the article is difficult to understand for a layman as myself but an important fact (among others) is that the uranium reserves on earth are considered to last for 100 years at 2008 levels of consumption.
An even more important fact is that uranium nuclear power is a couple of percentage points of 2008 energy consumption, and energy demand itself is growing exponentially. The metrics the DECC bureaucrats are plodding through are no-growth extrapolations of past trends. If clean energy is to be a reality, and if nuclear power is that clean energy, then we must scale it up by three or more orders of magnitude, and sustainability within the century is (potentially) a critical issue. DECC bureaucrats aren't considering this in that report; they are being conservative, in a bad way.
Don't look to government bureaucrats for revolutionary vision ;)
"Don't look to government bureaucrats for revolutionary vision"
Which bureaucrats should we look to? ;)
You seem rather negative towards bureaucrats.
Some bureaucratic positions are influential. Some people have visions which they can't do on their own or in a company. Some people figure out that the best way to achieve those visions is to become an influential bureaucrat. Vannevar Bush is one of those. He had a vision of how he wanted the US to fund science research. That vision became the NSF. His bureaucratic work started much earlier. For example, he was a key figure in organizing the Manhattan project.
Other bureaucrats with vision include: Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover (Hoover Dam, and more importantly the interstate compact which lead to it), the Health and Environmental Research Advisory Committee of the DOE (to start the Human Genome Project), J. C. R. Licklider (his DARPA memo on the "Intergalactic Computer Network" lead to ARPANet lead to the Internet), and Viktor Zhdanov, Deputy Minister of Health for the USSR (call for the WHO to undertake a global initiative to eradicate smallpox; the previous smallpox vaccination programs were also government driven).
An even more important fact is that uranium nuclear power is a couple of percentage points of 2008 energy consumption, and energy demand itself is growing exponentially. The metrics the DECC bureaucrats are plodding through are no-growth extrapolations of past trends. If clean energy is to be a reality, and if nuclear power is that clean energy, then we must scale it up by three or more orders of magnitude, and sustainability within the century is (potentially) a critical issue. DECC bureaucrats aren't considering this in that report; they are being conservative, in a bad way.
Don't look to government bureaucrats for revolutionary vision ;)