15 July 2009

Nevermind That Pesky Reality

Allianz, a global insurance company based in Germany, and WWF have teamed up to provide a ranking of G8 members performance on greenhouse gas emissions (here in PDF), which sounds like a useful thing to do. However, WWF doesn't believe in nuclear power as a matter of ideology, and therefore rather bizarrely refuses to acknowledge the presence of nuclear power as a matter of ontology. Here is what the report says about how it accounts for nuclear power in its rankings:
WWF does not consider nuclear power as a viable policy option, due to its costs, radiotoxic emissions, safety and proliferation impacts. In this report focusing on climate policies, a policy approach that favors the use of nuclear power is hence adjusted. The indicators emissions per capita, emissions per GDP and CO2/kWh are adjusted as if the generation of electricity from nuclear power had produced 350 gCO2/kWh (emission factor for natural gas). A country using nuclear energy is therefore rated as a country using gas, the most efficient fossil fuel.
What did I learn from this report? Not much, other than the fact that anyone doing business with Allianz had better read the fine print.

(H/T BP)


  1. One difference between children and grown-ups is that grown-ups can make priorities. Virtually the entire global warming bandwagon is incapable of setting priorities. One thing you know about them is that when they say that nothing is more important than global warming, they don't mean that nothing is more important than global warming. The anti-nuke prejudice is too close to their hearts to give up, even at the cost of the apocalypse.

  2. So France is going to look bad, right?

  3. Lucia: As I recall, France does not look BAD per se, but worse than it is. It comes in behind Germany. The WWF has effectively TRIPLED Frances power generation emissions.

    Germany, on the other hand, looks better than it actually is, as the WWF counted offsets that Germany had purchased.

    Allianz, of course, also dabbles in the carbon market. The fact that Alliance also would benefit from higher insurance premiuims, due to AGW, should also not be ignored.