Nuclear power is not the answer to climate change

We need a rapid and substantial decrease in our carbon emissions to deal with climate change. Nuclear power cannot deliver that. Our existing nuclear power stations provide just 20% of the electricity that we use and that is only 8% of our overall energy needs (a lot of the rest of our demand for energy comes from transport and industry). Currently, there is an unrealistic focus on nuclear power as a magical solution to climate change. Even if we doubled the UK's nuclear power production, our carbon emissions would only be reduced by 8%. In reality, nuclear power production is dirty, expensive and a uniquely risky business with the potential for catastrophic consequences.

The reductions to carbon emissions made by switching from coal, oil and gas powered electricity generation to nuclear power are very easily achievable, certainly compared to attempting to make reductions on a similar scale in transport and industry, for example. Indeed, as a number of fossil fuel powered generators (c.f. Kingsnorcth) come to the end of their natural lives they must be replaced in any event. So building new nuclear powered generators to maintain supply can be done without any upheaval to the status quo at all. As for the costs, these are high compared to coal fired generation, precisely because the externalities associated with high carbon outputs are not taken into account, whereas similar externalities relating to nuclear generation are. Requiring coal powered generators to clean up their act, for example through carbon capture and storage (CCS) completely changes the economic picture in favour of nuclear power.