Nuclear Energy
Nuclear energy is one of the only commercially viable technologies that can cope with the magnitude of the world’s additional electricity demand in a non carbon emission mode. If 85% of people living in non-OECD countries are to be able to access 5000KWh per capita of electricity consumption (average consumption required to have a reasonable living standard), then the total global electricity production would have to be almost doubled that today.
The per capita electricity consumption by the world population living in OECD countries is 9000KWh. The urgent need is to develop a technology that can meet this electricity requirement without impact on environment. The technology which is carbon emission free and which can stable the level of green house gases in the atmosphere.
Nuclear energy is the only commercial technology which has the highest efficiency with lowest pollution as of now. Developing other technologies based on either fossil fuels or other non-renewable resources will lead to higher level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and will delay the development of developing and under developed countries. Nuclear energy is safe, eco-friendly and economical source of energy.
Some of the developed countries like USA, France, Germany, United Kingdom etc. have realized the importance of developing nuclear energy and they are already utilizing this eco-friendly technology to meet their energy demands. Some developing countries like China, India etc. are on their way to explore this technology for electricity production.
It is very important now which technology we choose? Because our future will solely depend on the technology we develop and the level of commitment we show towards environment protection.
What simplistic and touching faith in nuclear energy, and not a sniff of any of the down sides !
I know there have been some nuclear accidents in the past but the fact can not be neglected that at present situation, nuclear energy is the only viable technology that can meet future electricity demand. There is no other clean and ecofriendly technology that can compete with the output of nuclear fuel.
Well, we’d probably agree that it would be unwise to loose the skills of building fission plant, but it seems to me that your argument is based on two predicates:
that nuclear energy is the ONLY viable low carbon technology,
and
that electricity consumption must necessarily rise.
This ignores renewables and energy conservation.
It remains to be seen if the life cycle cost of renewables is less than nuclear (including accidents and the ever more widespread availability of fissile material), but I have a hunch as to which is safer. I’m sure there’ll be more nuclear accidents in future too.
If we can’t crack fusion, and aren’t willing to invest in enough renewables, in the end I guess we will have to cut consumption, if only to moderate carbon emissions.
Cheers, J/.
I do agree with your point. But we should understand the fact that the demand for electricity will considerably rise as the population of earth is increasing and that will put further stress on green cover and natural habitats to accommodate the population.
This further emphasis the need to have low carbon and high efficiency technology. I know there are risks associated with nuclear technology but rectifications can be done in existing rector designs to make them more safer.