A Closer Look into Nuclear Energy

Chernobyl. Three Mile Island. Fukushima. The three-eyed fish from The Simpsons. All of these things probably jump to your mind when you hear the phrase “nuclear energy”. The word “nuclear” itself probably makes your mind jump to images of nuclear bombs exploding and causing total global annihilation. But, in reality, how much of a danger does nuclear energy pose? And could nuclear energy serve as a greener alternative to fossil fuel energy?

First, let’s break down how nuclear energy actually works. Nuclear power plants employ a process known as nuclear fission during which the splitting of an unstable nucleus releases energy in the form of heat. This heat energy is then used to turn water into steam, which spins a turbine and creates electricity via a generator. In some instances, cooling towers release steam into the air. While a common misconception leads people to believe the steam to be radioactive, the steam released into the air does not contain any radioactive material. Thus, the harvesting of electricity from nuclear energy does not contribute to any greenhouse gas emissions. Leading environmental scientists agree that cutting down on greenhouse gasses represents the prime way of reversing the effects of climate change.

Modern technology has rendered nuclear power plants safer than ever. The meltdowns that occurred at the infamous aforementioned power plants simply could not happen today (assuming that plants are placed in optimal locations away from natural disaster prone areas). Today, nuclear energy is one of the safest forms of energy in the industry. Coal, oil, and natural gas energies account for the vast majority of accident related deaths. Meanwhile, solar, wind, and nuclear energy all account for less deaths by several orders of magnitude.

In terms of energy viability, nuclear energy stands as one of the most energy dense systems currently employed. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the electricity generated by a one inch tall uranium pellet is equal to the energy created by 120 gallons of oil, one ton of coal, or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. So while the mining required for nuclear energy definitely poses a drawback, the output of energy is far more favorable than traditional fossil fuels.

Of course, nuclear power has its drawbacks. For one, it does not meet the definition of renewable energy. Renewable energy is inexhaustible, and we simply do not have unlimited stores of elements viable for nuclear energy. However, increasing the usage of nuclear energy as we start the longer transition toward a completely renewable energy grid could help the United States reach the decreased carbon emission targets. Additionally, many critics of nuclear energy point to the issue of nuclear waste. The vast majority of nuclear waste does not pose a dangerous risk to humans or the environment. However, a small portion of said waste does pose dangers. Reprocessing and recycling nuclear material ensures that total waste production does not reach alarming levels. It also ensures a higher level of energy efficiency. However, the United States does not currently employ reprocessing methods. If the United States adopted this system, the environmental impact of nuclear energy would be decreased even further.

While (like all forms of energy) nuclear energy has its drawbacks, with enough investment and technological advancement, nuclear energy could mean the difference between meeting or failing to meet carbon emission targets. The general public should make sure they are well informed about the reality of nuclear energy so that they can make educated decisions surrounding the future of energy in the United States and around the world.