It is time for the U.S. to reconsider its opinion of Nuclear Power

No new nuclear power plants have been licensed and built in the United States sense 1979 in large part due to the scare caused by the partial meltdown that year of a reactor at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. However, things have changed quite a bit since 1979, particularly from a safety and environmental standpoint. It is time that United States politicians and citizens alike re-examine their thoughts on Nuclear energy.

First off let’s address several American hang ups regarding Nuclear Energy. First off there is the very important issue of public safety, this is and should be a huge concern for the United States however it chooses to move forward in meeting growing energy demand. In the 52 year history of Nuclear power plants in the United States, Three Mile Island is the only accident on record. From an industrial standpoint this is a very good safety record, one not met by many of today’s leading industries. However, there is concern that even one nuclear accident could have such damaging effects on the population and environment that it is not worth the risk. Particularly in the wake of the accident at Chernobyl in Russia there is legitimate concern about the damage that could be caused by even one nuclear disaster.

However, Chernobyl is a unique example of what can go wrong at a nuclear power plant that is not properly built or maintained.  All nuclear plants in the United States are built inside huge concrete and steel buildings designed to keep any nuclear waste created in a potential meltdown in and natural forces and terrorists out. This alone would have helped prevent much of the damage caused by the Chernobyl disaster by limiting the amount of toxic material that actually made it off the grounds of the power plant and into the environment. Further the reactor and safety controls at Chernobyl were different in design and function from those used in the United States. The United States has never used the type of reactor used at Chernobyl because it is well know that they are inherently volatile. The safety systems that were in place at Chernobyl did not even meet western safety standards at the time; much less today’s safety standards. Finally, in addition to all of these differences, on the night of the disaster, the safety controls at the plant had been completely shut off and the plant was being run in an experimental mode that increased the danger of meltdown for the already volatile reactor. Thus, while Chernobyl serves as a grim reminder of what can go wrong, there are many factors that set the US nuclear power plants apart from the one at Chernobyl and will prevent anything like Chernobyl ever happening here.

Turning back to the US nuclear power industry it is important to note that even in 1979 at Three Mile Island the safety mechanisms in place were smart enough to shut down the reactor well before it went into meltdown, thereby stopping nuclear chain reactions and limiting the damage. The partial meltdown at Three Mile Island was caused by residual heat and this is a large part of the reason it was not more of a major incident from a safety or environmental standpoint. Sense that time we have completely overhauled our safety controls for nuclear plants to make them even stronger. In the event that something should go wrong today these safety controls would be able to prevent meltdown and contain any radioactive waste within the power plant. Thereby keeping the public and the environment completely safe.

Another major safety concern that has held up the development of nuclear power in this country revolves around what to do with the fuel rods after they are used. Many people feel that this nuclear waste will cause untold harm to the environment and, were we to expand our use of nuclear production, overwhelm any kind of storage facility. Currently a majority of the spent fuel rods in America get stored in sealed cylindrical containers made from steel reinforced concrete. Inside these larger containers each fuel rod is individually housed within its own metal container. The amount of waste created is not that large, one square mile could house the entire amount of nuclear waste that will be produced by the United States for the next 482 years at current levels of production. Stored in this manner fuel rods have never been known to decay or cause any kind of harm, they simply sit as inanimate objects.

In addition to this, technology is currently available that allows what are currently considered spent fuel rods to be reprocessed and re-used to create more power. After rods are recycled the then truly spent fuel rods are much less radioactive and far less harmful, returning to the same level of radioactivity as uranium in the ground within 400 years. Thus the case for nuclear waste causing harm to the environment or being a nuisance really isn’t very strong, in truth most of the current nuclear waste is simply fuel waiting to be reprocessed.

We wound up where we are today in our thinking about nuclear power because we haven’t really reconsidered it as a viable option sense the 1980’s. At that time there was much less good data and evidence available to support global warming and coal was an abundant resource here in the United States. The potential harm and lack of understanding about nuclear energy made it seem much more threatening than simply relying on our own natural resource of coal to provide our power. However, with global temperature on the rise and rapidly increasing effects of global warming, as well as an increased understanding of nuclear technologies, it is time that we transition to nuclear. In the long run nuclear generation will not be the end all solution for our power generation needs but it will be a low emissions way of bridging the gap between now and when truly renewable energy sources are found. It is time that America reconsiders its opinion of nuclear power.

Related Nuclear Articles