Urgent need for carbon action

Peter Noakes and I agree on the urgent need for carbon action, including carbon pricing. We disagree on nuclear energy’s ability to play an economically meaningful part of the solution.

Wind, solar, and storage technologies are plummeting in price. Efficiency and conservation are no-brainers: building envelope improvements, LED lighting, and high-efficiency heat pumps are proven methods. Many ways exist for highly renewable energy systems to be affordable and reliable. Global data also shows renewable electricity adds output and saves carbon faster than nuclear power does or ever has.

Nuclear takes forever, 10 to 19 years from planning to operation, or it gets abandoned. About half the nuclear reactors ever ordered in the U.S. were canceled. New wind and solar farms take two to five years from planning to operation. Nuclear power is practically dead. Look at the Vogtle nuclear plant being constructed in the U.S. It’s taking forever as always, and the projected cost has spiraled from an original $4.4 billion to an estimated $25 billion including financing costs. Despite receiving generous federal loan guarantees, a co-owner recently issued an ultimatum to walk away forcing a brutal deal to keep the project alive. This isn’t uncommon.

We’re out of tomorrows. In Canada, existing hydroelectric reservoirs can act as giant batteries. Wind, solar, and efficiency measures are affordable, as are a myriad of storage solutions. These project costs are falling. They scale rapidly, and consistently come in on time and budget. None of this holds true for nuclear power.

Phillip Griffin, North Wiltshire