“Nevertheless, overlooking the potential of nuclear energy—as many self-styled “progressives” such as U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Green Party leader Elizabeth May seem all too hasty to do—is nothing more than an empty ovation to rose-tinted idealism.” – Sancho Angulo, third-year public affairs and policy management.
With the recent surge in student-led protests for climate action, the Green New Deal has become the centrepiece of many activists’ demands for government. On its face, the plan demonstrates promise, achieving net-zero emissions in the United States.
For a plan whose backers seem all for embracing “the evidence,” the Green New Deal’s focus on winding down nuclear energy goes against a growing chorus of climate scientists who see nuclear energy as the cleanest, most cost-effective, and safest way of driving down greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while also satisfying our growing energy demands.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), an organization responsible for overseeing the use of nuclear technology for energy production worldwide, “nuclear power has significant potential to contribute to GHG reduction.”
Between 1970 and 2015, the deployment of nuclear power has prevented the release of nearly 68 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, according to the IAEA. The organization also said that achieving the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s objective of keeping global temperature increases below two degrees hinges on doubling nuclear power’s contribution to the world’s energy needs by 2030.
Studies also estimate, based on data from the U.S., for every nuclear reactor that goes offline, carbon dioxide emissions rise by 5.8 million tonnes, a release that would need to be offset by the planting of 95 million trees.
For the longest time, nuclear power has been an anathema in many environmental activist circles. Incidents such as Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima have soured the boundless optimism that once supported the proliferation of nuclear power following World War II.
They have ingrained in people a heightened sense of apprehension around the technology, despite the countervailing evidence pointing to the potential of nuclear energy in expediting our shift away from fossil fuels.
Further still, advances in nuclear technology, which have moved past the flaws of slide-rule designed facilities, have led to monumental improvements in the monitoring and safety mechanisms embedded in reactors, making meltdowns and ecological disasters an increasingly distant possibility.
It may come as a surprise to many that a full 60 per cent of Ontario’s energy mix is derived from nuclear energy according to the Canada Energy Regulation.
Without the contributions of nuclear energy in meeting our energy consumption needs, it is unlikely that the provincial government would have phased out coal-fired power plants at the speed that it did, the high costs and relatively low output of implementing other renewable sources such as wind and solar.
This decision led to a precipitous drop in the number of “smog days” in cities throughout Ontario, dropping from 48 in 2005 to near zero in 2017. In concert with the rollout of other green energy projects, our use of nuclear energy has fed into an 87 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in Ontario’s electricity sector.
Nuclear energy is far from a cure-all to meeting the energy demands of a country in transition away from fossil fuels. The upfront costs associated with building nuclear facilities remain extraordinarily high. We also continue to confront the issue of how aging reactors should be upgraded, and how nuclear waste can be securely disposed of.
Nevertheless, overlooking the potential of nuclear energy—as many self-styled “progressives” such as U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Green Party leader Elizabeth May seem all too hasty to do—is nothing more than an empty ovation to rose-tinted idealism.
The climate crisis deserves an urgent, effective response, supported by practical and results-oriented solutions. Ignoring nuclear energy as one of the most effective tools in our arsenal only weakens our collective response and distances us from our goal.
File photo.
