Nuclear Power Quietly
Confident in Energy Debate
October 11, 2005 — By Jeremy Lovell, Reuters
SELLAFIELD, England — The nuclear
power industry is quietly confident that the world is about to beat a
path to its door in an increasingly desperate search for "clean" energy
that doesn't heat up the planet.
Soaring oil prices and new data on global warming -- brought into sharp
focus by devastating hurricanes in the United States -- have heated up
the nuclear debate and outraged the environmental lobby, which says
nuclear power is not the answer.
China plans to invest some $50 billion to build around 30 new nuclear
reactors by 2020, there are investment incentives in the United States
and nuclear power was back on the agenda at a summit of the Group of
Eight industrialized nations in July.
The nuclear industry now feels it is on a roll -- 20 years after an
explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor spread a cloud of
radioactivity over Europe and dealt a severe blow to the reputation of a
sector long denounced by environmentalists.
"Nuclear power is in the ascendant world-wide -- less so in the (United
Kingdom) than elsewhere, but that will change," said Ian Hore-Lacy of
the World Nuclear Association (WNA), which aims to promote nuclear power
as a sustainable energy rs, putting millions of people at risk from
floods and droughts.
It is difficult to tell if global warming caused hurricanes Katrina and
Rita, scientists say but they forecast more unpredictable weather as the
world gets hotter.
CLEANING UP ITS IMAGE
The nuclear debate has long stirred passions in Britain, home of one of
the most intensively used nuclear sites in the world at Sellafield,
northwestern England.
In the late 1990s, Sellafield found itself in the firing line after a
report criticized safety standards at the nuclear reprocessing plant
which has been operating for some 50 years.
Now, workers understand the public relations challenge.
"We have got to demonstrate that we can clean up the legacy of the past.
That way we can show we can deal with the waste of the future," said
Tony Price, head of the clean-up program.
Waste has long been an industry black spot. The enriched uranium used in
atomic reactors in nuclear plants is highly radioactive and spent fuel
remains hazardous for 100,000 years.
"As we show we are dealing with the legacy waste, people are starting to
get more confident," Price said.
The nuclear industry's most optimistic projection, from the WNA, sees
global nuclear power capacity doubling to around 750 gigawatts over the
next 25 years but its share of world electricity supply only edging up
to 18 percent from 16 due to bould provide 50 percent of world
electricity."
"THE WRONG ANSWER"
Environmentalists say the true costs of nuclear power are three times
those stated, there is a risk terrorists could get hold of deadly
plutonium and waste is a problem for the future.
"We are not taking an ideological view ... We have analyzed the pros and
cons ... and we have concluded that (nuclear power) is the wrong
answer," said Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth.
"A much more positive set of options are there," he said, citing a
combination of energy efficiency, microgeneration, renewables, carbon
capture, and more sustainable transport.
Greenpeace told the European Parliament last week that far from being
the answer, nuclear power should be phased out.
"To replace one environmental catastrophe -- polluting fossil fuel power
-- with another environmental disaster -- nuclear energy -- is clearly
not the answer," it said.
Environmentalists want more use to be made of renewable energy like
solar, wind and waves. The wind power industry says that by 2020 wind
could provide 12 percent of the world's electricity, but it complains of
administrative barriers.
It says wind power has no carbon emissions, employs many and is good for
local economies -- although most complaints come from people who don't
want wind farms in their back yards.
Source: Reuters |