Nuclear power will not solve climate change: Report
The World Today - Nuclear power will not solve climate change: Report
The World Today - Thursday, 8 September , 2005 12:48:00
Reporter: Toni Hassan
ELEANOR HALL: An Australian coalition of environment and public health groups have today released a report challenging the Federal Government's view that nuclear power is an environmentally sound energy source for the future.
The report has been launched in Canberra by the former Ambassador to South Korea and nuclear proliferation expert Richard Broinowski.
Professor Broinowski says nuclear power is no solution to climate change, and that the issue is being used as a smokescreen by the Federal Government to boost Australia's uranium exports, as Toni Hassan reports.
TONI HASSAN: Against the backdrop of Australia starting negotiations to export uranium to China, the Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has in recent days been talking up the case for Australia to dramatically boost uranium exports, espousing the environmental merits of nuclear energy to contain global warming.
In a speech last Thursday Mr Downer said Australia has a responsibility to sell uranium to nuclear energy producing countries.
And he questioned the logic of people concerned about greenhouse gas emissions while opposed to nuclear energy.
ALEXANDER DOWNER: Frankly though, from the view of logic, one could comprehend someone not caring about cutting greenhouse gases and being opposed to nuclear energy, but it takes quite a challenge of the intellectual imagination to say you're concerned about greenhouse gases and you're opposed to nuclear energy.
TONI HASSAN: It's not just the Foreign Minister talking up nuclear power as a potential fix for climate change.
Science Minister Brendan Nelson has been saying he wants Australia to become a nuclear power producer to slash carbon emissions.
And the Government is backed by pro-nuclear scientists and the Minerals Council, groups that revive their arguments why nuclear power is better for world health than power derived from fossil fuels.
Well, the Federal Ministers and their allies "are wrong" according to an alliance of environment and public health groups led by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.
The alliance has released a report questioning the environmental or other merits of nuclear energy.
Launching the report this morning was Former Ambassador to South Korea and nuclear proliferation expert Richard Broinowski.
Professor Broinowski says today's report makes it clear nuclear energy is not a practical or safe solution to climate change.
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: It's quite clear from the figures and from all the work that's been done that it will never provide a swing fuel of sufficient quantity to make any effect on the greenhouse gas problem that we have.
TONI HASSAN: Shouldn't it be though, part of the mix?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: It could be if we have some practical solutions to some of the backend problems and to the enormous amount of energy required to enrich uranium, yes.
But I mean only one third of greenhouse gases are caused by the production of electricity, and only 15 to 20 per cent of that is from nuclear power. You'd have to have a huge number of reactors to make any difference on the energy mix, and they'd take a long time to build, it'd take at least 10 years so…
TONI HASSAN: What, a doubling of global nuclear power for any sort of significant impact, or much more than that?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: In effect we've got 440 reactors now, we'd need at least another thousand of ungigawattage, so…
TONI HASSAN: And is that at all feasible?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: No, it's really not.
TONI HASSAN: Under pressure to limit greenhouse gas emissions, power utilities and governments in the United States and some European countries are reconsidering their moratoriums on constructing new nuclear reactors.
Mark Wakeham with Greenpeace says Australia should not cash in on the world's growing appetite for uranium.
MARK WAKEHAM: This current discussion about nuclear power being some sort of solution to climate change is really a distraction.
Real action would actually mean moving to a clean energy future for Australia, rejecting both coal and nuclear and supporting renewable energy – things like solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal power for Australia and really making the shift and breaking our addiction to coal.
ELEANOR HALL: Greenpeace energy campaigner Mark Wakeham ending that report from Toni Hassan.
The World Today - Thursday, 8 September , 2005 12:48:00
Reporter: Toni Hassan
ELEANOR HALL: An Australian coalition of environment and public health groups have today released a report challenging the Federal Government's view that nuclear power is an environmentally sound energy source for the future.
The report has been launched in Canberra by the former Ambassador to South Korea and nuclear proliferation expert Richard Broinowski.
Professor Broinowski says nuclear power is no solution to climate change, and that the issue is being used as a smokescreen by the Federal Government to boost Australia's uranium exports, as Toni Hassan reports.
TONI HASSAN: Against the backdrop of Australia starting negotiations to export uranium to China, the Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has in recent days been talking up the case for Australia to dramatically boost uranium exports, espousing the environmental merits of nuclear energy to contain global warming.
In a speech last Thursday Mr Downer said Australia has a responsibility to sell uranium to nuclear energy producing countries.
And he questioned the logic of people concerned about greenhouse gas emissions while opposed to nuclear energy.
ALEXANDER DOWNER: Frankly though, from the view of logic, one could comprehend someone not caring about cutting greenhouse gases and being opposed to nuclear energy, but it takes quite a challenge of the intellectual imagination to say you're concerned about greenhouse gases and you're opposed to nuclear energy.
TONI HASSAN: It's not just the Foreign Minister talking up nuclear power as a potential fix for climate change.
Science Minister Brendan Nelson has been saying he wants Australia to become a nuclear power producer to slash carbon emissions.
And the Government is backed by pro-nuclear scientists and the Minerals Council, groups that revive their arguments why nuclear power is better for world health than power derived from fossil fuels.
Well, the Federal Ministers and their allies "are wrong" according to an alliance of environment and public health groups led by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.
The alliance has released a report questioning the environmental or other merits of nuclear energy.
Launching the report this morning was Former Ambassador to South Korea and nuclear proliferation expert Richard Broinowski.
Professor Broinowski says today's report makes it clear nuclear energy is not a practical or safe solution to climate change.
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: It's quite clear from the figures and from all the work that's been done that it will never provide a swing fuel of sufficient quantity to make any effect on the greenhouse gas problem that we have.
TONI HASSAN: Shouldn't it be though, part of the mix?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: It could be if we have some practical solutions to some of the backend problems and to the enormous amount of energy required to enrich uranium, yes.
But I mean only one third of greenhouse gases are caused by the production of electricity, and only 15 to 20 per cent of that is from nuclear power. You'd have to have a huge number of reactors to make any difference on the energy mix, and they'd take a long time to build, it'd take at least 10 years so…
TONI HASSAN: What, a doubling of global nuclear power for any sort of significant impact, or much more than that?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: In effect we've got 440 reactors now, we'd need at least another thousand of ungigawattage, so…
TONI HASSAN: And is that at all feasible?
RICHARD BROINOWSKI: No, it's really not.
TONI HASSAN: Under pressure to limit greenhouse gas emissions, power utilities and governments in the United States and some European countries are reconsidering their moratoriums on constructing new nuclear reactors.
Mark Wakeham with Greenpeace says Australia should not cash in on the world's growing appetite for uranium.
MARK WAKEHAM: This current discussion about nuclear power being some sort of solution to climate change is really a distraction.
Real action would actually mean moving to a clean energy future for Australia, rejecting both coal and nuclear and supporting renewable energy – things like solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal power for Australia and really making the shift and breaking our addiction to coal.
ELEANOR HALL: Greenpeace energy campaigner Mark Wakeham ending that report from Toni Hassan.
posted by Marcel at 9:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home