'Rapid technological strides but nuclear power still costly'

Opposition to nuclear power is driven by market not by ideology, every government in the world has given "implicit or explicit support" to this source of energy, and despite rapid technological advancement, it still remains costly.
These were some of the important points that came up during a debate on financial viability and safety of nuclear power in comparison to other sources of electricity.
Debating at the Raisina Dailogue 2017, Sony Kapoor, Managing Director of Re-Define, UK, said generating nuclear power is not only expensive but also has its own hazards like the ones witnessed at Fukushima and Chernobyl.
Pitching for renewables, Kapoor said, nuclear power is subsidised by several countries but the cost per unit is much more higher in comparison to the renewable sources of energy.

"Opposition to nuclear power is driven by market and not ideology," he said, adding there has not been a single country where nuclear power has not got implicit or explicit support of the government.
Kapoor claimed the accident at Fukushima and Chernobyl have cost over half a trillion dollars.

Erlan Batyrbekov, Director Genera, National Nuclear Centre, Ministry of Energy, said the technology in building nuclear power reactors has advanced multifold if one looks at accidents at nuclear power stations.
He said, it's the reactors that take decisions pertaining to operations in case of any malfunction now, pointing out at the advancement in the technology.

Michael Shellenberger, President, Environmental Progress, USA, said while a section bats for renewable energy like solar, it also incurs heavy costs and requires subsidies to make it financially viable.
He also pointed out that disposal of the waste that is generated from the materials used for producing solar power also becomes a problem.
Shellenberger added that in the US, while nuclear power gives 20 per cent of the total power, solar energy contributes less than an per cent.