Greenhouse warming: Comparative analysis of nuclear and efficiency abatement strategies

Abstract

We analyse two popular strategies for reducing fossil-fuel carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions: revitalizing nuclear power, and improving energy efficiency. Under highly favourable assumptions for nuclear power in scenarios of moderate to high energy growth, we find that even if large nuclear plants (1 000 MW) could be built every one to three days from now until 2025 (which is impossible in the Third World), global CO₂ emissions would still continue to grow. Thus, nuclear power cannot contribute significantly to abating greenhouse warming, except possibly in scenarios of low energy growth for which the problem is already largely ameliorated by efficiency improvement. In the USA — the world's largest producer of CO₂ — each dollar invested in electric efficiency displaces nearly seven times as much CO₂ as a dollar invested in nuclear power. Even if the most optimistic aspirations for the future economics of nuclear power were realized today, efficiency would still displace between 2.5 and 10 times more CO₂ per unit investment. We conclude that revitalizing nuclear power would be a relatively expensive and ineffective response to greenhouse warming, and that the key to reducing future CO₂ emissions is to improve the energy efficiency of the global economy.