Nuclear Power is no solution to Climate Change

Today is Blog Action Day 2009 and I want to argue that Nuclear Power is no solution to Climate Change. The nuclear industry is hoping that concern over climate change will result in support for nuclear power. However, even solely on the grounds of economic criteria it offers poor value for money in displacing fossil fuel plant. Further, with its high cost, long construction time, high environmental risk and problems resulting from waste management, it is clear that nuclear power does not offer a viable solution to climate change. Rather a mixture of energy efficiency and renewable energy offers a quicker, more realistic and sustainable approach to reducing CO2 emissions.

Nuclear power produces CO2

Nuclear power is not greenhouse friendly. While electricity generated from nuclear power entails no direct emissions of CO2, the nuclear fuel cycle does release CO2 during mining, fuel enrichment and plant construction. Uranium mining is one of the most CO2 intensive industrial operations and as demand for uranium grows CO2 emissions are expected to rise as core grades decline.

According to calculations by the Öko-Institute, 34 grams of CO2 are emitted per generated kWh in Germany [4]. The results from other international research studies show much higher figures - up to 60 grams of CO2 per kWh. In total, a nuclear power station of standard size (1,250MW operating at 6,500 hours/annum) indirectly emits between 376,000 million tonnes (Germany) and 1,300,000 million tonnes (other countries) of CO2 per year. In comparison to renewable energy, nuclear power releases 4-5 times more CO2 per unit of energy produced taking account of the whole fuel cycle. Also, with its long development time a nuclear power programme offers no short-term possibility for reducing CO2 emissions.

Nuclear power is unsafe

Problems of security, safety and environmental impact have been perennial issues for the nuclear industry. Many countries have decided against the development of nuclear power on these grounds, but radioactive contamination is no respector of national borders and nuclear power plants threaten the health and well-being of all surrounding nations and environments. There is also the very serious problems of nuclear proliferation and trafficking. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) view is that if nuclear power were to be used extensively to tackle climate change, "The security threat ... would be colossal"

Nuclear power is unsustainable

Nuclear power plants produce extremely long-lived toxic wastes, for which there is no safe means of disposal. The only independent scrutiny of a Government waste management safety case [NIREX in the UK] led to the cancellation of the proposed test site for nuclear waste disposal. As disposal is not scientifically credible, there is no option other than interim storage of radioactive wastes. This means that the legacy of radioactive wastes will have to be passed on to the next generation. Producing long-lived radioactive wastes, with no solution for their disposal, leaving a deadly legacy for many future generations to come is contrary to the principle of sustainability, as laid out in Agenda 21 at the Earth Summit.
In 1976 the UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution warned that it is, "irresponsible and morally wrong to commit future generations to the consequences of fission power on a massive scale unless it has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that at least one method exists for the safe isolation of these wastes for the indefinite future". Over twenty years on, still no such method has been found. Nuclear waste management policies are in disarray and there is growing public opposition to the transport and storage of nuclear waste - as has been demonstrated by the scenes at Gorleben, Germany. Under no circumstances can nuclear power be considered to be sustainable.

Uranium Mining in Meghalaya will violated International Law

Having argued that nuclear power in no solution to climate change I now want to address the hot topic of uranium mining in my homeland Meghalaya in North East India. I am very concerned by the Meghalaya government cabinet decision to allow the Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL) to initiate "pre-project" development programmes in uranium-rich West Khasi Hills in the name development by creating jobs for the poor in my state Meghalaya and to reduce climate change - it really does not make any social, environmental and economic sense to me.

Furthermore, the large scale open cast mining of high grade uranium in West Khasi Hills, Meghalaya is only 5 kms north of international border with Bangladesh. Once the government owned UCIL starts mining on the slopes of our native land it will contaminate the air and water system from our hills that flow down into the productive rice fields that feed millions of poor people in Bangladesh.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna which is the UN's nuclear watchdog facilitates the establishment of international conventions that address environmental issues which may relate to uranium mining and production facilities such as:

1. The Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context.

2. The Convention on access to Information, Public Participation in Decision Making and access to Justice in Environmental Matters.

3. The Convention on the Protection of the Environment through Criminal Law.

If UCIL still goes ahead with uranium mining away then they will violate International Law of cross boundary water and air pollution that will impact the people of another sovereign nation south of our border. But the people of Bangladesh can use International Law to protect themselves and hold the Government of India, the Government of Meghalaya and UCIL responsible for transboundary air and water contamination.

Fast forward to World Environment Day 2050!

Dairy Entry - June 5th 2009: The theme for World Environment Day 2009 is 'Your Planet Needs You - UNite to Combat Climate Change'. It reflects the urgency for nations to agree on a new global green deal at the crucial climate convention meeting in Copenhagen some 180 days later in the year, and the links with overcoming poverty and improved management of forests. But for me a Post-Carbon future would be a time in human history when no more oil is drilled, no more coal is mined and no more gas is piped in our planet. It would also mean a time when the remaining fossil fuels in stock globally are only burned with 100% Carbon Capture and Storage technologies. In a Post-Carbon future I see a world where apart from energy, no fertilizers, no plastics, no drugs, no foodstuffs - nothing will be manufactured from using fossil fuels. Lastly, as President Obama, promised that he will create 5 million new jobs in the new green economy - I see a Post-Carbon future where other politicians and leaders from around the world have come on board following Obama's leadership and within five decades they have together created 500 million green jobs in about 100 countries with a global annual turnover of USD $50 trillion.


