A nuclear proponent makes the case for nuclear power. [View all]

[kristopher]

This article is fundamentally "it" for nuclear. It gives the entire case for nuclear power.

Can you spot what is wrong?

We cannot afford not to have nuclear in our low-carbon energy mix
Nuclear power must prove itself in cost terms – but we should not be thinking of giving up now

James Smith
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 19 February 2013 12.59 GMT

The euphoric phase on low-carbon energy is over. There is no solution that is clean and cheap and always on.

Yet we must make major investments in energy. Old coal and nuclear plants will have to close. And climate change has to be tackled or it will result in costly economic damage.

So let's consider the options for investment in low-carbon electricity. Over the coming 20 years there are only three options that are relevant – wind, carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear. Each has significant imperfections yet each works. And there is no muddle through option.

Each technology has deeply entrenched opponents. But if all the opponents have their way, we are left with no solution. Or at a minimum there will be a long period of argument, muddle and delay, followed by a rushed, expensive and late period of investment. Isn't that how it is already feeling?

Let's consider the three energy technology options in turn....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/19/cannot-afford-nuclear-power-energy-mix