The use of, and investment in, nuclear power as a way of avoiding the consequences of climate chaos and peak oil offers a ‘Faustian bargain’ Photo: tobo / flickr CC
Nuclear power: The only option?
Chris Gwyntopher argues that nuclear power is unsustainable and a seed of war – not a viable alternative to oil
The people living near Fukushima in Japan have suffered disastrously from the false assumption that nuclear power stations are safe, as did the people living near Chernobyl. People have had to be evacuated from a twenty kilometre exclusion zone around the plant. France’s Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety recommended that a further 70,000 people outside the zone should be evacuated. The land is contaminated. Children’s school dinners have been found to contain dangerous levels of radioactive contamination.
Sustainability
I believe that the use of, and investment in, nuclear power as a way of avoiding the consequences of climate chaos and peak oil offers a ‘Faustian bargain’! I hope Friends will not support it. Nuclear power is not a sustainable alternative source of energy. We cannot, safely, rely on it to avoid radically reducing our energy consumption, switching to really renewable sources and effectively improving energy efficiency and conservation. We will contribute to the risk of terrorist attack and of war if we do so.
Nuclear power is not carbon neutral. Considerable CO2 emissions are produced by the mining of uranium, by the transport of nuclear materials, in the construction and dismantling of nuclear power stations, the processing of nuclear waste and the extra security needed to prevent theft of nuclear materials or terrorist attack. Energy Policy, the international journal, reported an analysis of over a hundred studies and concluded that the CO2 equivalent from nuclear power is about sixty-five grams per kilowatt hour.
Raw materials and toxic waste
The world’s supply of uranium, necessary for nuclear power, is limited. It is costly to mine, particularly to the mostly indigenous people on whose land it is mined. If the world becomes more dependent on nuclear power the point of ‘peak uranium’ will be reached. This will have similar disastrous consequences to ‘peak oil.’ Some analysts consider we have already passed peak uranium. Others put the point at which it becomes too expensive to mine and process at around 2035.
No safe way has been found to store the growing bulk of very toxic nuclear waste. It remains toxic for thousands of years: in the UK it is mostly stored above ground at Sellafield. There have been several accidents there and it is a particularly vulnerable target for terrorist attack. The trains carrying the waste from power stations are also vulnerable to terrorist attack or hijack. The ones carrying waste from Sizewell to Sellafield go through the Olympic site, close to Wanstead Meeting house. Just before a Nuclear Trains Action Groups demonstration along the line on 23 July, after several years of lobbying and demonstrations, we finally got official assurance that nuclear trains would be suspended during the two weeks of the Games.
Climate chaos
The UK’s nuclear power stations are located near the sea because water is needed for cooling. Rising sea levels and stronger storms, due to climate chaos, mean the risk of flooding is growing. Shoals of jellyfish, another consequence of climate change, have already caused Torness nuclear power station in Scotland to be closed down for two weeks. Following the incident at Fukushima, Germany, Switzerland and Japan, all advanced industrial economies, decided to phase out reliance on nuclear power. In a referendum in Italy in June ninety-five percent voted against nuclear power.
The seeds of war
Britain’s nuclear power industry was initially subsidised to provide plutonium and a respectable cover for the nuclear weapons programme. There continues to be a close relationship between nuclear power capability and nuclear weapons proliferation. This link is a particularly dangerous threat to peace in the Middle East. Iran’s nuclear power programme and Israel’s nuclear weapons, built using their nuclear power knowledge and materials, are a flash point.
Similar threats to peace are North Korea’s nuclear weapons armoury and those of India and Pakistan. The Cold War is long over but economic rivalry between the NATO countries and China could revive the threat of global nuclear war.
Reliance on nuclear power means jeopardising the lives of present and future generations to preserve an unsustainable level of energy consumption. It involves us helping to sow the seeds of war. We can live more simply and sustainably without it.