Dairy Entry - June 5th 2050: So here I am 75 years old, still fit and strong - celebrating World Environment Day 2050 with my 9 grandchildren and my extended family inside the Lyngdoh Sacred Forest where 395 species of plants have been protected and preserved by my clan for centuries in Mawphlang Village, India. The theme of WED 2050 is 'Indigenous People - Celebrating their Resilience to Climate Change'. I am one of those old indigenous warriors from my Khasi Tribe who like others from across the planet have fought the good fight against climate change and managed to preserve our culture, our identity, our environment and our planet for generations to come. So I am enjoying my life in this Post-Carbon world where the global human population has stabilized at 9 billion, each with an annual carbon footprint of about 1 ton. I recall the time when it all started 41 years ago while I was at the historic climate change negotiations of COP 15 in Copenhagen where world leaders put a price tag on the emissions of carbon and all green house gases. Since then the price of carbon has gone up from $10 to $500 per ton and so over the years we have learned to measure it, price it - like a tax - and this has encouraged people across the planet to produce less of these GHGs. Under international climate law we also introduced legally enforceable ‘caps’ or limits to the amounts of GHGs any one country can emit in the course of a year. This has resulted in the transfer of appropriate clean technologies from the developed to the developing world and over time we have build a global green economy with a non-carbon consuming or emitting energy infra-structure.

Indigenous Candidate for IFAD President

I am proud to inform you that Mr. Phrang Roy from my Khasi Tribe has been nominated as one of the candidates for the next Presidency of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) based in Rome. This rank in the U.N. system is equivalent to the Secretary General. When the IFAD Board meets in Rome he will need the votes from all the members states to support him as their leader.

We need the leaders from US, the UK, the EU, members of the G77 and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) to vote for him. So if any of you have access to the decision makers and politicians of these governments where you are based then please lobby them to vote for our very own Khasi Indigenous Champion for Sustainable Development.

I have know Phrang since I was in high school and I am very proud of him and what he has done to improve the lives of the millions of poor people across the planet through his work with the U.N. system. While he has lived and worked around the world (Africa, South East Asia, India, Europe, the United States etc.), he was born and brought up in our matrilineal community in remote and culturally diverse Meghalaya in North East India where we still naturally embrace gender-equality, diversity and environmentally-appropriate processes of change. With this background of local and global experiences, I am confident that he can lead the recently revamped IFAD to higher grounds.

Knowing Phrang I believe that he can offer IFAD with a kind of leadership that understands the traditional knowledge of the poor and appreciates the potential contributions of emerging sciences and management techniques for achieving sustainable development.

More info on http://www.phrangroy.com/

May the positive force be with our Khasi Warrior! Let us all support his candidacy to the IFAD Presidency.

Mission to Poznan

At the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Poznan Stakeholder Forum with the CSD Education Caucus held a side event. This was on the missing 5th Building Block: the need for a fifth working group on education for sustainability – otherwise know as the human dimension. The side event was chaired by Pam Puntenney one of the co-chairs of the Caucus speakers included Bremley Lyngdoh Co-chair of the Education Caucus, Felix Dodds from Stakeholder Forum and Falk Schmidt from United Nations University.



P.J. Puntenney, Environmental and Human System Management, described the development of a sustainable society as a learning processand stressed the importance of good governance, as well as the links between climate change, biodiversity loss, poverty and the financial crisis, where the amelioration in one area may worsen the situation in another. She also stressed that since the late 1990s, climate change scientists have been saying that solutions which worked in the past will not necessarily work in the future, and that the human dimension of climate change mustbe integrated into the strategic policy framework of the UNFCCC.

Felix Dodds, Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future, stressed theneed to move the human dimensions’ agenda for building well-prepared societies to the center stage of the 2012 framework. He expressed concern regarding the lack of proper stakeholder involvement in the climate change process, such as in the work of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation and the Ad hoc Working Group on Long Term Cooperative Action. He proposed the creation of an informal government support groupto prepare a set of detailed recommendations for Copenhagen, to be circulated to all governments.


Bremley Lyngdoh, Worldview Impact, stressed the link between poverty and the environment and the need to test the policies proposed at the international level to see how they work for people at the local level. He also emphasized that the principle of “eco-effectiveness” should prevailover “eco-efficiency,” as the latter would not necessarily prevent pollution. He advocated the localization of environmental curricula, and stressed the crucial role of youth and the engagement of local people in attaining sustainability.

John Takang, UNU-International Human Dimension Programme, described his research, which focuses on the human dimension of global change, namely how humans influence their environment and the resultant impacts of altered environments on human life. He stressed the importance ofresearch to identify the kind of education that is necessary for realizing sustainability and the institutions that are required to cope with global change.

Participants discussed: education and awareness as a fundament building block of sustainable development; the links between poverty, security and the environment; eco-effectiveness principles; and the absence ofresearch on the linkages between climate change and public health.