Nuclear power has been widely used for several decades now, having become a critical part of the power infrastructure of not only the United States, but many other nations from all around the world. The use of nuclear power entails several benefits that have all contributed to its widespread use. With the proliferation of fossil fuels for power generation came an unacceptable increase in the amount of pollutants being expelled into earth's atmosphere. With nuclear power, those emissions have been severely curtailed. Nuclear power also benefits from needing very little fuel in order to generate power. Uranium (and other types) fuel rods can fuel a reactor for decades, as opposed to the tons and tons of coal or natural gas that are needed on a daily basis to feed other forms of power plants.
With these inherent advantages though, come a whole host of other problems to deal with, and they all tend to have an increased element of risk when compared to simpler forms of power generation. Even though there are few if any direct pollutants in the day-to-day operations of a nuclear power plant, there are some long term considerations. Fuel for nuclear reactors can remain radioactive for decades or even centuries after its use. How to safely dispose of this fuel remains a highly contested topic in the field of nuclear power. So what is the best way to deal with the problem of spent fuel? Do we simply store these fuels over the long term, and wait for them to become less radioactive? Is there another way to use these fuels and extract even more energy from them in a safe manner?
Perhaps the greatest element of risk to nuclear power, in the eyes of the world, is the potential for a catastrophic meltdown of a reactor. Unfortunately, we've already seen several incidences of this, including the Chernobyl incident in the Ukraine, Three Mile Island in the United States, and the Fukushima Daiichi incident in Japan. These incidents varied in magnitude, but had the potential to be life altering events for significant portions of the world population. So what caused these incidents? Was it the nature of nuclear power itself, or was it the technology available at that time? Did human error play a significant role? If human error did play a significant role, what kinds of regulations and technology do we need to put into place to assure that this kind of incident never happens again? At the end of this paragraph is a video summarizing the Chernobyl disaster.
From my perspective, I think these incidents have taught us a lot in regards to safety in the modern era. Clearly though, we still have much to learn, especially in the wake of the Japan earthquake just six years ago, which caused the meltdown at the Fukushima plant. Overall, I think we can make nuclear power safe for everyone, but it takes the best technology, the most careful planning, and careful oversight to ensure proper operation. I also think that as technology progresses, newer and safer forms of nuclear energy will become available, that not only allow us to use prior spent fuel, but operate in such a way that a meltdown incident is all but impossible.
I dont think I'll have a hard time finding information on this subject from which to learn from. Nuclear power is so important that we cant help but continually research the subject matter, in order to ensure its survival in the future. There are numerous regulating bodies around the world that set standards and rules governing the use of nuclear power, and they should be a good place to start looking for information.
Some of the things I found very interesting within your post is how nuclear energy is a better alternative for the environment than fossil fuels. I also found it fascinating for myself that all three nuclear reactor mishaps have taken place in my lifetime. Some of the questions that your blog generated for me were; What are the actual environmental effects of nuclear byproducts as compared to fossil fuels? What are the cost differences in Uranium as compared to coal? Is the supply for nuclear fuel harder to obtain than a fossil fuel? I agree with your point that the greatest concern for the public is a reactor meltdown, mainly because we have seen that happen as recently as March 2011.
ReplyDelete