ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that there is at least one issue in the energy choice — the proliferation of nuclear weapons – that constrains the question into one of decision under uncertainty, with the implied imperative to act as if the worst that can happen, will happen. It examines the discussion on the realistic assumption that there will be a substantial increase in the need for energy. The chapter aims to distinguish between objective, theoretical and subjective probability. It also argues that nuclear power has the worst worst-consequence: a global nuclear war; that fossil power has a somewhat better worst-consequence: the reversible heating of the atmosphere; whereas the best worst-consequence belongs to an option that at present looks politically impossible, the no-growth economy. Nuclear energy has the risk of accident and the uncertain consequence of nuclear weapons proliferation.
