Okay, I copied the article directly from Forbes. Let’s see if the links come
through this time.
Evan
As Renewables Drive Up Energy Prices, Voters In U.S., Asia & Europe Are Opting
For
Nuclear Power
Michael Shellenberger
Michael Shellenberger
Contributor
Energy
I write about energy and the environment
Share facebook
Share twitter
Share linkedin
Dutch TV news comedian Arjen Lubach — the John Oliver of the Netherlands — makes
the case for nuclear power.
ZML
Voters in the U.S., Asia, and Europe are increasingly opting for nuclear power
in
response to rising electricity prices from the deployment of renewables like
solar
panels and wind turbines.
By a more than
two-to-one margin
(70% to 30%), voters in Arizona on Tuesday rejected a ballot initiative
(proposition
127) that would have resulted in the
closure of that state’s nuclear power plant
and in the massive deployment of solar and wind.
In Taiwan, momentum is building for a repeal of that nation’s nuclear energy
phase-out.
Grassroots pro-nuclear advocacy inspired a former president to
help activists gather over 300,000 signatures
so voters could vote directly on the issue on November 24.
And after
a coalition of grassroots groups rallied in Munich, Germany
last month to protest the closure of nuclear plants, a wave of mostly positive
media
coverage spread across Europe, inspiring
a majority of Netherlands voters
, and the nation’s ruling political party, to declare support for building new
nuclear
reactors.
Now, in the wake of rising public support for nuclear energy, a longstanding foe
of nuclear power, the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists, has
reversed its blanket opposition
to the technology and declared that existing U.S. nuclear plants must stay open
to protect the climate.
These events have surprised mainstream journalists, politicians, and energy
analysts
who, over the last three years, have dismissed and derided the world’s 454
operating
nuclear reactors as antiquated given the declining cost of solar panels and wind
turbines.
But the declining price of solar panels and wind turbines has not made the
technologies
more reliable, and the inherent unreliability of sunlight and wind — along with
their
huge material and land use requirements — have helped
drive up electricity prices
in places like California and Germany,
even at a time of lower natural gas prices
.
Notably, growing voter support for nuclear energy comes both from progressives
who
tend to be more concerned about climate change and from conservatives who tend
to
be more concerned about the cost of electricity.
In Netherlands, grassroots advocacy for nuclear energy, and favorable coverage
by
the mainstream media — including long segments (
in English
) by two of the nation’s most
influential TV journalists
— has shone a light on the inadequacy of solar and wind to address climate
change.
In Arizona, the campaign against proposition 127 focused heavily on avoiding the
mistakes made by California, where
electricity rates rose five times faster than the rest of the country
thanks in large measure to the closure of nuclear plants and the rapid
deployment
of solar panels.
California's anti-nuclear pro-renewables policies have become a poster child for
expensive energy
No on Prop 127
“Proposition 127 is a recycled version of California’s failed energy initiatives
being exported to Arizona courtesy of Tom Steyer, California energy hedge fund
billionaire,”
wrote
an Arizona state Senator.
Steyer, who
made his money
building coal plants in Asia, and has heavily invested in natural gas and
renewables,
spent a record $18 million
of his own money in the doomed effort to pass 127.
In Taiwan, it appears that it is the combination of environmental, economic, and
energy security concerns that has moved voters to overcome their fears of
nuclear
in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima accident and panic.
Taiwan imports 98% of its energy and, due to the nation’s nuclear energy phase
out,
suffered a devastating electricity shortage last year that
resulted in one death
,
threatened
the nation’s semiconductor industry, and contributed to the declining approval
of
the nation’s president.
Economics and environment are two sides of the same coin. Had California and
Germany
invested $680 billion into new nuclear power plants instead of renewables like
solar
and wind farms,
the two would already be generating 100% or more of their electricity from clean
(low-emissions) energy sources.
These aren’t the first pro-nuclear victories in recent years. In 2016, state
governments
in
Illinois
and
New York
acted to prevent nuclear plants from closing. In 2017, a
South Korean
“citizens jury” went from 60% opposed to 60% in favor of nuclear. That victory
was
quickly followed actions in
Connecticut
and
New Jersey
to save their nuclear plants.
Increasingly pro-nuclear advocacy is grassroots. In places like South Korea,
Taiwan,
and Europe, where the electric utilities that own nuclear plants are often
government-owned,
and thus unable to engage in politics, it has been up to independent
environmental
groups — and
outspoken climate scientists
— to advocate for nuclear power.
The impacts of their work has stunned and thrilled pro-nuclear activists. “We
Dutch
have been anti-nuclear since the 1970s,” said Olguita Oudendijk, co-founder of
Ecomodernism
Netherlands. “What turned us around is the high cost of renewables, the
Nuclear Pride Fest
, and serious media attention to the issue turned the public around.”
A poll of 18,000 Dutch voters released yesterday found that
54% favored the use of nuclear energy
while just 35% opposed it. “Achieving climate goals weighs heavier than their
objections
to nuclear energy for voters,” the pollster said.
In Taiwan — where pro-nuclear activists went on hunger strike, and to court — to
overturn the government’s attempt to keep the referendum off the ballot, a
former
president
said
, "Opposing nuclear energy is now outdated. What has become a trend is how to
reduce
emissions of carbon dioxide to tackle global warming."
In most places, activists have focused heavily on
debunking the many myths
about nuclear power promoted by organizations like Greenpeace, including the
notion
that cheaper solar panels and wind turbines will translate into lower
electricity
prices when
the opposite is usually the case
.
The inadequacy of solar panels and wind turbines was highlighted by
Arjen Lubach
— the John Oliver of Dutch TV — last Sunday, who in a 20-minute segment educated
viewers on nuclear power’s necessity and safety while making sly, sexual puns.
(The
segment
was translated into English.)
Taking nuclear out of "taboo-sphere"
ZMT
A telling moment in the segment came when Lubach cut to a Greenpeace
spokesperson
who acknowledged that with nuclear energy “There are no carbon emissions, that’s
true, so it doesn’t contribute to global warming, but there are other
disadvantages.”
“Whoa whoa, wait a minute,” Lubach interrupted. “It doesn’t contribute to global
warming but there are
‘other’
disadvantages? You can’t state a huge advantage and then say, “It becomes even
worse.”
Asked about the difference in attitudes between the Dutch and the nation’s
famously
romantic, antinuclear German neighbors, Dutch ecomodernist Oudendijk said, “We
Dutch
are basically very rational people. We just want to solve the problem.”
Said TV comedian Lubach to an on-air correspondent, “I say we take nuclear
energy
out of the taboo-sphere.” The correspondent in the "taboo-sphere" is dressed in
protective
gear to protect himself, he explains, not from nuclear but rather from STDs.
I am a Time Magazine “Hero of the Environment,” Green Book Award Winner, and
President
of Environmental Progress, a research and policy organization. My writings have
appeared
in The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, Scientific
American,
Nature Energy,...
MORE
Michael Shellenberger, President, Environmental Progress. Time Magazine "Hero
of the Environment."
