 |
Credible environmental groups and prominent individuals in the global environmental movement are increasingly endorsing nuclear power, or at least willing to keep an open mind to its potential. Among other things, environmentalists are appreciating nuclear power’s ability to reliably produce large amounts of energy with zero carbon emissions; its ability to store and contain all its waste products on-site for later recycling; and the relatively small geographic footprint of a nuclear plant. Nuclear power provides 20 percent of America’s energy and 80 percent of its emissions-free energy.
The Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch),
the main international group charged with analyzing and proposing solutions
for global warming, issued recommendations in May 2007 that call for nuclear
power and other forms of emissions-free energy.
Commercial nuclear provides over 1/3 of environmentally-conscious Europe’s
power, and 104 U.S. nuclear units supply 20% of our nation’s electricity.
Worldwide, there are 435 nuclear units operating in 30 countries, with 30
new nuclear plants under construction in 12 countries. IEC is currently one
of 14 companies that have announced intentions to file license applications
with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for nuclear construction in the
U.S. Most recently, a legislator from Southern California even introduced a
bill to lift the state’s ban on new nuclear power plants.
The IEC will result in significant greenhouse gas savings. To generate the same amount of electricity as the IEC, a coal plant would spew 11.3 million metric tons of carbon, 8,416 metric tons of nitrogen oxide and 10,433 metric tons of sulfur dioxide annually into the atmosphere, while a wind farm would require 150,000 acres.
Vermont, sometimes compared to an “Ecotopia” because of its forward-thinking environmental policies, gets 75 percent of its power from nuclear. It’s no surprise its capital, Burlington, ranked first on the 2007 Country Home Magazine list of Best Green Places (Boise-Nampa ranked 168 out of 379).
Nuclear plants also have a small footprint. To generate 1,600 megawatts of
power, for example, a wind farm would need to occupy 140,000 acres – about
100 times the area of a comparable nuclear plant – including thousands of
miles of access roads.
What are people saying about nuclear?
- Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) said in 2007 that he had “never seen a credible scenario for reducing emissions that did not include nuclear energy.”
- An April 2008 survey of US citizens found that overall 82% said nuclear power will be important in meeting the nation's electricity needs in the years ahead.
- According to the March 23, 2007 edition of USA today, The Pew Center on Global Climate Change, The Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense are willing to consider nuclear power as part of a long-term solution to global warming.
- Patrick Moore, founder of Greenpeace, wrote in a Washington Post Column that “… my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.”
- Senior Idaho political leaders all support nuclear power.
- Paul Newman, actor and philanthropist, supports nuclear.
- Gwyneth Cravens, an investigative journalist and former nuclear opponent, and author of “Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy" supports nuclear.
- James Lovelock, scientist, author, researcher, environmentalist and creator of the Gaia hypothesis: “I am a Green and I entreat my friends in the movement to drop their wrongheaded objection to nuclear energy … civilization is in imminent danger and has to use nuclear - the one safe, available, energy source - now or suffer the pain soon to be inflicted by our outraged planet.”
- Scott Howson, chairman of the Rappahannock Group of the Sierra Club, indicated in an interview with a Washington Post reporter that “I see a solution ultimately in nuclear energy. It's non-polluting, and that's what we're all looking for."
- Stanford University President John Hennessy, who expressed his support for nuclear at an alternative energy gathering, stated, “Nuclear power has to be part of the solution…Can we really understand the notion of risk? Nuclear plants vs. carbon emissions - which will kill and has killed more people?”
- United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the UK would be foolish to base its energy security on "two or three regions in the world" and it must pursue construction of "new nuclear power stations."
- James Clyburn, the House majority whip and third-ranking House Democrat, said nuclear energy must have a significant role in America’s future energy policy and “could be the centerpiece” of some states’ energy plans. “We must develop a smorgasbord of energy choices,” Clyburn said. “I believe nuclear has to be a significant part of the smorgasbord.
- All presidential candidates support nuclear.
Related links:
The Nuclear Energy Institute
Barron’s Online
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Nuclear Renaissance