A quick note :
The main arguments in the UK Press/public for nuclear and against renewable :
1) It can’t be done because wind/solar are sporadic resources
2) Nuclear is safe and the only option to reduce dependency on coal / oil
3) Basing on renewables means that the poor people of the world will suffer because they won’t have enough energy not being allowed to build nuclear power stations.
Living in Germany I’m very proud of their decision to tackle the “Power Transformation” – but it’s not wishy washy thinking here.
They aimed at 12% renewables by 2011 (which British commentators also said was a fantasy) and are currently at 17%.
They see the same problems with renewables must be solved everywhere (storage and transmission) which can make them market leaders if they solve them – they are not afraid of problems and have the intellectual and industrial means to solve them.
Nuclear is not safe. In just a few dozen years we have had a wide spectrum of severe accidents, of which doubtless many have been hushed up given that the global regulator is paid for and stocked from within the ranks of the nuclear industry. The consequences of the “unexpected”, the enormous cleanup costs, not to mention the horrendous problem of cleaning up the waste, are simply so severe that it is worth searching for alternatives.
As for the laughable ideas about damning people to poverty – pure hypocracy and ignorance : Manhattan and City of London, the two largest offshore centers for money laundering and coruption in the world. For every dollar “given” to Africa, 10 are taken out. The discrepency between our basic needs and what makes us fulfilled as human beings… it’s possible to go on for hours.