Is nuclear the answer to our energy woes?
MENTION the words nuclear energy and many would express concern about the effects of radiation. But the truth is that there is radiation everywhere in the atmosphere and nuclear power could very well be the future of renewable energy.
That was the topic of a recent lecture given by Robert Parker as part of the Explorations Series at Charles Sturt University’s Dubbo campus.
Titled ‘How our fear of nuclear energy is hurting the environment’, the talk focused on the effects of climate change and the benefits of renewable resources.
Mr Parker, who grew up in Dubbo, is now a civil engineer and holds a Master’s degree in Nuclear Science.
He is a huge supporter of renewable energy, and founded CANWIN – a climate action community group in the NSW Southern Highlands where he was a strong advocate for wind and solar power.
Mr Parker has since turned his attention to nuclear energy and is now the president of the Australian Nuclear Association. In 2015, he was a signatory to the Nice declaration which committed 39 countries to the Nuclear for Climate campaign.
“This is a topic that is very dear to my heart,” he told the audience. “And while it’s an issue that went off the boil – the problem remains.”
While wind and solar are great sources of renewable energy, Mr Parker says that Australia needs a robust supplier and ‘nuclear is the solution.’
He believes the nation is currently held back by a lack of interest and support at a national level. But if left as is, the situation will become untenable for future generations.
“Without climate policy, there will be a 2-3 degree global temperature rise. Ocean temperatures will be the drivers of terrestrial temperatures. Energy is the key to addressing this matter.” In Australia, commercial and manufacturing enterprise contribute a third of CO2 emissions, with transport (17 per cent), stationary energy (18 per cent) and agriculture (13 per cent) also contributing significantly. “The fossil fuels of coal, oil and gas make up 96 per cent of the primary energy landscape, with hydro, biofuels, wind and solar each at one per cent,” Mr Parker explained, adding that changes were needed. “Gas is not the solution – gas perpetuates the issue. Wind and solar have the issue of intermittency – we need to look at some more alternatives… more robust ways of supporting our energy sector. Wind, solar, geothermal and bio energy are just not enough.”
Nuclear energy may not have entered the fore in this country, but is hugely popular in places like France where it is the main source of renewable power, operating cheaply and efficiently.
“The French operate with 74 per cent nuclear energy and offer the second cheapest power in Europe. Between the 1970s and 2000s, they built 53 reactors, a monumental investment.”
It’s also used in various other European nations, across North America and parts of Asia.
Mr Parker said that it would be in Australia’s best interests to follow suit and invest in construction of nuclear plants.
“There is no credible path to address climate change that doesn’t involve nuclear power,” he said. “Nuclear power is essential to addressing climate change.”
“At the moment, we are trying to gather sparse energy at low grade, which ends up with a huge use of non-renewable materials.”
For nuclear energy to make a difference in Australia’s energy consumption, the government would need to make an investment much like France’s – 45 reactors with a value of $389.7 billion ‘to have enough for a significant impact on the industrial process.’
“It can stop Australia from sliding into becoming an industrial backwater and presents massive opportunity for industrial renewal and technical inventiveness.”
Addressing the fear that often surrounds this topic, Mr Parker said that radiation is everywhere.
“People always bring up the fear of radiation but there’s radiation all around us,” he said. “The concept is not borne of what humans have lived through.
“Just eating a banana is the equivalent of living within 80 km of a nuclear power plant for a year.”