Mission impossible
The uk government has a tough choice. In the next decade-and-a half decade, almost all of the country's 14 nuclear stations will have outlived their utility. Not a very welcome proposition in a country where nuclear power generates about 22 per cent of the electricity, annually. Moreover, the share of renewables in uk' s energy supply has not grown desirably, while demand for energy is on the rise. At the same time, the challenge to meet commitments of the Kyoto Protocol demands that the uk cut down on its nuclear plants.
Renewables could have been the best answer to uk's energy predicament. But its share in the electricity supply chart is quite small. In 2003, for instance, renewables accounted for a mere four per cent of the total electricity generated in the uk . The country's government does aim to generate 10 per cent of electricity from renewables by 2010, but many experts feel that's too ambitious a target.
Nuclear plants not obviated Even if the uk government meets its renewable energy target, experts believe much will depend on the fate of the nuclear plants. "Even if we achieve the target, we will be more reliant on fossil fuels in 2010 than we are today, if nuclear power stations are closed as scheduled,' David Wallace, vice-president of the Royal Society and vice-chancellor of Loughborough University recently wrote.
Voices opposing the nuclear option base their argument on market-factors. Tom Burke, visiting professor at Imperial and University College London and co-founder of the pressure group esg, Third Generation Environmentalism, thinks nuclear power "has no attractions for private investors ...as it produces no revenues for at least seven years, is subject to a host of difficult to quantify socio-political factors and is economically viable in large clusters of 10 reactors'.
As the debate rages on, cutting down co2 emissions in line with the Kyoto commitment becomes even more challenging. A recently released white paper on energy does state that co2 emissions will be cut by about 60 per cent by the middle of this century. But, the reality is quite different. In 2002 and 2003, emissions actually grew by two per cent. More than 70 percent of electricity in Britain is generated with the use of fossil fuels.
What about renewables? Programmes promoting such energy use are undergoing tough times in the uk . Media reports ascribe this to the government's lackadaisical attitude. Two significant schemes that provide financial support for small green energy schemes are to end this year, but their replacements are yet to materialise.
Some experts argue that the uk cannot afford to stick to renewables especially when fast emerging economies elsewhere have intensified fossil fuel use. They argue that the uk cannot afford to sit back when, around the world, coal-fired power stations are being commissioned at the rate of more than one a week. Forecasts that there would be more than 1,400 coal-fired power stations by 2030, about 600 of them in China alone, have given a fillip to their arguments. In fact, the Chinese example has come handy for critics of nuclear energy to press their advocacy of traditional fuels such as coal, albeit with modern technology to minimise the green house gas emissions. "This means bringing about the large-scale deployment of advanced coal technologies with carbon sequesteration and storage within the next decade to reduce these emissions to a safer level,' says Burke.
Carbon sequesteration, a process for capturing carbon and storing it, has become a buzzword for a group of uk energy companies that is in the process of establishing a power station in the North of Scotland to generate electricity. But will it help the uk manage it's Kyoto commitments? Will more nuclear plants ensue? It certainly is going to be a difficult decision for the country's government.
Navin Singh Khadka is a journalist with the bbc