DR DAVID SUZUKI INTERVIEW - Wednesday, 18th October, 2006
GEORGE NEGUS: David, it is good to see you again. Last time we
spoke it
was on your territory, this time it is on ours. But welcome.
DR DAVID SUZUKI, ENVIRONMENTALIST: I am glad to be here.
GEORGE NEGUS: David, could we start with something that is
particularly
topical in this country at the moment? It was yesterday that Australia,
it was said, was put on the path towards nuclear power after John
Howard's Government said construction of new plants, nuclear plants,
could start within a decade. That was greeted with mixed feelings, to
say the least, in this country. What was your reaction, as somebody who
has got pretty strong views about these things?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: Well, my reaction immediately was thank God
Mr Howard
is finally admitting that climate change is real and that something has
got to be done about it. I mean, here is a man in his fourth term in
office and it has taken until now for him to take climate change
seriously. And I think it is being driven by the current water crisis.
So good, we are finally going to start to do something, and certainly
something serious has to be done.
The question is whether it is to be nuclear. And I am not one who takes
a knee-jerk automatic 'no' response to nuclear energy, but I think that
if you're going to seriously consider nuclear as an issue, then you
have to answer some serious questions. First of all is cost. Show me
that nuclear can be competitive with other forms of energy, including
solar energy.
GEORGE NEGUS: Do you believe, David, if I can interrupt you
there. And
I want to hear those points because I know you do have a number of
them. But do you believe that it is cost-effective? Because when the
Minister involved, the Minister for Resources, Mr McFarlane, when this
point was raised, he says that - eventually at least - nuclear power
will be much, much cheaper than any of the other forms of power,
including renewables.
DR DAVID SUZUKI: You know what, they used to tell us - the
reason that
we bought into nuclear in the first place - was it is going to be so
cheap you won't even have to monitor how much you're using. It will be
virtually limitless at very cheap prices. That's turned out to be
absolute nonsense. And I'd like to take an example of my own country.
The largest province, Ontario, the industrial heartland of Canada, 40%
per cent of its energy is nuclear energy, and the province has a $40
billion debt for their energy, 95% of it is because of the nuclear
industry itself. This is not a cheap form of energy. So cost alone says
these guys ought to seriously consider the history of nuclear energy
around the world. It is not cheap.
Second of all, reliability. If you are going to go online with a very
serious commitment to mega, mega energy sources like this, you want to
be able to depend on it. History in Canada is they are breaking down
all the time. There are leaks that develop, cracks that develop and
then they go off the stream. And guess what, when they finally come
back on to start deliver energy, it costs us millions and millions more
dollars to get them back on stream. So that is cost and reliability -
two big issues.
We live in a post-9/11 world in which terrorism is a very real
possibility. Again, it has been shown again and again in Canada that
terrorists could get into any of our nuclear plants with no problem.
What do you do to ensure they don't get in and either blow it up or
steal radioactive material? That is going to cost you millions of
dollars more. And finally what you do with the waste? And waste is
usually the issue that is raised first. So I think there are four huge
questions that are raised and until those are satisfactorily answered,
I am amazed anyone would seriously say nuclear is what we should go
for.
GEORGE NEGUS: In the past, David, you have actually said that
the
Howard Government's position on climate change and on Kyoto was
outrageous. You were appalled at their position, the position they have
adopted. Why do you think this change of heart? You said because of our
water problems in this country. John Howard says he believes strongly
that nuclear power now has to be part of the equation in this search
for an answer to climate change.
DR DAVID SUZUKI: Well, I find that statement so lacking in
credibility.
This is a man, for years and years, who has denied the reality of
climate change caused by human beings even though his scientific
community in Australia has been saying that for more than 15 years,
that this is a serious issue and Australia is particularly vulnerable.
So for this man, now having denied all these years, to suddenly come
out and say nuclear is the only option, I don't see how he has any
credibility on this issue at all. I have no idea why suddenly nuclear's
on the agenda but I would think that anyone would say we have to look
at our whole energy policy, look at how it relates to water, how it
looks to many other issues - of sea level rise and so on - and then
having had a major consideration, come up with a plan that we can
commit to. I think the idea of nuclear is just not thought out very
critically.
GEORGE NEGUS: To be fair to John Howard, he has said that he
doesn't
believe nuclear power is THE solution but part of the solution. The
Government does intend looking at in fact they are looking at renewable
sources of energy as well.
DR DAVID SUZUKI: I'm getting very confusing signals from the
Federal
Government now because, OK, Mr Howard is finally admitting global
warming is serious, we've got to do something, but his Minister of the
Environment is saying, "Oh, we're gonna meet Kyoto." What's going on
here?
