Text Size AAA Bookmark and Share

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Nonsense

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: E09-10
YEAR: 2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article

Stewart Brand's book, Whole Earth Discipline, features a chapter claiming that new nuclear power plants are essential and desirable, and that a global "nuclear renaissance" is booming. In this book review, Amory Lovins' review finds fatal flaws in the chapter's facts and logic.

Four Nuclear Myths: A Commentary on Stewart Brand's Whole Earth Discipline and on Similar Writings

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: E09-09
YEAR: 2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article

Some nuclear-power advocates claim that wind and solar power can't provide much if any reliable power because they're not "baseload," that they use too much land, that all energy options including new nuclear build are needed to combat climate change, and that nuclear power's economics don't matter because climate change will force governments to dictate energy choices and pay for whatever is necessary. None of these claims can withstand analytic scrutiny.

Nuclear Power: Climate Fix or Folly?

AUTHORS:
Lovins, Amory
Sheikh, Imran
Markevich, Alex
DOCUMENT ID: E09-01
YEAR: 2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Report or White Paper

This semi-technical article, summarizing a detailed and documented technical paper (see "The Nuclear Illusion" (2008)), compares the cost, climate protection potential, reliability, financial risk, market success, deployment speed, and energy contribution of new nuclear power with those of its low- or no-carbon competitors.

Nuclear Power and Climate Change

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: C07-09
YEAR: 2007
DOCUMENT TYPE: Letter

This 2007 e-mail exchange between Steve Berry (University of Chicago), Peter Bradford (former U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner and senior utility regulator), and Amory Lovins illustrates the cases for and against nuclear power in relation to climate and the environment.

Nuclear Power: Competitive Economics and Climate Protection Potential

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: E06-04
YEAR: 2006
DOCUMENT TYPE: Presentation

In this presentation to the Royal Academy of Engineering, Amory Lovins explains the economic and environmental impacts of nuclear power. By showing that companies and governments have cut energy intensity without the use of nuclear power, Lovins shows that nuclear power is not a necessary step in the fight against climate change.

Nuclear Power: Economic Fundamentals and Potential Role in Climate Change Mitigation

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: E05-09
YEAR: 2005
DOCUMENT TYPE: Report or White Paper

In this presentation, Amory Lovins provides evidence that low and no-carbon decentralized sources of energy have eclipsed nuclear power as a climate friendly energy option. He argues that new nuclear power plants are unfinanceable in the private capital market and that resource efficiency provides a cheaper, more environmentally viable option.

Nuclear Power: Economics and Climate-Protection Potential

AUTHOR: Lovins, Amory
DOCUMENT ID: E05-14
YEAR: 2005
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article

This paper makes an economic argument against the use of nuclear power. Despite strong governmental support, nuclear power is unfinancible in the private capital market. Nuclear power worldwide has less installed capacity and generates less electricity than its decentralized no- and low-carbon competitors—one-third renewables (excluding big hydroelectric dams), two-thirds fossil-fueled combined-heat-and power. In 2004, these rivals added nearly three times as much output and six times as much capacity as nuclear power added; by 2010, industry forecasts this sixfold ratio to widen to 136–184 as nuclear orders fade, then nuclear capacity gradually disappears as aging reactors retire. These comparisons don’t count more efficient use of electricity, which isn’t being tracked, but efficiency gains plus decentralized sources now add at least ten times as much capacity per year as nuclear power. Empirical data also confirm that these competing technologies not only are being deployed an order of magnitude faster than nuclear power, but ultimately can become far bigger. Full deployment of these very cost-effective competitors could provide ~13–15 times nuclear power’s current 20% share of electric generation—all without significant land-use, reliability, or other constraints. Expanding nuclear power would both reduce and retard the desired decrease in CO2 emissions.

Nuclear Energy Debate

AUTHORS:
Lovins, Amory
Lovins, L. Hunter
DOCUMENT ID: E01-15
YEAR: 2001
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article

In 2001, Amory and Hunter Lovins participated in a published debate about nuclear power with the editors of USA Today. The Lovins' argued against nuclear power.

Can Nuclear Power Solve the Energy Crisis?

AUTHORS:
Lovins, Amory
Lovins, L. Hunter
DOCUMENT ID: E01-05
YEAR: 2001
DOCUMENT TYPE: Journal or Magazine Article

This article answers the question, can nuclear power solve the energy crisis? According to the authors, nuclear power is too costly, risky, and inefficient to be an answer to the country's energy problems.

 
 
Show Subscribe