How Renewable Energy Can Resolve the Iranian Nuclear Issue

Fuel Oil and Food Aid Were Key in North Korea
16 months ago North Korea agreed to shut down its nuclear program in exchange for aid and the lifting of sanctions. President Bush recently removed North Korea's designation as part of the 'Axis of Evil', and "the energy -starved state is already receiving the equivalent of one million tonnes of heavy fuel oil." This has been one of the Bush Administration's few diplomatic victories, yet even as it works to ensure that North Korea lives up to its end of the bargain, a new, equally ominous threat, has been grabbing headlines: Iran's nuclear ambitions. While the promise of aid in the form of fuel oil and food was instrumental in dealing with North Korea, the Iranian nuclear issue can be resolved with renewable energy. Here's how.

If Iran Wants Electricity, Give It Renewable Power
Iran claims that "its nuclear [program] is solely aimed at generating electricity so that it can sell more of its oil and gas." If that's the case, then all Iran really needs is a means of generating electricity that doesn't involve oil, gas or nuclear power, since the international community is staunchly opposed to a nuclear Iran. Well, that only leaves one form of energy production: renewable energy (nuclear power is not renewable, as uranium and plutonium are finite resources.) Imagine if the six countries involved in the negotiations--the U.S., China, Russia, Germany, Britain and France--went to Iran and made the following offer: "in exchange for shutting down your nuclear program, we will give you aid in the form of renewable energy equivalent to the amount of power that would have been produced from two of your planned nuclear reactors. In addition, we will provide strong incentives and subsidies in the future as you expand your wind, solar photovoltaic, solar concentrating and biomass programs, and we will also lift all economic sanctions."

Such an offer would not only have the benefit of reducing carbon emissions and potentially spurring the adoption of renewable energy in oil-producing countries, it would also force Iran to reveal the real reason behind its nuclear program. After all, if Iran is truly seeking more electricity generating capacity, then it should be happy to accept energy in any form; if the offer is rejected, then clearly Iran's program is not merely for civilian purposes. What's more, Iran would stand to benefit tremendously from an offer of free energy, as opposed to the exorbitant costs of developing and building a nuclear program in the face of economic sanctions.

A Costly Offer, Depending on the Definition of Costly
Of course, the U.S. and its allies would have to pony up a significant amount of money, both because a lot of energy would have to be provided--a nuclear power plant can easily generate 1,000 megawatts--and because renewable energy is intermittent and, as a result, 10,000 megawatts of wind and solar might be needed to equal 1,000 megawatts of nuclear power. If the average cost of all the renewable energy technologies utilized were $5 per installed watt, providing the electricity equivalent of two nuclear power plants might cost $50 billion, shared by the 6 participating nations and possibly the wider international community.

However, this would be a tremendous opportunity to give a boost to American and European manufacturers of renewable energy technologies, and could build capacity and infrastructure in Iran for a renewable economy. If the U.S. has been able to rationalize shelling out 2 trillion dollars to 'bring democracy to Iraq', it can surely justify spending a fraction of that--with no loss of American or Iranian life--to avoid war between Israel and Iran.

A Pipe Dream, Or a Necessity?
Okay, so all this is highly unlikely, but wouldn't it be great to see the offer made? As things stand now, Iran is toying with the international community as they parry "freeze-for-freeze" offers and other incentive packages. Current negotiations have accomplished little, and Iran's continued defiance of U.N. sanctions has led Israel to threaten military action, further destabilizing the world's most volatile region. In short, the "solar and wind for nuclear" plan may be a pipe dream, but only if we ignore the nightmare of a nuclear Iran. (Let's not forget that in 2007, wind power expansion beat nuclear 10-to-1. . .pipe dreams don't add 20,000 MW of worldwide capacity in one year!)

An offer of free renewable energy, coupled with other incentives and strong diplomatic pressure could, at a minimum, force Iran to show its cards. A rejection of the proposal would enable the world to deal with the threat of a country run by fanatics that, contrary to what is claims, is actually pursuing nuclear weapons. Yet if the offer were accepted, it would be a tremendous diplomatic victory for all involved--the world's first green disarmament initiative. Imagine an Iran that is threatening not because of its warheads and cooling towers, but rather because of its burgeoning renewable energy industry that, thanks to low labor costs, is pressuring American and European firms. Wouldn't that be a more palatable threat?

Background Information and Quotes Via:
::Reuters
::BBC News
::NY Times

More on Nuclear Power
New Generation of Nuclear Power Plants More Expensive Than Expected
Green Nuclear Waste?
Norwegian Wind Power Could Become Europe's Battery
Could Nuclear Power Be the Answer to the Energy Crisis?
William McDonough on Nuclear Power
Concerns Over Nuclear Power Continue to Mount

More on Renewable Energy
Renewable Energy Incentives Stalled in Senate
Renewable Energy, Solar Power, Key to India's New Climate Plan
Sweden Raises the Renewable Energy Bar
Google Sets Ambitious Goals For Renewable Energy
Spain: Renewable Energy Powerhouse

Comments

[mamacat]

This is the first time that I have run across this idea, but I like it. If we or anyone else can show the Iranians that renewable energy is cheaper and safer than developing their own nuclear industry, it should help in the arguments against nuclear.
Very good idea. I hope someone runs with it.

