THE NEED FOR NUCLEAR POWER

VIEWPOINT ON THE WORLD’S CHALLENGING ENERGY FUTURE

BY RICHARD RHODES AND DENIS BELLER

T
he world needs more
energy. Energy multiplies
human labor, increasing
productivity. It builds and lights
schools, purifies water, powers
farm machinery, drives sewing
machines and robot assemblers,
stores and moves information.
World population is steadily
increasing, having passed six
billion in 1999. Yet one-third of
that number — two billion
people — lack access to
electricity. Development
depends on energy, and the 43
alternative to development is
suffering: poverty, disease, and
death. Such conditions create
instability and the potential for
widespread violence. National
security therefore requires
developed nations to help
increase energy production in
their more populous developing
counterparts. For the sake of
safety as well as security, that
increased energy supply should
come from diverse sources.
“At a global level,” the
British Royal Society and
Royal Academy of Engineering with vigorous conservation, to support consumption at a
estimate in a 1999 report on world energy production mere one-third of today’s US
nuclear energy and climate would have to triple by 2050 per capita rate. The
change, “we can expect our
consumption of energy at least Mr. Rhodes is the author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb, Dark Sun,
to double in the next 50 years and other books. Mr. Beller is a nuclear engineer and Technical Staff
and to grow by a factor of up Member at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA. This article is
to five in the next 100 years as based on the authors’ essay in Foreign Affairs, Vol 70, No. 1 (January-
the world population increases February 2000) and is published here with permission of the New York
and as people seek to improve Times Syndicate.
their standards of living.” Even Photo: Maintaining electric power lines in Indonesia. (Credit:UNDP) IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000
 International Energy Agency plants, increasing capacity by secure than the fuels they have
(IEA) of the Organization for more than 100%. With 433 begun to replace, and their
Economic Cooperation and operating reactors worldwide, ascendance should be
Development (OECD) nuclear power is meeting the endorsed.
projects 65% growth in world annual electrical needs of more Even environmentalists
energy demand by 2020, two- than a billion people. should welcome the transition
thirds of that coming from In America and around the and reconsider their
developing countries. globe, nuclear safety and infatuation with renewable
“Given the levels of efficiency have improved energy sources.
consumption likely in the significantly since 1990. In
future,” the Royal Society and 1998, and again in 1999, unit CARBON-BASED
Royal Academy caution, “it capacity factor (the fraction of ENERGY
will be an immense challenge a power plant’s capacity that it Among sources of electric-
to meet the global demand for actually generates) for power generation, coal is the
energy without unsustainable operating reactors reached worst environmental offender.
long-term damage to the record levels. The average US (Petroleum, today’s dominant
environment.” That damage capacity factor in 1999 was source of energy, sustains
includes surface and air 85% for about 100 reactors, transportation, putting it in a
pollution and global warming. compared to 58% in 1980 and separate category.) Recent
66% in 1990. Despite a studies by the Harvard School
A CLEAN BREAK TO reduction in the number of of Public Health indicate that
THE FUTURE power plants, the US nuclear pollutants from coal-burning
Most of the world’s energy industry generated 9% more cause about 15,000 premature
today comes from petroleum nuclear electricity in 1999 than deaths annually in the United
(39%), coal (24%), natural gas in 1998. Average production States alone. Used to generate
(22%), hydroelectric power costs for nuclear energy are about a quarter of the world’s
44 (6.9%), and nuclear power now just 1.9 cents per primary energy, coal-burning
(6.3%). Although oil and coal kilowatt-hour (kWh), while releases amounts of toxic waste
still dominate, their market electricity produced from gas too immense to contain safely.
fraction began declining costs 3.4 cents per kWh. Such waste is either dispersed
decades ago. Meanwhile, By improving capacity and directly into the air or is
natural gas and nuclear power performance alone, nuclear solidified and dumped. Some
have steadily increased their power already has made the is even mixed into construction
shares and should continue to largest contribution of any materials.
