Is nuclear power the answer to Australia's fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions? Definitely not, reports Sam van Rood. Renewable energy, not nuclear, is the answer to our country's pressing need to reduce greenhouse pollution. In today's globally competitive markets, nuclear energy is in terminal decline and experiencing a meltdown of historic proportions. Nuclear power's biggest problems are economic: it is simply no longer competitive with other, newer forms of power generation. Construction of the last 20 US reactors cost $US3-4 billion each, or some $US3000-4000 per kilowatt of capacity. By contrast, new gas-fired combined cycle plants using the latest jet engine technology cost $US400-600 per kW, and wind turbines are being installed at less than $US1000 per kW. Curtains for nuclear power The Worldwatch Institute projects that global nuclear capacity will begin a sustained decline by 2002 at the latest and the US Department of Energy (DOE) projects that it will fall by half in the next two decades. DOE was once the strongest advocate and largest funder of nuclear-power activities in the Western world, but long ago realised it had been backing a lemon, especially when the issue of radioactive waste disposal is added to the equation. On economic - not to mention environmental - grounds, nuclear power is simply not the best way to reduce greenhouse pollution. Today in the US, every dollar spent on energy efficiency programs, such as low electricity consumption light bulbs, reduces carbon pollution by seven times more than a dollar spent on nuclear energy. While cuts are being made in energy consumption through energy efficiency programs, Australia must move its energy production base from fossil fuels to ‘renewables’ - wind, solar and biomass technologies that are greenhouse neutral. Renewables are not only the answer to our need for clean energy, they are also good for the economy. Research published through the Australian Cooperative Research Centre on Renewable Energy shows investment in renewables will create many more jobs for Australia than nuclear power ever could. Wind power With less than one third of the population and GDP of Australia, Denmark is the second-largest user of wind turbines in the world. Danish wind turbine technology accounts for 50% of global installations to date and their market share in 1996 amounted to an annual turnover of $US650 million from global sales of $US1000 million. Wind turbine manufacturing, maintenance, installation and consultancy services account for some 10,000 jobs in Denmark while another 6000 jobs exist world-wide through components supply and turbine installation. Solar power In Australia, Pacific Solar estimates conservatively that by 2010 the Australian photovoltaic industry could be providing direct employment for 1500 people and another 6000 jobs indirectly. With considerable government support for photovoltaics, job creation forecasts would be even more ambitious. This industry would generate annual revenues of $575 million for a capital investment of just $286 million spread over a 10-year period and save almost 1.5 million tonnes of greenhouse pollution annually. The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) opposes nuclear energy of any kind in Australia. Renewables are cheaper, cleaner and greener. Whether you take the socially, ecologically or economically rational line, the only option is to leave uncompetitive nuclear power to die. Sam van Rood, Fax: +61 3 3946 0767 E-mail: hab@peg.apc.org |