096-128UK.qxd:Layout 1
29-04-2010
17:27
Pagina 102
oxygen 09 – 05.2010
102
Why environmentalists should support nuclear energy
electric dams. However, nuclear
world has enough uranium to
power should only operate within
cover the forty or fifty years need-
a strong regulatory system. The
ed to get us to 100% renewables.
Chernobyl accident was serious
Reprocessing is also highly pollut-
and tragic, and had many causes,
ing and extremely expensive. Sec-
by Chicco Testa
the way, has the defect of absolv-
but one was the absence of proper
ondly, there should be an interna-
Chicco Testa is one of the
ing them from having any unrealis-
regulation given the political sys-
tional nuclear fuel cycle, controlled
founders of Legambiente and
tic expectations about technology
tem that then existed.
by the International Atomic Energy
in 1987 he was among the
– renewable energy sources –
Nuclear power is not cheap, and
Agency. This has been supported in
protestors of the referendum
which deserves a greater and more
never will be. The infamous claim
principle by the Obama administra-
that closed the doors on the
realistic kind of respect.
that it would produce electricity
tion, but must be implemented
use of nuclear power in Italy.
This is one of the points that was
“too cheap to metre” is often used
without delay.
But now he has changed his
well taken by the American Presi-
by opponents to argue that the
Thirdly, the countries which have
mind and has written: “My
dent. Quoting from a conference
nuclear industry should never be
nuclear weapons must finally meet
opinion is different today, but
with Obama: “I believe that the
trusted. Indeed, the reaction of
their obligations under the Nuclear
the reasoning behind the
creation of ‘green’ jobs will be a
many of my environmentalist
Non-Proliferation Treaty, which
thought is the same as it was
driving force for our economy for a
friends to my new position in sup-
requires nuclear states to negotiate
more than 20 years ago:
long time. That’s why we have allo-
port of nuclear has been more anti
away their own nuclear weapons,
the environmental factor.”
cated a large sum of money for
the industry than anti the technol-
as a ‘bargain’ with those states
ogy. The industry has not always
that promise not to acquire them.
The world depends ever increas-
diesel and all the other clean ener-
been fully open and transparent
There is a review of this treaty in
ingly upon fossil fuels – primarily
gy sources. Unfortunately, at the
about costs. Greater honesty is
May in New York, so the prolifera-
coal and gas - for the production of
same time, we’ll have an enormous
essential to winning public sup-
tion risk will rightly be high on the
electric energy. If you look at the
need for energy, which won’t be
port. In my view, the main risk of
agenda of nuclear discussions in
data of the last 10, 20 or 30 years,
able to be satisfied by these
nuclear power generation has
the next few months.
the phenomenon is evident. In the
sources, no matter how fast they
always been weapons prolifera-
last ten years, nuclear energy has
grow. So the question is: where will
tion. Every state that has nuclear
basically maintained its production.
this energy come from? The advan-
bombs has acquired them by
Hydroelectricity has increased a bit.
tage of nuclear energy is that it
developing nuclear power first –
The new renewable sources are
doesn’t emit greenhouse gas and
except Israel, which purchased its
rapidly growing, but are still a
we should have the courage to
weapons. It is challenging, to put it
small amount. On the other hand,
acknowledge that France, Japan
mildly, to argue that nuclear is
coal and gas have grown to such
and other countries are using
good for countries like the US, UK
a point as to overshadow the
nuclear energy more aggressively
or Italy, but not for Iran. Three
other sources and, instead, have
and much more successfully, with-
things must be done to ensure that
increased their percentage: from
out any accidents at all.” Again
a bridge expansion of nuclear
54% in 1997 to 62% in 2007. A
Obama very effectively states:
power does not lead to greater
far cry from being a boom of the
“Nuclear energy is still the major
weapons proliferation. First, there
renewable sources. The only real
source of energy that doesn’t pro-
should be an end to nuclear repro-
boom is the same old one, the suc-
duce the emission of pollutants. A
cessing, in which spent fuel is
cess of fossil fuels: 6 kilowatt hours
nuclear power station, with the
treated to become plutonium,
out of 10 are made from coal and
same energy produced in a year, is
which can then be used either in
with gas. It is quite extraordinary
capable of reducing pollution by
reactors or to make weapons. The
how some of the main environ-
16 million tons of coal. That’s prac-
mental organizations continue to close their eyes to the numbers and let themselves be lulled by chanting slogans (sun, wind…) which, by
solar energy, wind energy, bio-