In Perspective - Nuclear Power

In the debate for energy in America there are many alternatives that are mentioned in the discussion. Why is it so important? There are a few key reasons that can be demonstrated with simple numbers. First is population and we will use a fifty-year span to help highlight the changes. In 1959, there were 178 million Americans and in 2009 there are 308 million or a little more than 40% increase. The Census Bureau projects 439 million in 2050, which is a 45% gain showing a consistent increase of population. So let’s look at the electricity use over the same time. In 1959 the Americans used approximately 700 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and in 2009 that increased to 4.25 trillion kilowatts-hours of electricity that is about six times the amount over the span of fifty years. If you just apply a linear approach to electricity use based on population and demand in the next fifty years, we will need 25 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity.

So let’s look at the most controversial energy source, nuclear. What are the pros and cons of nuclear power? Nuclear power generation does emit relatively low amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The emissions of green house gases and therefore the contribution of nuclear power plants to global warming is therefore relatively small unless you add water vapor and then there is an increase, though small compared to a coal plant. Another point is that this technology is readily available, it does not have to be developed first and it is possible to generate a high amount of electrical energy in one single plant. All of these are positives in the modern world.

On the other hand, the negatives are numerous. First is cost, a typical power plant cost more than $10 billion for a 100MWe plant and we need hundreds of these plants. Another issue is the time it takes to build a plant. On average it takes at least 10 years to build one plant. That is not to mention that the average plant last about 30 years and cost about $1 billion to decommission the plant. And speaking of money, over the last 50 years the nuclear industry received $97 billion in direct and indirect subsidies from the federal government. To add to the con’s list is the water demand, and power plants need a large amount of water for cooling. A typical plant needs approximately 476,500 gallons of water per minute and the newer reactor, if built and operated, would need nearly 1,144,000 gallons per minute. This water also comes out of the plant 30 degrees warmer than what when in.

One more issue is the amount of uranium needed to power these plants. Projections say there is an 80-year supply at the present rate and most of that would have to be imported leaving us in the same predicament as our oil situation.

The last point has to be related to nuclear waste. Right now most waste is stored on-site and that storage has reached the bursting point. The other point related to waste is also in the news every day and that is terrorism. Most waste sites are outside the containment building which leaves the waste vulnerable to attack.

All-in-all, nuclear power is not the saving grace of the power industry. There are a lot of concerns that are glossed over in the debate. I will give an overview of other power sources in the coming weeks in the discussion of energy efficiency and use.

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/nuclear_power/20071204-ucs-brief-got-water.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants

http://timeforchange.org/pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-power-and-sustainability