by Krullix

Created on: October 03, 2008

Earlier in the year, the British Government gave the green light to a new generation of nuclear power plants. This debate examines whether nuclear power is the way forward as a sustainable energy alternative and whether this move will tackle climate change. I suggest it will not. With regards to the UK Government's decision, it would appear <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /

>Britain has copped out of its environmental responsibilities and has failed to find a real and sustainable alternative to meet its future energy needs. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Let's start by making it clear that nuclear technology is not a renewable energy resource. The construction of nuclear plants and mining the uranium necessary to power them has an impact on CO2 emissions, and it is also important that the right grade of uranium is mined. According to the New Economics Foundation, the high-grade uranium ore currently mined for use in nuclear power plants will only be available for some 50 years. If we increase our nuclear dependency, the availability of the ore will reduce considerably, leaving the industry no option but to use lower-grade ore. This would have an upward impact on costs, and the energy used to mine and decommission could lead to more CO2 emissions than fossil fueled plants. Friends of the Earth Australia reported that a ten fold expansion in nuclear power plants could see the entire world stock of uranium lasting only 20 years. If true, nuclear power would appear to offer only a short-term solution.
The British Government has stated that the new generation of power plants will be privately built, and that they will not be subsidised by British taxpayers, yet no nuclear power station has ever been built without subsidy. Storage of the waste, however, is likely to be funded by the state and used by the reactors at subsidised prices, at a potential cost to the government of 20 billion pounds or more. There is no long term strategy for the storage of radioactive waste, and while much of the waste' can be recycled, if Britain opted to open no further nuclear plants, and the existing facilities were to shut down when expected, there would be 36,590 cubic metres of intermediate and high-level waste in Britain the nasty stuff - enough to fill 14 Olympic-sized swimming pool.
There is no denying that nuclear technology has advanced since the Chernobyl disaster, however, since

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>