do so. American industry to meeting Besides emitting noxious
Contrary to the assertions of the US Kyoto commitment to chemicals in the form of gases
anti-nuclear organizations, limiting carbon dioxide releases or toxic particles — sulfur and
nuclear power is neither dead into the atmosphere. nitrogen oxides (components of
nor dying. France generates Meanwhile, radiation exposure acid rain and smog), arsenic,
about 75% of its electricity to workers and waste produced mercury, cadmium, selenium,
with nuclear power; Belgium, per unit of energy have hit new lead, boron, chromium, copper,
58%; Sweden, 47%; lows. fluorine, molybdenum, nickel,
Switzerland, 36%; Japan, Because major, complex vanadium, zinc, carbon
36%; Spain, 31%; the United technologies take more than monoxide and dioxide, and
Kingdom, 29%; and the half a century to spread around other greenhouse gases — coal-
United States (the largest the world, natural gas will fired power plants are also the
producer of nuclear energy in share the lead in power world’s major source of
the world), 20%. The Republic generation with nuclear power radioactive releases into the
of Korea and China have over the next hundred years. environment. Uranium and
announced ambitious plans to Which of the two will thorium, mildly radioactive
expand their nuclear-power command the greater share elements ubiquitous in the
capabilities — in the case of remains to be determined. But earth’s crust, are both released
IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000 Korea, by building 16 new both are cleaner and more when coal is burned.
Radioactive radon gas, Hydropower is not even a true and greenhouse gas. A global
produced when uranium in the renewable, since dams solar-energy system without
earth’s crust decays and eventually silt in. Most fossil or nuclear backup would
normally confined renewables collect extremely also be dangerously vulnerable
underground, is released when diluted energy, requiring large to drops in solar radiation
coal is mined. A 1000- areas of land and masses of from volcanic events such as
megawatt-electric (MWe) coal- collectors to concentrate. the 1815 eruption of
fired power plant releases about Manufacturing solar Tambura, which released 40
100 times as much radioactivity collectors, pouring concrete cubic kilometers of ash into
into the environment as a for fields of windmills, and the atmosphere. This ash
comparable nuclear plant. drowning many square miles significantly reduced solar
Worldwide releases of uranium of land behind dams cause radiation for several years
and thorium from coal-burning damage and pollution. afterward, which resulted in
total about 37,300 tonnes Photovoltaic cells used for widespread crop failure during
(metric tons) annually, with solar collection are large the “year without a summer”
about 7300 tonnes coming semiconductors; their that followed.
from the United States. Since manufacture produces highly Wind farms, besides
uranium and thorium are toxic waste metals and requiring millions of pounds
potent nuclear fuels, burning solvents that require special of concrete and steel to build
coal also wastes more potential technology for disposal. A (and thus creating huge
energy than it produces. 1000-MWe solar electric plant amounts of waste materials),
The overlooked radioactive would generate 6850 tonnes are inefficient, with low
waste that is generated while of hazardous waste from (because intermittent)
burning coal emphasizes the metals-processing alone over a capacity. They also cause
political disadvantages under 30-year lifetime. A visual and noise pollution and
which nuclear power labors. comparable solar thermal are mighty slayers of birds.
Current laws force nuclear plant (using mirrors focused Several hundred birds of prey, 45
utilities, unlike coal plants, to on a central tower) would including dozens of golden
invest in expensive systems that require metals for eagles, are killed every year by
limit the release of construction that would a single California wind farm;
radioactivity. Nuclear fuel is generate 435,000 tonnes of more eagles have been killed
not efficiently recycled in the manufacturing waste, of by wind turbines than were
United States because of which 16,300 tonnes would lost in the disastrous Exxon
proliferation fears. These be contaminated with lead Valdez oil spill. The National
factors have warped the and chromium and be Audubon Society has
economics of nuclear power considered hazardous. launched a campaign to save
development and created a A global solar-energy system the California condor from a
politically difficult waste- would consume at least 20% proposed wind farm to be
disposal problem. If coal of the world’s known iron built north of Los Angeles. A
utilities were forced to assume resources. It would require a wind farm equivalent in
similar costs, coal electricity century to build and a output and capacity to a
would no longer be cheaper substantial fraction of annual 1000-MWe fossil-fuel or
than nuclear. world iron production to nuclear plant would require
maintain. The energy the installation of more than
RENEWABLE ENERGY: necessary to manufacture 4000 large windmills and
CHANGING REALITIES sufficient solar collectors to occupy several hundred
Renewable sources of energy cover a half-million square thousand square miles of land
— hydroelectric, solar, wind, miles of the earth’s surface and and, even with substantial
geothermal, and biomass — to deliver the electricity subsidies and ignoring hidden
have high capital-investment through long-distance pollution costs, would
costs and significant, if usually transmission systems would produce electricity at double
unacknowledged, itself add grievously to the or triple the cost of fossil
environmental consequences. global burden of pollution fuels. IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000
 Although at least one-quarter to claim no more than 5% to thirds.” Replacing coal with
of the world’s potential for 8% by 2020. In the United nuclear generation would have
hydropower has already been States, which leads the world reduced overall emissions even
developed, hydroelectric power in renewable energy more.
