05. Countering Iran's Claims for a Nuclear Program

05. Does Iran Need Nuclear Reactors? Countering Arguments.

The last blog presented Iran’s arguments for nuclear power based on three arguments: (1) using the gas for producing petrochemical products, and (2) preserving much of Iran's gas reserves for her future generations and to position Iran in 40-50 years as the main supplier of energy to Europe and Asia, and, (3) avoiding the severe adverse effect of burning gas and the resulting carbon emission which is the major culprit in global warming and the greenhouse effect (to be discussed in the next blog entry.)


Before looking at the third argument Iran makes (listed above) let’s consider the first two arguments. It is true that sole reliance on a depletable source of energy is a potential disaster, not only for Iran, but for any country that has diminishing reserves. Further, worldwide, reserves are diminishing and imports are not only expensive, but they too make one a hostage politically and economically to guarantee a continuing supply. Of all alternative sources, nuclear is not the most advantageous one, and certainly not the only one to consider. Cost per kilowatt hour for nuclear energy is significantly higher than for oil-fired or gas-fired plants. Conservation could immediately reduce electrical demand by a third if fully implemented.

Looking at the capital investment required, the cost of containment, security, cleanup, and storage of spent nuclear fuel, makes nuclear look rather unattractive. If using up a depletable source is Iran’s only argument for nuclear power then it is at best self-serving, and at worst duplicitous. When one operates a nuclear plant, one is going to produce additional nuclear fuel from U238 in the fuel rods. If Iran selects breeder reactors then the quantity of material produce that could be used in nuclear weapons is even greater. Reprocessing spent fuel to recover plutonium is a relatively simple task compared to refining uranium to produce U235.

If Iran is truly concerned about alternative sources a great deal of effort and development in other alternative sources would make their claim more credible. A further, more credible claim from a developing country might be, “If we have nuclear weapons then you would not hesitate to provide us with nuclear power. The West, particularly the United States, views itself as the guardians of morality regarding warehousing and use of nuclear weapons. We do not concede that point.” Since truly persuasive arguments for nuclear power are not made in (1) and (2) above, they can be dismissed. We conclude Iran really wants a nuclear arsenal to be taken seriously in the community of nations.

We will next consider Iran’s environmental arguments for nuclear power.