This blog has now moved. Please visit Zerochampion.com and update your bookmarks
Powerfully argued article in today's Evening Standard (which very annoyingly I'm unable to find on their site) by Zac Goldsmith on the upcoming decision to go-ahead with a new generation of nuclear power station. The campaigner-cum Tory party candidate for Richmond Park picks apart the argument for pressing ahead with nuclear. "If nuclear power genuinely offered a solution, we would have to embrace it. But it doesn't, and nor does it address the looming energy crisis we face in this country," he writes.
Goldsmith goes on to point out how relatively minor the impact nuclear will have on climate change - we would only see an 8% reduction in carbon emissions and not until 2035. He adds that the decision to go nuclear would "divert money away from genuinely cost-effective solutions" such as energy efficiency. Goldsmith then quotes analysis from the Rocky Mountain Institute, which found that a pound invested in energy efficiency buys seven times more "energy solution" than a pound invested in nuclear.
He goes on to discuss micro-renewables and decentralised power as massive opportunities. "A yes to nuclear will not only bind us to a flawed course for decades; it is also a no to these opportunities - and a tragic mistake."
Comments