On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern

The author argues that the United States can simultaneously address nuclear proliferation, climate change, and oil dependence by rejecting nuclear power in favor of energy efficiency and renewable 'micropower.' He asserts that nuclear power is economically unviable, retards climate progress compared to cheaper alternatives, and inherently drives proliferation. The author suggests that the U.S. should shift its foreign policy and NPT obligations to help developing nations achieve energy security through non-nuclear, least-cost green technologies.

• The author contends that the assumption that climate protection is costly is incorrect; instead, it is profitable because saving fuel is cheaper than purchasing it. A 2009 McKinsey & Company study indicated that global greenhouse-gas emissions projected for 2030 could be reduced by 70 percent at an average cost of $6 per metric ton of CO2.
• U.S. oil dependence can be eliminated by the 2040s at an average cost of approximately $15 per barrel, according to a 2004 Pentagon-cosponsored study. The author notes that U.S. gasoline demand peaked in 2007 and suggests that light-vehicle electrification could reduce world oil demand to 8 percent below 2009 levels by 2030.
• The author argues that nuclear power is not commercially viable and is the primary driver of nuclear proliferation. He asserts that it is impossible to have nuclear power without proliferation because the materials, skills, and equipment required for civilian nuclear power create "do-it-yourself bomb kits" that safeguards cannot effectively prevent.
• Nuclear power is described as the least effective method for carbon reduction compared to its competitors, providing 2-20 times less carbon reduction per dollar and 20-40 times less per year. The author claims that expanding nuclear power would actually retard climate protection.
• Market data shows a decline in nuclear investment; since 2005, nuclear output has added only a small fraction of what "micropower" (renewables excluding big hydropower and cogeneration) has added. In 2008, distributed renewables received $100 billion in private investment and added 40 billion watts, while nuclear added zero.
• The author proposes that the U.S. should reform the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) bargain. Instead of providing access to nuclear power under Article IV, the U.S. and other exporting nations should provide aid for energy security and the displacement of oil and coal through efficiency and renewables.

APA

Lovins, A. (2010). On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern. RMI. https://rmi.org/app/uploads/2017/05/RMI_Document_Repository_Public-Reprts_2ABL_Jan2010ForeignPolicyReprint-1.pdf

Chicago

Lovins, Amory. On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern. RMI, 2010. https://rmi.org/app/uploads/2017/05/RMI_Document_Repository_Public-Reprts_2ABL_Jan2010ForeignPolicyReprint-1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Lovins |first1=Amory |title=On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern |publisher=RMI |date=21 January 2010 |url=https://rmi.org/app/uploads/2017/05/RMI_Document_Repository_Public-Reprts_2ABL_Jan2010ForeignPolicyReprint-1.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{lovins2010proliferation, author = {Lovins, Amory}, title = {{On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern}}, institution = {RMI}, year = {2010}, month = jan, url = {https://rmi.org/app/uploads/2017/05/RMI_Document_Repository_Public-Reprts_2ABL_Jan2010ForeignPolicyReprint-1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }