Man-Made Global Warming: Unravelling a Dogma

Nuclear Energy Versus Coal Energy

But, in addition to raising her own profile, there was another reason why Thatcher wanted to give priority to the climate issue. This was rationalisation of the British coal industry. At home, Thatcher had the support of her own party. Most of the members of the Conservative cabinet that came into office in 1979 had also been members of the government that lost the election in 1974. For that they blamed the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM). According to Courtney, they sought a pretext for curtailing the power of the British coal industry, and thereby also of the NUM. Coal-fired power stations emit CO 2; nuclear plants do not. Global warming provided a welcome alibi for reducing British dependence on coal and replacing it with nuclear energy. This was necessary not only for energy provision but also for the British nuclear arms programme, in particular Trident rockets and submarines. But the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island (March 1979) and Chernobyl (April 1986) had struck a severe blow to public confidence in nuclear technology. At the same time, privatisation of electricity generation had brought to light the fact that nuclear electricity was four times as expensive as electricity from coal. That meant that global warming was the only remaining excuse to legitimise maintenance of the unpopular nuclear electricity plants. To that end, Thatcher found it necessary to spend more money at home, in part to underpin the credibility of her international campaign. One of...

UNLIMITED FREE
ACCESS
TO THE WORLD'S BEST IDEAS

SUBMIT
Already a GlobalSpec user? Log in.

This is embarrasing...

An error occurred while processing the form. Please try again in a few minutes.

Customize Your GlobalSpec Experience

Category: Energy Production and Exploration Services
Finish!
Privacy Policy

This is embarrasing...

An error occurred while processing the form. Please try again in a few minutes.