On Proliferation, Climate, and Oil: Solving for Pattern

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The author contends that nuclear power is economically unviable and inherently linked to proliferation, suggesting that a shift toward 'micropower' and energy efficiency provides a superior, profitable path to energy security and climate mitigation.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Climate protection is profitable rather than costly because the cost of saving fuel is lower than the cost of 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 through business-led profit motives, with an average cost of approximately $15 per barrel. Demand-side 'peak oil' has already emerged, with U.S. gasoline demand peaking in 2007.
  • Nuclear power is a primary driver of proliferation because the materials, skills, and equipment required for civilian nuclear energy create 'do-it-yourself bomb kits' that are difficult to regulate. Phasing out nuclear power is presented as a necessary condition for nonproliferation because it removes the commercial availability of bomb-making ingredients.
  • Nuclear power is economically uncompetitive compared to 'micropower' (renewables excluding large hydro and cogeneration) and energy efficiency. Since 2006, micropower has surpassed nuclear output, and in 2008, distributed renewables attracted $100 billion in private investment while nuclear received zero.
  • Expanding nuclear power to combat climate change is inefficient, as it provides significantly less carbon reduction per dollar and per year than competing clean energy technologies. The author claims nuclear expansion would actually 'reduce and retard climate protection'.
  • The author proposes reinterpreting Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to shift the reward for non-weapons states from access to nuclear power to aid in achieving energy security and displacing oil and coal through renewables and efficiency.

Cite the original document

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} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated