To make a substantial reduction in CO 2 emissions, nuclear power plants would not only have to supply much of the world's electricity growth but also replace many coal-fired plants as they are retired. The total cost penalty of using nuclear would amount to several trillion dollars. It could be much more efficiently used to make investments in energy efficiency, cogeneration, renewables, combined-cycle power plants, fuel cells and the like. Thus, investments in nuclear power will detract from efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by preempting more appropriate investments. The challenges of non-proliferation and disarmament issues are even more daunting and basic than safety and economic issues, because they are not only technological, but also military, political, and institutional in nature.
Plutonium is made in all commercial reactors.
Once separated by reprocessing, the plutonium in this spent fuel can be used to make nuclear weapons. Stocks of separated commercial plutonium have been growing very rapidly since the early 1980s and are set to surpass military stocks in the next few years. If nuclear power were used as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the inventories of plutonium would rise dramatically. This inventory, the pressure on uranium resources, and the popular opposition to nuclear waste repositories would greatly intensify pressures for commercial plutonium separation and the use of such plutonium in nuclear reactors. This would further exacerbate economic, environmental, and proliferation problems associated with nuclear power.