I came across some graphics which help inform the debate on nuclear versus renewable energy. The first graphic relates to risk, the second graph relates to cost and the third graph shows the remarkable growth in wind energy.
The graphic above comes from an article titled Charting the Human Cost of Different Types of Energy on ProPublica. It shows the number of people killed in accidents related to different forms of power generation compared with the number that could potentially be killed in a catastrophic accident. It shows that fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) have caused far more deaths than nuclear and hydro. While the risk of a catastrophic accident is much greater from nuclear and hydro. (Please note: the data is from developed countries and doesn’t include the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.)
The graphic doesn’t include renewable energies such as wind or solar photovoltaic (PV). However, in terms of both actual deaths and potential deaths these forms of power generation would have low numbers. It is difficult to imagine a situation where a wind farm could kill hundreds or thousands of people.
The graphic above comes from an article titled Energy Policy After Fukushima on GreenStudy.tw. The first thing it shows is that wind is already much cheaper than nuclear power. While solar PV, solar thermal and offshore wind all have costs similar to nuclear. Once the plant is complete the fuel required for solar and wind is free whereas nuclear requires the ongoing input of fissile material.
A graphic from the Earth Policy Insitute in an article titled Wind Power Soared Past 150,000 Megawatts in 2009 shows the enormous growth of wind power around the world that has mostly occurred in the past decade. To put the numbers into context the article says that this installed wind power capacity is enough to meet “the residential electricity needs of 250 million people.”
