About twenty minutes long. I just watched. Thanks to this tweet by Barry Brook for the link.
He talks about a film called “Pandora’s Promise” that will come into cinemas this year. That film is documenting several people’s change of mind from anti to pro nuclear (including Lynas).
He also explains why he supports nuclear energy. The reasoning goes somewhat like this:
One. The global warming crisis makes deployment of low carbon energy necessary.
Two. Renewable energy can’t do the job because it takes too much space and is intermittent.
Three. Therefore, the choice is between global warming and nuclear energy. Even if the latter has some problems, the former is much more serious.
The problem with this approach is at number two. Renewable not only can do the job alone, it will have to do the job without nuclear, which is in decline and can’t be counted on. Nuclear is hopeless as a global warming countermeasure.
That in turn means if assertion number two is actually right, well, then global warming will proceed unchecked. Be careful what you wish for.
And of course, if your path to support for nuclear leads over getting people to stop supporting renewable energy, you will have a much harder time convincing anybody than if you just pointed out that whatever low carbon energy renewable provides will always be less than renewable plus nuclear.
Bonus fact check: Germany has not 27 GW of solar now, as Lynas says in that interview, but already over 32.