![]() ![]() But there are not two sides about climate change, there’s a very clear scientific consensus. There are some issues that may appear to be two-sided, like climate change. Was the idea to inform people about nuclear choices in an even-handed way, being neither for nor against? And you take us through all aspects of nuclear: from the basic physics, to fusion as a possible long-term solution. I’m a non-scientist so I love that you’ve written a ‘citizen’s guide’ to inform people like me about our nuclear options. Certainly, after both Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, and again, Fukushima-those were big blows to the nuclear power industry. You’re saying at the end of the day, it’s the economics that no longer makes sense, rather than, ‘Yikes, we’re going to have another Chernobyl’. The picture for nuclear power is complicated. After years of environmentalists wanting them shut down, that didn’t happen, but they shut down when they couldn’t compete with natural gas produced by fracking. Here in the United States, interestingly, we’re seeing perfectly functional nuclear power plants with safe records shutting down because they can’t compete economically with natural gas. And now I would say we probably over-understand them, in a way” “It took a while to understand the dangers of radiation. In fact, the one place that really shut down the most after Fukushima was Germany, which is pledging to shut down all its nuclear power. Japan, although it basically shut down all its power plants after the Fukushima event, is coming gradually back online, because they really can’t afford to be without their nuclear generation. Korea does have some very new nuclear facilities, but they have some changes in their political situation that have made it less favorable for nuclear power. Is it mainly China that’s still quite keen on nuclear? When you say Asia: Japan had a big scare and went off nuclear power after Fukushima and I thought Korea was stopping as well. It’s just a realistic look at where it’s going to fit into the energy mix in the future. And I’m not saying that from the point of view of somebody who is anti-nuclear power. So, my honest answer is I don’t think nuclear power is the wave of the future, but I think some places are going to see more of it, and some places are going to see less of it. So, a great many of them are going to be shut down in the next decade and the construction needed just to replace those is quite a big challenge. The other issue is that there are between 400 and 500 nuclear power plants in the world, and they have an average age of about 40 years. The other problem is that the timeframe for building a nuclear power plant is so long-even in countries that have a lot less regulation than the UK or the US, it can still be a decade or more-that we simply can’t build out the number of power plants we need to solve the climate problem and replace fossil fuels. But my honest opinion-and I have a whole chapter in my book that’s about this-is that I don’t think it is a viable means of solving our climate problem, not because it’s too dangerous, or environmentally unfriendly, but because it’s economically unfriendly right now, compared to many other ways of generating electricity, particularly solar and wind, but also natural gas. I think it is enjoying somewhat of a resurgence, particularly in Asia, and to a lesser extent in Eastern Europe. I think it is on the way out, at least for the foreseeable future, in most of the developed countries of the West, including your country and my country. That’s a very interesting question and the answer is ambiguous. Before we get to those, I wanted to ask about nuclear power specifically. You’ve chosen books on a variety of nuclear themes, some of them key to the safety of all of us. Foreign Policy & International Relations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |