SCIENCE@home

Promoting nuclear energy to sustain biodiversity conservation in the face of climate change: response to Brook and Bradshaw 2015

K. Henle,E. Gawel,I. Ring,Sebastian Strunz

Published 2016 in Conservation Biology

ABSTRACT

We agree with Brook and Bradshaw (2015) that pragmatic decisions on future energy mixes should be made without prejudice. They assessed different techniques for electricity generation based on a selected number of criteria. Using a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), they concluded that nuclear energy ranked particularly well relative to costs for biodiversity in terms of land consumption and human safety risks. There are several problems with their assessments. They equated the application of MCDA with objective evidence (Supporting Information), provided incomplete cost data, and treated different types of human safety risks for the different energy sources as identical. Their data are, in part, questionable, they ignored criteria important for human safety risks and biodiversity effects, and they considered technological innovations only for nuclear energy. Each of our four primary points of contention (outlined under the next four headings) is detailed in a separate online appendix (Supporting Information).

PUBLICATION RECORD

CITATION MAP

EXTRACTION MAP

CLAIMS

  • No claims are published for this paper.

CONCEPTS

  • No concepts are published for this paper.

REFERENCES

Showing 1-8 of 8 references · Page 1 of 1

CITED BY

Showing 1-8 of 8 citing papers · Page 1 of 1