Manufactured Fear: The promise of nuclear energy and roadblocks to energy abundance

Manufactured Fear

The promise of nuclear energy and roadblocks to energy abundance

On April 26th, 1986, humanity's fight against climate change was set back decades. In a now abandoned city in northern Ukraine, the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant suffered a meltdown and released radioactive contaminants that spread across much of Europe. Today, nuclear energy's detractors often bring up this event from almost 4 decades ago as proof that nuclear energy is not safe and should be avoided. This argument, however, is ill-informed at best and self-serving malevolence at worst. The fear of radiation and safety is manufactured propaganda using events that hold little relevance to today.

In 2023, nuclear energy is one of the safest sources of energy. It's also the most reliable source of energy. And to add to that, it's carbon-free. In an era with blackouts in America's most populous state, European energy reliance on adversaries like Russia, and the threat of global warming, it's time to return to the promise of nuclear energy.

How does nuclear energy work?

Nuclear energy can come in two forms: fission and fusion. While, nuclear fusion is still in development, nuclear fission has been a reliable source of energy in the US for decades. Nuclear has made up around 20% of US annual energy production since 1990.

Nuclear fission occurs when the nucleus of an atom is split into at least two nuclei. This process releases gamma photons and creates an enormous amount of energy. Today, power plants primarily use thermal reactors with enriched uranium. This process releases zero carbon which is a critical step in combating global warming.

Is nuclear energy actually safe?

Yes. In fact, it is one of the safest forms of energy. Between 1990 and 2014, nuclear energy had 0.03 deaths per Terrawatt-hour (TWh). By contrast, coal caused 24.6 deaths/TWh and wind caused 0.04 deaths/TWh. Of the major energy sources, only solar is safer at 0.02 deaths/TWh. To add to that, nuclear energy, contrary to popular belief, releases less radiation than the other major energy sources.

In addition to Chernobyl, critics bring up Three-Mile Island, a Pennsylvania nuclear reactor that also suffered a meltdown. However, the actual dangers of this meltdown were minimal. According to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the two million people who were around the accident received 1 millirem in additional radiation dosage while a chest X-ray adds 6 millirems.

Nuclear waste is also a major concern among critics of the energy source. This is no longer a problem either. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant run by the US Department of Energy in the New Mexico desert stores nuclear waste in an underground repository. It uses an ancient salt formation to permanently isolate radioactive waste.

There still are political challenges to nuclear waste storage. The Biden administration has had to try to find solutions to nuclear waste storage after Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm promised Sen. Catharine Cortez Masto (D-NV) that the Yucca Mountain long-term disposal site in Nevada would not be used.

Like many new innovations in the physical world today, politics seems to be a hindrance to the adoption and scaling of nuclear energy. As more Americans see its benefits, their representatives should follow suit. This could be a paramount step towards a cleaner, cheaper future of energy.

Can nuclear energy be a reliable source of energy?

Nuclear energy is the most reliable source of energy. Nuclear energy has a capacity factor of 92.5% while the two major sources of energy, coal and natural gas have capacity factors of 40.2% and 56.6% respectively. Other clean energy sources like wind and solar are at capacity factors of 35.4% and 24.9% respectively. Nuclear energy can operate almost year-round while other sources need significant downtime.

Where do we go from here?

The fight to leverage nuclear energy occurs on two fronts: preventing existing reactors from shutting down and developing new ones. California's last operating nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, is slated to be shut down in either 2024 or 2025 by PG&E, a California utility company. The plant, located in the San Luis Obispo County around 200 miles north of LA, currently accounts for 15% of California's clean energy production.

The stated reason for this closure is that California's energy regulations prefer renewables to nuclear and thus make running the plant uneconomical. This decision will set back California in its effort to have net-zero emissions by 2050. It's especially detrimental in a state that faces rolling blackouts. Operating the plant for 10 extra years through 2035, would save the state $2.6B according to researchers from Stanford and MIT.

The ~39M people who live in the state of California could see their quality of life improve from better sources of energy. It could mean less blackouts, cheaper electricity, and even help accelerate EV adoption in a state that is so focused on transitioning to greener options.

On the launching new nuclear reactors, progress has been made in other parts of the country. One example of this is in Kemmerer, Wyoming where TerraPower will build a Natrium plant. It was selected by the US Department of Energy as an advanced reactor demonstration project and has the support of the mayor of Kemmerer.

Nuclear energy is one of humanity's tickets to cleaner, safer energy. It's time to support its usage and take advantages of its reliability to reach decarbonization goals, bolster energy independence, and reach energy abundance.

Sources:

Baker, David R. “End of an Atomic Era: PG&E to Close Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant.” SFGATE, San Francisco Chronicle, 22 June 2016, https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/End-of-an-atomic-era-PG-E-to-close-Diablo-Canyon-8314258.php.

“How Safe Is Nuclear Energy?” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, 19 July 2022, https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/07/19/how-safe-is-nuclear-energy.

“Nuclear Power Is the Most Reliable Energy Source and It's Not Even Close.” Energy.gov, Office of Nuclear Energy, https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nuclear-power-most-reliable-energy-source-and-its-not-even-close.

Rhodes, Richard. “Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution.” Yale E360, Yale School of the Environment, 19 July 2018, https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-nuclear-power-must-be-part-of-the-energy-solution-environmentalists-climate.

Rubin, Gabriel T. “Escape from Yucca Mountain: Biden Administration Promises Progress on Nuclear Waste.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 14 May 2021, https://www.wsj.com/articles/escape-from-yucca-mountain-biden-administration-promises-progress-on-nuclear-waste-11620984602.

“TerraPower Selects Kemmerer, Wyoming as the Preferred Site for Advanced Reactor Demonstration Plant.” TerraPower A Nuclear Innovation Company, TerraPower, 16 Nov. 2021, https://www.terrapower.com/natrium-demo-kemmerer-wyoming/.

U.S. Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant - Wipp Site, https://wipp.energy.gov/wipp-site.asp.

“Will the Climate Crisis Force America to Reconsider Nuclear Power?” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, 10 Nov. 2021, https://www.economist.com/united-states/will-the-climate-crisis-force-america-to-reconsider-nuclear-power/21806194.