GEORGE NEGUS: So you don't believe that they will meet their
Kyoto
target?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: I have no idea. He is talking about things
that I have
no idea because this government has been denying the need to meet any
kind of target because it would destroy the economy. So where suddenly
does it come out that Australia is going to meet the Kyoto target? Now,
the Kyoto target for Australia, remember, is a much softer target than
any of the other industrialised world, so has always been a mystery to
me why there was a complaint that Australia was a special
consideration. But if Australia is going to meet its Kyoto target, why
not ratify? Kyoto is international law. When Putin of Russia signed and
ratified Kyoto, it became international law. The United States was the
only industrialised country to say no to Kyoto. We know they are
outlaws but I am amazed that Australia..
GEORGE NEGUS: You have described George Bush as an
international
outlaw. Do you put John Howard in the same category?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: Well, he is. Obviously if Mr Howard is going
to join
Mr Bush and say no to Kyoto, he is saying no to what is an
international law. Now, we know that Bush has been an outlaw. He said
from the time he got in 'no' to any landmines treaty, 'no' to any
dispute being settled in the world court, 'no' to any extension of
nuclear test bans, 'no' to Kyoto. He clearly has said the US is going
to go its own damn way and to hell with the rest of the world. I'm
amazed that Australia would choose to be that kind of an international
citizen.
GEORGE NEGUS: Is that one of your great frustrations - that
most of the
the time you are preaching to the converted, and the people you've been
trying to convert - if you like, the John Howards of this world - don't
want to know?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: The frustration I feel is with the political
process.
You see, I understand the reality of politics. When you get elected to
office your absolutely first priority is to get re-elected. That means
whatever you do has to pay off in something you can brag about before
the next election. The political vision is too short to really get
involved in something as serious as climate change. And then it is
compounded by the fact you've got to be worried about people that are
going to vote. Children don't vote. So the reality is politicians
cannot pay attention to the needs of children because they are not
voters. For that matter, future generations don't even exist. They're
not even on the political agenda.
GEORGE NEGUS: David, in your autobiography you suggest that
"it has
been your lot to be a Cassandra or Chicken Little, warning about
imminent disaster" - which you appear to be still doing. "But it gives
me no satisfaction at all to think that my concerns may be validated by
my grandchildren's generation." That is a very, very pessimistic, very
doomsday view of things. Do you feel as though you're a comparative
success as an environmentalist or a comparative failure?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: Well, it depends on how you define success.
The
problem is we don't know what the world would be like if
environmentalists and Greenpeace and Bob Brown and all of us didn't
exist. We don't know. But the reality is I have been doing this kind of
thing since Rachel Carson, in 1962, published 'Silent Spring'. And the
warnings of the scientific community for over 40 years have been coming
at us and we're going in the wrong direction. Now, I don't say this is
inevitable. I operate only because I have hope. When I do things I
always try to remember Nelson Mandela. If Nelson Mandela could hang in
there for all of those years as the best years of his life went down
the drain, then I don't think anyone can say it is too late, we have to
abandon hope. But I have also got a brain, I also listen to scientists
and they're telling us we're heading down a very dangerous path.
GEORGE NEGUS: But you are still hopeful nevertheless. Of what?
What are
you hoping for?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: I have to. I have got children. I mean, the
fact that
Mr Howard is finally, rather late, but finally admitting climate change
is serious, we have got to do something, that's an incremental step.
And that is what we have got to do, is keep working towards that. My
prediction is the next election is going to be one in which the
environment will be a major, major issue. He will not be able to avoid
that. And that is a small step again. The environment is emerging
around the world, again, to become the number one issue, as it was in
1988.
GEORGE NEGUS: It's a awful way to put it but it is almost
thanks to
climate change, the environment is back on the political agenda. That
is ironic isn't it?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: It is very ironic. You know, I've use the
metaphor - I
feel like we're in a giant car heading at a brick wall at 100 miles an
hour and everybody is arguing about where they want to sit. It doesn't
matter who is driving, for heaven's sake, someone's got say, "Put the
brake on and turn the wheel." A few of us are saying that but we are
locked in the trunk, and nobody hears us anyway.
GEORGE NEGUS: Does this autobiography mean it's the end of the
public
road that you're on, for David Suzuki, or are we going to have to put
up with you for a few years yet?
DR DAVID SUZUKI: Well, if George Negus keeps inviting me back
on the
show, I guess I won't be able to put a sock in my mouth and shut up.
GEORGE NEGUS: David, it is great to talk to you again.
DR DAVID SUZUKI: OK, thanks a lot.