The Nuclear energy dilemma

Nuclear energy is the most malevolent and righteous source of energy known to humanity. From a destructive force in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to the only non-carbon emission energy source that has the potential to provide energy needs for the world. Nuclear energy is the most frustrating and confusing element of the energy mix. Recently the Green New Deal advocate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said, "Green New Deal does leave the door open for nuclear (energy)”. Now the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) projection shows an increase from 2016 levels by 42% in 2030, 83% in 2040, and 123% in 2050. But why exactly was the door closed for nuclear in the first place and why has it opened now? 

The story of nuclear energy started during World War 2. The USA in a joint operation with Canada and the United Kingdom started the Manhattan Project,  followed by its use on Japan during 1945. Then in 1959, IAEA is created under the United Nations to ensure the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy. The treaty of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons entered force on 11 May 1970. The objective of this treaty was to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapon technology and general and complete disarmament. During this time everyone’s fascination was running wild. Scientists thought that setting in Antarctica might be possible. Everyone was talking about its free electricity potential of the world and nuclear-powered cars, buses, airplanes, and space rockets. During the middle east war in 1970, an increase in the prices of oil leads to extensive exploration of new energy resources in western countries. Most of the nuclear reactors in the USA were built during 1970-1985. All the reactors used today use the process of nuclear fission. After a few years, nuclear withdrawal occurred due to its expensive, complex, and harmful nature.

 
 

Nuclear had some inherent disadvantages. Nuclear waste takes thousands of years to decompose into a non-radiating waste. Nuclear waste has been the most important threat to nuclear energy exploration. From 1955-2005 the nuclear waste was thrown into the oceans as a way of disposal. Then nuclear waste was planned to be stored underground the nuclear energy site. All the nuclear waste ever created is stored in temporary facilities which are used until a long-term facility is built. Most of the waste is stored in water which is a cheap and abundantly available resource. Onkalo nuclear facility is the first-ever deep geological repository that is under construction in Olkiluoto, Finland. It is expected to finish construction in 2023. This facility will be the only permanent nuclear waste site to ever exist. But the problem lies in communicating to the future generations about the malevolent nature of this commodity. Can any of the symbols stand the test of time when history suggests the warning, in general, tends to be ignored? 

Potential for a catastrophic nuclear accident is also one of the major obstructions for nuclear energy. In the past 70 years, seven nuclear accidents have happened of which three major accidents resulted in large scale migration. Chernobyl, Fukushima Daiichi, and the Three Mile Island are the most important nuclear accidents. Chernobyl is the world’s worst nuclear disaster to date. CIA estimated the economic cost to be below $10 billion whereas the different governments estimated it to be hundreds of billions of dollars. For instance, Belarus has estimated the losses over 30 years at the US $235 billion. Fukushima Daiichi is the most recent nuclear catastrophe that occurred during 2011 in mainland Japan. This disaster triggered the complete phase-out of nuclear by bigger countries like Germany. Three Miles is considered to be the most serious accident in U.S. history. These accidents had a significant impact on nuclear policies and exploration by global governments. The contamination zone of these accidents is significant and is predicted to have created huge unhabitable areas.  

Having said that nuclear energy cannot be ignored. This is the only source that has the potential to fulfill the energy requirement of the world with insignificantly fewer carbon emissions. One NASA study revealed that coal and gas are far more harmful than nuclear power. According to NASA if nuclear power never existed the energy it supplied must have been supplied by fossil fuel mostly coal, which might have caused much higher air-pollution mortality and greenhouse gas emission per unit energy produced. The nuclear industry is the only industry that takes care of the waste produced by it, whereas most of the carbon emissions produced after the industrial revolution might still be in the atmosphere. Single nuclear accidents burn in our memory whereas fossil fuel kills more people silently. It is the same as the death rate of flying in aircraft and driving by car. In statistical terms, it is more dangerous to drive a car than to fly in an aircraft, whereas your perception might suggest otherwise. To limit warming under 2 degrees nuclear energy might be the most intriguing choice for the energy mix.

Only advanced technologies might be able to withstand the wrath of nuclear energy. Nuclear innovation stopped after the 1970s. Innovation in technology and an increase in previous knowledge due to the large hadron collider might suggest an effective alternative to existing practices. This energy source is very complex. More research and development is a critical requirement for its development. One thing is clear nuclear energy is an undeniable source of the future energy mix. In the future, we might be able to develop nuclear fusion power plants that produce large amounts of electricity, with a little amount of nuclear waste. If kept unexplored might result in a devastating impact on human health and atmosphere.