Andrew Kenny, physicist and mechanical engineer: The time is right for new nuclear power in South Africa. We have already proven ourselves with Koeberg, which works in harmony with nature and which has been delivering clean, safe, cheap reliable electricity for 34 years. But we must study, very carefully, the successes and failures of recent nuclear construction around the world before we begin.
Mark Mills, economics21.org: Not satisfied with the mere claim that solar and wind are reaching parity with the costs of conventional energy technologies, green enthusiasts are upping the ante claiming that by “2030, the cost [of solar] could be so near to zero it will effectively be free.” But no amount of research or torturing of reality, however, will lead to that result. Both physics and history offer instructive lessons. That scenario has played out in Germany and Britain, both far further down the green path, leading to radically higher electricity prices there — 200% to 300% higher than in America.
Shawn Ritenour: Professor of Economics, Fellow of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation: Realism Necessary - The idea that any economist can predict the quantitative effect of an action today on the economy three hundred years from now would be laughable if not taken so seriously by politicians seeking excuses for policies to which they’re already committed on other grounds.
Michael Shellenberger, Environmental Progress: We find a nuclear phase-out in South Korea would: Cost at least $10 billion per year for additional natural gas purchases alone, the equivalent of 343,000 salaries; Almost all of the cost would be in the form of payments for fuel; Require a significant increase in fossil fuel use; Increase premature deaths from air pollution by replacing nuclear plants instead of coal plants with natural gas; Damage and perhaps destroy South Korea’s lucrative nuclear export business;