Antinuclear

Australia could reduce greenhouse gas without nuclear power

Nuclear does not have the answers we need, Sydney Morning Herald, SCOTT LUDLAM, March 10, 2010 -“…….Dr Hansen argues that energy efficiency and renewable energy sources are our first-line weapons in the battle against climate change. No arguments there. In the Australian context, we have a growing body of scientific research mapping out sustainable energy scenarios that would allow us to keep the lights on while also sharply reducing greenhouse emissions.

For example, a 2008 report by McKinsey, a firm specialising in global greenhouse policy analysis, finds that with cost-saving energy efficiency measures and a number of other low-cost abatement measures, we could reduce Australia’s greenhouse emissions by 35 per cent below 1990 levels by 2030 at no net cost (with further measures identified to reduce emissions by another 25 per cent).

The 35 per cent reduction equates to a reduction of 191 million tonnes of emissions each year. For comparison, if we relied on nuclear power to do the same job, 32 power reactors would be required and the capital cost alone would be $128-192 billion…..

fourth generation nuclear power is still decades away. Yet we urgently need to reduce greenhouse emissions. Nuclear does not have the answers we need

March 10, 2010 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, energy | antinuclear, Australia, climate change, climate change - global warming, energy, nuclear, renewable