Lovelock: Greenpeace Making "Incredible Mistake" on Nuclear Energy

At the end of last week, we linked to a number of bloggers who took issue with the decision of the High Court in London to scuttle the U.K. government's energy review that called for an increase in new nuclear build.

Yesterday, James Lovelock, the father of the Gaia Theory, joined the chorus condemning Greenpeace, who filed the lawsuit, and continues to work to block the progress of the industry globally:

What an incredible mistake Greenpeace made when it took the government to court in an attempt to delay the building of new nuclear power stations. By so doing it increases the burden of carbon dioxide (C02) the Earth has to bear; nuclear is the only large-scale energy source that is emissions free.

Why don’t we wake up and emulate the French, who make almost all their electricity from nuclear energy? French trains are legendary, especially the TGV. One of these bound for Marseilles was standing at the Gare de Lyon; it seemed like any other train except that it was double decked. We climbed aboard and took our seats on the upper tier and sat back as it travelled from Paris to Marseilles at 200mph.

No wonder the French are building an even faster train track from Paris to Germany. Best of all, this form of intercity travel is the world’s only wholly carbon-free nonpolluting way of travelling, because the trains are powered by nuclear electricity. Soon our cars and trucks will be powered by batteries charged from the electricity supply. What a wonderful way to avoid C02 emissions, but only if we make nuclear our source of electricity.

For more on James Lovelock from our archives, click here.

Comments

Brian Mays said…

Yes, the TGV is really cool. Not all of the passenger cars are double-deckers, but the French railway company had to develop these double-decker cars for the popular routes to keep up with demand.

It's difficult to appreciate how fast they go (especially from inside -- the ride is so smooth) until you are in a TGV station and watch one of the trains blow by at top speed.

And remember, these are nuclear-powered trains. The electricity that runs them is almost exclusively provided by nuclear plants.

February 19, 2007 at 1:35 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog