123

This is a broad topic, and for an overview I would suggest to look at the wikipedia article on the anti-nuclear movement. The main points are: accidents which pose a risk to humans and the environment (see Fukushima or Chernobyl). waste disposal: the problem of disposing nuclear waste long-term is still completely unsolved, and the waste poses a threat to ...


96

Burning fossil fuels has a negative impact on the environment. This impact is relatively well understood and predictable. Nuclear power may have a negative impact on the environment, both when the fuel rods and reactors reach their end of life and when accidents happen. The problems of radioactive waste disposal are not solved and accidents are ...


76

TL;DR: Many green political parties worldwide predate widespread concerns over climate change. A timeline of events is in order: 1988: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is created. 1990: IPCC releases its First Assessment Report. 1992: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is adopted. Compare this with the ...


54

I can explain why the Swedish green party Miljöpartiet is against nuclear power. They have lots of arguments against nuclear power, but those which they consider the most important are summarized on their web page about nuclear power: Nuclear power is dangerous. Fukushima 2011 is given as an example. Nuclear power causes pollution. Examples include uranium ...


48

According to Holman Jenkins in 2016, the answer is murky, not least because environmentalists are not unified against nuclear: Honest greens have always said nuclear power is indispensable for achieving big carbon reduction. James Hansen, the former NASA scientist who has been chaining himself to fences since the first Bush administration, was in Illinois ...


48

The deal was not only between the USA and Iran, as other countries and the EU were signatories: China France Germany European Union Russia United Kingdom The situation with those signatories is complicated, as neither they nor Iran have withdrawn from the treaty. Those signatories are not trading with Iran due to USA sanction regimes; the pact is formally ...


43

The whole point of these "New X Deal"s is to unite the party proposing it, pick up some outside support, and put the other party in a weak position if they oppose it. If there's some kind of seam in popular support for bits of it, you want that seam to be in the other party, not in yours. For Democrats, putting nuclear power in there would not do that. ...


32

(Note: not all Green parties oppose nuclear; see the greens are no longer anti-nuclear in Finland) If we got all our energy from nuclear power, identified resources with extant widely deployed reactor types would last us five (5) years. This is unsustainable. (However, there exist technologies at various levels of readiness levels that can potentially ...


31

The treaty you're thinking of is the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (also known as the NPT or NNPT). The core of this treaty for non-nuclear weapon states is Article II, which says Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear ...


26

American media is, unsurprisingly, biased with a pro-American viewpoint. Thus, we see that Trump "withdraws" from the agreement where Iran "violates" the agreement. In fact, it is more correct to say that America violated the agreement, as the word violation suggests acting in bad faith. By every account, Iran had held to the terms of the deal in good faith ...


23

It depends on what you consider good and bad. If your only concern is greenshouse-gas emissions, then nuclear is indeed good. Yet, nuclear energy brings along problems of its own, e.g. nuclear waste, nuclear accidents, etc. These, are the main reasons why many proponents of green energy dismiss nuclear energy. If something goes wrong in a wind-park, then ...


20

Iran does have genuine reasons for developing a civilian nuclear power industry. Iran's oil production is comparable to that of Iraq or Kuwait, but Iran has a much larger population. Between declining production and increasing domestic consumption of subsidized gasoline, Iran risks becoming a petroleum importer in a few years. Nuclear power (especially ...


19

The environmental movement was initially opposed to nuclear power, partially due to it being tied to nuclear war (Chernobyl was a weapons grade Plutonium reactor), and partially due to the risks involved (this well predated Climate Change being the top concern). These fears would be exacerbated in 1979 by the Three Mile island accident, and the movie The ...


15

I would argue that the reason is less political and more about geography and economics. As this study shows, access to low-cost fossil fuels is in fact cheaper than nuclear. This page shows the cost of fossil fuels to be reasonable, whereas nuclear has a high capitalization that must be amortized in some fashion. Saudi Arabia, for example, has the world'...


11

I would attribute the basis to the monster movies of the 1950s and 1960s, which established an underlying "Omigawd, it's radioactive! We're all gonna DIE!" cultural meme. Combine that with the fact that neither the public in general, nor the membership of "green parties" in particular, have any great understanding of science (consider the way popular SF ...


