Nuclear Comeback

In February 2006 the Japanese Ministry of Environment turned off the heating in its buildings, leaving employees huddled around their computers for warmth. The intention was to encourage others to save energy and help Japan meet its Kyoto Protocol targets on greenhouse emissions. It may seem like a drastic measure but it's no less drastic than Tony Blair's solution to global warming. In a move provoking outrage from some environmentalists, the British Government has proved it's prepared to think the unthinkable by showing renewed interest in nuclear power.

Pending the publication of a report on the safety of nuclear waste disposal, the Government is widely expected to announce later this year plans to build the first new nuclear power stations in Britain for decades.

While many environmentalists find it distasteful that nuclear power is being promoted as the 'clean' option, some prominent environmental scientists have publicly revised their view of nuclear power in response to the growing threat of global warming. Sir James Lovelock, for example, creator of the Gaia hypothesis which views the entire planet as one giant organism, now sees nuclear power as the only way to prevent global warming.

This may seem surprising given the time it takes for the nuclear waste radiation to decay to safe levels – the thousands of tonnes of nuclear waste from existing nuclear power stations will take tens of thousands of years to decay. There are also concerns about the creation of plutonium, a by-product of nuclear power that's used in nuclear weapons.

But the problem, we are told, is that there are no alternatives. Renewable energies, such as solar, wind and wave power, just aren't capable of replacing fossil fuels to meet our ever increasing energy needs.

The Conservatives have distanced themselves from nuclear power, arguing that renewables such as wind and wave power could make a much more significant contribution than they have in the past. What's more, they say, there may yet be a new lease of life in fossil fuels, with clean coal and carbon capture technologies.

Are they right or are they just playing politics? If renewables can't meet our energy needs now, what about in the future? And if nuclear power really is the lesser evil just how much has the technology come on in the last couple of decades?