Nuclear Power Top Ten Lists: Pro and Con

[David A. Kates]

Top Ten Reasons To Be Pro-Nuclear

1. Nuclear power is proven technology: Nuclear power generation involves the Rankine Cycle, which uses a steam turbine to produce electricity. This same cycle is incorporated in natural gas, coal, oil, biomass, geothermal and biofuel power plants.
2. Nuclear is very reliable: A nuclear reactor operates at full capacity more than 90 percent of the time. Nuclear is great “base load” power. Wind turbines, on the other hand, operate just 35 percent of the time.


3. Virtually no greenhouse gas emissions: No carbon emissions are given off when uranium atoms are split, so nuclear reactors don’t burn carbon. (Although, carbon-heavy fossil fuels are used in the construction of nuclear plants, mining of uranium and transportation of spent fuel.)
4. Uranium fuel is quite available: There’s enough world supply of uranium fuel to last at least 50 years, according to Andrew Kadak, Massachusetts Inst. of Technology nuclear engineering professor.
5. Nuclear plants are compact: A 1,000 MW plant takes up just 500-1,000 acres, according to the Nuclear Energy Inst. While a solar or wind power plant with the same output would require many times more units and thus much more land area.
6. Nuclear waste is compact: A typical U.S. nuclear power plant generates just 20 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel annually. The entire industry has produced about 58,000 metric tons of used fuel in its 50-year history, which would cover a football field approximately seven yards deep.
7. Nuclear waste can be recycled: Reprocessing spent fuel produces additional usable fuel, which means less waste would have to be permanently stored. (France has been reprocessing spent fuel for two decades.)
8. Nuclear power is safe: The U.S. hasn’t had a major nuclear accident in nearly 30 years. Nuclear reactors are safer than ever with very tight security.
9. Nuclear will help meet future electricity needs: Nations throughout the world are adopting nuclear power to meet their escalating energy demands in the next few decades. Japan is boosting the share of nuclear in its energy mix by a third to 41 percent by 2017. France already gets nearly 80 percent of its power from nuclear and is constructing an advanced pressurized reactor set to open in 2012. In the U.S., utilities are seeking approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for 34 new reactors.


10. Nuclear has political and public support: Presidential candidate John McCain wants to build 45 nuclear reactors by 2030 to cleanly meet our future electricity requirements.

Resources

Nuclear Power Policy on Energy Experts Live Talk Radio with David K...
Virtual Nuclear Tourist
“Germany in Hot Seat as G8 Pushes Nuclear Power”




Top Ten Reasons To Be Anti-Nuclear


1. Nuclear power creates dangerous radioactive waste: America’s 50 years of nuclear spent fuel is being temporarily housed at reactors. There is no way to truly dispose of the waste; it will be with us for thousands of years. Radioactive waste causes cancer and other serious health problems.
2. Nuclear is politically untenable: No American wants a nuclear power plant and used fuel housed in their backyard. The Yucca Mountain storage site has been delayed for more than a decade because residents fear terrorist attacks on the site and radioactive leeching into the soil and ground water.


3. Nuclear power can be a ploy to build weapons: Unfriendly nations like Iran and North Korea claim to be building nuclear reactors when many experts believe they are making weapons. If reprocessed spent fuel got on the world market, it would be easier for rogue nations to build up a nuclear arsenal.
4. Nuclear reactor construction and operation is expensive: A nuclear power plant hasn’t been built for 30 years, so no one knows exactly how much it will cost to construct one today. Estimates are $4-8 billion or more. The capital and operation costs are great because of emergency, containment and radioactive waste storage systems.
5. Nuclear reactors take many years to build: A nuclear plant would take at least three years and possibly a decade to build because of regulatory roadblocks.

6. Renewable energy sources are better: Wind and solar power plants would be much less costly and would take less time to construct (without the security and safety issues).
7. No power source is emissions free: Nuclear uses polluting fossil fuels in uranium mining, milling and enrichment, as well as construction and waste storage.
8. Nuclear reactors are prone to breakdown and accident: Reactors at the beginning and the end of their life spans can be dangerous. Most of the 104 operating now are nearing the end of their cycles. Adding new ones doubles the risk of accident, according to the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.
9. Nuclear loses more electricity generation in the event of a breakdown: Most nuclear plants have just one reactor (and the largest plants have just three), so if the reactor is out of service, the plant isn’t producing electricity. This is less of a problem with wind and solar power stations, which have many more units.
10. Nuclear power uses a lot of water: Nuclear utilizes the Rankine Cycle, which needs lots of water for cooling. The U.S. Dept. of Energy found nuclear uses more than 600 gallons of water per MWh of generation. Wind uses less than a gallon of water per MWh produced.

Resources:

Nuclear Power Policy on Energy Experts Live Talk Radio with David K...
Virtual Nuclear Tourist

[Don]

Barry is right. We need to utilize all of the power sources he mentioned. There is one thing I would like to mention about the land requirements for windmills. Most people vastly exaggerate the amount of land that is displaced by windmills. I've seen windmills in several states and at each site the land around the windmill was being used for other purposes such as farming and cattle ranches. And it didn't look like the corn or cows seemed to mind. The actual land that the windmill equipment sits on is relatively small.

[Barry Fitzgerald]

Renewable energy sources, with the exception of geothermal and hydro, are completely unpredictable and not dispatchable. Nuclear, especially with reprocessing, is the perfect COMPLIMENT to solar/wind sources. We need ALL of them....nuclear bridges the gap until we can even out and store renewables. If you think storing a few 100 acres feet of nuclear for 10,000 years is hard, try storing a few BILLION acre feet of CO2 FOREVER!
It is all a trade off. There are going to be a lot desert tortoises sacrificed for solar versus a planetary disaster from CO2.

[AlternativeEnergy.com]

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pRPutoJh0TPPJK4Z4gcWQPw&output=html&gid=0&single=true&widget=true|450|600

[David A. Kates]

Hi Thomas: I appreciate your vision for the future. Thanks for writing. David

[Thomas J. Setter]

We need 100 new Nuclear Power plants now in the USA. Nuclear is the CLEANEST,Safest and Cheapest way to produce ELECTRICITY. The only way to get people out of PVERTY is to give them ELECTRICITY.
Solar ,Wind and Geothermal ar coming also. We need to speed up the transformation.
2010- Hybid Cars.-- Solar and Wind. Promote Hydrogen.
2015- No coal plants unless perfectly clean.
2016-18- Meet Nuclear Power plant Goal.
We can do this by working together. Do what is Right and best for our childrens future.