The dangers of nuclear tests
 

Welcome to our nuclear testing Archive. Have fun browsing!

 

Article #114: James Lovelock's Latest Book Trashes Renewables, Endorses Nuclear Energy

(Browse for more articles)

 
On the front page of the World Nuclear available. Iceland is one of them, and it
Association website prominently rests a draws a large part of its energy needs
quote from what some consider the world's from this source." How many of you know
leading environmentalist and among the that, while natural gas could cut carbon
world's top scientists, Dr. James dioxide emissions by half, if used
Lovelock: "There is no sensible ubiquitously, some of the natural gas
alternative to nuclear power if we are to leaks into the air before it burnt?
sustain civilization." - James Lovelock, According to the Society of Chemical
preeminent world leader in the Industry's report (2004), this amounts to
development of environmental about 2 to 4 percent of the gas used.
consciousness Methane, the main constituent of natural
At age eighty-six, Dr. Lovelock has just gas is 24 times more potent a greenhouse
published his fourth book, The Revenge of gas than carbon dioxide.
Gaia (Penguin Books, 2006). "Gaia" is Dr. Fusion sounded great in theory, but when
Lovelock's belief that earth is a living, I discussed it with Dr. Fred Begay, at
evolving organism, not just a hunk of the Los Alamos National Laboratories,
rock we all live upon. Through his book, this past November, he told me it may
Lovelock refers to Gaia, when he is take fifty years to develop, if it ever
discussing our third planet from the sun. could be developed as an energy source.
His latest book is a MUST read for anyone Lovelock explains in his book why Fusion
who is following the renaissance in Energy would be wonderful, but he brought
nuclear energy. Environmentalists won't up the one point, which stymies nuclear
read this book. Perhaps their bosses will physicists (and which environmentalists
BAN them from reading this book. Those won't even talk about), "... the nuclear
environmentalists who carefully read fusion of hydrogen yields millions of
Lovelock's latest book may very well times more energy than its mere
become nuclear power lobbyists, if they combustion, but to start the powerful
would bathe, shave and spiff up a bit. reaction requires some means of heating
Chapter Five, "Sources of Energy," will the hydrogen to 150 million degrees." How
instantly disintegrate every ridiculous exactly go you go about heating something
argument propounded by the naïve and on earth up to 150 million degrees, when
antediluvian anti-nuclear movements the core of the sun has a temperature of
across the world. a little more than 100 million degrees?
Dr. Lovelock's credentials and Again, great theory and work is being
achievements are light years beyond those done in this arena to bring about a
of any environmental mouthpiece espousing solution sometime this century, but this
the "green" movement. More so than anyone technology remains in an incubation
alive, Lovelock is first and foremost a stage.
giant of the earth's environmentalist The most shocking and disturbing
movement. Since 1974, Lovelock has been a discussion through Lovelock's book was
Fellow of the Royal Society. Since 1994, the problem with carbon dioxide
he has been an Honorary Visiting Fellow emissions. The burning question these
of Green College, University of Oxford. days is "WHAT" to do with nuclear waste.
New Scientist described him as "one of Lovelock believes we should start
the great thinkers of our time. The worrying about what to do about carbon
London Observer has called him, "one of dioxide emissions waste, "The world's
the environmental movement's most annual production of carbon dioxide is
influential figures." In 2003, he was 27,000 million tons. If this much were
made Companion of Honour by Her Majesty frozen into solid carbon dioxide at -80
the Queen. Prospect magazine named Dr. degrees Centigrade, it would make a
Lovelock in September 2005, "one of the mountain one mile high and twelve miles
world's top 100 global public in circumference. To sequester this much
intellectuals." each year could not be achieved quickly -
How does Dr. Lovelock respond to the probably not sooner than twenty years
question of nuclear waste? He writes, "I from now." He added, "If only had
have offered in public to accept all the developed and installed the equipment for
high-level waste produced in a year from removing carbon dioxide from power
a nuclear power station for deposit on my stations and industry fifty years ago, we
small plot of land it would occupy a would now face surmountable problems."
space about a cubic metre in size and fit Another problem with carbon dioxide
safely in a concrete pit, and I would use should give you nightmares or reach for a
the heat from its decaying radioactive gas mask. Carbon dioxide, according to
elements to heat my home. It would be a Dr. Lovelock, "has a complicated removal
waste not to use it. More important, it with an effective residence time of
would be no danger to me, my family or between fifty and a hundred years. About
the wildlife." That should enlighten the half of the carbon dioxide we have so far
yokels arguing against the Yucca Mountain added to the air remains there." That
nuclear waste depository. means the carbon dioxide we add to our
Chapter Five, "Sources of Energy," existing air pollution will still be
concisely and cogently answers every breathed by our children, grandchildren
silly "theory" about renewable energy and their children. How is that for a
sources hyped by the "green" movement. legacy?
Let's take Biomass, which makes sense to James Lovelock's Conclusion on Nuclear
any concerned citizen. Lovelock even Energy
agrees with the theory of Biomass, How does James Lovelock feel about
writing, "Used sensibly and on a modest nuclear energy? "I believe nuclear power
scale, burning wood or agricultural waste is the only source of energy that will
for heat or energy is no threat to Gaia." satisfy our demands and yet not be a
Please note that he modified his hazard to Gaia and interfere with its
statement with "sensibly" and "modest." capacity to sustain a comfortable climate
In a nutshell, he explains why Biomass and atmospheric composition. This is
