iraszl's picture

The Pro-Nukes Environmental Movement

The North Anna Nuclear Power Station near Mineral, Va. Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

After Fukushima, is nuclear energy still the best way to fight climate change?

James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientist, is one of the most impassioned and trusted voices on global warming. People listen closely to what he says about how drastically the climate is changing.

But when Hansen suggests what to do about it, many of those same people tune him out. Some even roll their eyes. What message is he peddling that few seemingly want to hear? It’s twofold: No. 1, solar and wind power cannot meet the world’s voracious demand for energy, especially given the projected needs of emerging economies like India and China, and No. 2, nuclear power is our best hope to get off of fossil fuels, which are primarily responsible for the heat-trapping gases cooking the planet.

Many in the environmental community say that renewable energy is a viable solution to the climate problem. So do numerous energy wonks, including two researchers who penned a 2009 cover story in Scientific American asserting that “wind, water, and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world’s energy” by 2030. Hansen calls claims like this the equivalent of “believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.”

He’s not the only environmental luminary who is bullish on nuclear power. Last year, Columbia University’s Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute, echoed Hansen’s argument. A number of other champions of nuclear power have stepped forward in recent years, from Australian climate scientist Barry Brook to American writer Gwyneth Cravens, author of Power to Save the World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy. A breakaway group in the traditionally no-nukes environmental movement has also begun advocating passionately for nuclear power. That story is the subject of a new documentary that is premiering this month at the Sundance Festival.

1 Comment

AlexC's picture

Hansen & others are right

Hansen & others are right about nuclear power, even present LWRs, based on a 1946 patent!

And, if we move to MSRs, with or without Thorium, we do far better, even able to extract decades of power from existing LWR 'spent' fuel -- it ain't "spent".

We need folks like Hansen to call folks like McKibben and tell them to wake up and stop ignoring us who write them to wake up.
;]
Fukushima actually displayed the safety of even old LWR technology -- only TEPCO/NISA collusion and non-nuclear design errors ruined what would have been a non event. The Japanese govt. had hands in it too, since it had ignored all those ancient stone tablets studding Sendai that said "Don't build here". Wonder how those ancestral stone carvers would feel seeing the results of such poor land-use policy?