THIS past summer, the Group of 7 nations promised “urgent and concrete action” to limit climate change. What actions exactly? Activists hope for answers from the coming United Nations climate conference in Paris, which begins Monday. They should look instead to Washington today.
The single most important action we can take is thawing a nuclear energy policy that keeps our technology frozen in time. If we are serious about replacing fossil fuels, we are going to need nuclear power, so the choice is stark: We can keep on merely talking about a carbon-free world, or we can go ahead and create one.
We already know that today’s energy sources cannot sustain a future we want to live in. This is most obvious in poor countries, where billions dream of living like Americans. The easiest way to satisfy this demand for a better life has been to burn more coal: In the past decade alone, China added more coal-burning capacity than America has ever had. But even though average Indians and Chinese use less than 30 percent as much electricity as Americans, the air they breathe is far worse. They deserve a third option besides dire poverty or dirty skies.
In America, the left worries more about our five billion metric tons of annual carbon dioxide emissions and what it might do to Earth’s climate. On the right, even those who discount the environmental effects of fossil fuels can’t deny their contribution to economic volatility. We saw this in 2008 when a historic high oil price coincided with a historic financial crisis.
The need for energy alternatives was already clear to investors a decade ago, which is why they poured funding into clean technology during the early 2000s. But while the money was there, the technology wasn’t: The result was a series of bankruptcies and the scandal of Solyndra, the solar panel manufacturer in California that went bankrupt in 2011 after receiving a federal guarantee of hundreds of millions of dollars. Wind and solar together provide less than 2 percent of the world’s energy, and they aren’t growing anywhere near fast enough to replace fossil fuels.
What’s especially strange about the failed push for renewables is that we already had a practical plan back in the 1960s to become fully carbon-free without any need of wind or solar: nuclear power. But after years of cost overruns, technical challenges and the bizarre coincidence of an accident at Three Mile Island and the 1979 release of the Hollywood horror movie “The China Syndrome,” about a hundred proposed reactors were canceled. If we had kept building, our power grid could have been carbon-free years ago.
Read more: The New Atomic Age We Need
The Latest on: Nuclear power
[google_news title=”” keyword=”nuclear power” num_posts=”10″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
via Google News
The Latest on: Nuclear power
- Fixation on UK nuclear power may not help to solve climate crisison May 10, 2024 at 8:27 am
Waste and cost among drawbacks, as researchers say renewables could power UK entirely ...
- Sam Altman takes nuclear energy company Oklo public to help power his AI ambitionson May 10, 2024 at 7:18 am
Oklo’s business model is based on commercializing nuclear fission, the reaction that fuels all nuclear power plants.
- Constellation Energy beats Q1 profit estimates on higher nuclear power generationon May 10, 2024 at 3:12 am
Inflation Reduction Act. "Higher output from our generation fleet, supportive energy policies and the strong performance of our commercial business contributed to our strong adjusted (non-GAAP) ...
- US House passes Rep. John Curtis' bill to remove 'red tape' around nuclear poweron May 9, 2024 at 1:04 pm
WASHINGTON — The U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill Wednesday aimed at accelerating nuclear power projects, which was sponsored by Utah Rep. John Curtis. Curtis, a Republican and founder of ...
- Microsoft, OpenAI Reportedly Plans $100-Billion Supercomputer Fueled by Nuclear Poweron May 9, 2024 at 10:11 am
Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) is reportedly gearing up to construct a colossal $100 billion data center, aptly named 'Stargate.' Analysts speculate ...
- Constellation Energy eyes new nuclear for unprecedented data center power demandon May 9, 2024 at 10:09 am
Constellation Energy is considering building next-generation nuclear plants on its existing sites to meet soaring demand from data centers, executives with the Baltimore-based power company said on ...
- Nano Nuclear wants to reinvent the nuclear power business—but it could take a whileon May 9, 2024 at 10:00 am
The company is trying to not only reinvent reactors but also reinvent fuel production and transportation. It’ll take several years yet before we know if it works. Nuclear energy is responsible for 19% ...
- The Diablo Dilemma: A look back at the nuclear power plant’s complicated history and what's nexton May 7, 2024 at 2:04 pm
The Diablo Canyon Power Plant is the last operating nuclear power plant in California and the largest power generating plant of any kind, producing about nine percent of the state’s electricity.
- Nuclear power makes no sense for Australia – but it’s a useful diversion from real climate actionon May 5, 2024 at 1:06 pm
Insisting nuclear power is the only way for Australia to achieve net zero by 2050 is a classic move from the playbook of those who oppose urgent action on climate change.
- Nuclear Power as a Clean Energy Tool?on May 3, 2024 at 9:22 am
Readers discuss an Opinion guest essay calling that a fantasy. Also: Quality at Boeing; a toilet sign; running, fast and slow.
via Bing News