Skip to main content

No Energy Pecking Order Necessary

A theme developing among a lot of writers is the notion that if some country in the world decides to abandon nuclear energy, the alternative pickings leave a lot to be desired.

But the alarm in Japan and globally belies the fact that nuclear power plants, in the approximately half a century that they have existed, have caused fewer deaths than another common source of power production: coal.

Frankly, it’s too soon for defensiveness – always too soon, really.There have been plenty of politicians who have not been shaken from their conviction that nuclear energy  has to be part of any energy policy that seeks to reduce carbon emissions - I’ve quoted quite a few of them here over the last few days - and keep up with world demand for electricity generation. On Thursday, for example, UAE broke ground on its first nuclear plant.

Coal plants pose an even larger threat than mining, however: pollution. Coal plants emit soot, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and other pollutants.

The concern now should be finishing the job at Fukushima Daiichi, getting Japan back on its feet and letting Tepco and the Japanese government get to the bottom of what happened at Fukushima. All that is not going to happen tomorrow or next week or next month. 

While natural gas plants burn their fuel more cleanly than coal plants, people who live near drilling sites have complained about air and water pollution stemming from exploration.

All the other nuclear energy plants all over the world, including those in Japan not shut down by the earthquake last week, are thrumming along quite well, making electricity safely and cleanly.

That is because renewable energy, too, has downsides: The wind does not blow all the time, and wind farms can occupy substantial amounts of land. Solar power is expensive, and it does not work all the time, either. Hydroelectric dams kill fish.

The attempt to establish a pecking order for energy sources that put nuclear energy on top (or at the bottom, depending on perspective) isn’t really necessary. Not yet, likely not ever.

Comments

Joffan said…
"letting Tepco and the Japanese government get to the bottom of what happened at Fukushima"... I can save them a bit of time - it was a tsunami.

OK, OK - there's more to find out. There's boatloads of details to uncover and consider. Contingencies that could have been made. Designs that could have been different. International lessons that might have made a difference. Implications of, and responses to, releases (and I expect, sooner or later, a Japanese equivalent of Yablokov claiming spuriously large numbers affected).

But at bottom - unlike Chernobyl and Three-Mile Island - it was a very extreme nature event that overcame mulitple defenses. Which should not be forgotten.

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…