Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

David Hone
Climate Change Adviser, Shell Group

David Hone

David Hone is the climate change adviser for the Shell Group and vice chairman of the International Emissions Trading Association. He also works closely with the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. ALL POSTS

Proliferation or not?

Q: At this week's international nuclear summit in Washington, D.C., one of the key issues being addressed was nuclear proliferation. To what extent would a rapid expansion of nuclear power, particularly in developing countries, raise the risk of nuclear proliferation?

Nuclear power represents the only zero carbon power technology that can generate electricity on a very large scale in any location as part of the base load. Today, much of the base load in many countries is delivered by coal, the highest emitting route to electricity generation. As such nuclear is an important part of the limited number of options available for substantially reducing emissions in the power sector. But who really needs it?

Arguably, if just the EU, USA, China, India, Russia and Japan built nuclear power stations as an alternative to coal, more than 80% or the global coal emissions would be covered. In 2007 emissions from coal/peat use were 12.2 GT globally, with the above countries at about 10.3 GT. All of these countries (or region in the case of the EU) have both civilian and military nuclear programs in operation and have managed nuclear stocks for several decades. They also all have the technical ability to build nuclear weapons should they choose to do so, with or without technology assistance and nuclear technology transfer.

As an extreme case, if just the EU, USA and China utilized nuclear, 9.3 GT of coal emissions could be accounted for, such is the skewed use of the resource globally.

Whilst some other nations may wish to use nuclear, the reality is that the technology doesn't require widespread deployment in order to tackle emissions. Concentrated heavy deployment in limited locations is all that is actually necessary for the foreseeable future.

By David Hone  |  April 16, 2010; 8:00 AM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: A mosaic? | Next: How clean is clean enough?

Post a Comment


 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company