In Insurmountable Risks: the Dangers of Using Nuclear Power to Combat Global Climate Change, Dr. Brice Smith* gives more reasons why building more nuclear power stations is not the best way to combat global warming ...

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US) estimates that the world would need to build at least a thousand 1,000 megawatt new nuclear power stations by 2050 if it were serious about using nuclear power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Theoretically, that would reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by the global warming potential of 800 million tonnes of carbon dioxide if the nuclear power stations replaced gas-fired power stations, or of 1,800 million tonnes of carbon dioxide if the nuclear power stations replaced coal-fired power stations. Sadly, they say, it will not work out that way in reality. Most of the new nuclear power stations are likely be built in the US, where their output will at best match the US’s ever increasing demand for electricity. Few, if any, coal- and gas-fired power stations will be stood down. The US’s overall greenhouse gas emissions may even increase.

On the other hand, in a round about way, adopting a nuclear power strategy could lead to not only significant emissions reductions by individuals and businesses, but also greater demand for lower cost electricity from renewable energy technology, like wind and wave power. The only way to make electricity from nuclear power stations competitive with electricity from gas and oil is to impose heavy taxes on carbon emissions. These will hit the coal- and gas-fired power station operators hardest, particularly if carbon emissions from building nuclear power stations are exempted. Inevitably, these new costs will be passed on to customers in the form of higher electricity prices.
A UK Government Policy and Innovation Unit report estimated that, by 2050:

• nuclear power could reduce the UK’s annual greenhouse gas emissions by 20 million tonnes
• if double the money required for the new nuclear power project were spent on energy efficiency measures, the UK’s emissions would be reduced by more than three times as much (65 million tonnes)

Ed.-

(i) The Oxford Research Group calculates that, for nuclear power to make a significant contribution to reducing the UK’s carbon emissions, around 48 reactors would have to begin construction every year between now and 2075. During its heyday of building nuclear power stations between 1997 and 1993, the French Government averaged 3.4 reactors a year. The entire world commissioned an average 16.6 reactors a year over the same period.

(ii) The cost per kiloWatt of electricity from nuclear power stations is currently around six pence, the same cost predicted for wind and wave power. Given that the cost will be the same but the latter presents far fewer dangers, why not invest in the latter?

(iii) Wind power offers the cheapest carbon-free electricity. A joint study by Greenpeace and the European Wind Energy Association shows that windpower could provide 10% of global electricity demand by 2020.

* Dr. Brice Smith is a senior scientist at The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Maryland (US)
(13354) Brice Smith. 1.5.06