Is nuclear power the answer to global warming? As countries bid to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, released by burning oil, coal and gas, nuclear energy is once again finding itself in the spotlight. The Kyoto Protocol - setting limits on the emissions which cause global warming - is now in place and the search for cleaner fuels is intensifying.

Step up much maligned nuclear power - people may be worried about its safety and they may be concerned about nuclear waste, but it is greenhouse gas emission free.

And even the Dutch - long sceptical about nuclear power - are considering re-opening discussions on the previously agreed closure date of a nuclear power plant in the south of the country.

Last week's Amsterdam Forum focused on this new nuclear power debate.

Host Andy Clark was joined by Bruno Comby, the president of Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy, and Rianne Teule, a campaigner on nuclear energy from Greenpeace Netherlands.

Key quotes:

Bruno Comby on the need for nuclear power:

"Nuclear energy, if it is safely developed with safe reactors, is very ecological and it is absolutely necessary to protect the environment. Humanity is running into two major energy crises, the first is that we are going to run out of oil and our civilisation is in danger of collapsing in a few years from now."

"The second danger is an environmental danger. We are throwing out 25 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide [the main greenhouse gas] into the atmosphere and as an environmentalist I cannot accept that oil and gas remain the dominating energy source because we are going to destroy our environment."

Rianne Teule, why it's a bad idea:

"Of course Greenpeace agrees fully with the fact that climate change is a real, serious problem and we have fought for years to tackle this, but we are not in favour of replacing the one serious environmental problem with the other and that is nuclear waste."

"Nuclear energy has this huge disadvantage which will be a major environmental problem for many generations after us, so we don't think this is the solution to climate change and there are much better solutions." 

Bruno Comby on France and waste:

"The high-level radioactivity produced by France, which makes more than 80 percent of its electricity with nuclear energy, is the size of a football field and less than one meter high."

"The way this waste is managed is very very clean - it's not poured out into the environment, it is almost totally confined which is not the case for toxic industrial waste."

Rianne Teule on nuclear waste:

"I understand Bruno Comby is trying to minimise the problem of the nuclear waste, but unfortunately the nuclear waste stays radioactive and really dangerous for more than 100,000 years, which is a timescale that we humans cannot understand."

Rianne Teule on alternatives:

"There are many many alternatives [wind energy, hydro-electric power, solar energy, bio-mass] if we combine these different energy sources on a large scale together with energy efficiency, then we don't need nuclear energy to tackle climate change."

Bruno Comby on wind versus nuclear power:

"Windmills do not work - in fact, if you compare the Netherlands, which has been massively investing in windmills, and France, which has developed nuclear energy, nuclear electricity is 80 percent in France and windmills are hardly about ten percent in the Netherlands."

"The price of electricity in France is about 30 percent cheaper than it is in the Netherlands and the French citizen emits about 25 percent less CO2 in the atmosphere than the Dutch. So the Dutch should follow the French example and not the opposite."

Rianne Teule on windmills:

"The Netherlands has unfortunately not invested a lot in wind energy which explains why there's not a huge contribution from this source."

Here's a brief selection of the comments you e-mailed to us for the programme:

Patricio G. Hutchins in the US: "Nuclear reactors are not economic sustainable for small and poor nations, this is another slavery. The developed nations will charge the costs of recycling the waste. Then there's the risk of natural disaster, like earthquakes, and man-made negligence."

Brian Merritt from Canada: "Nuclear fission power generation is one answer to preventing climate change from carbon dioxide emissions. In the future we may be able to generate power with nuclear fusion. Building ugly windmills is not. Many of us Canadians are blessed with cheap, clean, efficient, renewable hydroelectric power."

PJ Allen from Phoenix, Arizona, in the US: "Where is Greenpeace's investment in 'solar, wind, and hydropower' technologies?  Wanting these things and advocating these things are both quite different from doing anything practical to develop them ('easier said than done'.) If only we could harness the Greenpeaceniks' HOT AIR."

Mostak Ahmed from Bangladesh: "I can say just one thing 'we must start today otherwise we'll fail to survive!'"

Patricia Fraser from Australia: "Hydropower is not such a sustainable alternative; witness the destruction of Australian waterways through the Snowy Mountains Scheme, a much-touted hydroelectric scheme. It might be more helpful for all of us to consider carefully all the available options before ruling any of them out."

Jack from Canada: "No nuclear energy is not safe. The green house idea is bull. Any energy source will have drawback. So we need to minimize the risks."

Vera Gottlieb from British Columbia, Canada: "Nuclear power environmentally friendly? If this were so, then the nuclear waste would be just as environmentally friendly. Right? Why must the human race insist on annihilating itself?"

Ozacas Lima from Brazil: "I think there is no serious and quick alternative to nuclear energy for complementing non- or low-level polluting energy sources, at the moment.
To deal with the problem of nuclear waste, we have the 200,000 years to come. Tackling with the intense detrimental effects of air pollution and climate change to the environment, to human health and to the economy is a question of now, and that will worsen badly in the next few decades."

Ludwig Messer from the US: "Although there is no greenhouse gas harm, there is a problem with the disposal of nuclear.  I do not know of anywhere that is not harmed by pollution from burying nuclear waste."

Our panellists:

Rianne Teule, campaigner on nuclear energy from Greenpeace Netherlands.

Bruno Comby, president of Paris-based Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy.

Click to listen to the programme: Mediaplayer, Realplayer