Dear Ms. Fonda,
Kudos to you for
rising up to draw attention to the crisis of climate change. You are an
inspiration! I read the story about your protests in the NY Times and also
watched your interview with Judy Woodruff.
You clearly
articulated the gravity of the problem and say that we should listen to the
scientists. As a scientist, I was gladdened to hear you say that. I hope you
will also lend your voice to the only effective solution that scientists like
James Hansen are telling us to embrace, namely nuclear power. To the extent
that your movie, “The China Syndrome,” contributed to the public fear of radiation
and nuclear power, your coming out in support of nuclear power would go a long
way.
Climate change is also
a matter of social justice as it most adversely affects those who can least
afford it and who contributed the least to bring it on. People need energy to
lead healthy productive lives, and currently about half the world’s population
does not have access to adequate energy. Social justice demands that the global
supply of energy be increased to rectify this situation. However, burning
fossil fuels, which are the easy source of energy, aggravates climate challenge.
Most champions of
social justice movements call for rapidly expanding renewable energy sources
like wind and solar. However, these intermittent, low-energy density sources cannot
meet the energy demand while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Germany’s
experience with Energiewende makes that amply clear. They spent over
$550 billion but their greenhouse gas emissions are rising, because they have
had to add lignite-burning plants. Further, wind and solar require inordinate
amounts of materials. Meeting the global energy demand by renewables would
require more than doubling the global production of basic commodities such as
copper, steel, cement, and rare-earth metals with enormous environmental
degradation from mining. Just replacing one coal power plant with wind and
solar along with a modest amount of battery storage would require half the
global production of lithium in 2018!
Nuclear power can
produce vast quantities of carbon-free energy. It has resulted in the fewest
fatalities per unit of energy delivered than any other system, including wind
and solar. It also has the smallest environmental footprint. Our unfounded fear
of radiation, reinforced by decades of fearmongering, has prevented us from building
any new plants in the U.S. for decades and has exacerbated the climate challenge.
Given the urgency
to reduce carbon emissions, it is foolish to shut down working nuclear power
plants. Instead, we should support their continued operation, and promote
building and exporting new walk-away safe nuclear power plants. I have written
and spoken on this subject extensively and welcome you to read more about it in
book, A Cubic Mile of Oil,” or on earlier posts on this blog. Additionally,
you may want to look at, “A Bright Future” by Joshua Goldstein and Steffan
Qvist.
Respectfully,
Ripudaman Malhotra
