I live in Slovenia, but I still do not speak Slovenian well enough to write such a blog, so I decided to write in English, that it is understandable for the most people here.

Politicians agreed that the industrial countries (including EU) have to reduce CO2 emissions by 80% until 2050. This is to stay with 50% probability within the 2 C range. The effects of climate change are internationally regarded as "more severe than terrorism".

All energy projects of the future must lead to this aim to diminish CO2 emissions. BUT: Gas-terminals actually increase CO2 emissions!

LNG actually causes in many cases higher CO2 emissions than oil. All fossil energies (coal, oil, gas) release CO2 into the air.

Natural gas (methane) contains 20% less carbon than oil but:

• Exploiting the natural resources releases up to 15% C02 into the air at the spot of exploitation, because many sources contain only 85 % NG, rest is CO2 and removed and released into the atmosphere

• Deepfreeze and compression needs so much energy that up to 30% more gas has to be burned for that process, causing additional up to 30% CO2 emissions.

• The transport in big ships uses a high amount of fuel, partly from "boil-off" LNG, partly from heavy oil, causing additional up to 8% CO2 emission

• The constant compression on the ship and in the tank on-shore uses constantly energy that adds up to CO2 emission

 all together LNG is just another fossil energy which is not renewable. It uses the earths atmosphere as a trash bin for waste.

So are the nuclear powerplants the solution?

Even nuclear energy, often regarded as "CO2-free" or "green" is NEITHER "CO2-free" NOR "green".

• The Uranium resources of the world are already highly exploited. What's left of remainders with low concentration of Uranium must now be extracted with huge amount of energy, causing high CO2 emissions.

• According to the International Energy Agency IEA (http://www.iea.org/) the peak of nuclear energy production was reached 1985 and it is declining since then. Presently 2% of the worlds energy consumption is provided by nuclear energy with declining tendency (while renewables account 2008 worldwide on 18%). Even a maximum support of nuclear energy could not solve the worlds energy demands.

• Nobody in the world has so far a solution for the storage of nuclear waste. The nuclear waste must be stored safely for periods that are so long that they are not forseeable: For example Plutonium 239 (one ingredient of nuclear waste) has a halflife of 24.000 years. It must be stored at least 10 halflifes = 240.000 years. Plutonium is produced in every nuclear power plant. It is highly toxic and carcinogenic, only 0,008 mg are estimated to cause cancer in human beings. Worldwide every year nuclear waste is produced in tons by the power plants. For instance if Jesus Christ would have built nuclear power plants, of the 240.000 years still 238.000 years would be left. How many earthquakes and wars did we have since Jesus Christ? No country has so far created a safe storage. For example Germany: The only working storage-place "Asse", former salt mine, more than 900m deep, was declared to be safe for eternity. In 2009 it became public that waters broke in, mixing with waste, and there is now radioactive base flowing around. Experts already think of evacuating the place, but where to put the waste? Nobody knows. Every pizza stand in industrialised countries would have to close, if the owner could not make evidence of a waste disposal when the inspection comes, but there is already 60 years of nuclear power plants and not a single long term waste disposal worldwide. http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,562263,00.html http://mediathek.daserste.de/daserste/servlet/content/2907730;jsessionid=6F0646E2BAF0869A728977914BA81966?pageId=487910&moduleId=310918&categoryId=&goto=&show=

 Nuclear energy is no solution for our energy demands. It is unresponsable because it will burden thousands of our childrens generations with dangerous waste for our present small energetical profit.

What we need in the future is renewable energy that does not cause waste! Wind-Energy, solar-Energy and geothermal energy could provide us more energy than we actually need, without dangerous waste. Examples:

• In Germany last week the government initiated a new project with 40 off-shore windfarms of 12.000 GW capacity that would supply 12 Million of households (ca. 12x of Slovenia households). 2/3 of the farms are already approved from local bodies. http://www.manager-magazin.de/unternehmen/artikel/0,2828,648804,00.html

• The international project "desertec" will start to produce solar electricity for Europe in North Africa by 2020. By a technical storage trick the plants work even at night when there is no sunlight. There is so much capacity that only 3% of Sahara's surface (125x125 km) would be enough to fully supply the world with electricity! http://www.energetika.net/novice/News/projekt-desertec-bi-zaposlil-240000-nemcev

• Latest research of the Harvard University show that the suitable on-shore-locations for wind energy on earth would provide 40x of the worlds present energy supply. http://www.zeit.de/online/2009/26/erde-sd-windanlagen Even the conservative trade review cites the renewables as more rewarding http://www.handelsblatt.com/technologie/energie_technik/windenergie-reicht-fuer-die-ganze-erde;2386375

• Long distance transmission of electricity by "super-grids" (DC-technology) is already more than 20 years in operation. Its losses are very low, only 3% per 1000 km, and the costs are moderate. China for example, is now installing such a supergrid. Even financial times sees China ahead in solar power and supergrid. http://www.ftd.de/unternehmen/unternehmen/:erneuerbare-energien-china-baut-weltgroesstes-sonnenkraftwerk/50007218.html

 Safe and clean energy production is possible, for Slovenia, for Italy, for Europe and the world. It can be extended from 18% now to 100% in the future with the technology we already have now at prices that are not higher as they are now.

 We as citizens have to make it clear to our politicians, that we want safe and clean energy, not climate change and radioactive waste! No more investments into dinosaur-energy protects like gas terminals and nuclear power plants, but intelligent, modern, international and interconnected clean energy projects of the future!

Pictures:

40 off-shore wind-farms in Germany will produce electric power for 12 million households, according to the governments plans.

Radioaktive storage Asse/Germany survived only 30 years, although made to store nuclear waste for eternity: Now water broke in and made a radioactive soup 750 metres below ground. Experts are without clue where to put the waste now.