Email List
Most Popular This Week
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Picture of the Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- Bradley Manning is Off Limits at SF Gay Pride Parade, but Corporate Sleaze is Embraced
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- The Life and Death of Words, People, and Even Nature
- You and Your Family Are Guinea Pigs for the Chemical Corporations
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nuclear Storm Gathers as Climate Change Experts Meet
BANGKOK, Thailand - Few issues are as divisive as nuclear power, and the furore over its use threatens to resurface as leading scientists meet in Thailand to thrash out a plan to reduce the impact of climate change.
Nuclear supporters hail it a "clean" energy that will help lessen the world's dependence on the polluting fossil fuels, gas, oil and coal, which spew damaging greenhouse gasses into the air and drive global warming.
The potential of nuclear energy to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions is expected to be mentioned in a report being drawn up in Bangkok this week by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN's top authority on the issue.
"There has so far been a tendency both at the IPCC and (Kyoto Protocol talks) to duck the nuclear issue, but they will not be able to duck it forever," said Malcolm Grimston, a nuclear policy expert and associate fellow at London-based think tank Chatham House.
The arguments against nuclear energy have changed little since the heyday of the anti-nuclear movement in the 1970s, with environmental groups such as Greenpeace and WWF labelling it unsafe and unclean.
Stephan Singer, WWF's European head of climate and energy policy, told AFP on the sidelines of the IPCC conference that his group did not consider it a sustainable or cost effective alternative to fossil fuels.
Greenpeace also maintains that nuclear is never an option, but boundaries have recently blurred between nuclear friends and foes.
A number of gurus of the environmental movement, including Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore and James Lovelock, one of the best-known figures of the green movement, have come out in favour of nuclear power.
"There are some very important people who are now speaking positively about nuclear energy, so I think the debate is at a different place (from where it was) three or four years ago," said Richard Tarasofsky, head of the energy, environment and development programme at Chatham House.
This debate may be played out behind the closed doors of the IPCC meeting, where scientists and diplomats are likely to argue their governments' corners.
An early draft of the report's summary seen by AFP lists nuclear power as one of a range of technologies available to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Greenpeace says there are currently 441 nuclear power reactors in 31 countries, and leading the pack in developing or using nuclear energy are the United States, France and Japan -- with India and China close behind.
China has said it plans to build as many as three nuclear power plants a year over the next decade, while India last year reached an initial agreement with the United States, giving it access to US nuclear fuel and technology.
Poorer countries such as Thailand, the Philippines and Egypt are also pondering going nuclear as the demand for energy increases, but analysts say there remain many unresolved issues, not least the cost.
"Traditionally nuclear energy has had to receive major subsidies from governments in order to be financially viable," said Tarasofsky.
Disposing of nuclear waste also remains a problem.
"We do not have a single depository for radioactive toxic waste which is accepted by geologists in the world," WWF's Singer said.
The nuclear power debate is not limited to the environment.
Charles Ferguson, science and technology fellow at Washington-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the administration of US president George W. Bush was pushing nuclear as one solution to climate change.
But at the same time it denounces Iran and North Korea over claims that they are using civilian nuclear programmes as a cover for developing weapons, leaving the US open to accusations of double standards.
"The White House wants to play favourites in defining some countries as 'good guys' who are allowed the full access to nuclear technologies... and others as 'bad guys' who are denied access to all of those technologies," Ferguson told AFP by email.
IPCC delegates said that although nuclear power would be discussed, they insisted it was merely one piece of the climate change puzzle.
"The message that comes out here is that there is not a silver bullet, (but) a whole range of different methodologies and technologies," David Warrilow, head of the UK delegation, told AFP here.
Copyright © 2007 AFP.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



10 Comments so far
Show AllI bet we can build a million solar-thermal units per year. Like these: http://www.sunmachine.de/english/main.html
Whoops, not made in the US. But these are:
http://tinyurl.com/23rn9s
http://www.stirlingenergy.com/
Constuction of the engines is similiar to automobile engines. I would also point out that unlike solar panels these units can store thermal energy in the ground or in molten salt chambers for use when the sun isn't shining.
