Promise of nuclear energy deserves fresh scrutiny

Date

October 4, 2013

The need to cut through the dogma and opt for another power source is looming.

Like it or not, nuclear energy is the most scalable and abundant source of clean, non-CO2-emitting energy available. Photo: Getty Images

In the face of climate change and 25 years of abject failure to curb the growth of global greenhouse gas emissions, it’s incumbent upon all of us to be open to new approaches – even one as seemingly unthinkable to many as nuclear power.

Australia has one of the most active and influential anti-nuclear movements in the world, one which succeeded in having a prohibition of nuclear power plants written into federal legislation. At the same time, Australia’s per capita carbon dioxide emissions are rising faster than any other developed nation and have now approached being on par with my own country, the US. Like much of the world, the main fuel that lights Australian homes and powers Australian industry is coal. The difference is that Australia’s dependence on coal is nearly double the global average.

Like it or not, nuclear energy is the most scalable and abundant source of clean, non-CO2-emitting energy available. Yes, renewable energies such as wind and solar show great promise and Australians should be proud of their achievements in this area. But these technologies remain very limited in their ability to displace fossil fuels due to intermittency, scalability and the lack of a solution to large-scale energy storage. These limitations are real even in a country with such an abundance of wind and sun as yours.

Australia is particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change, as evidenced by the recent drought, heat waves, floods and fires. That so much of the population lives close to the coast makes rising sea levels a concern. Ocean acidification, a direct consequence of CO2 emissions, threatens the Great Barrier Reef. So there’s no question that Australians have an interest in tackling this problem. The commitments to renewable energy and carbon trading are examples of the seriousness with which it is being taken. But it’s not nearly enough, not by a long shot.

Humanity faces momentous challenges in rapidly moving from fossil energy. To avoid taking an open-minded second look at nuclear energy would be a tragic victory of ideology over common sense. It’s our children who will pay the price if we don’t take this moment, at least, to reconsider nuclear’s promise and potential.

There are, of course, a great many legitimate questions people have about nuclear technology: How does it stack up against the alternatives? How dangerous is it really? What do we do about nuclear waste? Can today’s nuclear power be improved? And finally, is nuclear power really necessary? My film Pandora’s Promise attempts to answer these questions through the personal narratives of noted environmentalists who, like me, once passionately opposed this technology (and who explain exactly why they once held that position), but who have now changed their minds about it in light of new information and dramatically changed circumstances.

The sad fact is that about 35 years ago the environmental movement in Australia, as in much of the world, was hijacked by anti-nuclear activists who had previously focused their attention on the abolition of nuclear weapons. Dr Helen Caldicott, whose work against nuclear weapons I have fully supported, redirected her ire, and that of her followers, on an easier target: nuclear power. Their mistaken assumption was that by stopping one they could stop the other. Rising CO2 emissions today are in part a legacy of this Cold War political movement and its moral crusade against the insanity of nuclear annihilation.

The anti-nuclear movement has successfully convinced a great many well-meaning people that we face a similar threat of annihilation from nuclear power plants. They cite Chernobyl and Fukushima as evidence of this. But what if they’re wrong? What if both accidents (horrific as they were) when put into perspective actually prove the opposite of what anti-nuclear groups contend? What if this extraordinarily powerful technology once associated with the existential threat that defined the Cold War, turned out to hold the key to solving the great existential threat of the current era?

It’s time to look again at nuclear energy, to unravel its potential, to face squarely its failures, and to chart a course towards a clean energy future that’s not obscured by the ideologies and dogma of a bygone era. I hope you’ll join me in sparking a necessary and vigorous national debate.

Robert Stone is an environmentalist and filmmaker. Pandora’s Promise will be shown at the Classic Cinema, Elsternwick, next Tuesday. There will be a Q&A with him after the screening.