Is Nuclear the enemy?

Recognising that nuclear isn’t necessarily an option for everyone, doesn’t inherently rule it out – but it does mean we need to consider additional solutions. For many in the global south, renewables do provide an answer to energy production where nuclear does not. Technological reparations provide a means for the global north to support the global south’s industrialisation with improved green research to combat the problems renewables face – from energy storage (like hydroelectric dams), infrastructure efficiency and improving energy production density. Facilitating many countries to skip the polluting stages of industrialisation with better planning, and greener technology, and a faster transition overall.

This is all just the tip of the iceberg – an iceberg which I’d personally rather wasn’t at risk of melting due to global warming – but outwith a global approach, we can’t hope to combat climate change. We cannot leave the global south behind by exclusively focusing on solutions which they can’t utilise too. Nuclear would also benefit from this research, especially energy storage or turbine energy conversion efficiency, and it also doesn’t mean we stop all nuclear research such as commercialised fusion plants – it’s simply a recognition that renewable technology, and energy research in general, are the immediate priority from a global perspective. We can’t afford to view this from the lens of the global north alone.

Regardless of the discussion around nuclear’s viability, the one thing we can all at least agree upon is that the problems for nuclear, and renewables alike, pale in comparison to those presented by continued fossil fuel usage – that climate catastrophe must be averted! A Bright Green Environmentalist approach, through green technological reparations and greater research investment, is the only real solution to ending our dependence on fossil fuels and delivering upon climate, global and resource justice simultaneously.