— produced by dams that generation, such production Despite the massive
submerge large areas of land, actually declined by 9.4% investment, conservation and
displace rural populations, from 1997 to 1998: hydro by non-hydro renewables remain
change river ecology, kill fish, 9.2%, geothermal by 5.4%, stubbornly uncompetitive and
and risk catastrophic collapse wind by 50.5%, and solar by contribute only marginally to
— has understandably lost the 27.7%. US energy supplies. If the most
backing of environmentalists in Like the dream of controlled prosperous nation in the world
recent years. The US Export- thermonuclear fusion, then, cannot afford them, who can?
Import Bank was responding the reality of a world run on Not China, evidently, which
in part to environmental pristine energy generated from expects to generate less than
lobbying when it denied renewables continues to 1% of its commercial energy
funding to China’s 18,000- recede, despite expensive, from non-hydro renewables in
MWe Three Gorges project. highly subsidized research and 2025. Coal and oil will still
Generating hydroelectric development. The 1997 US account for the bulk of China’s
energy can actually release federal R&D investment per energy supply in that year
more greenhouse gases into the thousand kWh was only 5 unless developed countries
atmosphere than does fossil cents for nuclear and coal, 58 offer incentives to convince the
generation: vegetation cents for oil, and 41 cents for world’s most populous nation
submerged in the water gas, but was more than $4700 to change its plans.
impounded behind many dams for wind and $17,000 for
decomposes anaerobically, photovoltaics. This massive COMPARING THE
which releases copious public investment in CHOICES
46 quantities of methane, a worse renewables would have been Natural gas has many virtues as
greenhouse gas than carbon better spent making coal a fuel compared to coal or oil,
dioxide. plants and automobiles and its share of the world’s
Meanwhile, geothermal cleaner. energy will assuredly grow in
sources — which exploit the According to Robert Bradley the first half of the 21st
internal heat of the earth of Houston’s Institute for century. But its supply is
emerging in geyser areas or Energy Research, US limited and unevenly
under volcanoes — are conservation efforts and non- distributed, it is expensive as a
inherently limited and often hydroelectric renewables have power source compared to coal
coincide with scenic sites benefited from a cumulative or uranium, and it pollutes the
(such as Yellowstone National 20-year taxpayer investment air. A 1000-MWe natural gas
Park in the USA) that of some $30-$40 billion — plant releases 5.5 tonnes of
conservationists “the largest governmental sulfur oxides per day, 21
understandably want to peacetime energy expenditure tonnes of nitrogen oxides, 1.6
preserve. in US history.” And Bradley tonnes of carbon monoxide,
Because of these and other estimates that “the $5.8 and 0.9 tonnes of particulates.
disadvantages, organizations billion spent by the In the United States, energy
such as the World Energy Department of Energy on production from natural gas
Council and the IEA predict wind and solar subsidies” released about 5.5 billion
that hydroelectric generation alone could have paid for tonnes of waste in 1994.
will continue to account for “replacing between 5000 and Natural gas fires and explosions
no more than its present 6.9% 10,000 MWe of the nation’s are also significant risks. A
share of the world’s primary dirtiest coal capacity with gas- single mile of gas pipeline three
energy supply, while all other fired combined-cycle units, feet in diameter at a pressure of
renewables, even though which would have reduced 1000 pounds per square inch
robustly subsidized, will move carbon dioxide emissions by (psi) contains the equivalent of
IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000 from their present 0.5% share between one-third and two- two-thirds of a kiloton of
explosive energy; a million coal, more than 300,000 States because of widespread
miles of such large pipelines tonnes from oil, and 200,000 fear disproportionate to the
lace the earth. tonnes from natural gas. reality of risk. But it is not an
The great advantage of In contrast, a 1000-MWe engineering problem, as
nuclear power is its ability to nuclear plant releases no advanced projects in France,
wrest enormous energy from a noxious gases or other Sweden, and Japan
small volume of fuel. Nuclear pollutants* and much less demonstrate. The World
fission, transforming matter radioactivity per capita than is Health Organization has
directly into energy, is several encountered from airline estimated that indoor and
million times as energetic as travel, a home smoke detector, outdoor air pollution cause
chemical burning, which or a television set. It produces some three million deaths per
merely breaks chemical bonds. about 30 tonnes of high-level year. Substituting small,
One tonne of nuclear fuel waste (spent fuel) and 800 properly contained volumes of
produces energy equivalent to tonnes of low- and nuclear waste for vast,
2 to 3 million tonnes of fossil intermediate-level waste — dispersed amounts of toxic
fuel. Burning 1 kilogram of about 20 cubic meters in all wastes from fossil fuels would
firewood can generate 1 when compacted (roughly, the produce so obvious an
kilowatt-hour of electricity; 1 volume of two automobiles). improvement in public health
kg of coal, 3 kWh; 1 kg of oil, All the operating nuclear plants that it is astonishing that
4 kWh. But 1 kg of uranium in the world produce some physicians have not already
fuel in a modern light-water 3000 cubic meters of waste demanded such a conversion.
