Merryn Talks Money: Why Nuclear Power Should Be Ramped Up - Bloomberg
Merryn Talks Money: Why Nuclear Power Should Be Ramped Up - Bloomberg
Merryn Talks Money: Why Nuclear Power Should Be Ramped Up
Kathryn Porter, an energy consultant at Watt-Logic, contends the increase in mining needed to obtain critical minerals necessary for the energy transition “starts to actually look morally questionable” once the harms are factored in. Porter points to the issues around opening up new mines, including water supply, contaminants, wildlife impacts and indigenous rights. She joins Merryn Somerset Webb on this week’s episode of Merryn Talks Money to discuss the matter and what she sees as a better approach to the green transition. EMBED Nuclear power, according to Porter, is the way to go. “Once you’ve built it, it can run for 60 years. It’s extremely safe. Nuclear and solar have the lowest deaths by unit of electricity generation of all generation technologies,” she argues. Given that, then, between Bitcoin, gold, or uranium, Porter is choosing the nuclear option: “if you’re saying Bitcoin or gold, I’d do gold. Between gold and uranium, I’d probably do uranium.”
Feb 16, 2024
Related Knowledge Center: ENERGY BASICS: nuclear
Nuclear energy provides almost 20 percent of the U.S. electricity supply. Advocates have called for an expanded role for nuclear as an emissions-free fuel source. But the economics of building new reactors are daunting. In addition, lingering safety concerns are an institutionalized part of the calculation of nuclear regulation, and highly radioactive nuclear waste remains a can that public officials have been inclined to kick down the road. The Energy Information Administration projects a sharp decline in nuclear power generation over the next decade, as new nuclear plants — two are planned — are more than offset by anticipated retirements of several operating reactors.