will not become a leading energy source, mainly because nuclear reactions are
"Bio fuels are especially dangerous millions of times more energetic than
because it is too easy to grow them as a chemical reactions. The most energy
replacement for fossil fuel they will available from a chemical reaction, such
then demand an area of land or ocean far as burning carbon in oxygen, is about
larger than Gaia can afford... We have nine kilowatt hours per kilogram. The
already taken more than half of the nuclear fusion of hydrogen atoms to form
productive land to grow food for helium gives several million times as
ourselves. How can we expect Gaia to much, and the energy from splitting
manage the Earth if we try to take the uranium is greater still."
rest of the land for fuel production?" He Through his book, Lovelock reminds us
added poignantly, "Just imagine that we that nuclear power is the single answer
tried to power our present civilization for this century, "We need emission-free
on crops grown specifically for fuel, energy sources immediately, and there is
such as coppice woodland, fields of no serious contender to nuclear fission."
oilseed rape, and so on. These are the Lovelock addresses Three Mile Island,
'bio fuels', the much-applauded renewable Chernobyl, nuclear testing in the 1960s,
energy source...We would need the land and many other events over the past fifty
area of several Earths just to grow the years, as nuclear energy has developed.
bio fuel." If you wondered about radiation and
Wind power gets shellacked as well. For cancer, Lovelock answers that as well.
those environmentalists, such as Amory You may leap up, after reading those
Lovins, who believe "Wind Farms" are pages, and start faxing them off to every
going to become a significant energy environmentalist group you can contact.
source, they are full of hot air. It may be the most definitive analysis of
According to the Royal Society of the disconnect the media and the greens
Engineers 2004 report, onshore European have about nuclear energy and its impact
wind energy is two and a half times, and on our health that you have ever read.
offshore wind energy over three times, Lovelock concludes, "The persistent
more expensive per kilowatt hour than gas distortion of the truth about the health
or nuclear energy. Denmark, which risks of nuclear energy should make us
pioneered wind farms, is regretting the wonder if the other statements about
decision. Niels Gram of the Danish nuclear energy are equally flawed."
Federation of Industries said, "In green One specific question that has puzzled
terms windmills are a mistake and me, for a number of years, was this: How
economically make no sense... Many of us many people die to produce each of our
thought wind was the 100-percent solution energy sources? The table below answered
for the future, but we were wrong. In that question. The comparative safety of
fact, taking all energy needs into the different energy sources comes from
account it is only a 3 percent solution." the Paul Scherrer Institute in
Lovelock writes, "To supply the UK's Switzerland in a 2001 report, which
present electricity needs would require Lovelock reproduces on page 102 of his
276,000 wind generators, about three per book. The Institute examined all of the
square mile, if national parks, urban, world's large-scale energy sources and
suburban and industrial areas are compared them against their safety
excluded... at best, energy is available records. The numbers of deaths were
from wind turbines only 25 percent of the expressed in terms of terrawatt year of
time." German environmentalists, who have energy made, between 1970 and 1992. A
recently led the charge for Wind Power, terrawatt year (TTY) is one million
should reconsider. Lovelock writes, "The million watts of electricity made and
most recent report from Germany put wind continuously used throughout a year.
energy as available only 16 percent of Fuel Fatalities Who Deaths per TTY
the time." Coal 6400 Workers 342
Surely, solar power must be the answer, Hydro 4000 Public 883
right? Wrong! Lovelock writes, "Solar Natural Gas 1200 Workers and Public 85
cells are not yet suitable for supplying Nuclear 31 Workers 8
electricity directly to homes or Lovelock does not simply endorse nuclear,
workplaces, mostly because, despite over as an idle thought. He is passionate
thirty years of development, they are about nuclear energy as a life-saving
quite expensive to make. At the Centre measure, "My strong pleas for nuclear
for Alternative Technology in Wales there energy come from a growing sense that we
is an experimental house with a roof made have little time left in which to install
almost entirely of silicon photocells. In a reliable and secure supply of
summer it provides about three kilowatts electricity.... The important and
of electricity, but the cost of overriding consideration is time we have
installation was comparable with the nuclear power now, and new nuclear
house itself, and the expected life of building should be started immediately.
the cells is about ten years. Sunlight, All of the alternatives, including fusion
like wind, is intermittent and would, energy, require decades of development
without efficient storage, be an before they can be employed on a scale
inconvenient energy source at these that would significantly reduce
latitudes." emissions."
Solar and wind power were just two of the He concludes his masterpiece of Chapter
many energy sources Lovelock sends to the Five of The Revenge of Gaia by writing:
dumpster. Wave and tidal energy, "Meanwhile at the world's climate centres
hydro-electricity, hydrogen, fusion the barometer continues to fall and tell
energy, coal and oil and natural gas all of the imminent danger of a climate storm
suffer similar consequences under Dr. whose severity the Earth has not endured
Lovelock's scientific microscope. for fifty-five million years. But in the
Geothermal gets a partial endorsement, cities the party goes on how much longer
but Lovelock writes, "Unfortunately there before reality enters our minds?
are few places where it is freely






1 - A - B - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - 37 - 38 - 39 - 40 - 41 - 42 - 43 - 44 - 45 - 46 - 47 - 48 - 49 - 50 - 51 - 52 - 53 - 54 - 55 - 56 - 57 -