reactor generates 400,000 kWh annually. By comparison, US The production cost of
of electricity, and if that industry generates annually nuclear electricity generated
uranium is recycled, 1 kg can about 50,000,000 cubic meters from existing US plants is
generate more than 7,000,000 of solid toxic waste. already fully competitive with
kWh. These spectacular The high-level waste is electricity from fossil fuels,
differences in volume help intensely radioactive, of course although new nuclear power is 47
explain the vast difference in (the low-level waste can be less somewhat more expensive. But
the environmental impacts of radioactive than coal ash, this higher price tag is
nuclear versus fossil fuels. which is used to make concrete deceptive. Large nuclear power
Running a 1000-MWe power and gypsum — both of which plants require larger capital
plant for a year requires 2000 are incorporated into building investments than comparable
train cars of coal or 10 materials). But thanks to its coal or gas plants only because
supertankers of oil but only 12 small volume and the fact that nuclear utilities are required to
cubic meters of natural it is not released into the build and maintain costly
uranium. Out the other end of environment, this high-level systems to keep their
fossil-fuel plants, even those waste can be meticulously radioactivity from the
with pollution-control systems, sequestered behind multiple environment.
come thousands of tonnes of barriers. Waste from coal, If fossil-fuel plants were
noxious gases, particulates, and dispersed across the landscape similarly required to sequester
heavy-metal-bearing (and in smoke or buried near the the pollutants they generate,
radioactive) ash, plus solid surface, remains toxic forever. they would cost significantly
hazardous waste — up to Radioactive nuclear waste more than nuclear power
500,000 tonnes of sulfur from decays steadily, losing 99% of plants do. The European
its toxicity after 600 years — Union and the IAEA have
*Uranium is refined and processed into well within the range of determined that “for equivalent
fuel assemblies today using coal energy, human experience with amounts of energy generation,
which does of course release pollutants. custody and maintenance, as coal and oil plants...owing to
If nuclear power were made available evidenced by structures such as their large emissions and huge
for process heat or if fuel assemblies were the Roman Pantheon and fuel and transport
recycled, this source of manufacturing Notre Dame Cathedral. requirements, have the highest
pollution would be eliminated or greatly Nuclear waste disposal is a externality costs as well as
reduced. political problem in the United equivalent lives lost. The IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000
 external costs are some ten power generation presents at environmental damage locally,
times higher than for a nuclear worst a negligible risk. including 31 deaths, most
power plant and can be a Authorities on coal geology from radiation exposure.
significant fraction of and engineering make the same Thyroid cancer, which could
generation costs.” In equivalent argument about low-level have been prevented with
lives lost per gigawatt radioactivity from coal- prompt iodine prophylaxis, has
generated (that is, loss of life burning; a US Geological increased in Ukrainian
expectancy from exposure to Survey fact sheet, for example, children exposed to fallout.
pollutants), coal kills 37 people concludes that “radioactive More than 800 cases have been
annually; oil, 32; gas, 2; elements in coal and fly ash diagnosed and several thousand
nuclear, 1. Compared to should not be sources of more are projected; although
nuclear power, in other words, alarm.” Yet nuclear power the disease is treatable, three
fossil fuels (and renewables) development has been children have died. LNT-based
have enjoyed a free ride with hobbled, and nuclear waste calculations project 3420
respect to protection of the disposal unnecessarily delayed, cancer deaths in Chernobyl-
environment and public health by limits not visited upon the area residents and cleanup
and safety. coal industry. crews. The Chernobyl reactor
Even the estimate of one life No technological system is lacked a containment
lost to nuclear power is immune to accident. Recent structure, a fundamental safety
questionable. Such an estimate dam overflows and failures in system that is required on
depends on whether or not, as Italy and India each resulted in Western reactors. Post-accident
the long-standing “linear no- several thousand fatalities. calculations indicate that such
threshold” theory (LNT) Coal-mine accidents, oil- and a structure would have
maintains, exposure to gas-plant fires, and pipeline confined the explosion and
amounts of radiation explosions typically kill thus the radioactivity, in which
considerably less than hundreds per incident. The case no injuries or deaths
48 preexisting natural levels 1984 Bhopal chemical plant would have occurred.