One other advantage is that these sytems will produce more power per hour of sunlight in the winter than in the summer due to a greater thermal gap between the hot and cold sides of the engine.
I know of one place where most geologist would agree to store nuclear waste: http://tinyurl.com/2gjq7m
It's on a stable bit of geology that hasn't experienced an earthquake in known history. The local geology is known for it's salt domes that have held crude oil for millions of years without release.
Sounds like a good site to me.
in the documantary "Crude Awakening" on peak oil, one professor stated that something like 10,000 nuclear power plants would have to be constructed to be able to match the power othat fossil fuels are currently producing. Currently. With a population of 6.5 billion. He then went on to say that Uranium mining would deplete it's resources in "a couple of decades". How long is it going to take to builkd those 3 nuclear power plants in China a again? What will the population be then? How much time do we have? The clock is ticking.....
Patrick Moore was not a founder of GreenPeace. A shill by any other name.... Too bad the author of this story doesn't read Harvey Wasserman's articles.
http://www.freepublictransit.org
think about it... take a few minutes this time.
We are already exhausting our uranium supplies, and we may be past peak uranium. Production dropped 5% in 2006. Good riddance.
Whatever happens, with an exponentially growing population, the environmentalists will always eventually be right. We should collect every piece of content where people take a stand one way or the other on environmentalism and preserve it for record. Then we should never let them forget!
Patrick Moore has to pay the rent.
His clients include:
# B.C. Hazardous Waste Management Corporation (1991-92);
# Moore established the B.C. Carbon Project – 'working to achieve a common understanding of the carbon budget and the implications of global climate change for B.C' - which received a $C145,000 grant in May 1991. Moores involvement ended in 1994;
# on retainer to the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association to tour European countries to counter advocacy by environmental groups for a boycott of British Columbian forest products (1992-96);
# Westcoast Energy and BC Gas 1993-1994 "to design a public consultation process to address greenhouse gas emissions for the natural gas sector in B.C";
# BHP Minerals to facilitate a round table on proposals to use the abandoned Island Copper mine as a landfill site (1993-94);
# Director and Vice-President, Environment and Government Affairs for Waterfurnace International 1995-1998 to "build awareness of the benefits of renewable earth energy technology". According to his website, Moore remains a member of the Board of Directors.
# Consultant to the National Association of Forest Industries in Australia for a national tour defending the logging of native forests (1996);
# consultant to the Canadian Mining Association and the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada "on the role of biodiversity in environmental policy in the mining industry" (1996);
# consultant to BHP Minerals (Canada) Ltd. to author a paper on the environmental impact of submarine tailings disposal over the 23-year life of the Island Copper Mine on Vancouver Island (1996);
# speaker for numerous timber industry associations including the American Forest and Paper Association, the Council of European Paper Industries, State Forestry Associations in Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, New York, Maine, and Florida, the National Hardwood Lumber Association (1998-1999);
# gave evidence in support of bio-technology before the New Zealand Royal Commission on Genetic Modification and undertook at tour of Southeast Asia, hosted by the International Service for Assistance with Agri-Biotech Applications. "Led seminars in Bangkok and Jakarta on the benefits of biotechnology for farmers in developing countries", Moore's website states (2000);
# speaker for groups including the Filipino Society of Foresters and the Agri-Food Canada (2000); and
# consultant to the largest manufacturer of PVC in Canada, IPEX, to "intervene in the environmental policy of the Toronto 2008 Olympic Bid". The environmental guidelines adopted for the Sydney Olympics recommended against the use of PVC wherever possible.
Thailand wants nukes. Will this allow expansion of their sex based economy? 25% of their economy is based on sex - even with children. I am sure that the government that turns a blind eye to perverts and pedophiles will provide the same quality regulation and inspection of nukes.
The question of energy production is a question of unlimited growth, increasing demand, sustainability, birth control or war.
ALL THESE ENERGY SORCES ARE MUTE
UNLESS THE POPULATION EXPLOSION
IS CONDTAINED.