According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA, 2013), global nuclear generating capacity will grow by between 17 and 94 per cent by 2030, mostly due to growth in China and other emerging economies in Asia. Nuclear power has successfully decarbonized entire nations and when comparing an energy’s deathprint, the number of people killed by one kind of energy or another, nuclear comes out best with only 90 deaths per trillion kWhr, unlike coal with 170000 deaths, for comparison1. Environmentalist Mark Lynas, in his controversial new ebook entitled Nuclear 2.0: Why a Green Future Needs Nuclear Power suggests that if 800 new nuclear power stations can be designed, built and online by 2030, we may have a chance at limiting global climate change to two degrees.
Politicians and their voters have become uneasy about supporting an energy industry which gets such bad press when accidents occur, the clean-up cost at Fukashima will take over 40 years and cost tens of billions of pounds 2. Of the 52 Japanese reactors running at the time of the Fukashima disaster only two are back online. Germany, Switzerland and Belgium have decided to find alternative energy sources and France, where nuclear is the primary source of energy, is reducing output from 80 per cent down to 50 per cent by 2020.
If nuclear is not the affordable, reliable and safe energy source it was thought to be, what is?
1 How deadly is your kilowatt?
2 Fukushima farce reveals nuclear industry's fatal flaw
Video Link: Mark Lynas thinking the unthinkable on nuclear power, discussing how nuclear is better than other technologies to produce power. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pXiiQBknHM