A False Dawn, Again...

Is Hinckley Point C the future of stable, carbon-neutral energy generation?  The proponents of nuclear energy and the lobbyists that support the industry and the adoption of its dubious technologies would say a resounding "yes", citing the variable and some would argue unreliable supply available from renewable energy sources.

The reality is as usual, somewhat different to the puffery of the corporately interested. From the coal industry and lobby in the States and elsewhere, to the oil and gas industry, still with their politically and financially connected supporters in our and governments abroad; those vested personally in the profit-streams of climate despoilers will continue to argue black is white to continue to feather their squalid little nests at the expense of the rest of the world's population, and ultimately, ironically their own, such is their myopic self-interest.

The simple facts are that nuclear at best will supply around 33% of electricity, whereas renewables top 40% and rising. Renewables have a minimal impact on the environment, and while admittedly, nuclear in terms of emissions and fuel is far, far cleaner in the short-term than fossil fuels, the working life of the plants that produce it are very short-lived and leave a toxic legacy that will endure for generations to come, let alone the potential for catastrophic failure within their working lives.

One argument that is always levelled against renewables is the variability of their output, being inherently dependant on  inconstant sources of energy. Well, the converse has always been true of nuclear: you can't shut a nuclear power-plant down if the demand for its output drops. The solution to this was co-developed in the UK, alongside the nuclear power programme [itself a blind, as it was our part in the arms-race that fuelled the development in the first place]: pumped-storage. This simple in concept, but difficult in execution idea is to use water to store energy kinetically in reservoirs, using electricity surplus to current requirements to pump it to those reservoirs, for it to be released as needed to power turbines below.

I would maintain that the use of - effectively - capacitors to store the surplus output of nuclear generation, could also smooth out the inconsistency of renewable supplies: the electrical analogy holds true in both usage cases as far as I'm concerned. The plus points of renewables  so far outweigh the negatives of nuclear, I really can't see a valid debate here - despite the estimable James Lovelock coming out in favour of nuclear as the only practical solution to climate change.

I would argue quite the contrary, as the principal issues at hand are greed and waste. We can generate all the resources we require to produce all the food and goods we need with renewables and intelligent energy storage; provided that we rein in the waste produced by short-termism and inbuilt obsolescence. Attitude is everything, and we need to appreciate that being green is neither fashion nor fad, but a necessity.