(350c) The Risk of Nuclear Power: Weighing the Safety and Proliferation Concerns Associated with Nuclear Energy against the Threat of a Changing Climate and Energy Security

In 2007, the United States consumed 42.09 quadrillion BTUs of electrical energy and produced 6 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide. The global warming impact of carbon dioxide has lead to a recent government initiative to require emissions reductions of 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. The United States will need ?carbon-free? energy generation technologies that are available on a realistic timescale, and for economically competitive prices, to achieve this CO2 reduction.

Nuclear energy is largely ?carbon free,? and is the second most abundant electrical energy resource in the world. Tripling nuclear power energy generation capacity to 1 million megawatts could decrease carbon dioxide emissions by 0.8 to 1.8 billion tons annually, representing 25% of the reductions necessary to meet the CO2 reduction goal. In addition, nuclear energy could help stabilize the cost of electricity by reducing the United States' dependence on volatile natural gas prices. Although nuclear energy is currently more expensive than other forms of energy generation, the introduction of a carbon tax of just $5-$15 per megaton carbon would cause nuclear energy to become more competitive than coal and natural gas.

Investment in the expansion of nuclear energy was discontinued in the early 1990's because of concerns with safety, long-term storage of nuclear waste, high capital costs, and nuclear weapons proliferation. While these issues still drive current research, technological innovations are providing solutions and mitigation strategies to address these problems. This paper presents a probable course of development for the expanded use of nuclear power, considering the risks, benefits, costs, and technological feasibility of nuclear power generation.

New construction should begin immediately to supplement and replace the aging U.S. nuclear fleet. In the short term, improved Light Water Reactors employing an open, once-through or partially closed fuel cycle are commercially viable based on cost and technological readiness. However, issues with waste disposal and uranium availability make this option unsustainable in the long term. A fully closed fuel cycle can greatly improve energy utilization, increase long-term storage capacity, and help mitigate waste disposal hazards.

Since current fuel recycle technologies, such as PUREX, present unacceptable environmental safety and proliferation risks, new recycle processes that address these problems will need to be deployed. The time scales involved with developing some of these technologies (e.g. fast reactors) emphasize the need for immediate and extensive R&D efforts to secure the growth of nuclear energy resources for the future. Expansion of the sustainable, safe, clean and cost-effective electrical energy source presented by nuclear power is necessary to provide a foundation for future U.S. growth.

Notes:

1. ?Carbon-free? in this context defines no carbon emissions due directly to energy generation and does not account for Life-Cycle related emissions in plant construction and materials.

2. One megaton equals one million metric tons.