Lewis Wolpert: The safety and reliability of nuclear power is having a significant impact

The generation of electricity by nuclear power is becoming an increasingly desirable proposition. But the very word "nuclear" enrages environmental activists, who protest so forcibly against the use of nuclear power – and they have been pretty effective in persuading governments against building new plants. But things may be changing.

At present, nearly 20 per cent of the world's electricity is generated by nuclear power. Electricity supports much of what is so useful and supportive of modern life; any and every society wants it, and its availability is a measure of affluence and a high standard of living. What is now becoming accepted, even by environmental fundamentalists, is the need to both cut emission of greenhouse gasses and to increase electricity production without damage to the environment – global warming is what underlies these concerns.

Of particular significance is an opinion poll in the US that found that 60 per cent of those questioned believe that nuclear power is safe and 70 per cent are in favour of building new nuclear plants – no new ones have been built there since 1990. In Europe, too, the image of nuclear power is not so poisonous as it once was. The Swedish public did not support the closing of one of their nuclear power stations, and it seems that the Germans, too, have a more positive view of nuclear power.

The improved safety and reliability of nuclear power is having a significant impact. Moreover, the capacity of existing plants has improved almost twofold. It is not widely recognised that France relies on nuclear power for generating 70 per cent of its electricity. In Sweden and Belgium, the figure is around 50 per cent. The industry worldwide now has almost 8,000 reactor-years of experience. There has not been a single death or injury attributed to commercial nuclear power in these countries. It is claimed that the statistical likelihood of a member of the public being killed by a nuclear accident is about the same as a chance of being hit by a meteorite.

A disadvantage of nuclear power is the high cost of the initial plant, but the advantages when compared with generating electricity plants powered by coal are enormous. Consider a plant that will generate 700 megawatts of electricity. If it is based on coal, the amount of fuel it will require is nearly two million tons and this will generate around four million tons of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas. There will also be 80,000 tons of other nasty gases like sulphur dioxide, around 150 tons of toxic metals, and, at the end, 600,000 tons of ash waste.

In contrast, a nuclear power plant will only require 100 tons of uranium fuel, and then there are no by-products released during production of electricity. But waste is a problem and the 100 tons remaining are highly radioactive and will remain so for hundreds of thousands of years. Nuclear waste disposal is thus a major issue that has to be addressed and solutions found. But there are stories of Japanese families picnicking around storage sites with safety. There is no evidence that radiation from the production of energy by nuclear reactors has been responsible for human cancers.

And has not the food industry capitulated with respect to irradiated food, which is a perfectly safe way of preventing bacterial infection? Chernobyl and the bomb are still in the minds of many people. All technology carries some risks, but the advantages of nuclear power seems unquestionable.

But politicians must discuss technological problems like nuclear power with dignity and openness. It will be ironic if it is the fear of climate change that actually causes them to change their attitude.

Lewis Wolpert is Professor of Biology as Applied to Medicine at University College London