Going Nuclear?

Is nuclear the solution to our future energy needs?

It's a good question. Nuclear definitely has some advantages but, like other energy sources, it has disadvantages too. There are groups that are against the use of nuclear energy at all, groups that think we should make much more use of it than we do, and groups that think we should use it as a temporary solution to energy demand and a need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, but try to make much more use of renewables in the long run.

So, what are the advantages?

Well, as we talked about before, there is general agreement that the world needs to reduce its global carbon dioxide emissions. Nuclear fuel is not burnt like coal, oil and gas, and using it to make energy does not produce carbon dioxide, and so many people see it as a cleaner energy source.

In addition, nuclear power is a relatively established technology, which currently contributes around 12% of global energy supply. Supporters argue that this makes it a more reliable future energy source than some renewables, that have currently only been used on a small scale, and may not be able to be 'scaled-up' fast enough.

Nuclear energy has other advantages over renewables too. Although it needs to be near a water source (the sea or a large river) It is not reliant on steep river valleys which can be flooded (like HEP, or hydroelectric power), and it can produce energy day and night, whatever the weather, unlike wind or solar power.

HEP requires steep sided valleys

Source: By Normherr (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

But there are disadvantages, right?

Of course. The main disadvantage for nuclear power is the waste it produces. Nuclear waste is radioactive and can be dangerous to humans for thousands of years. This means there are difficulties and costs linked to disposing (getting rid of) this waste and with decommissioning (running down) nuclear power stations after they are no longer useful. There are also concerns that the waste could be used by criminals as a weapon, and so it needs to be kept secure.

Decommissioning Chaplecross nuclear power station, Scotland

Source: M J Richardson [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Low-level waste, stored in Nevada, USA

Source: By Federal Government of the United States (Nevada Test Site Guide, DOE/NV-715) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

There are also risks of accidents. The fires and explosions in the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan, caused by the 2011 tsunami led to Japan shutting down all its nuclear reactors. It also resulted in Germany deciding to phase out its use if nuclear energy. Before that, the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine in 1986 was the worst nuclear power disaster the world had seen; the area around Chernobyl is still uninhabited. In the UK here have been safety concerns resulting from the Fukushima disaster.

The Chernobyl power plant, still enclosed in a protective 'sarcophagus' to keep it safe

Source: By Piotr Andryszczak (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Linked to this are the concerns the public have about nuclear energy, which mean people are often unhappy about having nuclear power plants close to them. There were protests against nuclear energy in Germany after the Fukushima disaster, and there have been protests about the locations suggested for new nuclear power plants in the UK. 

Because of the the risks discussed above, nuclear energy can cost more than it at first appears to. When thinking about how much nuclear energy costs, the need for secure transport of fuel and waste and for safe waste disposal and decommissioning has to be included.

Finally, the mining of uranium, to provide fuel for nuclear power plants, can damage the environment and produce even more hazardous waste.

Ranger uranium mine, Australia

Source: By Alberto Otero Garcìa from Barcelona, Spain [CC-BY-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The disadvantages sound pretty serious...

Well, yes, but it is important to remember that nuclear accidents are rare. And there are many deaths each year linked to mining fossil fuels, not to mention the effects of pollution. If nuclear power can reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, these could be cut.

Also, there is a lot of money and effort going into research as to how to make nuclear power safer. One idea that scientists are working on is thorium-powered nuclear reactors. Thorium reactors would be safer and produce much less waste.

So...?

The thing to remember is that all energy sources have advantages and disadvantages. It would be easy to write off nuclear power after Chernobyl and Fukushima, but we need to consider what the alternatives are.