Nuclear Energy and what else?

Since 2004, when the government of Argentina suddenly started cutting the gas supply to our country, the discussion about energy in Chile has intensified. Nowadays, factors such as the popularization of “the environmental problem and the global warming” as topics to talk about over a cup of coffee and as if they mere pieces of news, have turned ideas about sustainable energy, from something worthless, mere novelties, into very important, top-priority subjects. While we Chileans keep on using our PC’s more and more everyday and continue replacing the regular kettle for “inconsiderate” electric ones, the question of how we will get the energy we need becomes crucial, transcendental.

As usual, the first thing we do when facing a problem, a threat or the possibility of a catastrophe coming out of the blue is to panic, to start talking as if we were mad, and to publish any idea that comes into our minds from anywhere; and if possible, we try to create a lot of fuzz in the process.  The impulse and the need to do “something” become everyday topics, notwithstanding whether that something is “really something” or not. We start looking out for new solutions, propositions and ideas approved by “more developed” countries than ours, and if possible, we adopt a new perspective and we try to make it true no matter how. But let’s keep it clear: we merely adopt this lonely and sad proposition that we liked so much, but we don’t worry about all its implications. As some might say, we just go for it. This is why some people defend the beneficial hydroelectric dams; others support the always clean and pure wind turbines; and yet others go and scandalously champion nuclear energy (may God protect us). Some people say there are just too many possibilities available. However, it would be good asking ourselves, have we really thought about our problem and its possible solutions? Many times, in the middle of all the fuzz, we don’t give ourselves time to answer this simple little question.

Nowadays, the need and the problem are becoming more evident. Our society is starting to require more and more energy, and we not only depend on this energy, but we also depend on the idea that by living in an energy-consumer system that is expanding, we are boosting our growth, thus becoming more developed and improving our quality of life. Yet to our detriment, the problem is not as simple as proposing a new generation technology and – after some routine research and some diplomacy – installing it somewhere in our country, letting the mass of thoughtless consumers waste energy freely; contributing, some might say, to the growth of the country.

The environmental problem is serious (believe me, VERY SERIOUS). To think that we need to keep on burning fossil fuels and that the ever-increasing demand of energy is a good indicator, is something that will lead us to ruin. It’s high-time for a technological change. For the time being, we really need a new technology that fulfills the current needs and the environmental expectations, that allows us to stop the chain reaction that we have started, thus giving ourselves the time we need to continue being a species on the planet and not to turn ourselves into a mere paleontological remembrance. A possible candidate could be the nuclear energy: it doesn’t pollute the air, nor contributes to the global warming; its price is stable; its supply is permanent, and its economic potential is attractive. Although we still have the serious problem of where to dispose the nuclear waste, we could say that nuclear energy is something which could help us dealing with the problem for the years to come. Anything to stop the dizzy and harmful emission of fossil-fuel pollution to our biosphere. The nuclear energy could be a good “transitional technology” till we find something better and more sustainable. Yet if we are planning to look out for new technologies, do some copy/paste and, some years after, install a harmless and productive nuclear plant, I think that my reaction would be of horror and desperation, rather than of happiness and excitement.

Imagine if the government launched a nuclear energy program, championing its virtues and peculiarities, stating their intentions of nurturing the institutions and the culture necessary for its correct implementation, and asserting the bright future we have ahead of us. What should we think of this? Having in mind the way these subjects have been dealt with till now, could we really believe that Chile has made the great and that we are going toward a brighter future in terms of energy? Let’s be honest: it would mean a couple of plants here and there, conceived to feed an uneducated and bad-mannered monster (environmentally speaking), and presenting the same problems of sustainability as before, plus the constant risk of a nuclear catastrophe.

Nuclear energy and what else? A new and efficient environmental policy framework? An adequate legislation? The implementation of efficient energy technologies? The longed-for and relatively unknown effective education of the people? Finally, the main question is not about nuclear energy (or solar, or wind, etc.) but about the What else? It is about the path we have to follow; about the perspective that we should adopt; about what is really important and what is not. Before that, let’s put “the atoms” in our pockets, and let’s think of them as a possible (and attractive) future, because now we need to act. Time flies and the clock is ever-ticking against us, tic, tac, tic, tac.

Danilo Jara

Electrical Engineering Student

Translated by Pablo Saavedra

Advertisement