Greenpeace has always fought - and will continue to fight -
vigorously against nuclear power because it is an unacceptable risk to the
environment and to humanity. The only solution is to halt the expansion of all
nuclear power, and for the shutdown of existing plants.
We need an energy system that can fight climate change, based on
renewable
energy and energy efficiency. Nuclear power already delivers less energy
globally than renewable energy, and the share will continue to decrease in the
coming years.
Despite what the nuclear industry tells us, building enough
nuclear power stations to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of
lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of
nuclear weapons materials, and result in a Chernobyl-scale accident once every
decade. Perhaps most significantly, it will squander the resources
necessary to implement meaningful climate change solutions. (Briefing:
Climate
change - Nuclear not the answer.)
"Nuclear power plants are, next to nuclear warheads themselves, the most
dangerous devices that man has ever created. Their construction and
proliferation is the most irresponsible, in fact the most criminal, act ever to
have taken place on this planet."
Patrick Moore,
Assault on Future Generations, 1976
The Nuclear Age began in July 1945 when the US tested their
first nuclear bomb near Alamogordo, New Mexico. A few years later, in 1953,
President Eisenhower launched his "Atoms for Peace" Programme at the UN amid a
wave of unbridled atomic optimism.
But as we know there is nothing
"peaceful" about all things nuclear. More than half a century after Eisenhower's
speech the planet is left with the legacy of nuclear waste. This legacy is
beginning to be recognised for what it truly is.
Things are moving
slowly in the right direction. In November 2000 the world recognised nuclear
power as a dirty, dangerous and unnecessary technology by refusing to give it
greenhouse gas credits during the UN Climate Change talks in The Hague. Nuclear
power was dealt a further blow when a UN Sustainable Development Conference
refused to label nuclear a sustainable technology in April 2001.
The
risks from nuclear energy are real, inherent and long-lasting.
Safety: No reactor in the world is
inherently safe. All operational reactors have inherent safety flaws, which
cannot be eliminated by safety upgrading. Highly radioactive spent fuel requires
constant cooling. If this fails, it could lead to a catastrophic release of
radioactivity. They are also highly vulnerable to deliberate acts of sabotage,
including terrorist attack.
Waste: From the moment uranium is mined
nuclear waste on a massive scale is produced. There is no secure, risk free way
to store nuclear waste. No country in the world has a solution for high-level
waste that stays radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years. The least
damaging option at this current time is for waste to be stored above ground, in
dry storage at the site of origin, but this option also presents major
challenges and the threats.
Weapons proliferation: The possession of
nuclear weapons by the US, Russia, France, the UK and China has encouraged the
further proliferation of nuclear technology and materials. Every state that has
a nuclear power capability, has the means to obtain nuclear material usable in a
nuclear weapon. Basically this means that the 44 nuclear power states could
become 44 nuclear weapons states. Many nations that have active commercial
nuclear power programs, began their research with two objectives - electricity
generation and the option to develop nuclear weapons. Also nuclear programs
based on reprocessing plutonium from spent fuel have dramatically increased the
risk of proliferation as the creation of more plutonium, means more nuclear
waste which in turn means more materials available for the creation of dirty
bombs.
Check out our 'zoom on
doom' map for those countries with nuclear weapons programmes or nuclear
weapons stationed on their soil.