Debate at COP27: Nuclear Energy, Climate Friend or Foe? (youtube.com) 273
Long-time Slashdot reader gordm shares an interesting video from the United Nations Climate Change Conference. "At COP27, Tobias Holle (activist with Youth Strike for Climate) debated Mark Nelson (founder of Radiant Energy Fund) as to whether nuclear power can help us tackle climate change."
The event took place at the International Atomic Energy Agency's "Atoms for Climate" pavillion, where the IAEA's climate advisor presented the debate's topic as "Nuclear Energy: Climate Friend or Foe?" (and introduced the two debaters as "enthusiastic young climate champions"). The Youth Strike for Climate activist objected to commiting humanity to 1 million years of maintaining nuclear waste. But he also argued that extreme weather was creating additional security risks, that the per-kilowatt hour cost was economically prohibitive, that nuclear plants were politically unpopular — and that anyways, they take too long to build given our current climate crisis. "We need fast solutions."
The Radiant Energy founder disagreed, arguing over specific statistics and insisting that nuclear energy should be considered a low-carbon energy solution, and also safe. (He pointed out that Chernobyl's nuclear plant actually continued operating for 14 years after its 1986 nuclear accident.) Interestingly he also argued that in the Netherlands there's a museum of nuclear waste — a science museum attached to their nuclear facility — "where they don't just have the high-level waste, they have the highest part of high-level waste, the most dangerous isotopes, separated from the nuclear fuel. The most radioactive stuff — very hot for 500 years — and they have a tour where you can walk over it, and you can feel the warmth from the floor from the radioactive isotopes....
"You can absolutely manage the safe, secure, and even educational storage of the most radioactive isotopes... We know very well how to manage it."
The event took place at the International Atomic Energy Agency's "Atoms for Climate" pavillion, where the IAEA's climate advisor presented the debate's topic as "Nuclear Energy: Climate Friend or Foe?" (and introduced the two debaters as "enthusiastic young climate champions"). The Youth Strike for Climate activist objected to commiting humanity to 1 million years of maintaining nuclear waste. But he also argued that extreme weather was creating additional security risks, that the per-kilowatt hour cost was economically prohibitive, that nuclear plants were politically unpopular — and that anyways, they take too long to build given our current climate crisis. "We need fast solutions."
The Radiant Energy founder disagreed, arguing over specific statistics and insisting that nuclear energy should be considered a low-carbon energy solution, and also safe. (He pointed out that Chernobyl's nuclear plant actually continued operating for 14 years after its 1986 nuclear accident.) Interestingly he also argued that in the Netherlands there's a museum of nuclear waste — a science museum attached to their nuclear facility — "where they don't just have the high-level waste, they have the highest part of high-level waste, the most dangerous isotopes, separated from the nuclear fuel. The most radioactive stuff — very hot for 500 years — and they have a tour where you can walk over it, and you can feel the warmth from the floor from the radioactive isotopes....
"You can absolutely manage the safe, secure, and even educational storage of the most radioactive isotopes... We know very well how to manage it."
