Chilean government will take an option for nuclear energy, perhaps similar like Japan (but before Fukushima meltdown in three reactors), or even France, USA, Belgium. It fears not to fullfill and complete  the mission of 20% renewable energy in 2020. Everybody says: It’s too expensive. Looks true, at first sight,  if we don’t put into the game all these negative effects by burning fossil energy, like coal, oil, gas or even uranium. Giant hydroelectric dams and plants becomes even more into twilight by environmental and social conflicts, if proper climate won’t fail by irregulary raining seasons.

To begin an early, peacefull and guided national discussion in Chile, we  need concrete arguments for energy planning next future. Not only in Chile and South America, but also for the whole world.  Xavier Martínez, Exploraberg’s  energy expert open the debate with his statement: Future Energy Costs of Chile 2020-30 (in spanish, pdf), Escenario de costos energéticos a futuro en Chile 2020-2030 , comparing costs from different energy supply, fossil and renewable. Coming to the conclusion that Solar Energy for instance will be cheaper than nuclear energy for a seismic country like Chile.

So, our question is still here to the Government: Why we (Chileans) need to spend a lot of money in a high cost/risk technology, whereas the same money will better inverted to “cheapen” even more the renewable energies with inhouse innovation? Renewable energies are much more social than imported “black box” technologies, involving horrorfied mistakes, like in Fukushima and Chernobyl. The IPCC-organization came to similar results, recently.

Ref.: KaBe