Berlin — A GERMAN environmental activist has challenged African and European countries to consider finding other sources of energy instead of establishing nuclear power plants which have proved to be unsafe to the world.
The activist urged other nations that had nuclear plants to emulate Germany that had commenced phasing out the facilities and had since closed seven stations while the remaining would be phased out by 2022.
Friend of the Earth Campaign activist in Germany, Miko Omiestanski said for the sake of the future and the environment, it was in the best interest of the new generation should not construct nuclear power plants.
The plants had proved to be unsafe as evidenced in the Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan which suffered a meltdown as a result of the earthquake and Tsunami in March last year.
He was speaking during a presentation on "Germany's Energy system, an example beyond Europe" to journalists undergoing training on environment.
Mr Omiestanski said the answer to have access to power lay in investing in renewable energies such as solar and it was possible to get other sources of energy.
He said some countries like Germany and Spain had committed themselves to phasing out nuclear power, while the United Kingdom (UK), France and other European countries recently committed themselves to building new power plants, while some, including Ukraine and Finland, already had.
He said Germany had shown the world that it was prepared to pay more for the power if it meant getting rid of the dangers of nuclear, hence the increased renewable industry which had created about 367,000 jobs compared to 64,000 in nuclear.
He said Germany's coalition government recently announced a reversal of policy that would see all the country's nuclear power plants phased out by 2022.
The decision makes Germany the biggest industrial power to announce plans to give up nuclear energy.
"Other countries should emulate European countries such as Germany that has taken a bold decision to phase out nuclear power plants following the Fukushima disaster.
Chancellor Angela Merkel set up a panel to review nuclear power following the crisis at Fukushima in Japan.
There were mass anti-nuclear protests across Germany in the wake of March's Fukushima crisis, triggered by an earthquake and tsunami.
And a former correspondent on environment with the Guardian Newspaper Paul Brown cautioned against mining of uranium saying the move did not only have a negative impact on the environment but was also capable of bringing about animal conflict as many areas where uranium had been discovered were mostly within game management areas.
He urged the media to be the voice and engage themselves in research so as to inform the readers and listeners with understanding.
Comments Post a comment
First a minor correction. There was not "a meltdown" at Fukushima, there were 3. Plus two additional reactors were so badly damaged, they will likely never operate again.
But what is more important for African countries considering nuclear power or alternatives like solar and wind, is that nuclear power has never succeeded economically without tremendous subsidies from the state.
Beyond the high cost of building reactors (it is common for them to cost over 100% more than originally estimated and take years longer to build than forecasted), nuclear power can not exist financially without the government taking on the risk of a nuclear accident and paying for the long term disposition of the radioactive waste.
Plus despite thee being dozens of efforts worldwide, no country has a workable long term waste storage solution, despite billions having been spent on this effort.
Africa does not need nuclear power, because it does not make sense economically, ecologically or in terms of capacity.
I think the Germans are wise to bow out of using nuclear power. From a distance, that looks a gutsy and gut-level decision. But I want to add into this conversation the idea of a deeper perception of the Atomic World and nuclear power, which comes from look at our nuclear work in the context of the "holographic nature" of our Universe. This 'holographic' term is simply a modern version of the principle know in ancient times as "as above, so below". The nuclear industry only works with the physics of the atom, whereas this larger and deeper view requires us to inquire about the metaphysics of the atom. It is an approach we can not avoid for much longer. For one thing, it recognises radiation as an expression of the immense pain and distress that fission causes in the particle world. We've somehow lost touch with our morality because of this promise of cheap energy. The reactors are in effect like concentration camps for the particle population: or mini-holocaust chambers. It is appropriate that Germany turned away from this technology. I'm seeking in just a few sentences to introduce the idea of the particle world being social and sentient, more than our physics on its own cares or dares to see. I've developed a couple of web sites which enlarge on this holistic view of nuclear power. Go to www.nuclear4everyone.com or www.kenyanuclear.com The positive aspect that emerges from this 'holographic insight' is the possibility that we humans, we Humanity, can create some kind of healing process for the phenomena we know as radiation. In this regard, my guess is that African people, more than others, have the instinct and experience of working collectively which is what seems necessary if we are to communicate, as it were, down the stairwell of our Universe and bring healing effects to the particle world. Okay. Thanks for the opportunity to post on this substantial and profound subject. Ian Turnbull Findhorn, Scotland.