Is nuclear power the answer to our energy needs? |
The Government needs to combat climate change and meet future energy demands. But is nuclear power a viable option?
Many people feel uncomfortable about nuclear power but cannot see any real alternatives. They are right to be wary. Nuclear power is costly, toxic and not 'emission free'. It is also not necessary.
Friends of the Earth supports safer, greener and cheaper solutions that can collectively satisfy UK energy requirements and cut greenhouse gases.
Why say no to nuclear?
Nuclear power is still unsafe and cannot help the UK meet its pollution targets. Here's the low-down on an energy a former Environment Minister says we need 'like a hole in the head'.
Expensive
- Costs more than wind - In 2002 the Cabinet Office estimated that nuclear could cost over 40% more per kWh than on/off-shore wind.
- Waste of money - Construction costs are large and unpredictable
with delays causing greater losses. Windfarm costs are known, smaller and falling.
- Hits taxpayers - Disposal of existing waste will cost around £56 billion. More reactors mean more waste, with no guarantee that costs won't be passed on to the public.
Dangerous waste
- Highly radioactive - Nuclear waste can remain dangerous for tens of thousands of years.
- Deadly inheritance -
No one has yet demonstrated a safe way of disposing of it
.
- Accidents do happen - Leaks and near misses cannot be ruled out.
Environmentally unfriendly
- Way off target -
Doubling nuclear power would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at most eight per cent.
- Not emission free - Mining and transporting uranium, building nuclear plants and storage of nuclear waste all produce carbon dioxide emissions.
- Only electricity - It will not replace petrol and diesel - currently responsible for around 22 per cent of UK carbon emissions.
Security threat
- Weapons - Uranium enrichment plants can be misused to make nuclear weapons.
- Vulnerable -
No nuclear reactor could withstand a direct hit from a jumbo jet.
- Nowhere to hide - A successful attack could have an impact 40 times worse than the explosion at Chernobyl.
Real alternatives
- No need for nuclear - The UK's vast renewable resources combined with simple energy-saving tactics provide a safer, cleaner and more sensible solution.
- Secure supply - Renewable sources could generate more than half our current electricity needs by 2025.
- Quick technology - All the major renewable technologies can be implemented within three years. We'd be waiting at least ten for nuclear.
- Bright idea - A programme to phase out inefficient light bulbs could save a whole reactor's worth of electricity by 2020.
- Forward thinking - We could save fifteen reactor's worth by investing in the potential of using waste heat to generate electricity.
Back Friends of the Earth's Big Ask campaign to ensure a better future for people and the environment.
†To view PDF files you will need to download
Adobe Acrobat Reader. Visually impaired users can get extra help with these
documents from access.adobe.com.
FAQs - frequently asked questions
We've put together some of your most frequent questions, so if there's something you need to know, chances are someone has already asked it. Have a look through the full list to see if you can find what you're looking for.
Our website has over 6,000 pages of information, covering a wide range of topics from biodiversity to pollution so if you can’t find what your looking for try using:
You could also take a look at our forum - which covers green lifestyle issues, local activism and campaigning.
Last modified
Content: Feb
2006