11

Are any party officials really needed to ask for their opinion? Fact is, that in all scenarios nuclear energy is dangerous in all respects, and it doesn't make a real dent in terms of preventing climate change. Going by a simulation of these complex interactions: Scenario 1: Business as usual so far on all levels: Scenario 2: Business as usual but going ...


11

The answer is simple: Green parties are similar to other political parties in that they are not entirely rational. They reflect a certain constituency's and clientele's mindset and interests. Most Green parties emerged from a confluence of social movements of the 70s: The modern peace movement, the anti-nuclear movement, feminism, and the radical left; in ...


10

When the Oil Crisis hit in 1973 France was heavily dependent upon foreign oil for energy production - and it was in response to that vulnerability that they made a big push towards becoming self-sufficient as regards power, and nuclear was seen as the way to do this (aka the Messmer Plan) - hence the overwhelmingly large proportion of the country's ...


10

Partial answer: It's usable as reactor fuel 20% enrichment is also referred to as "High-assay Low-Enrichment Uranium" (HALEU). It has various benefits when used as a fuel in some reactors; see the Centrus page on HALEU. Apparently, it is already in use in existing research reactors in the US, for example - after 10 tonnes of the material had been produced ...


10

The basic issue US media has with this situation is the same issue they have had a lot in the Trump era: accurately reporting what was done (in this case, the US broke its word on an international agreement) would look a lot like a partisan political attack. This would violate the principle of "balance", which by training and ideology they just cannot make ...


10

Perhaps the green parties are arguing from a financial perspective: The Nuclear industry receives far more than 60 billion per year just for power plants and equipment. $67 Billion in 2019. Its a 200 billion dollars-per-year global industy including staff and safety. i.e. Hinkley B total running costs is 3.5 times the price of the equipment cost. The ...


9

I am just adding some stuff regarding CO2 emissions. The rest is well summarized by user tim. While it is true that the process of generating electricity from uranium is more or less CO2 emission free, the mining of uranium ore is not. The emissions are minor when compared to coal based electrical energy though. But it is a fact that nuclear power (uranium ...


9

The main problem is the Dimona reactor in which Israel's nuclear warheads are produced. Israel has not signed the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and does not allow inspectors in the facility. From Nuclear energy and desalination in Israel by Or Rabinowitz: This facility was never placed under IAEA safeguards or any other international ...


9

Because this is what their voters want. The main purpose of a party is to represent it's voters. The policy and the statute is subject to reflect their views, and evolve with the consciousness of citizens. Green parties being opposed to nuclear power is merely a reflection of general sentiment of their voters.


8

I notice your question is tagged united-states but most of the arguments from my European background will nonetheless remain valid. Security This sounds a little bit like fear of technology, but there have been significant incidents in three of the largest users of nuclear power (the US, the USSR and Japan). Now for the US accident you could say that it ...


8

Why did France stop its uranium extraction activities? Commercial reason It's cheaper to buy from a foreign site with a higher concentration of Uranium ore than mine it from an inferior mine in your own country. Uranium ore is very common (40 times more common than silver and 500 times more common than gold) and can be found everywhere on the planet - ...


5

As Philipp mentioned in a comment, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is both available online and short. The basic agreement and controls are: Iran agrees not to pursue nuclear weapons, but may pursue nuclear energy for other purposes. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is requested to monitor and verify Iran for compliance. A joint ...


5

Genuine opposition to nuclear power, as opposed to astroturfing by the coal industry, best explains the current situation. If anything, attitudes towards coal are positively correlated with attitudes towards nuclear power. John Howard, who investigated the feasibility of nuclear power in Australia, was fairly friendly to the coal industry. He opposed ...


5

The nuclear energy question is complicated by other considerations. The only nuclear power plant being built in the US (Vogtle in Georgia) is costing $7 per watt, and eventually perhaps more. Wind turbines cost around $2 per watt, solar including installation around $2 per watt, some combined cycle natural gas plants around $1 per watt. Fiscal ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible