The future is nuclear. By Lea Booth.
Deployment of weather-dependent energies is handicapped by physics. The intermittency and low densities of solar and wind are what dictate the need for backup power, extensive new transmission lines, and large swathes of habitat, all of which will raise prices and harm wildlife. Lithium-ion batteries and hydrogen suffer from the same energy density problem, and natural gas is currently not a reliable partner for renewables.
Nuclear power is perfect for these circumstances. …
Nuclear plants usually have the highest capital needs of any power source, but they can generate affordable power. In Germany, nuclear ranks as the lowest-cost major source of power. In the Ontario province of Canada (where most of the nation’s nuclear power is), nuclear energy is second only to hydroelectric. Globally, the International Energy Agency reported in 2020 that nuclear energy is expected to be the cheapest source of dispatchable low-carbon electricity in 2025.
Cost overruns are not as prohibitive as anti-nuclear advocates claim. Because nuclear reactors can run for 60 or even 80 years, their expansive output spreads the upfront capital costs over long time horizons. …
Today, South Korea operates 25 reactors that generate 27 percent of its electricity. They kept costs down by building a standardized design using the same construction crews and making only incremental changes. Indeed, costs of certain plants dropped in the US and France when those plants followed the Korean model. …
Radiation hysteria was politically useful for the Greens:
Costs rose in the aforementioned nations in part due to baseless radiation hysteria, which is often aided and abetted by people who oppose nuclear energy. In the US, costs for nuclear plants skyrocketed by 280 percent after the Three Mile Island accident even though no one received harmful doses of radiation from the mishap.
Even worse, radiation panic kills. The Japanese government shut down the nation’s nuclear plants due to radiation fears after the reactor meltdowns at Fukushima, which was triggered by a record-breaking 9.0 magnitude earthquake and resulting 10-meter tsunami. A 2019 analysis found that this action raised energy prices, likely causing around 1,200 deaths in four years from loss of heat during freezing conditions. In comparison, the accident itself caused only one death due to radiation.
The Chernobyl nuclear accident, the deadliest in the history of nuclear energy, is calculated to have resulted in 245 deaths, a fatality count well surpassed by fossil fuel accidents. In the US alone, 276 people have been killed and 1,145 injured by natural gas pipeline accidents in the past 20 years. Additionally, the cleanup for Chernobyl was more successful than widely understood. After the accident, radiation levels dropped to a point where the undamaged reactors could return to operation. The last reactor didn’t close until 2000 over the protests of the Chernobyl workforce.
And, of course, radiation deaths are minimal compared to those caused by fossil fuel emissions. The air pollution from fossil fuels shortens the lives of millions each year. …
In fact, because nuclear power as a whole has generated so much more power over its lifetime compared to the projected lifetimes of solar and wind developments, nuclear energy is just as safe as solar and wind once adjusted for energy generated over time.
Nuclear is safer than the much-lauded lithium-ion storage. In developed countries, lithium-ion batteries have killed more people than nuclear radiation. Battery fires have killed eight people and injured 130 since 2021 in New York City alone. …
Used fuel — the real story:
With respect to nuclear waste, anti-nuclear activists obsess over used fuel, promoting the idea that it is hazardous. Yet nuclear waste has never killed anyone. While harmful if handled improperly, it is easy to store the waste in water pools and concrete casks. In fact, water is such a potent shield of radiation that humans can swim in the cooling pools containing nuclear waste without receiving harmful doses of radiation.
Unlike nuclear waste, solar energy has contaminated the environment with carcinogens, something which anti-nuclear activists either ignore or are unaware of. Many solar panels contain heavy metals including lead and cadmium, which can leach into the ground if the panels are destroyed by extreme weather.
Nuclear waste is actually very useful. Because most nuclear plants use only 10 percent or less of the available energy in uranium rods, breeder or fast reactors can generate energy from the waste while reprocessing it for use in conventional reactors. Russia already does this, and innovators in the West are working on this opportunity now. Because of this and other innovations, there is actually enough spent or unmined nuclear fuel to last billions of years. …
The West used to have a healthy nuclear industry:
In the heyday of nuclear power in the US, two of America’s leading companies spent over $125 million to build a nuclear plant factory on an artificial island that would churn out identical 1,150-MW nuclear plants that could then be barged to customers. Despite the bold vision, the factory never produced a reactor, dying from a thousand cuts. The ’70s oil crisis halted power demand growth; President Jimmy Carter placed a moratorium on nuclear plant construction; and then the Three Mile Island accident terrified the US. …
Modern small modular reactor (NuScale)
Free countries versus the despots:
At least 10 European nations plan to build nuclear plants. Even anti-nuclear Germany has reluctantly delayed its planned phaseout of its last three nuclear plants.
In France, President Macron has swapped his scheme to roll back nuclear’s share of electricity from 75 to 50 percent with plans to build 14 new nuclear plants. …
South Korea is back in the nuclear race. Its previous government had pledged to end its nuclear program, a decision which has been reversed by South Korea’s President Yoon Suk-yeol, who has promised to make South Korea a “nuclear reactor superpower.” …
The world leader at the moment is China. Its nuclear competencies and ambitions lead the world, with 52 reactors planned or under construction, and another 150 reactors proposed. For context, the US is currently the world’s largest generator of nuclear energy with 92 reactors. …
Russia is second to China but ahead of the countries of the free world. It is a top global exporter and domestic builder of nuclear energy. Russian and Chinese designs constitute 87 percent of reactors that began construction between 2017 and the first half of 2022. ….
Currently, the free world is behind China and Russia by at least five to seven years in the SMR race and, other than South Korea, a decade behind in the race for conventional reactors. The free world is finally running forward, but, for now, the despots are ahead.
Fossil fuels and fission are just the stop gap after horses and sail, until we develop fusion.
