 2008 giving the go-ahead to new reactors, Professor Gordon Mackerron, who had been a prominent member of the PIU Energy Review team and went on to Chair the first Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), expressed concern that nuclear investments would ultimately stall. But the

expectation that new reactors would be built would hold back investment in the alternatives. So we could get to 2020 and find that neither nuclear, nor other forms of carbon abatement technology had been built. (2)

Regrettably, now we are 7 years closer to 2020, it looks as though Hewitt and Mackerron’s worst fears are coming true.

Nuclear power is a distraction from the urgent task of tackling climate change for five main

reasons.

Firstly, nuclear power provides quite a small percentage of the UK’s energy needs, so it is

important that we don’t allow plans to build new reactors to disrupt plans to introduce other

forms of low carbon energy.

Secondly, Funding is limited. Even in boom times there is a limited supply of money, so we need

to maximise the carbon savings achieved from every pound spent. But, as we shall see, nuclear

is probably the most expensive way to save carbon.

Thirdly, there is a serious risk that nuclear will soak up all the funds available for low carbon

energy.

Fourthly tackling climate change is urgent, the sooner we can start making savings, the bigger the cumulative impact. New reactors at Hinkley are not expected to start operating until about 2023 at the earliest, whereas other forms of carbon abatement could start making savings now.No2NuclearPower

Finally, global markets are moving rapidly towards more decentralised low carbon energy

systems. But by promoting nuclear power, the UK will be bucking this trend and prolonging the

life of outmoded, centralised utility models. Andy Blowers, Emeritus Professor of Sociology, and

another former CoRWM member says it is this “Business As Usual” aspect of nuclear power

which is the most insidious……….http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo69.pdf

December 17, 2014 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | climate change, Reference, UK

No comments yet.

nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope