Nuclear Power
by Biko Nagara on July 21, 2006  At this week’s G-8 summit meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed on the need for an increased role for nuclear energy worldwide.
Yes 25% (704 votes) No 66% (1840 votes) Not Sure 9% (263 votes) Total votes: 2807
by Worldwatch Institute on June 15, 2006 Plus, Solar Energy in China, E-Waste, Goldman Prize Profiles, and More in the July/August 2006 issue of World Watch.
by Christopher Flavin on June 15, 2006 In January this year, Newsweek magazine’s cover boldly proclaimed “The Return of Nuclear Power.” As I gazed at the cover photo of a glowing red nuclear power plant, I realized that I had seen virtually the same cover—on Time magazine, roughly 15 years ago. The two stories had the same thesis: nuclear power is about to mount a comeback.
Since nuclear construction collapsed in the early 1980s, its return from the dead has been proclaimed at regular intervals, spurred by environmental and economic concerns and by the public-relations efforts of a multi-billion-dollar industry that has had an almost empty order book for over two decades.
None of these “revivals” materialized, but many argue that the latest should be taken more seriously. With oil prices skyrocketing and concern about global warming deepening, scores of editorial writers and policymakers, and even a few environmentalists, argue that we can’t afford to discard any energy option with the potential to displace coal, which provides 40 percent of the world’s electricity and is the largest threat…
by Alana Herro on June 14, 2006  The residents of Kara Agach, a mountain village in western Kyrgystan, are receiving radiation doses as much as 40 times the internationally recognized safety limit, according to a new study cited in the June 10 issue of New Scientist.
by Worldwatch Institute on April 10, 2006 Washington, DC—Many politicians and even a few environmentalists have begun advocating nuclear power as a remedy for climate change. And in an effort to ride the coattails of a far more popular set of energy alternatives, political leaders including U.S. President George W. Bush are now referring to nuclear power as "a renewable source of energy".
by Worldwatch Institute on March 3, 2006 WASHINGTON, D.C.—The security risks from the nuclear cooperation agreement reached yesterday between President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh far outweigh the energy benefits of the deal, according to researchers at the Worldwatch Institute. Spending the same money on new, clean energy options would provide energy without increasing the risk that terrorists will get their hands on nuclear arsenals.
by Nicholas Lenssen - Christopher Flavin on April 15, 1996 In the 10 years since the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, the number of nuclear power plants under construction has dropped from 160 to only 34. (Many of these are in energy-starved developing countries; in the United States, it has been 18 years since a construction order was placed for a nuclear plant.) Nuclear power is still being promoted aggressively by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency, by some governments, and by the industry itself. But Lenssen and Flavin argue that despite this industrial inertia, nuclear power is no longer a viable energy strategy anywhere in the world. The demise of the nuclear option is a tremendous opportunity for renewable energy technologies, such as wind and solar. Even in the face of continued heavy subsidies for nuclear, renewables are booming. The challenge now is to bring government investment priorities into line with the new energy reality.
|
|
Shopping Cart
