5 Jan (NucNet): More than 65 conservation scientists from 14 countries have signed an open letter to environmentalists urging them to “recognise and support” the role nuclear energy can play in combatting climate change and protecting biodiversity.
Nuclear energy is one of the least damaging sources of energy for the environment, and the green movement must accept its expansion if the world is to avoid dangerous climate change, the scientists said.
Rising demand for energy will place ever greater burdens on the natural world, threatening its rich biodiversity, unless societies accept nuclear power as a key part of the energy mix, they said. And so the environmental movement and pressure groups such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace should drop their opposition to the building of nuclear power stations.
The letter was organised by University of Tasmania professor of environmental sustainability Barry Brook and Professor Corey Bradshaw, of the University of Adelaide. It supports their article, ‘Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation’, published in the journal Conservation Biology. The letter was signed by leading academics from countries including Australia, the UK, China, France, Switzerland, the US, Canada, Singapore, Indonesia, India, South Africa and Turkey.
“If human kind is to avoid a potential biodiversity disaster due to climate change, we will need to use all of the tools at our disposal, including nuclear power,” Professor Brook said.
“Full decarbonisation of the global electricity-generation sector is required within the next few decades to avoid the worst ravages of climate change.”
Professor Brook said biodiversity was threatened not just by emissions but also by land transformation resulting from energy sources such as flooded areas for hydro-electricity, agricultural areas needed for biofuels and large spaces needed for wind and solar farms.
Although the environmental movement had historically rejected it, the reality was that in evaluations carried out for the Conservation Biology article, nuclear power performed “as well or better” than other options in terms of safety, cost, scaleability, reliability, land transformation and emissions, he said.
“There is strong evidence for supporting advanced nuclear power systems with complete fuel recycling as part of a portfolio of sustainable energy technologies,” Professor Brook said.
“We must accept that trade-offs and compromises are inevitable and require advocating energy mixes that minimise net environmental damage.”
Professor Brook said the environmentalist mantra on energy needs to shift from “100 per cent renewables” to “zero per cent fossil fuels”.
The Conservation Biology article, ‘Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation’, is online:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.12433/full
The open letter to environmentalists is online:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2014/12/15/an-open-letter-to-environmentalists-on-nuclear-energy
