Energy Efficiency Cheaper and Faster than Nuclear Power

A new report, conducted by the Environment California Research &
Policy Center, has shown that creating a nuclear power industry from
scratch is slower and more expensive than relying on energy efficient
solutions to fight climate change.

The US currently have no nuclear reactors in construction, and the
country's power companies have not ordered a nuclear power plant since
1973. On the contrary, the US government is currently implementing
policies and protocols encouraging energy efficiency, to save money
and reduce the country's carbon footprint.

The report points out that it would take about 10 years to build a
reactor, and that making reactor parts would be complicated without an
existing infrastructure.

Furthermore, the US total emissions would only be decreased by 12%
over the next 2 decades, should the nuclear industry succeed in
building 100 reactors by 2030. This is considered as insufficient by
Environment California.

Building 100 reactors would require a $600-billion upfront investment,
this amount would cut out twice as much carbon pollution in the same period if it was
invested in energy efficient solutions. Moreover, clean energy
can produce 5 times as much progress per dollar in lowering pollution when
considering the running cost of a power plant.

Counting on new nuclear reactors to combat climate change is not a
logical option. Energy efficiency can deliver better results and the
price to pay is infinitely less - both financially and
environmentally.

Thursday 26th November 2009


Add New Comment:

Comments

To Comment you must be a member of The ESA, please login or register to join

There are currently no comments, be the first to comment above.