Nuclear Power research

Against

Unsafe and expensive

  • Fukushima disaster 2011
  • Public investment in nuclear energy for out-strips investment in renewable
  • If money pumped into nuclear power had been spent on renewable, then pay-off would have been much greater per-euro instead.

Renewable

  • Ready to take over from nuclear
  • Could produce 100% renewable energy by 2050
  • Need to make the first step NOW!

Nuclear free world

  • Iran said they need nuclear power to guarantee energy security, but efforts to persuade them otherwise could be easier if we could demonstrate civilian nuclear energy was unnecessary.
  • Europe needs to commit to abandoning nuclear technology completely.

For

It’s safe

  • Fukushima was an old plant, latest generation of nuclear reactor designs are much less likely to melt down.
  • Earthquakes and Tsunamis which caused Fukushima are much less common in Europe.

Climate change

  • Renewable aren’t ready to take over
  • Alternatives are coal and natural gas, these over the long run are much more polluting and damaging the nuclear.

Potential

  • Potentially solve all of our energy needs.
  • Valuable area of research that could guarantee clean energy, worth investing the technology.

The nuclear industry is responsible for horrific wastes which will endure as a nightmare for our grandchildren but people could disagree with this by saying that Nuclear power is the only energy producing industry which takes full responsibility for managing all it’s wastes, and bears the cost of this. I disagree with this response, the high costs which is usually billions wouldn’t be necessary if we used renewable energy, we still have to endure high toxins and we will have to deal with it for thousands of years.

Green peace reasons against nuclear power

  • If Britain built ten new reactors, nuclear power can only deliver 4% cut in carbon emissions after 2025, this is too little too late at too high price.
  • Nuclear power can’t replace heating and hot water for industrial purposes which is where we use it most, nuclear power can only replace electricity.
  • We only use 14% for electricity so having nuclear power which only creates electricity is irrelevant.
  • Energy efficiency, cleaner use of fossil fuels, renewable and decentralized power stations have the potential to deliver reliable low carbon energy quicker and cheaper, they’re safe and globally appropriate.

Solution for Climate change

Picture2

Nuclear Power is only a little piece of electricity, Nuclear plans won’t increase this, only play tinny rule in cutting CO2.

  • Since 1970 government have spent £13 billion on nuclear research and development.
  • We will have to spend £70 billion on cleaning up nuclear waste which will be produced.
  • We already have 2 million cubic meters of nuclear waste.
  • Only invested £1 billion research and development into renewable – haven’t had the chance to research their full potential.
  • Ocean power can produce 12% of our electricity, combine all raw renewable it can produce twice as much electricity than nuclear and quicker.
  • Big power plants waste 2/3 of their energy at lost heat out the cooling towers, this waste heat could be used to warm homes.
  • To do this we need smaller power plants to be built closer to where the heat will be used, these are called combine heat power plants (CHP) they’re quieter as well. They are successfully using this method is Southampton which heats homes and large businesses and provides air conditioning in the summer. These users receives financial benefits as it’s 5%-10% cheaper.
  • CHO can use greener fuels such as waste wood o’r straw.

 

http://www.debatingeurope.eu/focus/infobox-arguments-for-and-against-nuclear/#.WNLZNWiLTIV

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/the-nuclear-debate.aspx

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/nuclear/the-case-against-nuclear-power-20080108

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/the-convenient-solution-20070718

 

%d bloggers like this: