welsh
Junkmaster
Unless we stop now, we will really doom the lives of our descendants. If we just go on for another 40 or 50 years faffing around, they'll have no chance at all, it'll be back to the Stone Age. There'll be people around still. But civilisation will go."
James Lovelock,
Nuclear power and global warming
Seems there is something of a debate that says essentially, if we want to beat global climate change we need to turn back to nuclear power. Essentially, the argument seems to be that nuclear is clean, and the facilities are often safe.
Alternatively, no other viable means exists to replace global energy needs. That would mean that we would continue to rely on internal combustion engines and other makes carbon gases that lead to the green house effect.
What are your thoughts? Is this a crappy trade off? Should we embrace nuclear power more enthusiastically? Do we have a choice?
From a recent DOE report-
Nuclear fission power reactors represent a potential solution to many aspects of global change possibly induced by inputting of either particulate or carbon or sulfur oxides into the Earth`s atmosphere. Of proven technological feasibility, they presently produce high-grade heat for large-scale electricity generation, space heating and industrial process-energizing around the world, without emitting greenhouse gases or atmospheric particulates; importantly, electricity production costs from the best nuclear plants presently are closely comparable with those of the best fossil-fired plants. However, a substantial number of issues currently stand between nuclear power and widespread substitution for large stationary fossil fuel-fired systems. These include perceptual ones regarding both long-term and acute operational safety, plant decommissioning, fuel reprocessing, radwaste disposal, fissile materials diversion to military purposes and - perhaps most seriously- readily quantifiable concerns regarding long-term fuel supply and total unit electrical energy cost. We sketch a road-map for proceeding from the present situation toward a nuclear power-intensive world, addressing along the way each of the concerns which presently impede widespread nuclear substitution for fossil fuels, particularly for coal in the most populous and rapidly developing portions of the world, e.g., China and India. This`design to societal specifications` approach to large-scale nuclear fission power systems may lead to energy sources meeting essentially all stationary demands for high-temperature heat. Such advanced options offer a human population of ten billion the electricity supply levels currently enjoyed by Americans for 10,000 years. Nuclear power systems tailored to local needs-and-interests and having a common advanced technology base could reduce present-day world-wide C0{sub 2} emissions by two-fold, if universally employed. By application to small mobile demands, a second two-fold reduction might be attained. Even the first such halving of carbon intensivity of stationary-source energy production world-wide might permit continued slow power-demand growth in the highly developed countries and rapid development of the other 80% of the world, both without active governmental suppression of fossil fuel usage - while also stabilizing carbon input-rates into the Earth`s atmosphere. The second two-fold reduction might obviate most global warming concerns
DOE report on global nuclear power
Alternative views say forget it, nuclear power is not an alternative-
nuclear power as not an alternative
Yet nuclear power is not only ineffective at addressing climate change, when the entire fuel chain is examined, nuclear power is found to be a producer of greenhouse gases. Adding enough nuclear power to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of nuclear weapons materials, result in a Chernobyl-scale accident once every decade or so, and, perhaps most significantly, squander the resources necessary to implement meaningful climate change mitigation policies.
A UNESCO report also examines this question-
nuclear power as solution to global warming