Charles Hunter
04/23/2012 AME/EG40401
Nuclear Energy: Is This A Feasible Option The debate for nuclear energy is one which has been ongoing since the 1970s. The debate may have ebbed between the years, but is currently becoming a controversial topic once again. The Western world generally views nuclear energy as a major a safety issue and is reluctant to build nuclear power plants because of the enormous impact a plant meltdown could have on the environment and those living near the plant. The Eastern world, specifically, China, India, and Iran has committed to nuclear energy. Even with accidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters these nations have not been reluctant to build nuclear plants. China currently has 25 nuclear reactors under construction. The United States is considering but not constructing reactors, instead it has extended the life of current nuclear plants to 60 years. Nuclear power plants currently provide about 6 percent of the world’s energy and 13 percent of the world’s electricity. IAEA estimates that by 2030 nuclear energy generating capacities will be larger but the percentage of electricity supplied by nuclear power will decrease from around 18 percent to anywhere between 15.5 – 17 percent. Is nuclear energy an option which should continue to be pursued or just be abandoned? To answer this question one needs to look at both the positives and negatives of nuclear energy. The following is a list of the positives for nuclear energy:
Thousands die each year of respiratory diseases related to CO2 in the atmosphere. The technology is readily available and does not have to be developed first. One plant can generate a large amount of electricity. Nuclear plants are “clean” energy providers to help solve climate mitigation. Nuclear waste is produced in small quantities and may be solved with new technology. Uranium is an abundant resource and very little fuel is needed for large amounts of energy. Strengthen energy security True cost lower than fossil fuels or renewable
The following is a list of the negatives against nuclear energy:
Nuclear plants cannot be built fast enough to be an effective response to climate mitigation.
Charles Hunter
04/23/2012 AME/EG40401
Nuclear plants are expensive to build. Waste problem is unresolved. Increase the production of nuclear weapons and the risk of nuclear war. Safety concerns with low probability, high risk failure. Public opinion is extremely low. Uranium is not a renewable source of energy. Nuclear power plants cannot be easily iterated for improvement like other energy providers. When all the energy-intensive stages are considered, nuclear power is not a true low carbon electricity source.
Considering the factors above as well as economic, security, and environmental factors, the U.S. should eliminate nuclear energy as an option. Economically, nuclear energy does not fit what America needs. Each plant is a multi-billion dollar investment. The large capital costs for building the nuclear power plants are not worth the long production time before the facility is operational. Cost also needs to be taken into account for the unresolved problem of nuclear waste which at the moment either sits on the power plants premises or is put in a large underground governmental storage facility. China currently has the ability to make the cheapest nuclear plants with an upfront cost around 2 billion dollars. The United States is unable to produce nuclear plants at this price mainly due to the large labor cost. The best option for energy generation from a cost standpoint is to use natural gas. This resource is very abundant in the United States due to the discovery of large shale gas deposits. The money invested in nuclear energy should be invested into other renewable energy sources, such as solar or wind in which extracting power from it is getting cheaper every year due to iterative technology. Energy independence and security may not be solid as one may believe. For the United States nuclear power has been relatively unaffected due to embargoes and such in regards to uranium acquirement. However, large resources of uranium are present in politically unstable countries which would gain stronger and stronger footholds as the supply of uranium from other countries diminishes.
Charles Hunter
04/23/2012 AME/EG40401
The IAEA has estimated that existing uranium mines may only be able to supply the needs of current nuclear reactors for 40-50 years. As uranium depletes the volatility of pricing will escalate for nuclear power. Energy security may also be compromised due to the reliability of nuclear plants to stay operational. Nuclear plants must shut down periodically for maintenance and refueling, as wells as if there is a power failure, and cannot be quickly restarted. Droughts and high temperatures can also destroy the energy security by severely reducing the power level of a plant. These plants also have large environmental risks to current and future generations. The plants create spent nuclear fuel on site. Radioactive waste is dangerous for estimates ranging from 10,000 to millions of years. This is a major concern which remains unresolved other than placing them in storage containers underneath the Earth with the hope that this problem will be solved in the future. Radiation is also emitted during the process of mining the uranium necessary for the plants. Radioactive isotopes are released in small quantities during operation which may affect the population and environment around the plant. If one of these plants had a meltdown large amounts of radioactive material would be discharged and completely destroy the environment for generations as well as lead to the death or serious health concerns of the population near the plant. Nuclear energy in the United States should be avoided in favor of other renewable sources of energy. The negatives of nuclear energy far outweigh the positives. Climate mitigation is the only reason to support nuclear energy and this problem can best be solved by expanding the time and money from nuclear energy and investing it into solar, wind, or other renewable sources of energy. In the United States nuclear energy will never have the social, political, and economic support needed to justify the pursuit of a nuclear nation.