Glow Or Cook - Are There Any Other Options ?  

WorldChanging has a look at the nuclear power industry and contemplates the idea that only nuclear can save us from global warming - an idea which has had the power of the nuclear PR machine behind it for quite some time.

Their conclusion ? On the whole we'll be a lot better off building clean energy technology solutions instead of enormous sinkholes for taxpayer funds.

Nuclear energy, which not so long ago seemed an obvious dead-end to most people concerned about the environment, has seen its fortunes rise a bit lately as concerns over climate change (or climate chaos, as the latest buzzphrase goes) intensify.

The argument, as made by people like James Lovelock and the Wired crowd, goes something like this: we must make drastic cuts in our greenhouse emissions; renewable energy is not yet ready for prime time and efficiency improvements alone won't work; nuclear energy is safer than it was and is zero-carbon in operation; therefore, climate chaos demands a massive program of building nuclear reactors.

There are numerous problems with this argument. First and most pressingly, a massive global nuclear program raises massive unanswered questions about the realism of safely operating (and storing the radioactive waste from) so many reactors in so many places. Second, while more research needs to be done, it appears that nuclear energy is not all that climate-safe after all.

...

Given the long lag-times involved in building new plants, and the hidden costs involved, many are saying that renewables are in fact far more economically competitive, and that with a comparable level of subsidy (and the elimation of subsidies for fossil fuels), wind, solar, hydro and wave energy could in fact deliver a clean-energy future more cheaply and on a quicker timeframe, without any of the attendant security or health risks.

Indeed, the worm seems to have turned on the Nukes-against-Greenhouse argument, politically. More and more scientists are questioning the validity of the pro-nuclear argument, while the campaign to green nuclear power seems to have made little headway in convincing the voters in most developed world countries. Just this week, forty of the U.K.'s leading climate and energy scientists have gone public with their opposition to Blair's nuclear proposals, while Blair's support on the issue within his own party has been described as weak. In the U.S. Germany and Canada, polls show consistant large-opposition to nuclear power, while Sweden already has a nuclear phase-out program.

I personally would not be willing to say that nuclear power never has a role: or, at least, I'm willing to be convinced. But the concerns are dire, and the benefits of making a bold, global commitment to creating a clean-energy economy are clear -- including the fact that it will yield real economic benefits to early adopters.

We should remember, too, that what's important is not that any particular clean energy or energy efficiency technology prove a silver bullet, but that we get smarter about creating dramatic improvements throughout the energy system.

Climate change is a huge challenge, and demands changed thinking. It's pretty clear, though, that we have many more choices than glow or cook.

Ex-WorldChanger Jamias Cascio has a new home on the web called "Open The Future".

Wired has a piece on clean technology investment entitled "Betting On a Green Future" which discusses KPCB's venture capital bets on the industry (which I've mentioned here before, but it never hurts to repeat good news).

Venture capitalist John Doerr made his name and fortune with early investments in Netscape Communications Corp., Amazon.com Inc., Google Inc. and other pioneering tech firms that went from scrappy startups to household names.

Now Doerr and his firm, Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, are placing big bets on an emerging sector he calls "green technology," one he believes could become as lucrative as information technology and biotechnology.

Kleiner Perkins, based in Menlo Park, California, plans to set aside $100 million of its latest $600 million fund for technologies that help provide cleaner energy, transportation, air and water. That's on top of more than $50 million Kleiner Perkins had already invested in seven greentech ventures.

"This field of greentech could be the largest economic opportunity of the 21st century," Doerr said. "There's never been a better time than now to start or accelerate a greentech venture."

...

Investors are seeing better prospects as technologies advance, more seasoned entrepreneurs enter the field and cleantech companies generate higher revenue. Successful initial public offerings by cleantech companies, such as SunPower Corp. of Sunnyvale, Calfornia, and China's SunTech Power, have also stoked investor interest.

Besides investing in greentech ventures, Doerr said he and Kleiner Perkins plan to "advocate for policies that reduce the climate crisis and increase energy innovation."

Vinod Khosla, a Kleiner Perkins associate who recently started his own venture capital firm, is financing a California ballot initiative to fund alternative energy initiatives through tax hikes on oil companies.

Venture capitalists point to the global forces driving greentech investment: the rising cost of fuel; the economic expansion of China, India and other Asian nations; and growing worries over global warming.