increases the risk of cancer. disaster caused some 3000 These numbers, for the
Although LNT dictates immediate deaths and worst ever nuclear power
elaborate and expensive poisoned several hundred accident, are remarkably low
confinement regimes for thousand people. According to compared to major accidents
nuclear power operations and the US Environmental in other industries. More than
waste disposal, there is no Protection Agency, between 40 years of commercial nuclear
evidence that low-level 1987 and 1996 more than power operations demonstrate
radiation exposure increases 600,000 accidental releases of that nuclear power is much
cancer risk. In fact, there is toxic chemicals in the United safer than fossil-fuel systems in
good evidence that it does not. States killed a total of 2565 terms of industrial accidents,
There is even good evidence people and injured 22,949. environmental damage, health
that exposure to low doses of By comparison, nuclear effects, and long-term risk.
radioactivity improves health accidents have been few and
and lengthens life, probably by minimal. The recent, much- REASSESSING
stimulating the immune reported accident in Japan RECYCLING
system much as vaccines do occurred not at a power plant Most of the uranium used in
(the best study, of background but at a facility processing fuel nuclear reactors is inert, a non-
radon levels in hundreds of for a research reactor. It caused fissile product unavailable for
thousands of homes in more no deaths or injuries to the use in weapons. Operating
than 90% of US counties, public. As for the Chernobyl reactors, however, breed fissile
found lung cancer rates explosion, it resulted from plutonium that could be used
decreasing significantly with human error in operating a in bombs, and therefore the
increasing radon levels among fundamentally faulty reactor commercialization of nuclear
both smokers and design that could not have power has raised concerns
nonsmokers). So low-level been licensed in the West. It about the spread of weapons.
IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000 radioactivity from nuclear caused severe human and In 1977, President Carter
deferred indefinitely the nonproliferation regime that reactors that would receive,
recycling of “spent” nuclear will remain the cornerstone of control, and process all fuel
fuel, citing proliferation risks. efforts to prevent the spread of discharged from reactors
This decision effectively ended nuclear weapons.” throughout the world,
nuclear recycling in the United Ironically, burying spent fuel generating electricity and
States, even though such without extracting its reducing spent fuel to short-
recycling reduces the volume plutonium through lived nuclear waste ready for
and radiotoxicity of nuclear reprocessing would actually permanent geological storage.
waste and could extend nuclear increase the long-term risk of
fuel supplies for thousands of nuclear proliferation, since the THE NEXT NEW
years. Other nations assessed decay of less-fissile and more- THING
the risks differently and the radioactive isotopes in spent A new generation of small,
majority did not follow the US fuel after one to three centuries modular power plants —
example. France and the improves the explosive qualities competitive with natural gas
United Kingdom currently of the plutonium it contains, and designed for safety,
reprocess spent fuel; Russia is making it more attractive for proliferation resistance, and
stockpiling fuel and separated weapons use. Besides extending ease of operation — will be
plutonium for jump-starting the world’s uranium resources necessary to extend the benefits
future fast-reactor fuel cycles; almost indefinitely, recycling of nuclear power to smaller
Japan has begun using recycled would make it possible to developing countries that lack
uranium and plutonium convert plutonium to useful a nuclear infrastructure. The
mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel in its energy while breaking it down Department of Energy has
reactors and recently approved into shorter-lived, awarded funding to three
the construction of a new nonfissionable, nonthreatening designs for such “fourth-
nuclear power plant to use nuclear waste. generation” plants. A South
100% MOX fuel by 2007. Hundreds of tons of African utility, Eskom, has
Although power-reactor weapons-grade plutonium, announced plans to market a 49
plutonium theoretically can be which cost the nuclear modular gas-cooled pebble-bed
used to make nuclear superpowers billions of dollars reactor that does not require
explosives, spent fuel is to produce, have become emergency core-cooling
refractory, highly radioactive, military surplus in the past systems and physically cannot
and beyond the capacity of decade. Rather than burying “melt down.” Eskom estimates
terrorists to process. Weapons some of this strategically that the reactor will produce
made from reactor-grade worrisome but energetically electricity at around 1.5 cents
plutonium would be hot, valuable material — as per kWh, which is cheaper
unstable, and of uncertain Washington has proposed — it than electricity from a
yield. India has extracted should be recycled into nuclear combined-cycle gas plant. The
weapons plutonium from a fuel. An international system Massachusetts Institute of
Canadian heavy-water reactor to recycle and manage such Technology and the Idaho
and bars inspection of some fuel would prevent covert National Engineering and
dual-purpose reactors it has proliferation. As envisioned by Environmental Laboratory are
built. But no plutonium has Edward Arthur, Paul developing a similar design to
ever been diverted from British Cunningham, and Richard supply high-temperature heat
or French reprocessing facilities Wagner of the Los Alamos for industrial processes such as
or fuel shipments for weapons National Laboratory, such a hydrogen generation and
production; IAEA inspections system would combine desalinization.
