Proliferation frustration

Since the first commercial power plant opened in 1950s, 440 have opened in over 30 countries, providing 14 percent of the world’s energy. We know of eight countries that have base nuclear weaponry capability (this negates sharing policies in Europe). And all of this has happened in just 60 years. One could assume, then, that this is a fast and exciting growing industry. So what do we have in store? Do we need a nuclear deterrent? Is nuclear power a clean and efficient alternative? Is it the answer to our ever growing energy production needs? What _is_ the future of nuclear?

Of course this question has two parts: the question of whether we use nuclear power, be it fission or investing in researching fusion, and the issue of nuclear weapons, be they as an international deterrent or as a solution to war. The answers to these questions determine the future of nuclear.

As a source of energy, activists say that nuclear is redundant and outdated. Greenpeace reported that it is too expensive and too late to implement another nuclear programme within the United Kingdom. They state that only 14 percent of UK fuel is used to make electricity (which can be sourced by ‘green’ means), and the problem is with heating, not electricity.

However, despite election promises from the Lib Dems to the contrary, all of the UK’s major political parties seem to support the plans to expand the industry within the UK. This supports a new trend worldwide of re-investing in nuclear and we will see a large boost in nuclear plants in around 15 years. This is because of the push for cleaner energy. International pressures to produce low carbon energy schemes due to the fear of global warming have both pushed governments and people to change their mind about the industry. Let’s not forget nuclear energy has progressed massively in the last 60 years, with waste treatment being a new industry in itself; so with these two factors alone it is no wonder that _Elle _magazine listed nuclear power as one of the top ten “cool things for 2006”.

How does one start talking about a nuclear deterrent versus nuclear disarmament? Firstly, only the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel have the capability (that we know of) of producing nuclear weapons. Also, only half of these countries have permission from the United Nations to have these weapons.

This permission of course comes from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which permitted the possession of nuclear weapons to the five largest powers at the time. Pakistan and India never signed the treaty, North Korea withdrew from it and Israel’s policy of nuclear ambiguity means they do not ‘officially’ have nuclear weapons in their possession. Do the five countries have the right to have these powers at all? What can we do about those breaking the treaty? Are the organisations born out of the treaty, like the IAEA, capable of policing the world nuclear issue?

This is just a brief look at the issue and we are already throwing up questions; there are so many more issues with weaponry, like the use of nuclear weapons in space, the decommissioning of weapons and many more.

One World Week forum this year is covering this stimulating topic, along with the food gap, Asia-Euroamerican relations, the forgotten continent of South America and corporate social responsibility.

So if you want to hear more of the above, fancy a hot debate on where we should be going with the nuclear industry or if you think growing GM is an applicable answer to our food crises then have your say, come to OWW Forum.