By Kang Hyun-kyung
The three events of the Arab Spring, the Washington-led effort to deter Iran’s nuclear weapons program and the meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear reactors have one thing in common.
They together have led to a global energy dilemma as oil prices went up while there are currently no alternative energy sources as effective as nuclear energy, a Norwegian expert of future studies said Monday.
Martin Kruse, a senior futurist at the Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies based in Denmark, said among these the Fukushima nuclear crisis last year had a severe effect on the global energy market.
“Before the disaster, nuclear energy had been thought to be the energy alternative as it is clean and safe,” Kruse said in an interview with The Korea Times at a Seoul hotel.
“There are alternative energy sources, including bio fuel. But the problem is that no other existing energy sources are as effective as nuclear energy in terms of production of electricity.”
Consequently, the global effort to reduce carbon dioxide became an uphill battle, he said.
Countries such as Korea, which have poor natural resources and rely heavily on trade, are the hardest-hit after the global energy situation has deteriorated over the past few years.
Since the meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear reactors last year after a monster tsunami hit the northeastern region of Japan, a global nuclear push has declined.
Korea is suffering as it plans to export its nuclear energy technology after winning a deal to build four nuclear reactors in Abu Dhabi in 2009.
Besides earthquakes and natural calamities, Kruse said, there are other risks concerning nuclear energy.
“If they are resolved, nuclear energy will be safer,” he said. But he declined to elaborate on what those risks are.
Kruse arrived in Seoul Thursday for a four-day global seminar hosted by the Korea Foundation.
Starting from Thursday, scholars, government officials and experts from several countries had exchanged their views on a global regulatory framework for balance and governance for green growth and development.
Iran is another source of concern as the United States-led effort to impose fresh sanctions against the Middle Eastern country’s nuclear program is set to cause an oil price hike.
The United States upholds the position that Iran intends to build nuclear weapons.
Iran denied the allegation, saying it is seeking the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
Washington encouraged its allies, including Korea and Japan, to join the U.S.-led campaign aimed at Iran.
As Korea is under pressure to cut Iranian oil imports, President Lee Myung-bak launched oil diplomacy during his summit talks with Arab leaders this week during a week-long trip, which also included a stopover in Turkey.
Kruse pointed out a public perception discrepancy between hazardous effects of nuclear accidents and other disasters such as oil spills.
According to him, oil spills have a much larger and longer-term effect on people’s health and the environment.
He said the Gulf of Mexico oil spill last year, for example, had much more serious impact on human health and the environment than the Three Mile Island nuclear incident in the United States in 1979 did.
The meltdown in Unit 2 of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Dauphin County, Pa., resulted in the release of up to 13 million curies of radioactive gases and nearly 20 curies of iodine-131.
“People are, to some degree, irrational as they fear nuclear accident more than oil spills. When people think of the risks of disasters, they are much more concerned about immediate risks rather than the long-term effect on the environment,” he said.
Kruse said the rare coincidence of the release of the movie “The China Syndrome” and the Three Mile Island disaster prompted the general public to have a prolonged fear of the risks of nuclear incidents.
“The movie was released two weeks after the Three Mile nuclear accident. People saw the movie and the accident and this had a severe impact on their perception of nuclear accidents,” he said.