Mark Diesendorf dispels nuclear/renewable energy myths

Nuclear energy and renewable energy are the principal competitors for low-carbon electricity in many countries. As renewable energy technologies have grown in volume and investment, and become much cheaper, nuclear proponents and deniers of climate science have become deniers of renewable energy.

Associate Professor
Dr Mark Diesendorf.

The strategies and tactics of renewable energy deniers are very similar to those of climate science deniers. To create uncertainty about the ability of renewable energy to power an industrial society, they bombard decision-makers and the media with negative myths about renewable energy and positive myths about nuclear energy, attempting to turn these myths into conventional wisdom. In responding to the climate crisis, few countries have the economic resources to expand investment substantially in both nuclear and renewable energy. This is demonstrated in 2016 by the UK government, which is offering huge long-term subsidies to nuclear while severely cutting existing short-term subsidies to renewable energy.

This article, a sequel to one busting the myth that we need base-load power stations such as nuclear or coal, examines critically some of the other myths about nuclear energy and renewable energy. It offers a resource for those who wish to question these myths. The myths discussed here have been drawn from comments by nuclear proponents and renewable energy opponents in the media, articles, blogs and on-line comments.

Read the energypost story by Mark Diesendorf - “Renewable energy versus nuclear: dispelling the myths.”

(Associate professor, Dr Mark Diesendorf, was brought to the Goulburn Valley by Slap Tomorrow to talk about renewable energy and some 150 people gathered at Mooroopna’s Westbank about three years ago to hear him then say with confidence that Australia, and the world, could abandon fossil fuels completely and embrace a combination of renewable sources - Robert McLean)

Cities of hope: Tim Flannery on tackling the challenge of climate change

Our understanding of the way the Earth’s system works has grown significantly over the past decade. Earlier this year, scientists published an equation called the Anthropocene Equation. For the past four billion years, the factors that have affected the Earth’s climate are listed in that equation. They are the astronomical forces, the geophysical forces, and the internal dynamics of the system. But over the past 40 years, we must add another factor into that equation, which is the H factor – the human factor. Because of that factor, the impact of industrialised societies, we are now driving Earth’s climate system at rates 170 times faster than the natural factors have done, historically. So, H is big. We are a big influence, now, on Earth’s climate system.

Tens of thousands of people around Australia have marched
 for credible climate change action, with over 10,000 taking
 to the streets in Melbourne in 2014.

Why are we such a big influence? Because we are shifting so much carbon from the Earth’s crust into the atmosphere. The atmosphere is one of the smaller organs of our planet – it’s about 1/500th the size of the oceans. So, it’s small, and very dynamic, and we are moving lots of carbon into it. As of 2010, we are emitting 49 gigatons of CO2 equivalent every year. Data that has just come out for 2016 shows that, in fact, emissions have grown again, by about three percent. So, we are well in excess of 50 gigatons of CO2 equivalent now.

Read the Fore-ground story by Tim Flannery - “Cities of hope: Tim Flannery on tackling the challenge of climate change.”