Greenpeace New Zealand is claiming that if Australia starts nuclear power generation, nuclear weapons will only be a small step away. Their executive director claims that there is a very thin line between nuclear power and nuclear weapons technology.

While they are definitely similar, it needs to be emphasised that there are many types of nuclear reactors these days that are designed to use nuclear material very different to that used in nuclear weapons. For example, the enriched uranium used in many reactors these days is about 4% enriched. Little Boy, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima used 90% enriched uranium.

In addition, under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty nations with nuclear power are closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. While there are some countries where this monitoring is interfered with, it would be rather crazy to suggest that Australia would fall into such a category.

There is a problem with disposing of nuclear waste. However, that does not mean that informed debate shouldn't be held about nuclear power. That is the problem I have with some of these environmental groups. They are opposed to any debate on the subject. I think it was a few years ago the Christchurch City Council recommended nuclear power be investigated for the region, and the Green Party called for the government to overrule them immediately.

But that is a terrible way to come to a decision. Any decision should be based on all the relevant factors: financial, supply, security, environmental, and potentially others. It may well be that nuclear power fails on one or more of these grounds. But ruling it out before the debate starts is simply bad science.

Update 22/5 10am : Fixed typo

Posted by Dave Bryant at 9:35 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)