Sorry, no Nukes please

Europe does not need nuclear power which can be dangerous and is not a solution to climate change

Mehru Jaffer Vienna

According to anti-nuclear Europeans, nuclear power is the most dirty and dangerous form of energy. It is an expensive technology that poses a problem and is not the solution to climate change.  At 'Science or fiction: Is there a future for nuclear?' an international conference on fusion energy and new nuclear reactor models hosted in Vienna by Global 2000 and Friends of the Earth — Austria, participants focused on climate change and the fair distribution of resources and energy.

Indeed, once again, the conclusion is that Europe must stop wasting the taxpayer's money to pursue a dangerous and expensive technology like nuclear power. The anti-nuclear groups feel that Europe does not need nuclear power. Instead, it needs investment in renewable energies as well as in cutting back energy waste.

Energy policy stands at a crossroad today waiting for the world to decide whether going nuclear is a sustainable option. Since global warming is already upon the world, it is said that there is no time to test costly and time-consuming technologies. The Friends of the Earth suggest safer technologies that are cheaper and need refinement to improve efficiency.

Antony Frogatt, an independent consultant on nuclear issues who held a workshop on the impact of public spending and political support for nuclear energy on energy saving, efficiency and renewable energies, feels that minimising the energy demand is a condition for a sustainable energy supply by renewables. Instead of importing oil, gas or biomass, a sustainable energy system has to rely on regional energy resources.

Nuclear power remains the least desired energy option within the European Union (EU). Yet, the EU funding for fission and fusion energy research for the period 2007 to 2011is 2.75 billion euros, a huge increase from 1.35 billion euros for the previous seven years.

In Austria, a campaign was launched in January 2007 to leave the 'Euratom' and save 40 million euros annually for investment in alternative sources of energy. The widespread consensus is that nuclear power is too risky a technology and its use will burden future generations with nuclear waste. Austria remains one of the staunchest anti-nuclear members of the EU with public opinion as low as five per cent in favour of nuclear energy.

The EU supports the expensive nuclear industry through the Euratom Treaty signed in 1957. All EU member states are automatically members of Euratom, including nations like Austria that do not have nuclear power. An opinion poll in March 2007 showed that 63 per cent of Austrians favour withdrawal from Euratom. 

Thomas Lackner, Project Coordinator, Friends of the Earth, regretted that none of the pro-nuclear experts who were invited made it to the conference that ended with an open discussion with the public on nuclear fusion. “What we would like to see are more debates on the nuclear issue so that the public can decide for itself,” Lackner told Hardnews.

The perception here is that the public is often excluded from essential political decisions like the use of nuclear energy. Technocratic paternalism and political preferences often overlook elements that are essentially social. The demand is to identify the social in the technical, to allow discussions on technical issues and social consequences in a culture of transparency and openness. “Technical aspects have to be discussed and understood before social choices are made by ordinary people who don't know enough about nuclear issues,” Lackner said.