are effective in preventing such internationally monitored Petroleum is used today
diversions. The risk of retrievable storage, the primarily for transportation,
proliferation, the IAEA has processing of all separated but the internal combustion
concluded, “is not zero and plutonium into MOX fuel for engine has been refined to its
would not become zero even if power reactors, and, in the limit. Further reductions in
nuclear power ceased to exist. longer term, advanced transportation pollution can
It is a continually strengthened integrated materials-processing come only from abandoning IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000
 and licensing modular nuclear
power systems to developing
nations.
According to Arnulf
Gruebler, Nebojsa
Nakicenovic, and David
Victor, who study the
dynamics of energy
technologies, “the share of
energy supplied by electricity is
growing rapidly in most
countries and worldwide.”
Throughout history,
humankind has gradually
decarbonized its dominant
fuels, moving steadily away
petroleum and developing the continuing buildup of from the more polluting,
nonpolluting power systems carbon in the atmosphere. In carbon-rich sources. Thus the
for cars and trucks. Recharging the meantime, fuel cells using world has gone from coal
batteries for electric cars will natural gas could significantly (which has one hydrogen atom
simply transfer pollution from reduce air pollution. per carbon atom and was
mobile to centralized sources dominant from 1880 to 1950)
unless the centralized source of POWERING THE to oil (with two hydrogens per
electricity is nuclear. Fuel cells, FUTURE carbon, dominant from 1950
which are now approaching To meet the world’s growing to today). Natural gas (four
commercialization, may be a need for energy, the Royal hydrogens per carbon) is
50 better solution. Because fuel Society and Royal Academy steadily increasing its market
cells generate electricity report proposes “the formation share. But nuclear fission
directly from gaseous or liquid of an international body for produces no carbon at all.
fuels, they can be refueled energy research and Physical reality — not
along the way, much as present development, funded by arguments about corporate
internal combustion engines contributions from individual greed, hypothetical risks,
are. When operated on pure nations on the basis of GDP or radiation exposure, or waste
hydrogen, fuel cells produce total national energy disposal — ought to inform
only water as a waste product. consumption.” The body decisions vital to the future of
Since hydrogen can be would be “a funding agency the world. Because diversity and
generated from water using supporting research, redundancy are important for
heat or electricity, one can development and safety and security, renewable
envisage a minimally polluting demonstrators elsewhere, not a energy sources ought to retain a
energy infrastructure, using research center itself.” Its place in the energy economy of
hydrogen generated by nuclear budget might build to an the century to come. But nuclear
power for transportation, annual level of some $25 power should be central. Despite
nuclear electricity and process billion, “roughly 1% of the its outstanding record, it has
heat for most other total global energy budget.” If instead been relegated by its
applications, and natural gas it truly wants to develop opponents to the same twilight
and renewable systems as efficient and responsible energy zone of contentious ideological
backups. supplies, such a body should conflict as abortion and
Such a major commitment to focus on the nuclear option, on evolution. It deserves better.
nuclear power could not only establishing a secure Nuclear power is
halt but eventually even reverse international nuclear-fuel environmentally safe, practical,
storage and reprocessing and affordable. It is not the
Photo: Forsmark nuclear plant in system, and on providing problem — it is one of the best
IAEA BULLETIN, 42/2/2000 Sweden. Credit: Göran Hansson expertise for siting, financing, solutions. ❐