[Donnat]

why can't we have renewable clean energy in the U.S. and tell Iran to go and pound sand? Why is the end game that we have the most polluting energy? Be a leader, america.

[sheila]

I have a better idea - use all that money to get solar and wind on every home and business in the US, develop the electric car, and then maybe we can stop rattling our sabers at Iran because we will no longer need to kill them for their oil. Let's just let Iran do their thing - they won't want Nukes if we and Israel stop trying to take them over and steal their oil.

Eliminate the middle man and obtain TRUE energy independence here at home (meaning independence from ALL Big Energy, including Big Foreign Oil but also Big Domestic Wind and Big Domestic Solar) - ON OUR OWN HOMES AND PROPERTIES. The tech and manufacturing capacity is here, now...

[research]

Yup, see my profile for details and links. 1T$,less then oil subsidies, to convert all us energy to wind and solar.

[KillTheMessenger]

Iran's run for the nukes is a simple consequence of a US threatening every and all non-nuclear countries with "pre-emptive measures". Look how well that works! They are all trying to arm themselves with the only weapons we seem to respect. As long as we keep "all options on the table", they will do whatever they can to restrict our options by any means possible.

This is not about energy. This is about the US acting absolutely foolish on the world stage.

[research]

http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~aupec/aupec02/Final-Papers/H-Kazemi1.pdf

Learn all about Iran Solar and Wind programs.

Yes they have been installing them since 1994.

Does Iran have the right to develop Nuke power? I wish they wouldn't, but since we keep threatening to bomb and invade them, they realize they need a Nuke Bomb so they can be treated li North Korea is now.

If Iran gets the Bomb, they will be yet another country I wish didn't have it. Pakistan is far more dangerous then Iran. The war mongering has tried hard to make us hate Iran, but it's as always, it's way overblown.

Anyone who trust BushCo to run another war crime, needs immediate mental care.

[Semaj51]

But the big question is.... Does Iran want nuclear plants ONLY for generating electricity or do they want the additional bonus of nuclear material for weapons?

[mouselion]

Well, considering Israel is a de facto nuclear power -- and Iran considers Israel its arch enemy;
and, that t Iran is sitting on oil reserves, as well as has perfect conditions for solar and wind...

Probably do want it for more than energy...

[Guitarsandmore]

I like this idea as it shows bold and creative solutions without the use of military force. I think you would also have to couple with this the offer that Israel would also disarm and destroy its nuclear weapons, otherwise it wouldn't really make any sense. Why should Iran sit there naked and exposed with Israel pointing nuclear weapons at them and the U.S. on the Iraq / Iranian border playing shoot em up cowboy in Baghdad? Doesn't Iran have the right to defend itself against attack just like any other nation would?

[tompoe]

"Iran claims that "its nuclear [program] is solely aimed at generating electricity so that it can sell more of its oil and gas." If that's the case, then all Iran really needs is a means of generating electricity that doesn't involve oil, gas or nuclear power, since the international community is staunchly opposed to a nuclear Iran."

Glad you inserted the country, Iran, in that quote. Otherwise, I would have bet your statement was referring to the U.S., or Israel, or any other country in the world. American public thinks wind power is just fine. Why doesn't our government permit us to have it? Iran, by the way, doesn't need to be given anything. If they want wind power, they can make the switch as easily as any country. If they want nuclear energy resources, they'll continue as they are, now. We have AEIA in Iran, today, and there's no nuclear weapons grade uranium present. No evidence of nuclear weapons uranium processing. Issue is resolved. What's not resolved, is why the administration in the white house fighting so hard to prevent our country from switching to wind power.

[JonnyVerdorben]

Iran has every right to develop nuclear technology and nuclear power if that's what they prefer to do.

That being said, the eastern half of Iran is primarily desert with poor soil and harsh climate conditions not suitable for food agriculture. That land WILL however support desert plants such as oleander, jojoba and Leucophyllum frutescens. Those species grow naturally in desert conditions while at the same time require virtually no artificial irrigation, fertiliser or human attention. A good portion of the Iranian land mass is non-productive agriculturally. The Iranians have the potential to grow millions if not billions of tons of non-edible biomass in their desert regions that would make perfectly satisfactory material for cellulosic ethanol conversion. They could thus transition from a pure gasoline-based transportation fuel economy to pure ethanol or a gasoline/ethanol blend. The same conditions exist in the southwest and western deserts of the USA.

The Iranians could thereby devote their immense natural gas reserves to domestic energy production and then sell all their petroleum for top dollar (Euro, yuan etc.) to the oil junkies of the world such as the USA, China, India and Japan.

$5000 per year is good money in the Iranian countryside. Half a billion U.S. dollars per year would hire 100,000 residents of rural Iran to plant oleander plantations in the desert. Half a billion dollars is about two days' worth of Iraq war spending.