The Renewable Energy Reality Check

[wtmusic]

37. We don't have all eternity.

We have a tiny, tiny slice of it to drastically reduce our carbon output, and the only thing significant about wind and solar is the attention they're drawing from energy sources that can make a difference - in time.

"As for wind and solar power...there is no hope that they can supply our energy needs. The only practical substitute for fossil fuels is nuclear power. In 1988 some 1.9 x 1012 kWh of electricity was generated by nuclear power stations. The same amount would be produced by burning 900 million tonnes of coal or 600 million tonnes of oil. In other words, the emission of 3000 million tonnes of carbon dioxide has been saved by using nuclear power, rather than coal. (While coal emits 850 tonnes of carbon dioxide per gigawatt hour, the figures for oil are 750, gas 500, nuclear 8, wind 7 and hydro 4.)

As countries switch to nuclear, their rate of carbon-dioxide emissions fall. Since 1970 France has halved its emissions, Japan (32% nuclear) has achieved a reduction of 20%, while the US (20% nuclear) has reduced it by only 6%. The emission of noxious gases like sulphur dioxide is also dramatically reduced by going nuclear.

If we are to stabilize the emission of carbon dioxide by the middle of the 21st century, we need to replace 2000 fossil-fuel power stations in the next 40 years, equivalent to a rate of one per week. Can we find 500 km2 each week to install 4000 windmills? Or perhaps we could cover 10 km2 of desert each week with solar panels and keep them clean? Tidal power can produce large amounts of energy, but can we find a new Severn estuary and build a barrage costing £9bn every five weeks?

Nuclear power, however, is a well tried and reliable source. At the height of new nuclear construction in the 1980s, an average of 23 new nuclear reactors were being built each year, with a peak of 43 in 1983. A construction rate of one per week is therefore practicable."

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/2001/jun/05/do-we-need-nuclear-power,2