Energy debate drives onward

February 8, 2010 by Amy Woodward 

Climate change demands increase energy interest

A senior fellow of The Brookings Institute discussed using nuclear power as an alternative energy source and the dangers of nuclear proliferation on Thursday.

Charles Ebinger, director of the energy security initiative, is a leading expert on energy markets and energy politics, both domestic and international.

The lecture, entitled “The Nuclear Renaissance,” was a mixture of global history, politics and speculation about the energy future of the United States and the world.

“No other subject is as controversial as nuclear power in the energy arena,” Ebinger said.

The tension between fear of proliferation and desire for nuclear energy are embodied in the The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The NPT, created in 1970, is still enforced to this day.

“The trade-off is that the countries that agreed forgo the direct acquisition of the weapons,” Ebinger said.

“In exchange were promised the fullest possible exchange of nuclear technology. The second part is complete and total unilateral disarmament.”

There are currently 436 commercial nuclear power stations in 30 countries. Thirty new reactors are under construction and 90 new ones are in the planning stages.

A hundred stations are being planned in China alone and eight countries are known to have nuclear weapons capabilities.

Ebinger identified the drivers of the nuclear renaissance as: climate change, increasing global demands for energy and the need for energy security.

Ebinger also focused on carbon dioxide emissions and the need to dispel the fear some may have about using nuclear power in the United States.

“First and foremost, it releases no CO2 emissions,” he explained. As for issues about how to manage both nuclear power and waste internationally, “They must be addressed. [There is] no future for the nuclear power industry… if we don’t long-term learn to deal with the nuclear waste issue.”

Ebinger discouraged placing the blame on ineffective nuclear waste disposal on technology.

“I don’t think the technology is the problem. The problem is a political [one]. I don’t think Nevada was sold it well,” adding that carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is much more dangerous than the storage of nuclear waste.

The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site, after decades of controversy and political tug-of-war, is being closed. It was to be used as a storage site for spent fuel.

Despite Nevadans’ experiences with the controversy surrounding nuclear power, public perception of nuclear safety is becoming more positive, Ebinger said.

“Public support for nuclear power is actually rising, a fact that often gets ignored in the nuclear debate.”